 |
|
|
|
 Congregation Or Hadash, a conservative Jewish synagogue built from a former auto body repair shop.
November 20th, 2013
12:11 PM ET
From auto shop to sacred spaceEditor's note: This story is part of CNN's American Journey series to show how old buildings around the United States have found new purposes and helped to build communities. Are there repurposed buildings in your community? Share the stories with CNN iReport and they could be featured in a CNN story. Sandy Springs, Georgia (CNN) - The old Chevrolet paint and body shop was vacant - 24,000 square feet of metal and concrete surrounded by a sea of asphalt. But when some members of Congregation Or Hadash saw it, they saw a home. Since it was founded in 2003, the conservative Jewish congregation had bounced from location to location outside Atlanta - a Methodist church, a windowless space in a school, any place they could rent or borrow as they grew. "Sometimes, from week to week, we didn't know exactly where we were going to be," said Fred Wachter, president of the congregation and a member since its early years. "All the while ... we probably walked every piece of available property and real estate in Sandy Springs, trying to find something, anything, that would look like it." FULL STORY
Next entry »How Catholic was John F. Kennedy?
« Previous entryDisfigured man embraced by Pope: 'I felt only love'
|
  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 with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
Hear ya'll got your own mega churches too! Now all you need is the real God!
Atheist mega churches....now ain't that ironic!
"Mega churches" to critical thinking? Ah, you must mean respected universities!
Ben, please dont feed the trolls.
Which god is the real god? No mentally ill delusional believer (which includes all god believers) has ever proven the existence of their personal sky buddy.
Thus it proves atheism has always been a religion. If atheism wasn't a religion, they wouldn't need a church! Atheists have been lying to us!!!!
And you have proven beyond doubt you are nothing but a lying punk troll.
When have atheists ever forced their beliefs on you?
Get out of the megachurches – find your own personal God!
(Shh...[whispers] Added bonus – once you do, you can hate anyone and it's justified!)
OK, get back in church -power in numbers!
(Shh...[whispers] Added bonus – we can lobby together and disenfranchise large groups we don't like all at once!)
No, get back out!
No, get back in!
No, get back out!
.
.
.
.
As attendance declines, many churches have been converted to restaurants, houses, apartments, bars, recording studios, bookshops, and music clubs. Got to do something with them now that more and more people wise up and accept the real world as it is.
Yes, the next thing you know the atheist will be in the vacated k-mart singing we are the world.
The converted 😉 an old church into condos where I live. The units all have some stained glass and great woodwork, but the big draw was the prime downtown location. All the new megachurches are opening up in ugly barns out in the sticks. Nobody would ever want them for anything but Costcos in the future.
This is all wrong.
Whoa Nelly, I need a touch up and some spirit shine on the chrome!
Can I drive thru?
I just hear Stefon from SNL. "This synagogue has everything....built in an abandon Chevy paint shop...."
For the newbies:
Recognizing the flaws, follies and frauds in the foundations of Islam, Judaism and Christianity, the "bowers", kneelers" and "pew peasants" are converging these religions into some simple rules of life (e.g. Do no harm). No koran, bible, popes, clerics, nuns, monks, imams, evangelicals, ayatollahs, rabbis, professors of religion or priests needed or desired.
Ditto for houses of "worthless worship" aka mosques, churches, basilicas, cathedrals, temples and synagogues.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
For the newbies:
Recognizing the flaws, follies and frauds in the foundations of Islam, Judaism and Christianity, the "bowers", kneelers" and "pew peasants" are converging these religions into some simple rules of life (e.g. Do no harm). No koran, bible, popes, clerics, nuns, monks, imams, evangelicals, ayatollahs, rabbis, professors of religion or priests needed or desired.
Ditto for houses of "worthless worship" aka mosques, churches, basilicas, cathedrals, temples and synagogues.
A Christian and a different kind of Christian are arguing over the truth of their versions of Christ when the topic involves conservative Jews in Sandy Springs (near Atlanta). Things seem a little slow.
Seeing how CNN is a little slow on this one...Good News on a couple of fronts...Psychic Sylvia Browne has passed away...no more will she deceive people. http://www.tmz.com/2013/11/20/sylvia-browne-world-famous-psychic-dead/
And Costco has labelled the bible in the most honest way ever-Fiction http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/19/costco-bible-fiction_n_4304784.html.
I wonder is she saw her own death coming?
Costco will no doubt feel some heat fir that decision.
*for
And the Comedy Gold Award goes to the three below arguing how their BRAND of fiction works..
Galileo: "The Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go."
The Bible viewed Heaven as being below where satellites orbit, up just beyond the "Firmament".
