By Arielle Hawkins, CNN
Here's the Belief Blog’s morning rundown of the top faith-angle stories from around the United States and around the world. Click the headlines for the full stories.
From the Blog:
CNN: Pat Robertson challenges creationism
Televangelist Pat Robertson challenged the idea that Earth is 6,000 years old this week, saying the man who many credit with conceiving the idea, former Archbishop of Ireland James Ussher, “wasn’t inspired by the Lord when he said that it all took 6,000 years.”
CNN: What we may have in common with 'Two and a Half Men' actor
In the introduction to the TV sitcom "Two and a Half Men," actor Angus T. Jones morphs from boy to teen before our eyes. Now we're watching the actor venture into adulthood and the complicated moral questions that come with it. This week in posted Internet videos, Jones announced his ethical and religious awakening by condemning as "filth" the CBS show that made him rich and famous. Jones isn't alone in facing his crisis of conscience. His experience, though dramatic, is universal in how many job holders struggle to reconcile work and spiritual values, experts say.
Tweet of the Day:
Pride prevents prayer, As long as we believe the lie that we're in control of everything we fail to ask for God's help.— Rick Warren (@RickWarren) November 30, 2012
Pride prevents prayer, As long as we believe the lie that we're in control of everything we fail to ask for God's help.
Belief on TV:
Reuters: Vatican hails U.N. Palestine vote, wants guarantees for Jerusalem
The Vatican hailed the United Nations' implicit recognition of a Palestinian state on Thursday and called for an internationally guaranteed special status for Jerusalem, something bound to irritate Israel. The 193-nation U.N. General Assembly overwhelmingly approved a resolution to upgrade the Palestinian Authority's observer status at the United Nations from "entity" to "non-member state," the same status as the Vatican. That Vatican’s statement called for "an internationally guaranteed special statute" for Jerusalem, aimed at "safeguarding the freedom of religion and of conscience, the identity and sacred character of Jerusalem as a Holy City, (and) respect for, and freedom of, access to its holy places."
Reuters: Islam’s status unchanged in Egypt draft constitution, al-Azhar made reference
An assembly drafting Egypt’s new constitution voted on Thursday to keep the principles of Islamic law as the main source of legislation, unchanged from the previous constitution in force under former President Hosni Mubarak. The issue was the subject of a long dispute between hardline Salafi Islamists and liberals in the assembly which will vote on each of 234 articles in the draft constitution before it is sent to President Mohamed Mursi for approval. After that, Mursi must put it to a popular referendum.
Religion News Service: Catholic intensity fades as evangelical devotion surges
After November’s presidential vote, Catholics could cite ample evidence for their renewed political relevance while dispirited evangelicals were left wondering if they are destined to be yesterday’s election news. Yet their roles in American spiritual life may be reversed. New research shows that Catholics now report the lowest proportion of "strongly affiliated" followers among major American religious traditions, while the data indicates that evangelicals are increasingly devout and committed to their faith.
Catholic News Agency: Catholics for a Free Choice spends millions in Latin American abortion support
The abortion advocacy group Catholics For a Free Choice has invested more than $13 million over the last decade in pushing the legalization of abortion in Latin America.
The Guardian: Free schools must teach evolution, ministers announce
All free schools will be forced to present evolution as a comprehensive and central tenet of scientific theory, ministers have announced, following lobbying by senior scientists concerned that Christian-run institutions could exploit loopholes in the rules to present creationism as a credible theory. The tightening of the funding rules for free schools comes after representations to the Department for Education by the Royal Society and its president, the Nobel-prizewinning geneticist Sir Paul Nurse, as well as by secular
and humanist groups.
Reuters: Tunisia’s Ghannouchi says Islamists will eventually dominate Arab world
The leader of the Tunisian Islamist party that rose to power after the first Arab Spring uprising last year said this week that Islamist movements would eventually emerge triumphant throughout the Arab world after a difficult transition period. Rached al-Ghannouchi, whose Ennahda party governs with two junior leftist partners, said secular groups should join forces with Islamists to manage the first phase after autocratic rulers were removed. But in the end, Islam will be the “reference point”.
Religion News Service: Anglicans vow to vote again on allowing women bishops
The Church of England plans to rush through legislation to consecrate women bishops after last week’s surprising defeat at the church's General Synod in London. The church's Archbishops’ Council ended two days of closed-door meetings on Wednesday (Nov. 28), and said a plan to allow women bishops needs to be "restarted" when General Synod reconvenes in July. Church leaders originally said the issue could not be reopened until 2015.
Opinions of the Day:
CNN: Short Takes: Gauging the impact of 'Purpose Driven Life,' 10 years on
This month marks the 10th anniversary of the best-selling hardback book in American history: Rick Warren's The Purpose Driven Life. We reached out to scholars, religion experts and Warren's wife, Kay, to ask for their thoughts about the book's impact after a decade.
Join the conversation…
CNN: Is praying for a lottery win frowned upon? Depends on who you ask
With odds of purchasing the winning Powerball ticket set at 1 in 175,223,510 – longer odds than dying from a bee sting or being struck by lighting – it shouldn’t be shocking that lotto hopefuls are turning to God for some divine intervention in advance of Wednesday night’s drawing for a $550 million jackpot. One hastily set up website, “Prayer List for Powerball,” even charges people a dollar a piece to be included on a “list of those wishing to pray for each other to win the Powerball lottery.”
Very wonderful site thank you so much for your time in writing the posts for all of us to learn about.
I do believe all of the ideas you have offered on your post. They're really convincing and can certainly work. Nonetheless, the posts are too quick for beginners. May just you please lengthen them a bit from subsequent time? Thank you for the post.
