home
RSS
December 4th, 2012
04:59 AM ET

Belief Blog's Morning Speed Read for Tuesday, December 04

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: WWJD...about taxes?
Dig under the rhetoric over taxes in Washington now, and you’ll find one question: should the wealthy pay more in taxes than other people? It’s a question that goes back to the Bible. Geoffrey Miller is a law professor at New York University who’s written about taxation in the Bible. He writes about the Temple Tax, the one God told Moses to impose in Exodus 30. It’s the one where each person, rich and poor, pays half a shekel – for the Temple – and God.

Photos of the Day:


Photo credit: Sanjay Kanojia/AFP/Getty Images

Hindu holy men or sadhus arrive at Sangam to participate in the upcoming Maha Kumbh Festival, in Allahabad on December 2, 2012. The Kumbh Mela is the largest gathering of people for a religious purpose in the world and millions of people gather for this auspicious occasion.


Photo credit: Matt Cardy/Getty Images

In this combination of two images with a multiple long exposure the interior of Salisbury Cathedral is illuminated by trails of candles carried by choristers during the annual 'darkness to light' advent procession on December 1, 2012 in Salisbury, England. The annual advent service, which takes place over three nights and is seen by several thousand people, is a mix of music and readings during which two great candlelit processions move around the different spaces in the 750-year-old building which, by the end, is illuminated by almost 1300 candles and is a spectacular start to the Christmas season.

Enlightening Reads:

Religion News Service: Poll: Most Americans say employers should cover contraception
Most Americans say that employers - even religious ones - should provide birth control coverage to their employees, according to a survey released on Monday (Dec. 3). The poll by LifeWay Research also showed that almost two-thirds of Americans (63 percent) believe businesses should be required to provide the coverage for free, even if contraception conflicts with the owner’s religious ethics.

Huffington Post: Catholic Priest Calls 'Fox & Friends' Anger Over 'War On Christmas' Just 'Silly'
Fox News' overemphasis on America's "War on Christmas" is just getting "silly," according to one Catholic priest. Father Jonathan Morris, who has been a contributor on Fox News since 2005, recently visited the set of "Fox & Friends" to discuss "The War on Christmas," Mediaite reports. Although the show's co-hosts might have assumed Morris would unleash wrath upon those battling against the holiday's religious connotation, he did not. In fact, he called the whole "War on Christmas" plain old "silly."

Reuters: More than 100 graves robbed in Benin for skulls and organs for voodoo rituals
Tomb raiders have dug up more than 100 graves at a cemetery in Benin in the last two weeks for what authorities suspect is a black-market trade in human organs and skulls for voodoo ritual fetishes. The incident is the most serious case of grave-robbing in the West African state, the world capital of voodoo where most of the country’s 9 million residents practice a benign form of the official religion.

Catholic News Agency: LA Guadalupe procession draws thousands in celebration of faith
An outdoor procession for Our Lady of Guadalupe held Sunday in Los Angeles attracted 25,000 participants to venerate the Virgin and to express their Catholic faith. “We want to learn from the example of faith of our Blessed Mother, as Jesus did. Jesus learned his prayers and the practice of his faith from his Mother and from Saint Joseph,” Archbishop Jose H. Gomez told the crowd assembled for Mass following the Dec. 2 procession.

The Jewish Daily Forward: Deck The Halls With Boughs of Challah
A Jewish music preservation group sets out to make the definitive Hanukkah compilation and ends up with an album dripping with Christmas cheer. That’s not just a humdrum holiday punch line — it’s also an accurate description of the genesis of the Idelsohn Society’s December release, “‘Twas the Night Before Hanukkah: The Musical Battle Between Christmas and the Festival of Lights,” a catalog of efforts by a century’s worth of Jewish musicians to head off the yuletide blues.

The Guardian: Scouts and guides consider adopting atheist oaths
Since 1908, when Robert Baden-Powell laid down the rules for his nascent movement in Scouting for Boys, new Scouts and Guides have made the traditional three-finger salute and promised to not just help others but remain loyal to a deity or higher power. Now, for the first time, the self-professed godless could also be welcome.