Just another one it got wrong.
Yeah, if humans looked to be the size of grasshoppers to "God", he couldn't have been very high up there! Oddly enough, though, it *is* about the size we'd look to the guys who wrote those stories if they looked down from the hillsides/hilltops around Judea.
So some Jews saw a bargain and grabbed it. This is not news.
Why you are trolling us with a stereotype of Jews is bound to be pretty low-handed, considering the source, O "editors".
Jesus expressed doubt. It is ok if Christians do, too. Don't listen to the looney atheist theories... there is a reason their websites look like 1988 Geocities pages and don't include references.
Wow, that is exactly backwards, even your tag name.
Way to project anxiety over your own inadequacies.
YOU ARE POSTING COMMENTS TO QUICKLY. SLOW DOWN.
Or will the monster under the bed get you in your sleep ?
Why so capitalized? Is your screen really small? Or your head?
Quick, agile minds blessed with material that is not only logical, but eloquently reasonable can counter religious nonsense in no time flat. People often accuse we atheists of hanging out here overly long, but the truth is I find that it takes very little time to post comments in response to your kind of statements. It's just too easy!
@JW : Russ- yes Jesus was created. Rev 3:14- "...These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God.."
The term 'beginning' comes from the Greek word 'arche', which can be translated as beginning or ruler. It is essentially saying first or highest. To properly translated it, you need to understand the context. In ancient times, when a city was founded, it was named after the person who founded it. That same person was its ruler. Thus, the person is the "beginning" of the city.
Note that the term 'arche' is different from 'ktizo', which actually MEANS create. So, if Jesus was created, it would have stated that Jesus was 'protos' (or first) among the 'ktizo'. Since it doesn't, it is saying that Jesus is the ruler of all creation – even over Satan (who is the ruler of this corrupted world).
Is Jesus eternally incarnate?
It depends upon what you mean by incarnate. If you mean this bodily form we see in this world, then no. If you mean that he has a spiritual body, then yes.
What is a spiritual body, Live4Him? It seems oxymoron-ish.
Addendum: Here are some other passages that also use the Greek term 'arche':
Matt 2:6 for out of you will come a ruler who will be the shepherd of my people Israel
Mark 5:35 the house of Jairus, the synagogue ruler.
Luke 13:14 because Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, the synagogue ruler said to the people
Luke 18:18 A certain ruler asked him, “Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
Acts 7:18 Joseph, became ruler of Egypt
Acts 7:35 Who made you ruler and judge?
Rev. 1:1; 3:14, RS: “The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him . . . ‘And to the angel of the church in La-odicea write: “The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning [Greek, ar·khe′] of God’s creation.”’” (KJ, Dy, CC, and NW, as well as others, read similarly.) Is that rendering correct? Some take the view that what is meant is that the Son was ‘the beginner of God’s creation,’ that he was its ‘ultimate source.’ But Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon lists “beginning” as its first meaning of ar·khe′. (Oxford, 1968, p. 252) The logical conclusion is that the one being quoted at Revelation 3:14 is a creation, the first of God’s creations, that he had a beginning. Compare Proverbs 8:22, where, as many Bible commentators agree, the Son is referred to as wisdom personified. According to RS, NE, and JB, the one there speaking is said to be “created.”)
Look at the other passages that I referenced. Each of them also use the arche term. Would you argue that the proper translation would be 'beginning'?
Depends on the context. The majority of translations, translate Rev 3:14 as "beginning" including the KJV... If it was "ruler" don't you think the translators would've preferred using that term instead?
What do you think about prov 8:22?
@JW : Depends on the context.
Yes, it does, but that can also be a subjective viewpoint. Lets look at just two of the verses that we've addressed (Act and Rev).
Act 7:35 Who made you ruler and judge? Greek : (τίς σε κατέστησεν ἄρχοντα καὶ δικαστήν;)
Rev 3:14 the ruler of God’s creation. Greek: (ἡ ἀρχὴ τη̂ς κτίσεως του̂ θεου̂)
Now, the context in Acts cannot be 'beginning' because it wouldn't make sense. Therefore, this should show that arche can mean ruler. Unless you understand Greek context, then at most you could claim is that the term is ambiguous to you. If is it ambiguous, don't you think it is unwise to take a firm position on the issue?
@JW : What do you think about prov 8:22?
Proverbs 8 is talking about wisdom, not a person nor Jesus himself.
8:12 I, wisdom, dwell together with prudence;
8:22 The LORD brought me forth as the first of his works, before his deeds of old;
BTW – I enjoyed the discussion, but I'm calling it a day. Maybe we can chat again some time? Bye.