CCC wrote on November 30, 2012 at 6:21 am, declaring, "Then, secondly, I came over here to lurk around and happened across the story about that 700 Club guy backing off the "world was created in 6000 years" crap and was thinking "Wow! I thought pigs would fly before that would ever happen and the progression of thought was maybe if he can convince the evan-fundacrowd that Genesis never was supposed to be interpreted as science and that it is written in the format of poetry and then I got the thought "if you could take the creation story out of the science class and move it over to poetry in literature everyone would be satisfied". The creationists would still get to read Genesis and everybody else gets to breath a sign of relief that we aren't teaching non-science in science class. And THAT's when that's when it hit me! We Catholics have been saying this all along. Scripture reveals truth but is not literal. Rather, it is the puff of a breeze whispering the revelation of the truth through poetry."
Where for di thou rationalize such a cunning an forthright thought of pleasure's pleasing to infer the many verses of scripture to be but poetic embolisms of pure joy!? My head doeth a bow unto your compassionate views of sheer pleasure and I am left with awe and wonder CCC ! Bravo! Bravo! Bravo!
F.A.I.T.H H.O.P.E C.H.A.R.I.T.Y P.R.U.D.E.N.C.E F.O.R.T.IT.U.D.E M.O.D.E.R.A.T.I.O.N J.U.S.T.I.C.E
Religion is nothing more than a belief in magic.
People who believe in magic also think that people who accept facts are insane.
The questions when asked about the ages of spatial nebulas, galaxy clusters and solar systems should be considered as Godly Time verses our understandings of earth based times. For God's Timeframe only a season has lapsed by and says a billion years have thusly lapsed by earth time. Within the gospel is written, Psalms 90:4 "For a thousand years in thy sight [are but] as yesterday when it is past, and [as] a watch in the night." I see nothing wrong in understandings toward our science's age theories. In fact I stand resolute and in favor of it. The theories of inward inter-cosmological paradigms and outward paradigms of cosmological comparisons is truly where sciences should consider and bible based theologians should also.
It's "versus," not "verses." Why don't you try writing in English for a change? Your posts are just too childish and painful to read.
Usually when the only argument one has is about spelling, that one usually has nothing intellectual left to say.
Yeah, I saw this the other day, where one person accidentally omitted a letter in a word, and the responding poster went on to condescendingly gave her the definition of the word, according to two dictionaries, (which the OP had used in the correct context, despite the omitted letter; she had written expicitly instead of explicitly) and then when on to write a two-paragraph post about how she omitted that letter...what was one of the most absurd posts I've ever seen.
Next time I write versus I'll 'yous' vs,,, "Ohkee doackee" Dippy?
A question for everyone to think on...
The criteria :
1) you are in a world full of magic.
2) you are on a co.mm.it.te.e for your public education board.
3) students from all over are taking their various final exam (their disciplines) in 'summoning an elemental based conjuration'
The question is:
How would the standard (or rule) by which someone is deemed "qualified" then?
In other words – what set of ci.rc.um.st.an.ces should be graded on (to become a fully recognized summoner) ?
I'll give everyone a few examples like; the intensity of the fire/ice/wind/lightning.. maybe the duration.. maybe the quickness of calling the elemental spell. You get the general idea I hope.
Now then compare this set of items (list) to the scientific method. You'll notice that even in a world full of magic – you need to narrow the criteria down to give a standard for following it. XD
A very neat point is presented also – you can and will have to test for magic and it's effect on the world that you live in.
If one diatribes fetal modernism, one is locked within a promiscuous choice: either make acceptable a proponent’s rationalism or declare the other has a ranking significance, but only if artistic leverage is interchangeable with the narratively orientated and therefore an unattainable languishing of a higher order. Many quatrain narratives concerning rationalism do so exist. Therefore, the subject “God” does endure to be a relative diagnostic embolism.
Any number of discourses concerning sub-textual conceptualism exists. Thus, the premise of deconstructive rationalism suggests that society, paradoxically, has intrinsic meaning. Lycanthropic obscurity properties propose that unobstructed reality is fundamentally a legal fiction. Thusly, I do concur “the premise of the cultural paradigm of expression holds that art is capable of social comment, but only if the cultural paradigm of narrative is invalid; if that is not the case, truth is used to reinforce the status quo.”
God, whether he is or isn’t will ever be the celestial beings’ raiment. God forbade no one their only will; to be constrained by leavened breadths and widening clusters upon fragmented minds of tribunal conclaves.
If diatribes, is locked a choice: make orientated a proponent’s languishing rationalism or declare fetal other ranking insignificance, but only if narratives leverage is interchangeable with the narratively and therefore an unattainable of a higher order. Many quatrain concerning rationalism do noy exist. Therefore, the “God” subject dank endurement to be a nonrelative diagnostic embolism.
Any discourses number of concerning sub-space conceptualism don't exists. Thus, the premisementleness of deconstructive rationalism suggests that society, paradoxically, has no intrinsical meaning. Lycanthropic obscurityness propose unobstructed reality is fundamentally fucked up. Thusly, I do concur “the premise of the cultural paradigmlessness of expressionlessness holds nothing is capable of social comment, but only if the cultural paradigmabililty of narrative is an invalid; if that is not the case, fruit is used to reinforce the status quorum.”
God will be constrained by leavened breads and butters with widening clusters upon fragmented minds of tribunal conclaveness.
Sorry, "noy" should be "not." Otherwise it just doesn't make any sense.
"Sorry, “noy” should be “not.” Otherwise it just doesn’t make any sense."
I see someone's bored again! ;)
What many people seem to be misplacing in regards to the gods and goddesses is that they all are the sons and daughters of God Almighty! God’s Holy Spirit is the vast Seas of the Nothingness regions that reach ever so far away in the celestial domains and spirals ever inward towards the inner domains! We all live in a semi-lucid state of constant fluctuations in ever diminishing states of rationed containments in randomized soulless fulgurations ever pulsating and really never at a true resting mode due to particle physics law of thermal dynamics regarding sub-quantum flexing. Can you fathom this angular sublimated dichotomy or?