Huffington Post: Shariah Law: The Five Things Every Non-Muslim (and Muslim) Should Know
Shariah is the law of the Qur'an and literally means "A path to life giving water." In fact, the word Yarrah (i.e. the root of the Hebrew word Torah) means precisely the same thing. Therefore, Shariah is actually ingrained in Abrahamic tradition. Shariah is comprised of five main branches: adab (behavior, morals and manners), ibadah (ritual worship), i'tiqadat (beliefs), mu'amalat (transactions and contracts) and 'uqubat (punishments). These branches combine to create a society based on justice, pluralism and equity for every member of that society. Furthermore, Shariah forbids that it be imposed on any unwilling person.

Join the conversation…

Christian’s year of living 'gay' leads to dramatic change, sparks controversy
Timothy Kurek’s motivation to spend a year pretending to be gay can be boiled down to a simple conviction: it takes drastic change to alter deeply held religious beliefs. The experiment began after a lesbian friend opened up to Kurek about being excommunicated by her family. All Kurek, an avowed evangelical Christian, could think about, he says, “was trying to convert her.”He was quickly disgusted by his own feelings, more pious than humane. In fact, Kurek was so disgusted by his response to his friend that he decided to do something drastic. Living in Nashville, Tennessee, he would pretend to be gay for a year. The experiment began on the first day of 2009; Kurek came out to his family, got a job as a barista at a gay café and enlisted the help of a friend to act as his boyfriend in public.

- A. Hawkins

Filed under: Morning Read

« Previous entry
soundoff (174 Responses)
  1. Chick-a-dee

    uh hum... CNN has a belief blog... Earth has a few billion Catholics + other assorted christians... its almost midnight and STILL not a single story on Advent. But we've covered the guy who pretended to be gay for three days in a row. They must have a vacancy for Belief Blog administrator that HR hasn't filled yet.

    December 5, 2012 at 12:24 am |
    • Yawn

      Advent is not news. Get over yourself.

      December 5, 2012 at 3:31 am |
  2. Chick-a-dee

    Akira,

    Please accept my condolences on your loss. No one can understand the loss a parent experiences when a child dies, not even another parent in the same situation. May you find solace.

    December 4, 2012 at 11:41 pm |
    • Akira

      Thank you.
      I have found solace.
      I appreciate your words.

      Lionlylamb is childless, so he would not know about the joys (and heartbreak) of being a parent; I found no enlightenment in his words.

      December 5, 2012 at 12:14 am |
  3. lionlylamb

    Lunchbreaker wrote on December 4, 2012 at 2:58 pm stating, “I contend that the absence of matter is a poor definition of "nothing". I see space as a thing and time as a thing. And it is quite plausible that there are "things" not consisting of space, time or matter. I would debate that there was never, no "thing."”
    Lionlylamb writes, “Space is an infantile prerogative in declaring that nothing is to be the unknowable fixation of spatial ambiances. Your stance whereof you think time to be a “thing” is somewhat of a fallacy for; time is only a unit of measuring distances that are deduced and subjugated around great distances. Your Einstein thoughts are lavishly felt though and I hold no bitterness in your educated stance. Nothingness is a fact of reality and should be deemed as what you declare to be of “space”.

    Hawaiiguest wrote on December 4, 2012 at 2:45 pm, stating, “And here comes the pseudo-intellectual irrelevancies. You make statements of sin, the holy, spirit, and the very nature of humanity (while simultaneously dehumanizing everyone who lives, has lived, or ever will live), all without justification. Guess what that makes it you wordy little poetry nut. It makes it an unjustified assertion. So why don't you stop being a dishonest ****tard?”

    Lionlylamb now writes, “Like I said in other posts, we are all born from sin and sinfulness of the flesh lain within the physical consuming or edible contorting constraints of nowadays thought of as being abiotic nuances but are in my view; essences of life formed in the absences of nothing out of nothingness in ways many simple minds might never fathom. Therefore, I stand fixed in saying that the Holy Spirit is a God whose body is the vast Seas of absolute Nothingness and this Holy Spirit holds creation and all creation-made manifestations ever within its seas and lakes and rivers and streams of nothingness. To deny this is to be as an immovable objective placard with no sense worthiness of being read.

    Akira wrote on December 4, 2012 at 4:10 pm, “Akra writes: There is nothing sinful about a baby being born; the act of being born, taking its first breath, and having its first meal is beautiful, not sinful. Time to examine why any rational, thinking person would choose to take a joyous occasion and, not only label being born a sin, but label an innocent child a sinner. Marlarky, rubbish, absurd. In other words, *********!