Compare Proverbs 8:22, where, as many Bible commentators agree, the Son is referred to as wisdom personified. According to RS, NE, and JB, the one there speaking is said to be “created.”)
Even if your way of translating that verse "the ruler of Gods creation", Is write from all other bible translators... Think about the meaning, "the ruler of Gods creations"... That verse is telling me that Jesus is ruling over Gods creations, meaning Jesus is totally separate from God, and authority was given to Jesus from his father Jehovah God to rule over Jehovah's creations... That is in the bible.
Nice talking to you too. Will continue another time. An example of a good conversation without dropping the F bomb.
BTW – I've gone to Seminary and have studied Greek. I also can supply many more verses that have the arche term and would not make sense with the term beginning, but would make sense with ruler.
🙄
John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
And you think quoting pure BS from your book of lies is some sort of rational argument? Please throw yourself off a cliff.
Just trying to help live4him & JW, but thanks for asking Crom.
Isaiah 57:15
For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones.
John 1 says Jesus is God. The verse from Jesus uses the plural, let us. Isaiah says God is in eternity with him.
By "our" image, what's to say that this isn't an artifact of Hebrew belief dating back to when they were polytheistic?
John 1:1,How the word can be god and WITH God at the same time? Explain please.
God the father, God the son, God the Holy Spirit. Jesus, God the son is with God the father.
But how is Jesus God the father if he is WITH God?
Jesus is the word, he is with God the father and he is God the son.
"John 1 says Jesus is God. The verse from Jesus uses the plural,"
Before assuming that the plural indicates Jesus as God look at these examples:
Judges 16:23 – ( Elo-him = plural, is used on this text to identify Dagon the god fish... Was this god 2 gods in one?
Genesis 42:30 – Adoh-nei = plural is used in reference to Joseph the lord of Egypt...Is Joesph 2 gods in one?
Ok so Jesus is separated from God then, Jehovah God is one identiity, Jesus another one.
Acts 7:55 – "But he, being full of holy spirit, gazed into heaven and caught sight of God’s glory and of Jesus standing at God’s right hand"
How do you interpret this scripture?
In what sense is Jesus "a god"?
For example, at Psalm 82:1-6 human judges in Israel were referred to as “gods” (Hebrew, ’elo·him′; Greek, the·oi′, at John 10:34) because they were representatives of Jehovah and were to speak his law.
The bible refers to the Devil as "the god of this world", does this mean Satan is the true God?
He experienced all 3 persons of the trinity.
How has he experienced the trinity? What scriptures you use to back that statement?
That was my interpretation of the acts verse. Stephen experienced the trinity.
Stephen was full of holy spirit, and he saw Jesus standing at the Right Hand of God, 2 different identiities, ....How is that a trinity experience? If Jesus is God, how come hes standing at the right hand of God?
Don McLean experienced the trinity:
And the three men I admire most
The Father, Son and the Holy Ghost
They caught the last train to the coast
The day the music died
Nice to talk to you Robert. Talk to you another time.
Robert
“Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus.”
Thomas Jefferson
@Robert Brown
"Jesus is the word, he is with God the father and he is God the son."
Robert has his fingers in his ears going.. "lah lah lah lah lah lah lah lah lah lah lah..... i can't hear you... lah lah lah lah...."
wow, robbie, a quote.....very impressive, indeed
"and the Word was God."
Correction...... the bird is the word.
There was an entire thread here up until just an hour or so ago which now is gone. Didn't seem like any of the discussion was beyond the norm, so it's hard to see how it was worthy of censoring individual comments... much less the entire thread.
I made it go away.
Russ,
That happens here sometimes and it's VERY maddening.
Try dropping an e-mail to Editor "daniel.burke@cnn.com". He's said that he wants to know about these things. Maybe you can more clearly describe the problem to him.
When atheists act like fundamentalists. When fundamentalists act like atheists. You guys deserve each other! 🙂
Don't care
Any love is good love.
-Boy George
It's not about being a fundamentalist... We can all have a good conversation and respect each other's views without spewing hatred.
And you may ask yourself
Am I right?...Am I wrong?
Once in a lifetime.
JW,
Do JWs still refuse to allow transfusions for themselves and their children?
For all my years they still seem to.. blood transfusions are still not their "thing."
Each person has the right to reject or not a medical treatment. If you smoke or overdrink and your docter tells you to stop, at the end it's up to you.
Myth: Many Witnesses, including children, die each year as a result of refusing blood transfusions.