Do I call you idiotic just because one feels a sensation to call you so? My godliness perceptions lay upon my worded pragmatisms. Anyone’s godlessness comes about by ungodliness hammerings of societal bitterness. Forsake you not in ungodly mannerisms for these are your causality in these celestially anthropic morphs regarding godlessness and ungodliness. Your crying out against God gives me reasons for God to be and even become and also as once was in the schematic morphologies within cosmologic paradigms’ leavening ways regardless what one does so clamor on being one’s own gods and/or goddesses.
Bullshit, meaningless bullshit.
Can you love someone you have never met?
Yes. I worked with someone who met her husband over the internet. Their entire courtship took place on two continents.
I guess it depends on the definition of "never met"...do you mean as in never met face to face or never communicated with?
I have several friends who I communicate with every day who I love dearly, but I have never met face-to-face.
I leave it open to interpretation to promote discussion. *grin*
Likewise, I have many friends I have "known" for years and love dearly, but have never actually met in person.
Yet, I have love generically for people I don't know, people in need, people hurting...it's certainly a different type of emotion...I call it love, but is it really?
Can it be? Or is love reserved for those we know on some level? And if knowledge is required, does that mean that love at first sight is a fallacy?
Can a person in a mental ward love the woman he talks to that only he can see and hear? I say yes, you can love things that dont exist.
Did I say anything about something that didn't exist?
Well, I don't know about the love at first sight scenario, as I haven't experienced first hand; I fell in love with my husband many years ago only after knowing him for a relatively short length of time, but it wasn't at first sight.
"Yet, I have love generically for people I don’t know, people in need, people hurting…it’s certainly a different type of emotion…I call it love, but is it really?"
I do, too, except I call it empathy.
I guess this really gets into semantics, and I do love words. I would not call that empathy necessarily, as to me empathy requires a stronger, more personal connection...maybe that's not accurate. Hmmm...maybe I mean more intimate knowledge?
I may have to ponder a bit.
It exists. I fell in love at first sight with my husband back in 1978 and it's still going strong.
Semantics are indeed tricky...
"I guess this really gets into semantics, and I do love words. I would not call that empathy necessarily, as to me empathy requires a stronger, more personal connection…maybe that’s not accurate. Hmmm…maybe I mean more intimate knowledge?"
Lol! That's precisely how I feel about the word 'love', in a non-romantic situation!
I feel empathy for the homeless, say, but I don't love them.
Happy Friday everyone. Boy is it wet and messy outside my window today. My 15 minute drive to work took over an hour!
But I arrived safe and sound, thankfully. Many others out there were not as lucky.
Today's question: Is a good deed a selfish act?
My opinion is the good deed itself is not selfish; if it's done for a selfish reason, it doesn't negate the good deed itself.
I generally agree. I have...issues with the people who do good things out of some desire to get something in return, but it does not necessarily negate the good of the act, just kind of sours the taste.
Hope your day is going well.
" I have...issues with the people who do good things out of some desire to get something in return"
The first thing that crossed my mind when I read that is many people do good deeds with the thought it gives them more points when they die and go to heaven. Or when some religions do good deeds then try to convert the people they are helping. It doesn't take away from the deed but deep down we all get something out of it since it does make you feel good to help and sometimes really makes you feel better about who you are as a person.
David, there is a point there. When I do something for someone else, I feel good about myself for a time, this is true. And I do like that feeling.
I work with someone who makes a big show of their good deeds. They flaunt how many gifts they buy for the Angel Tree. They talk endlessly about how many hours of volunteer work they do, how many trips they make a year to the food banks, etc.
In my opinion, she's no better than the person with the means to help who chooses not to. Yeah, the good deed still gets done, kids get presents, hungry people get to eat, etc...but that good feeling she gets from it isn't enough for her.
That was actually what I was thinking about when I asked the question, though your observation is valid as well.
That the person you work with has to crow about her good deeds says more about her as a person than anything...it does indeed leave a sour taste in one's mouth...I am not a fan of those types of people.
Although it doesn't lessen the deed itself, in my opinion it lessens the integrity of the deed-doer, in my eyes, anyway.
Akira, I tend to think that she's a very lonely person who has never really been loved properly...I get the impression that she has always bought affection.
Sad really. Other than this, she's a nice enough person...and she is very generous. But she really is the kind of person who does these things for the recognition.
It could be. It could not be. It depends on the motivation for doing it.
Mwiw, that is sad.
You work with this person, who I've never met; I am just talking solely about the people I have met.
These people have the "top THIS!" kind of personality, if you know what I mean.
Akira, yeah. I know a few of those too.
It's just sad all the way around.
Yes some men, women and children (innocents) today were beaten, squashed, crushed, torn apart, blown up, strangled, r ap ed or murdered today. jesus;s love is real and he is everywhere.He was watching and he was pleased.
You seem to have a bit of an obsession there, my friend. No where in the conversation was Jesus even mentioned.
I was speaking specifically of those hurt in traffic areas in the area this morning. Yes, men, women and children around the world are also suffering. I acknowledge that.
I wish there was more that I could do to alleviate that suffering.
Today's question: Is a good deed a selfish act?
Who knows...just do whats right.
I tend to concur. I just like to spark conversation.
@0G – If you don't mind, I'd like to jump in and steal the book references for future discussion. I barely passed high school chem. and opted for Historiography & Philosophy instead of Physics. In fact, all I remember of chem is that there are 92 elements on the periodic table, evaporation is a cooling process, the whole floor of the building gets evacuated if you break the mercury thermometers to play with the stuff, Bic lighters and gas jets make for really cool lab periods and don't party at lunch if you have an experiment in the afternoon. BUT... years later a company I worked for invited Stephen Hawkins to speak to us in the customer-facing staff...and he really made things very accessible and interesting...above and addition to how cool his speaking presentation equipment. Do you chat anywhere else?