    Lionlylamb wrote on December 4, 2012 at 5:11 pm stating, “Akira, Only the Holy Spirit remains being Holy. All other physicality's lamenting or mourning attributes are as sinful prides. The flesh is incarnate and found guilty of consuming in every imaginable décor that the bodies dare need. Nourishments are not needed by God, the Holy Spirit who is the Nothingness that reaches outwardly and inwardly and even above and below and around and about.

    To deny Nothingness being the Holy Spirit as God is like saying one's will is more physical than spiritual! The generalist nature of many people is to deny God the Nothingness that is God. Nothingness holds all things together and does not consume things as all things made manifest do so do. The consuming nature of all living endowments does convict all mannerism of the living.

    It is also true that humanists deny themselves the Godly internments in favors more palatable to one's thoughts. We would all rather be anointed with pagan ritualism than look inwardly toward that which one's will does tell us in truth's own undeniable wordage. We play out our lives as being in needs yet know not what our will's needs truly are.

    We idolize one's self and our families' and brethren's ways and do forsake and give no sound measures toward the Holy Spirit being the God who is Nothingness. I do so make my repentant will to be well known to others who then do hold such actions against me! Where then is humanist justice to be found when everyone makes rudeness wordage to my tenured beliefs? Justice by others is blinded and in blindness all will ever so be against my willed convictions!

    Akira wrote on December 4, 2012 at 6:18 pm, saying, “I said nothing aboit being holy. I SAID, "There is nothing sinful about a baby being born; the act of being born, taking its first breath, and having its first meal is beautiful, not sinful." Because there ISN'T.

    Lionlylamb wrote on December 4, 2012 at 7:03 pm, writing, Akira, " We would all rather be anointed with pagan ritualism than look inwardly toward that which one's will does tell us in truth's own undeniable wordage. We play out our lives as being in needs yet know not what our will's needs truly are." is written in 5:11 post.

    Lionly lamb continues writing, “The flesh is incarnate and found guilty of consuming in every imaginable décor that the bodies dare need nourishments which are not needed by God, the Holy Spirit who is the Nothingness that reaches outwardly and inwardly to above and below and around and about. We are born unto sin and in sinning are we so raised and likewise our thoughts beware and condone all mannerisms of the sinful natures of living within vivacious ways.”

    Lionlylamb writes on December 4, 2012 at 7:13 pm, stating, “Akira, I do not disagree the births of children being born and their first breath and first meal, yet if one truly reaches deeply within their will, you should know that all life is not sacred but is an unholy resonance of the beguiled living natures whereby any life is willed to one day die. Why does one celebrate a newborn's birth when knowing full well that one day the newborn will die?”

    (edited version)

    December 4, 2012 at 7:26 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      And as usual, you have no point linoly.

      December 4, 2012 at 7:31 pm |
    • lionylamb is a

      Fop

      December 4, 2012 at 8:02 pm |
    • Akira

      And I stand fixed that there is nothing sinful about a baby being born, a baby taking its first breath, and a baby taking its first sustenance.
      No amount of cutting ot pasting is going to change what you wrote.
      You think babies are sinful from the bloody moment they make their innocent way into the world.
      You are wrong.
      I stopped reading after that; I should have never began.
      You. Are. Wrong.
      The end.
      I am profoundly grateful you are childless, for any child born of your loins would immediately have been wrapped in a hairshirt blanket.

      December 4, 2012 at 9:06 pm |
    • Akira

      "Why does one celebrate a newborn’s birth when knowing full well that one day the newborn will die?”

      Where to start? I'm not.
      Everyone dies, unless you haven't figured that out yet; then I'm sorry I spoiled the ending for you.
      Babies are a cause for celebration, in most scenarios.
      I'm sorry you seem to be so bitter about such a lovely event.
      I'm not going to address you anymore tonight; it is wholly pointless.

      December 4, 2012 at 9:18 pm |
    • Athy

      Geez, what is wrong with you, lionly? Please get some help.

      December 4, 2012 at 10:54 pm |
    • Chick-a-dee

      Where's Waldo challenge for this crowd.... Can you read far enough to find

      "It is especially in regard to original sin in this second meaning that modern culture raises strong reservations. It cannot admit the idea of a hereditary sin, connected with the decision of a progenitor and not with that of the person concerned. It holds that such a view runs counter to the personalistic vision of man and to the demands which derive from full respect for his subjectivity.