Fact: This statement is totally unfounded. Surgeons regularly perform such complex procedures as heart operations, orthopedic surgery, and organ transplants without the use of blood transfusions. * Patients, including children, who do not receive transfusions usually fare as well as or better than those who do accept transfusions. * In any case, no one can say for certain that a patient will die because of refusing blood or will live because of accepting it.
JW
"Each person has the right to reject or not a medical treatment."
Nope. Children have NO SAY. So when they are in accidents and blood is pouring out, what do you tell them? "tough luck"?
Who's gonna decide for my kids? You?
The main conserb of a doctor is to stop bleeding, not starting by administrate blood.
JW,
Obviously you do unless the law can show how much damage you could do. So will you tell them "tough luck"?
Administering blood to counter blood loss isn 't necessarily a transfusion, and I would trust the word of the doctor over a parent, especially of the blood loss were at a critical point that may result in death.
With a kid I admit it's a very hard situation...completely different since it envolves much more. Gladly it's situations far in between, where doctors think a kid needs blood... Though people cannot say for sure if a blood transfusion really saves a life or not in different situations.
How do you feel about bone marrow transplants, JW?
One of the scenarios on which the whole Jehovahs Witness doctrine falls flat is in the case of someone who comes in to emergency treatment already having had significant blood loss. In that case, the patient will die without receiving blood.
Witness or witless? You decide, but that particular religious cult is sure to remain in the margins, if it even survives at all.
How does the medical community view now a days the usage of alternative treatments to blood transfusions?
At one time, the medical community generally viewed strategies for avoiding transfusions, so-called bloodless medicine, as extreme, even suicidal, but this has changed in recent years. For example, in 2004, an article published in a medical education journal stated that “many of the techniques developed for use in Jehovah’s Witness patients will become standard practice in years to come.” * An article in the journal Heart, Lung and Circulation said in 2010 that “‘bloodless surgery’ should not be limited to J[ehovah’s] W[itnesses] but should form an integral part of everyday surgical practice.”
Thousands of doctors worldwide now use blood-conservation techniques to perform complex surgeries without transfusions. Such alternatives to blood transfusions are used even in developing countries and are requested by many patients who are not Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Many surgeries are virtually blood free these days. My last 2 were.
I don't know of too many surgeries that ever required full blood transfusions.
One of the scenarios on which the whole Jehovahs Witness doctrine falls flat is in the case of someone who comes in to emergency treatment already having had significant blood loss. In that case, the patient will die without receiving blood.
Witness or witless? You decide, but that particular religious cult is sure to remain in the margins, at best.
"Daddy, why is it raining?"
"Because God is crying, probably because of something you did..."
Jack Handy
Jack Handy was deep, indeed.
Why is Answer's opinion true? Because it is reasonable. Why is it reasonable? Because it isn’t faith. What happens if you reject faith? You think Answer's opinion is true.
What a beautiful circle. 🙂
Boring troll is boring....and lying. Jesus must be proud.
You troll. Your mom is probably not proud of you.
Why is something reasonable? Because if you reason it out in a reasonable manner, you will find that it is indeed reasonable.
It would not be reasonable to reject something simply because it has a tenuous connection with someone who is religious, so you're wrong about that.
Religious people can have reasonable thoughts, but religious thoughts are often not reasonable, particularly those involving the supernatural because we have no evidence supporting the existence of anything supernatural.
Yes.
When I'm shown that my views are silly, I can only respond, "Well...at least it's better than believing in some invisible SKY DADDY!"
That sounds stupid. What views do you have that others think are silly?
Dude, don't pretend like you haven't seen that pathetic atheist crapola. I'm not saying you do. But that kind of crap happens often.
I'm not sure what post you read, but I have never claimed that I have not seen that. I wish you had not muddied the waters and let my question ring.
Levi, Is that the best you can do? Try producing some facts.
I became an atheist when I was 10 years old, based on ideas of God that I learned in Sunday School. My ideas about God haven't changed since.
Perhaps some research is in order?
Maybe he was a very wise 10 year old and asked for empirical evidence of any God to be provided before he signed on and he is still waiting...
Thus we will find some arguing that atheists are necessarily more rational or just plain “better” than theists. That, however, is not only naked bigotry, but is in fact an example of how atheists can fail to be rational and adopt just the sort of ridiculous beliefs which they find contemptible in others.
You mean some atheists might be hypocrites about some things? Oh my what a shock. I may swoon. I may faint. *plop*
Not better people, but generally better critical thinkers. If you're willing to accept important things based only on faith you're also prone to get cheated by Ponzi schemes and other cons. Greed usually clouds people's better judgment in such cases, but wanting Heaven and the favor of a supernatural being are also forms of greed, right?