0G, do NOT give this person any information about yourself, this goes for anyone else on this blog too.You will regret it, I promise you!
Nope, this is it.
Frig. I just wanted to know if you want to discuss the books you recommended. I promise I don't want to know the size of your shorts.
When you read (each of) the books, we can discuss them in a convenient thread at the time. But, my shorts are XL.
"How Old is the Torah?
Question: "Is there any evidence that the Bible is more than two thousand years old?"
Answer: Yes, in fact there's plenty of evidence of that. We have had the Torah for at least 3,313 years, when Hashem gave it to us at Mount Sinai. Can we prove that the Torah is really that old? Yes, we can.
Let us trace the existence of the Torah back through history. We will show that the Torah existed during the time of Moses and Joshua, and was not created later.
First, a brief rundown of the periods of Jewish History, so we can understand all this better: ...
2,900 Years Ago
Perhaps the Torah was written just before King David was born, during the era of the Judges? That, too, cannot be. The Torah says that it is forbidden to wage war against the nations of Moab and Ammon (Deuteronomy 2:19). Yet the Judges all the way from after Joshua to King David (inclusive) fought with those nations! Ammon invaded Israel during the time of Yiftach the Judge (around 970 B.C.E.), and Moab oppressed them during the time of Ehud the Judge (around 1160 B.C.E.). They had to fight with them out of self-defense, so they would never have included such a Law in the Torah had they composed it!
The Israelites spent a great deal of time and energy, and lost many good people defending themselves against those nations. Would the Prophets or Judges or anyone of that time have written a Law stating that it was forbidden to attack Moab or Amon if they were inventing the Torah? So the Torah could not have been written during the time of the Judges either.
Therefore the Torah predates the Judges, and come from the time of Moses and Joshua! That means that we have had the Torah for 3,313 years. And therefore, the Torah tells us that Moses told the Children of Israel:
Only take heed and watch yourselves very carefully, so that you do not forget the things that your eyes saw. Do not let this memory leave your hearts, all the days of your lives. Teach your children, and your children's children about the day you stood before Hashem your G-d at Horeb (Deut. 4:9-10).
(Horeb is another name for Mount Sinai.)
Moses wrote the Torah according to the instructions given him by Hashem. Hashem dictated the Torah to Moses, letter by letter. Moses then taught it to the Children of Israel. And we have studied the Torah ever since, for 3,313 or so years.
Of course, the Torah itself is much older than that. Our Tradition tells us that Hashem created the Torah, both the Written and the Oral, 2,000 years before He created the universe. Hashem used it as a blueprint when He created the universe. And Hashem then kept it until it was time for us to receive it.
(The approach of this article, as well as some of the proofs, I took primarily from the works of Rabbi Avigdor Miller, especially Sing You Righteous, paragraphs 102-121.)"
Tune into NPR. Throughout the day they've got to play the same story again at least once. Listen for the one about the guy who, at the top of his enthusiasm during the campaign, tattooed the Romney/Ryan symbol on his face and now wants to get it off.
You know, I've got this stereotype in my mind about what kind intelligence you have in a person who tattoos his face...and that's where I have to end this thought in its tracks.
He was paid 5 grand to get the ink – some enthusiasm.
Was that on the air? Or, is there a print story somewhere? I've just got to hear the rest of this. I could make a stand up comedy routine out of it. ;-)
Bill Maher slammed the guy during his last show for 2012.
Thanks...I'll have to look for that show on YouTube or Hulu. I haven't watched broadcast TV since the '90s....not that I've missed much....but I will spare everyone & won't get on my anti-TV soapbox.
religions are not worth the respect of any for they command the separation and division of the many! Religions are by their creation there to explain that which we mere humans can not. At what point do was as a species realize since science those answers from religion have been lessened? At what point do we as a species of such high intelligence start using that which allowed us to rise above the rest? When shadows no longer hold sway and bedtime stories do not frighten anymore...that is the day.
OK...I can only speak of what I know, and I can't talk for all religions...but I know that the Church calls for us to be one. It just happens that the individual members are people and people suck at getting along....and we are taking our own sweet time as a socialized species to getting plumbed up to the idea that you don't kill members of your own species...and it's probably not too great an idea to kill members of other species if you can avoid it.
this church you speak of – it does not call all to be as one – it calls all to believe this then be as one in that belief – your ignorance is rather sad. it once sat women and men separatly...ah the godly love, that is to say that if god exists he at one point wanted churches to seat their genders in their proper sections as well.
so three things are most likely to be true here –
1. god is not real
2. religion is just and nothing more then crowd control
3. god is not real and religion is just crowd control.
i'll give you a hint on which one is the most likely to be true...
BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you for playing Hippiepoet. We've got some lovely prizes for you back stage.
"this church you speak of – it does not call all to be as one" Buzz! Actually, the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches:
"God does not accept the sacrifice of a sower of disunion, but commands that he depart from the altar so that he may first be reconciled with his brother. For God can be appeased only by prayers that make peace. To God, the better offering is peace, brotherly concord, and a people made one in the unity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit."
However, not everyone is a Catholic and some people apparently don't see any value in living peacefully, in unity and in brotherly concord.
your argument is your undoing – "and a people made one in the unity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit."
your an idiot.
Man, everything is one. We are all just the same energy. The Trilogy isn't three different physical bodies it's one...it's all energy that manifests itself differently...and we are the same energy...and so is everything around us. Plug in and tune out, man. You'll see.
dude, no one was discussing energy – we were discussing religions. you are right in your words but wrong in the context it finds itself it.
Seriously. They're the same thing. Why do you think Shaman go off and smoke to have visions. It opens up their minds to be able to see an expanded way. Energy is all around us. It's in us. And it reduces everything to the same matter. So, everything different ... solid, gases, liquids...it is all the same as each other and the same as us...and we are the same as everyone else.