      However, the Church's teaching on original sin can be extremely valuable for modern people. Having rejected the data of faith in this matter, they can no longer understand the mysterious and distressing aspects of evil which they daily experience. They end up by wavering between a hasty and unjustified optimism and a radical pessimism bereft of hope."

      December 4, 2012 at 11:34 pm |
    • Chick-a-dee

      The Church's Teaching on Original Sin
      General Audience September 24, 1986
       Death is a consequence of sin
      Thanks to the previous catechesis of the present series, we have before our eyes, on the one hand, the analysis of the first sin in human history according to the description contained in Genesis 3; on the other, we have an ample view of what divine revelation teaches on the universality and hereditary nature of sin. This truth is constantly proposed, over and over again, by the Church's Magisterium, even in our own time. Here we must refer to the docu,ments of Vatican II, especially to the Consti.tution Gaudium et Spes, and with a special mention of the post-synodal Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia (l984).
      The source of this teaching is above all the pa.ssage of the Book of Genesis, in which we see that man, tempted by the evil one ("when you eat of it...you will be like God, knowing good and evil" Gen 3:5), "abused his liberty, setting himself against God and seeking to attain his goal apart from God" (GS 13). Then "the eyes of both were opened" (that is, of the man and of the woman), "and they knew that they were naked" (Gen 3:7). When the Lord God "called the man and said to him: 'where are you?' he replied: 'I was afraid because I was naked, and I hid myself'" (Gen 3:9-10). This is a very significant reply. Man in the beginning (in the state of original justice) spoke to the Creator with friendship and confidence in the whole truth of his spiritual-corporeal being, created in God's image. But now he has lost the basis of that friendship and covenant. He has lost the grace of sharing in God's life—the good of belonging to him in the holiness of the original relationship of subordination and sonship. But sin has immediately made its presence felt in the existence and the whole comportment of the man and the woman—shame for their transgression, the consequent condition as sinners and therefore fear of God. Revelation and psychological analysis are united in this page of the Bible to express man's "state" after the fall.
      1.  Death is a consequence of sin
      We have seen another truth emerge from the books of the Old and New Testaments—a kind of "invasion" of sin in the history of humanity. Sin has become the common lot of man, his inheritance from his mother's womb. "In sin did my mother conceive me," exclaimed the Psalmist in a moment of existential anguish, in which repentance is coupled with the invocation of divine mercy (Ps 51). St. Paul frequently referred to this same anguishing experience, as we saw in the previous catechesis. He gave a theoretical formulation to this truth in the Letter to the Romans: "All are under the power of sin" (Rom 3:9). "Let every mouth be stopped, and let the whole world be held accountable to God" (Rom 3:19). "We were by nature children of wrath" (Eph 2:3). Biblical scholars comment that these are all allusions to human nature left to itself, without the help of grace. They refer to nature as it is reduced by the sin of our first parents, and thus to the condition of all their descendants and heirs.
      The biblical texts on the universality and hereditary nature of sin lead us to examine more directly the Catholic teaching on original sin. It is as though sin is "congenital" in nature in the state in which everyone receives it at the moment of conception from one's parents.
      It concerns a truth transmitted implicitly in the Church's teaching from the beginning. It became the object of a formal declaration of the Magisterium in the fifteenth Synod of Carthage in 418 and the Synod of Orange in 529, principally against the errors of Pelagius [1] . Later, during the period of the Reformation, the Council of Trent solemnly formulated this truth in 1546 (cf. DS 1510-1516). The Tridentine decree on original sin expresses this truth in the precise form in which it is the object of faith and of the Church's teaching. We can refer to this decree for the essential content of Catholic dogma on this point.
      Our first parents (the decree says: Primum hominem Adam), in the earthly paradise (and therefore in the state of original justice and perfection) sinned gravely, by transgressing the commandment of God. Because of their sin they lost sanctifying grace; likewise they lost also the holiness and justice in which they were "consti.tuted" from the beginning, and they drew down on themselves the anger of God. The consequence of this sin was death as we now know it. One must recall here the words of the Lord in Genesis 2:17: "Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die." In the previous catecheses we spoke of the meaning of this prohibition. As a result of sin Satan was able to extend his "dominion" over man. The Tridentine decree speaks of "slavery under the dominion of him who has the power of death" (cf. DS 1511). Being under the "power" of Satan is described as "slavery."
      It will be necessary to return to this aspect of the drama of the origins to examine the elements of "alienation" that sin brought with it. Meanwhile we note that the Tridentine decree refers to the "sin of Adam" inasmuch as it was our first parents' own personal sin (what the theologians call peccatum originale originans). But it does not fail to describe its fateful consequences in the history of the human race (the so-called peccatum originale originatum).
      It is especially in regard to original sin in this second meaning that modern culture raises strong reservations. It cannot admit the idea of a hereditary sin, connected with the decision of a progenitor and not with that of the person concerned. It holds that such a view runs counter to the personalistic vision of man and to the demands which derive from full respect for his subjectivity.
      However, the Church's teaching on original sin can be extremely valuable for modern people. Having rejected the data of faith in this matter, they can no longer understand the mysterious and distressing aspects of evil which they daily experience. They end up by wavering between a hasty and unjustified optimism and a radical pessimism bereft of hope.
      In the next catechesis we shall pause to reflect on the message faith offers us on a theme so important for the individual and for the whole of humanity.

      December 4, 2012 at 11:34 pm |
  4. Akira

    I said nothing aboit being holy.
    I SAID, "There is nothing sinful about a baby being born; the act of being born, taking its first breath, and having its first meal is beautiful, not sinful."
    Because there ISN'T.

    December 4, 2012 at 6:18 pm |
    • Akira

      This is in reply to ll's 5:11 post.

      December 4, 2012 at 6:28 pm |
    • uoıƃılǝɹ ɟo plɹoʍ uʍop ǝpısdn ǝɥʇ

      Why would anyone believe that the real world is exactly what it looks like, when it is so obvioously the result of magic?

      December 4, 2012 at 6:28 pm |
    • lionlylamb

      Akira,

      " We would all rather be anointed with pagan ritualism than look inwardly toward that which one's will does tell us in truth's own undeniable wordage. We play out our lives as being in needs yet know not what our will's needs truly are." is written in 5:11 post.

      The flesh is incarnate and found guilty of consuming in every imaginable décor that the bodies dare need. nourishments which are not needed by God, the Holy Spirit who is the Nothingness that reaches outwardly and inwardly to above and below and around and about. We are born unto sin and in sinning are we so raised and likewise our thoughts beware and condone all mannerisms of the sinful natures of living within vivacious ways.

      December 4, 2012 at 7:03 pm |
    • lionlylamb

      Akira,

      I do not disagree the births of children being born and their first breath and first meal, yet if one truly reaches deeply within their will, you should know that all life is not sacred but is an unholy resonance of the beguiled natures whereby any life is willed to one day die. Why does one celebrate a newborn's birth when knowing full well that one day the newborn will die?

      December 4, 2012 at 7:13 pm |
    • Akira

      Lionly. You wrote elsewhere that all babies are born in sin, take their first breath in sin, and eat their first meal in sin.
      I said bullsh!t, because it is.
      I don't give a flying fig how many ways one wants to pontificate and bloviate on the subject, thinking that the joy of a baby's birth and their first moments of life is sinful is just very, very disturbed thinking.
      You can write a 40 page post about it, but if it comes to the same conclusion, I will still call bs on it, because that assertion is wholly absurd.

      December 4, 2012 at 7:42 pm |
    • lionlylamb

      Akira,

      Your denying the eventual death of one's child is nothing but that, a deniability. Accepting that one day your child will someday die is but a rationalism made easier to take by admitting to one's selfish will that one day my child will die and I will do my best to give my child all that they do need to make their life here as pleasant as I can so make it.

      Death Akira, is an inevitability and all measure should be afforded one's children to have a good life as they do age under one's wings of parenthood and on into adulthood. Not thinking about death will not make it go away Akira. Not telling your child that all things will die does nothing for any child's willfulness in understanding death's finalities.

      How then Akira are you going to level with your children regarding one dying if you yourself cannot face the door of death?

      December 4, 2012 at 8:30 pm |
    • Akira

      Ll, are you even fvcking kidding me??
      I gave birth to three children; I have two that survived...my firstborn died when he was 17.
      Clearly you know absolutely nothing about life OR death on one's children; I would suggest you stop writing about something you have absolutely no knowledge of.
      Your continued assumptions are pathetic and sad; you ignorance is staggering.
      Shut up.

      December 4, 2012 at 9:27 pm |
    • Moby Schtick.