Don't think about it linearly. Unhook your mind and get it out of its box.
dude, your having a moment -take it and run. as far as the discussion, leave. you are not a benefit as of yet and i do not see you being one shortly.
no insult intended, just your attendance is unneeded, unwanted, and is more of a diverision...side track type.
Oh boy! Vatican calling for unity again. Ugh oh! I'm thinking ugly thoughts again and they have to stop....but really...do I get to ask any of the ladies in my Catholic Now group...the ones that were beating me up all year for sitting on the blue side of the aisle...do I get to ask them how they feel about voting for a foreign policy in opposition to the Vatican's position and whether that makes them real Catholics or not? I guess I better not. Although I feel better for having vented about it here. I still have to hold steaks over my black eyes and the election is a month old.
""The Holy See welcomes with favor the decision of the General as.sembly by which Palestine has become a Non-member Observer State of the United Nations," a statement said.
But it also said it was a "propitious occasion" to recall a "common position" on Jerusalem expressed by the Vatican and the Palestine Liberation Organisation when the two sides signed a basic agreement on their bilateral relations in 2000.
Thursday's statement called for "an internationally guaranteed special statute" for Jerusalem, aimed at "safeguarding the freedom of religion and of conscience, the identi.ty and sacred character of Jerusalem as a Holy City, (and) respect for, and freedom o"The Holy See welcomes with favor the decision of the General as.sembly by which Palestine has become a Non-member Observer State of the United Nations," a statement said.
But it also said it was a "propitious occasion" to recall a "common position" on Jerusalem expressed by the Vatican and the Palestine Liberation Organisation when the two sides signed a basic agreement on their bilateral relations in 2000.
Thursday's statement called for "an internationally guaranteed special statute" for Jerusalem, aimed at "safeguarding the freedom of religion and of conscience, the identi.ty and sacred character of Jerusalem as a Holy City, (and) respect for, and freedom of, access to its holy places."
The Vatican's re-stating of its position on Jerusalem, which has remained mostly dormant for years, was bound to irk Israel, which says there is no need for an international status for Jerusalem because those guarantees already exist.
Israel declared Jerusalem its "united and eternal" capital in 1980 after annexing East Jerusalem in the Six Day War in 1967. World powers have not recognized the annexation.
Palestinians want East Jerusalem to be the capital of an eventual state.
Religion itself is really not good for much. The rituals and ceremonies established by people are of no use without the spirit of God. Lots of people attend church or belong to a religion but their hearts are far from God. A personal relationship with Jesus Christ is really the only thing that will give you peace, hope, and joy. If you have a personal relationship with Christ and meet with a group who also has him, then you can really learn the word, worship, and praise him.
But it's still superstitious nonsense.
Prayer changes things
Avert your eyes.
"Ronald Regonzo" who degenerates to:
"Salvatore" degenerates to:
"Douglas" degenerates to:
"truth be told" degenerates to:
"Thinker23" degenerates to:
"Atheism is not healthy ..." degenerates to:
"another repentant sinner" degenerates to:
"Dodney Rangerfield" degenerates to:
"tina" degenerates to:
"captain america" degenerates to:
"Atheist Hunter" degenerates to:
"Anybody know how to read? " degenerates to:
"just sayin" degenerates to:
"ImLook'nUp" degenerates to:
"Kindness" degenerates to:
"Chad" degenerates to
"Bob" degenerates to
"nope" degenerates to:
"2357" degenerates to:
"WOW" degenerates to:
"fred" degenerates to:
"!" degenerates to:
"John 3:16" degenerates to:
"pervert alert" is the degenerate.
This troll is not a christian.
Prayer does not; you are such a LIAR. You have NO proof it changes anything! A great example of prayer proven not to work is the Christians in jail because prayer didn't work and their children died. For example: Susan Grady, who relied on prayer to heal her son. Nine-year-old Aaron Grady died and Susan Grady was arrested.
An article in the Journal of Pediatrics examined the deaths of 172 children from families who relied upon faith healing from 1975 to 1995. They concluded that four out of five ill children, who died under the care of faith healers or being left to prayer only, would most likely have survived if they had received medical care.
The statistical studies from the nineteenth century and the three CCU studies on prayer are quite consistent with the fact that humanity is wasting a huge amount of time on a procedure that simply doesn’t work. Nonetheless, faith in prayer is so pervasive and deeply rooted, you can be sure believers will continue to devise future studies in a desperate effort to confirm their beliefs.
BMJ. 2001 Dec 22-29;323(7327):1450-1.
Effects of remote, retroactive intercessory prayer on outcomes in patients with bloodstream infection: randomised controlled trial.
Department of Medicine, Beilinson Campus, Rabin Medical Center, Petah-Tiqva 49100, Israel. email@example.com
To determine whether remote, retroactive intercessory prayer, said for a group of patients with a bloodstream infection, has an effect on outcomes.
Double blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trial of a retroactive intervention.
All 3393 adult patients whose bloodstream infection was detected at the hospital in 1990-6.
In July 2000 patients were randomised to a control group and an intervention group. A remote, retroactive intercessory prayer was said for the well being and full recovery of the intervention group.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:
Mortality in hospital, length of stay in hospital, and duration of fever.
Mortality was 28.1% (475/1691) in the intervention group and 30.2% (514/1702) in the control group (P for difference=0.4). Length of stay in hospital and duration of fever were significantly shorter in the intervention group than in the control group (P=0.01 and P=0.04, respectively).
Remote, retroactive intercessory prayer said for a group is associated with a shorter stay in hospital and shorter duration of fever in patients with a bloodstream infection and should be considered for use in clinical practice.
November 29, 2012 at 9:49 am | Report abuse |
More trolling how quaint.
From another blog, we've been through this already Chad.
From your same website.
Prayer is amongst the oldest and most widespread interventions used with the intention of alleviating illness and promoting good health. Given the significance of this response to illness for a large proportion of the world's population, there has been considerable interest in recent years in measuring the efficacy of intercessory prayer for the alleviation of ill health in a scientifically rigorous fashion. The question of whether this may contribute towards proving or disproving the existence of God is a philosophical question lying outside the scope of this review of the effects of prayer. This revised version of the review has been prepared in response to feedback and to reflect new methods in the conduct and presentation of Cochrane reviews.
To review the effects of intercessory prayer as an additional intervention for people with health problems already receiving routine health care.
We systematically searched ten relevant databases including MEDLINE and EMBASE (June 2007).
We included any randomised trial comparing personal, focused, committed and organised intercessory prayer with those interceding holding some belief that they are praying to God or a god versus any other intervention. This prayer could be offered on behalf of anyone with health problems.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:
We extracted data independently and analysed it on an intention to treat basis, where possible. We calculated, for binary data, the fixed-effect relative risk (RR), their 95% confidence intervals (CI), and the number needed to treat or harm (NNT or NNH).
Ten studies are included in this updated review (7646 patients). For the comparison of intercessory prayer plus standard care versus standard care alone, overall there was no clear effect of intercessory prayer on death, with the effect not reaching statistical significance and data being heterogeneous (6 RCTs, n=6784, random-effects RR 0.77 CI 0.51 to 1.16, I(2) 83%). For general clinical state there was also no significant difference between groups (5 RCTs, n=2705, RR intermediate or bad outcome 0.98 CI 0.86 to 1.11). Four studies found no effect for re-admission to Coronary Care Unit (4 RCTs, n=2644, RR 1.00 CI 0.77 to 1.30).Two other trials found intercessory prayer had no effect on re-hospitalisation (2 RCTs, n=1155, RR 0.93 CI 0.71 to 1.22).
These findings are equivocal and, although some of the results of individual studies suggest a positive effect of intercessory prayer,the majority do not and the evidence does not support a recommendation either in favour or against the use of intercessory prayer. We are not convinced that further trials of this intervention should be undertaken and would prefer to see any resources available for such a trial used to investigate other questions in health care.
November 29, 2012 at 10:05 am | Report abuse |
This is fun....from another study from the same website
In the light of the best available data, there are no grounds to change current practices
November 29, 2012 at 10:07 am | Report abuse |
I love this one from the same website.
Scientific experiments claiming that distant intercessory prayer produces salubrious effects are deeply flawed.
I'm sorry, "Atheism is not healthy for children and other living things", but your assertions regarding atheism and prayer are unfounded. Using my Idiomatic Expression Equivalency module (IEE), the expression that best matches the degree to which your assertions may represent truths is: "TOTAL FAIL".
I see that you repeat these unfounded statements with high frequency. Perhaps the following book can help you:
I'm Told I Have Dementia: What You Can Do... Who You Can Turn to...
"I see that you repeat these unfounded statements with high frequency. Perhaps the following book can help you:
I'm Told I Have Dementia: What You Can Do... Who You Can Turn to... "
Shoot! So that's why you post the same crap everyday about your Idiomatic Expression Equivalency module! Dang Mr. Spock, you better get that thing patented before someone else steals it and installs it on every other space ship in your Federation. 8 – / < eyes rolling around Whatever.
Then, secondly, I came over here to lurk around and happened across the story about that 700 Club guy backing off the "world was created in 6000 years" crap and was thinking "Wow! I thought pigs would fly before that would ever happen and the progression of thought was maybe if he can convince the evan-fundacrowd that Genesis never was supposed to be interpreted as science and that it is written in the format of poetry and then I got the thought "if you could take the creation story out of the science class and move it over to poetry in literature everyone would be satisfied". The creationists would still get to read Genesis and everybody else gets to breath a sign of relief that we aren't teaching non-science in science class. And THAT's when that's when it hit me! We Catholics have been saying this all along. Scripture reveals truth but is not literal. Rather, it is the puff of a breeze whispering the revelation of the truth through poetry.
Wow! Just had to share this... First, I read this and thought this is the most beautiful poetry....
God himself created the visible world in all its richness, diversity and order. Scripture presents the work of the Creator symbolically as a succession of six days of divine "work", concluded by the "rest" of the seventh day. On the subject of creation, the sacred text teaches the truths revealed by God for our salvation, permitting us to "recognize the inner nature, the value and the ordering of the whole of creation to the praise of God."
Nothing exists that does not owe its existence to God the Creator. The world began when God's word drew it out of nothingness; all existent beings, all of nature, and all human history are rooted in this primordial event, the very genesis by which the world was consti.tuted and time begun.
Each creature possesses its own particular goodness and perfection. For each one of the works of the "six days" it is said: "And God saw that it was good." "By the very nature of creation, material being is endowed with its own stability, truth and excellence, its own order and laws." Each of the various creatures, willed in its own being, reflects in its own way a ray of God's infinite wisdom and goodness. Man must therefore respect the particular goodness of every creature, to avoid any disordered use of things which would be in contempt of the Creator and would bring disastrous consequences for human beings and their environment.
God wills the interdependence of creatures. The sun and the moon, the cedar and the little flower, the eagle and the sparrow: the spectacle of their countless diversities and inequalities tells us that no creature is self-sufficient. Creatures exist only in dependence on each other, to complete each other, in the service of each other.
The beauty of the universe: The order and harmony of the created world results from the diversity of beings and from the relationships which exist among them. Man discovers them progressively as the laws of nature. They call forth the admiration of scholars. The beauty of creation reflects the infinite beauty of the Creator and ought to inspire the respect and submission of man's intellect and will.