      Akira, I have children around that age. I can't imagine. I'm sorry.

      You can't take ll seriously on such matter, though. I appreciate the candor of your reply to him.

      December 4, 2012 at 9:29 pm |
    • Akira

      Moby:
      Thank you.
      It was hard.
      One thing I do know about is the mortality of children.

      December 4, 2012 at 9:47 pm |
    • Chick-a-dee

      "It is especially in regard to original sin in this second meaning that modern culture raises strong reservations. It cannot admit the idea of a hereditary sin, connected with the decision of a progenitor and not with that of the person concerned. It holds that such a view runs counter to the personalistic vision of man and to the demands which derive from full respect for his subjectivity."

      December 4, 2012 at 11:37 pm |
  5. lionlylamb

    Lunchbreaker wrote on December 4, 2012 at 2:58 pm stating, “I contend that the absence of matter is a poor definition of "nothing". I see space as a thing and time as a thing. And it is quite plausible that there are "things" not consisting of space, time or matter. I would debate that there was never, no "thing."”

    Lionlylamb writes, “Space is an infantile prerogative in declaring that nothing is to be the unknowable fixation of spatial ambiances. Your stance whereof you think time to be a “thing” is somewhat of a fallacy for; time is only a unit of measuring distances that are deduced and subjugated around great distances. Your Einstein thoughts are lavishly felt though and I hold no bitterness in your educated stance. Nothingness is a fact of reality and should be deemed as what you declare to be of “space”.

    Hawaiiguest wrote on December 4, 2012 at 2:45 pm, stating, “And here comes the pseudo-intellectual irrelevancies. You make statements of sin, the holy, spirit, and the very nature of humanity (while simultaneously dehumanizing everyone who lives, has lived, or ever will live), all without justification. Guess what that makes it you wordy little poetry nut. It makes it an unjustified assertion. So why don't you stop being a dishonest ****tard?”

    Lionlylamb now writes, “Like I said in other posts, we are all born from sin and sinfulness of the flesh lain within the physical consuming or edible contorting constraints of nowadays thought of as being abiotic nuances but are in my view; essences of life formed in the absences of nothing out of nothingness in ways many simple minds might never fathom. Therefore, I stand fixed in saying that the Holy Spirit is a God whose body is the vast Seas of absolute Nothingness and this Holy Spirit holds creation and all creation’s made manifestation ever within its seas and lakes and rivers and streams of nothingness. To deny this is to stay as an immovable objective placard with no sense worthy of being approached.

    December 4, 2012 at 3:50 pm |
    • Akira

      Akra writes:
      There is nothing sinful about a baby being born; the act of being born, taking its first breath, and having its first meal is beautiful, not sinful.
      Time to examine why any rational, thinking person would choose to take a joyous occasion and, not only label being born a sin, but label an innocent child a sinner.
      Marlarky, rubbish, absurd.
      In other words, BULLSH!T!

      December 4, 2012 at 4:10 pm |
    • lionlylamb

      Akira,

      Only the Holy Spirit remains being Holy. All other physicality's lamenting or mourning attributes are as sinful prides. The flesh is incarnate and found guilty of consuming in every imaginable décor that the bodies dare need. Nourishments are not needed by God, the Holy Spirit who is the Nothingness that reaches outwardly and inwardly above and below and around and about.

      To deny Nothingness being the Holy Spirit as God is like saying one's will is more physical than spiritual! The generalist natures of many people is to deny God the Nothingness that is God. Nothingness holds all things together and does not consume things as all things made manifest do so do. The consuming natures of all living endowments does convict all mannerism of the living.

      It is also true that humanists deny themselves the Godly internments in favors more palatable to one's thoughts. We would all rather be anointed with pagan ritualism than look inwardly toward that which one's will does tell us in truth's own undeniable wordage. We play out our lives as being in needs yet know not what our will's needs truly are.

      We idolize one's self and our families' and brethren's ways and do forsake and give no sound measures toward the Holy Spirit being the God who is Nothingness. I do so make my repentant will well known to others who then do hold such actions against me! Where then is humanist justice to be found when everyone makes rudeness wordage to my tenured beliefs? Justice by others are blinded and in blindness all will ever so be against my willed convictions!

      December 4, 2012 at 5:11 pm |
1 2

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

« Previous entry
Advertisement
About this blog

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 and Eric Marrapodi with daily contributions from CNN's worldwide newsgathering team.