The hierarchy of creatures is expressed by the order of the "six days", from the less perfect to the more perfect. God loves all his creatures and takes care of each one, even the sparrow. Nevertheless, Jesus said: "You are of more value than many sparrows", or again: "Of how much more value is a man than a sheep!"
Any creator than makes anything "less than perfect" is no god. Poetry is nice. Science is better. Get real. You have not a shred of evidence for any of it.
Who is this god person / entity and why should I care what "he" says?
This is like taking the grammer school kids to the MOMA. They can stand right in front of the most beautiful sculpture or visual art and not see anything but the most superficial outward appearance or just a collection of oil paint, canvas, marble, wood or whatever other elements are used for the creations.
The thing that is exciting...the thing I was typing while you were busy hocking up loogies to spit on this...is that I realized how simple it it. Poetry and science are two sides of the same coin, both pointing at the same cosmic truth.
Poetry came first and is in a style that can be embraced and understood by minds that are more right-brain oriented, who have oral, rather than written histories, and who are more visual and artistic as well as less left-brain oriented, technical and specific. Maybe if we had been more adept in interpreting art, we would unearthed these scientific discoveries earlier.
Spin it any way you like, you are still left with an unsupported myth. You are simply looking for a way to continue public acceptance of your delusions. You are not insightful – you are mentally ill.
Seriously, you sound like the math club guys in every one of my English lit classes. Didn't like it, didn't "get" it, it's so stupid, what's it good for, why do we have to take this for graduation anyway...ad nauseum.
Look at this...and I had to cheat and look it up...because – Hey, I'm Catholic, I only hear scripture during the liturgy. But here's an electronic copy. And if you read it as poetry, its not only beautiful but it tells the story of the astronomic, geologic and biologic developments from prehistory. And it does them in what science has figured out is the order that they occurred. Now, how did that happen? How did a 5000+ year old group of Hebrews write down this story and how did all the stone age tribes around the world come up with such similar stories at such different times in such diverse locations before there was much in the way of travel or communication? And how were these "primitive" people able to do this so long before the modern western world was able to come up with sustainable, defendable theories to explain the same thing, although in much more detail and with measurable observations.
The Story of Creation.* 1In the beginning, when God created the heavens and the eartha— 2* and the earth was without form or shape, with darkness over the abyss and a mighty wind sweeping over the waters—b
3Then God said: Let there be light, and there was light.c 4God saw that the light was good. God then separated the light from the darkness. 5God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” Evening came, and morning followed—the first day.*
6Then God said: Let there be a dome in the middle of the waters, to separate one body of water from the other. 7God made the dome,* and it separated the water below the dome from the water above the dome. And so it happened.d 8God called the dome “sky.” Evening came, and morning followed—the second day.
9Then God said: Let the water under the sky be gathered into a single basin, so that the dry land may appear. And so it happened: the water under the sky was gathered into its basin, and the dry land appeared.e 10God called the dry land “earth,” and the basin of water he called “sea.” God saw that it was good. 11f Then God said: Let the earth bring forth vegetation: every kind of plant that bears seed and every kind of fruit tree on earth that bears fruit with its seed in it. And so it happened: 12the earth brought forth vegetation: every kind of plant that bears seed and every kind of fruit tree that bears fruit with its seed in it. God saw that it was good. 13Evening came, and morning followed—the third day.
14Then God said: Let there be lights in the dome of the sky, to separate day from night. Let them mark the seasons, the days and the years,g 15and serve as lights in the dome of the sky, to illuminate the earth. And so it happened: 16God made the two great lights, the greater one to govern the day, and the lesser one to govern the night, and the stars.h 17God set them in the dome of the sky, to illuminate the earth, 18to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. God saw that it was good. 19Evening came, and morning followed—the fourth day.
20i Then God said: Let the water teem with an abundance of living creatures, and on the earth let birds fly beneath the dome of the sky. 21God created the great sea monsters and all kinds of crawling living creatures with which the water teems, and all kinds of winged birds. God saw that it was good, 22and God blessed them, saying: Be fertile, multiply, and fill the water of the seas; and let the birds multiply on the earth.j 23Evening came, and morning followed—the fifth day.
24k Then God said: Let the earth bring forth every kind of living creature: tame animals, crawling things, and every kind of wild animal. And so it happened: 25God made every kind of wild animal, every kind of tame animal, and every kind of thing that crawls on the ground. God saw that it was good. 26l Then God said: Let us make* human beings in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, the tame animals, all the wild animals, and all the creatures that crawl on the earth.
27God created mankind in his image;
in the image of God he created them;
male and female* he created them.
28God blessed them and God said to them: Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.* Have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and all the living things that crawl on the earth.m 29* n God also said: See, I give you every seed-bearing plant on all the earth and every tree that has seed-bearing fruit on it to be your food; 30and to all the wild animals, all the birds of the air, and all the living creatures that crawl on the earth, I give all the green plants for food. And so it happened. 31God looked at everything he had made, and found it very good. Evening came, and morning followed—the sixth day.o
* [1:1–2:3] This section, from the Priestly source, functions as an introduction, as ancient stories of the origin of the world (cosmogonies) often did. It introduces the primordial story (2:4–11:26), the stories of the ancestors (11:27–50:26), and indeed the whole Pentateuch. The chapter highlights the goodness of creation and the divine desire that human beings share in that goodness. God brings an orderly universe out of primordial chaos merely by uttering a word. In the literary structure of six days, the creation events in the first three days are related to those in the second three.
1. light (day)/darkness (night) = 4. sun/moon
2. arrangement of water = 5. fish + birds from waters
3. a) dry land = 6. a) animals
b) vegetation b) human beings: male/female
The seventh day, on which God rests, the climax of the account, falls outside the six-day structure.
If you can't show that your god exists, you can't show that The Babble is anything but a myth. You seem to be able to use a computer – do the honest thing and look up the scientific rebuttals to the creationist myth. I have no quarrel with poetry, but poetry itself does not mean truth. Regardless of the form of communication used, you have a content problem – your assertions are unsupported.
It's not an assertion. It's a question. How DID they get the right order of things? And how did they do it in so many different cultures even before literacy and communications became widespread?
oops! Just re-read you... It's not the type of communication I'm referring to I'm talking about communications. It's not like these people came up with an idea and were able to broadcast or teletype or mail a letter. And even smoke signals have a limited range. So how did this story get to be so widespread before we had effective means of communication? These stories are older than domesticated animals so they weren't riding the pony-express around the middle east and asia, not to mention sailing or any of the modern forms of transportation.
CCC, read up on the Roman Empire. Their system of roads, as well as their merchant fleets, were top-notch. And yes, they did have a form of "pony express". They had the roads for it, and they used them. Getting messages around the Empire didn't take as long as you think it did.
The Babble did not get it right. In fact, The Babble has two differing versions. But you're a smart guy, take a chance and research the scientific rebuttal to your myth. And while you are doing that, come up with a proof for your god 'cause until you do that you are asking people to assume your myths have a foundation in truth and to discuss them as if they are true. That is unreasonable.
The Romans also had the Silk Road trading route to India and China. The Romans were advanced. They had the networks for communication by land and sea.
I'm talking waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay before the Romans. By the time they were on the scene, the Hebrews had had written this on scrolls for thousands of years...and before that it was an oral tradition...and before that it was a similar story in quite a few stone age societies. I'm not talking about written history, I'm talking before the lascaux caves were formed much less adorned with cave paintings. How did THAT happen?
While we're at it I want to know, if we are all and everything else is made of atoms. And each atom is just electrons, protons and neutrons, (and whatever other smaller subatomic parts they were discussing while I was busy drawing my now husband/then my crush's name all over my chemistry notebook) all whirling around each other, then couldn't you say that all matter is really just made of energy? All that energy in different observational forms but still the "same stuff" at its most basic? We and everything else is the same and all part of the same glob or universal energy. Wow! That sounds frighteningly CA new age.
Mirosal has taken care of the "how did they spread?" question. If there really was a supernatural being, my question would be why didn't the same extremely clear message go out to everyone on Earth at the same time, in an efficient manner, instead of relying on a bunch of uneducated goat herders? I suggest they took hold because there was no better alternative at the time, and the power structures were heavily invested in them because of their ability to control people and events. To object in any way, often meant death. One only needs to observe the idiots in the Middle East to see that this is still the case in much of the (under developed) world today.
These conditions do not exist in most of the world today (scientific knowledge has increased massively and most countries do not kill skeptics) but culture is a powerful thing. We believe what our parents tell us and unfortunately most parents still indoctrinate their children into their silly childish cults.
Gotta go for now. Big day ahead and there's just enough time to wake hubby gently before the kid gets up for school. Will check back in the evening.
Still not my question. No doubt about the sheep-herd express getting communications going....but I'm talking about before cro-magnon and neanderthal tribes were living in Eurasia. I'm talking about the time that was way Lucy was buzzing around Africa. Which calls to mind how did the really primative message get over to the pre-Columbian western hemisphere?
CCC, with apologies for assuming you are a guy, with regard to atoms and the creation of the universe, I strongly suggest you read two books by Laurence Krauss: Atom and A Universe From Nothing. You should be able to find videos of at least A Universe From Nothing on the web.
duh! **waaaay before** Lucy was buzzing... & if I don't get moving...I won't have time to give hubby anything other than a cup of coffee before the house is awake... b back l8tr
Cool thanks! Hitting the library later/ will check f/em
Every ancient culture had its own myths on how the world came to be.
I'm talking waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay before the Romans. By the time they were on the scene, the Hebrews had had written this on scrolls for thousands of years....
yeah, thats bullshi t. the romans were in existence from roughly 400 bc. they were just a little city state under the rule of another. Not an empire, but they were still there – the oldest hebrew text is only 1,000 bc...a mere 600 years before roman – not thousands.
here is a few source pages i did my research on... i have about 10 more.
eitherway, your wrong by a lot and that was the closest thing to making sense you had – you are a waste of space. time to shut up.
i should have put that the date i gave for the romans is not when they became something but became something different then what they already were – they have existed since about 800bc...around 400bc they become a republic. that is when i believe the romans that you had in mind came about –
@ Mirosal: Of course the Romans were advanced. I, as well as any other Italian, can tell you just how advanced our ancestors were. But the Jews date Abraham in their Torah back to something like 2100 BC... and the Genesis stories are way older than era of the patriarchs. If we are fair, we would have to say that any story about the creation of man would have to date back to the earliest known man. Who would that be? Neaderthals were what, 120k-130k years ago? Hey, Italians and Romans are great, but I don't think we can attribute to them a 130k year old telephone system for oral history.
CCC you are of an unsound mind
(1) Hallucinations – the person has invisible friends who (s)he insists are real, and to whom (s)he speaks daily, even though nobody can actually see or hear
(2) Delusions – the patient believes that the invisible friends have magical powers to make them rich, cure cancer, bring about world peace, and will do so eventually if asked.
(3) Denial/Inability to learn – though the requests for world peace remain unanswered, even after hundreds of years, the patients persist with the praying behaviour, each time expecting different results.
(4) Inability to distinguish fantasy from reality – the beliefs are contingent upon ancient mythology being accepted as historical fact.
(5) Paranoia – the belief that anyone who does not share their supernatural concept of reality is "evil," "the devil," "an agent of Satan".
(6) Emotional abuse – religious concepts such as sin, hell, cause feelings of guilt, shame, fear, and other types of emotional "baggage" which can scar the
psyche for life.
@ Christianity is a form: I don't know....hallucinations can be fun if they come in sugar cubes.
; – D It's a joke, son. Laugh. I'm out of here...enough procrastinating for the day...
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.