The Bible, Chapter and Verse

O, how I miss this show!!

I say belief and adherence without context and thought is the breeding ground of self-justified superiority and judgmentalism.

Or more simply put, rock on President Bartlett!

I spent a lot of the past seven years finding some relief in this wonderful alternate universe – looks like I’ll be going there for at least another four…

I find it very interesting that of all the major issues facing our society which were discussed publicly in the “The West Wing”, almost ten years on not one of these issues has been addressed.

Having elected yet another vapid, superficial, sock puppet I’m beginning to think we’ve exceeded the limits of our collective intelligence.

All of the Biblical laws that the Fundie’s love so much, come from Bronze age societies. What else is there to say.

I missed it too because of work. But, Bravo has been rerunning the series, but it takes a DVR to catch those shows.

I recommend strongly that you rent the DVDs of the entire series.

There are so many episodes that are, imho, “for the ages.” One of my most favorite episodes is the one that involves President Bartlet’s efforts to bring about an “accord” between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

I’ve got about 50 episodes left to go. Every one is a true pleasure. Only one, so far, was a bit weak.

THEN there is the treat of looking at the names of D.C. insiders who contributed significantly to the series. Some of the very best episodes were suggested and written (in part or all, I’m not sure) by PAT CADELL. You’ll recall him this past fall. The rare Democratic party strategist who told it “like it is.”

Comment by SHV | 2008-12-22 22:31:31

All of the Biblical laws that the Fundie’s love so much, come from Bronze age societies. What else is there to say.
***********
That being said, a lot of Biblical law was progressive for its time. An example is the “Eye for and Eye..etc..” At the time, it was a new idea of “proportional justice”. A good read on Biblical law is:
The Genesis of Justice : 10 Stories of Biblical Injustice That Led to the 10 Commandments and Modern Morality and Law

I’m don’t believe in anything, I just came in -30 degrees wind chill in Chicago God Hates!

I never watched the series as a regular but caught this episode accidentally and was quite impressed. May be I will catch the reruns.

Morality without religion is an age-old question for philosophers. I am an atheist since my early high school days and I firmly believe that I can be good and humane without any external props. Once on UVA campus, a man stopped me asking if I was a Christian with a clear goal of proselytizing and he did not like it when I said I did not believe in God. He then said the rapist round the corner does not believe in God either which of course, made me mad and as I started to argue he walked away saying, thank you, thank you and that of course made me even more mad. This was in the first year of my coming to the US and I was so surprised by the religiosity of the people.

rent the DVDs of the entire series…

We own the whole shabang., My sane half wanted to watch it again a to z…

Me thinks we will.

Thankyou for this clip. It is a reminder of the type of pretentious, sanctimonious, and straw-man type drivel that made “West Wing” nothing but leftist pablum, and risible to anyone with more than a “Hollywood Wonderland” mentality. In a strictly controlled realm like a television show, any good writer can argue any position and make it seem bomb proof. The use of a fictional T.V. clip to make some sort of inspirational point is lazy and vacuous. Will you dig up old “All in the Family” clips next (Archie Bunker was the ultimate straw-man) to butress your positions? I expect more intellectual substance from NQ.

If you read the Old Testament murder, mayhem, rape, and genocide were also allowed. I don’t think anyone would subscribe to those things today.

One of my favorite scenes!

Why can’t we have a president like Jed Bartlett? (I know it’s fantasy, but what else is there now? These DVDs kept me going through the last few years. Now the next four too?)

Sheesh anyone using Martin Sheen as his standard of wisdom already knows so much about the world that it is more fun watching him than educating him. Have a blast…remember you got the world you asked for.

Here is a quote from the New Testament, book of Matthew which is a better read, SHV, because it is a quote from Jesus himself. Interestingly enough, it follows the Beatitudes. Your reference was to old Jewish Law.

You have heard that it has been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say to you, That you resist not evil: but whoever shall smite you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if any man will sue you at the law, and take away your coat, let him have your cloak also. 41 And whoever shall compel you to go a mile, go with him two. 42 Give to him that asks you, and from him that would borrow of you turn not you away.

I am one of those “some people” but only in response to a comment.

Then again I could say “Dear God”

Go Brrrrears!

I’m using my many readings of the Old Testament as my standard of wisdom. Nothing he says is untrue. Too bad eh?

Christmas is coming … the goose is getting fat

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alIcwofkrS8

pm317, I have to take issue and not because I am defending any religion, but because I have read so many comments by people who call themselves atheists without any illumination of their views.

Atheists are determinists. If you allow even the possibility of free will, you are allowing the possibility of a creator. Otherwise, your moral or amoral behavior was determined at the beginning of the Universe. In other words, the Universe is a machine and there is no right or wrong, good or bad.

If you are at all familiar with quantum mechanics, you should remember the double split experiments which prove random results and destroys determinism.
Some people mistakenly claim the late mathematician, Bertram Russell, was an atheist when, in fact, he was agnostic.

The agnostics do not argue about the existence or non-existence of a creator because there is no empirical data to prove either position. A person who adheres to Christianity, for example, takes it as a matter of faith his God exists. An atheist takes it on faith there is no God.

Andrew, literature has reflected and influenced societies since the beginning of the written word. I seem to remember the commandant of West Point visited the producers of 24 with the purpose of asking them to change their depiction of torture as an acceptable method of interrogation because it was influencing actual situations in the war.

Um, no. An atheist DENIES that there is a God. It’s really not that much different from how Christians deny that Zeus and Odin exist (or had ever existed) nor is it that much different from the way that Muslims (and Jews) deny that Christ is the Son of God.
One could say, with regards to “faith”, that children have “faith” that Santa exists, yet there’s no absolute evidence that proves the existence of a jolly fat guy who wears red and travels around the world on Christmas Eve. Most adults deny Santa’s existence (though they pretend he does if they have children or regularly deal with kids) but I wouldn’t say that any adult “takes it on faith” that Santa doesn’t exist. Adults KNOW that Santa isn’t real–in much the same way they “know” that 2 + 2 = 4.
It’s more or less RELIGIOUS people who insist that others have “faith” to support their positions. As the dictionary defines “faith” in the religious sense, it’s a “firm belief in something for which there is no proof”. Since the key element of atheism is not believing in the existence of God (or a god), an atheist having “faith” in atheism would be a bit oxymoronic. Since there’s no “proof” that God exists (even the most avid religionist can’t “prove” that existence), atheism fails the definition.

Your reference to 24 and it’s influence on the real world actually reinforces the main point that I was making as far as giving undue credence to hypothetical fictional situations. I would never minimize the effects or contributions that good literature has for civilization. That being said, do you really want to defend your apparent position that the “West Wing” is literature? If you try, then you’ll open the door for me to classify “South Park” as literature and I’ll demonstrate that cartoon 4th graders usually present better arguments than the president in “The West Wing”. They certainly have more reasoned positions than PEBO.

Excuse me, 2nd graders!

since the beginning of the written word.

Carbon isotope analysis of charcoal used in pictures of horses at Chauvet, south-central France, show that they are 30,000 years old, a discovery that should prompt a rethink about the development of art.

[and the written word]

Elise, I have always thought a basic requirement is to communicate. I would say that humans have been using “words” for a long time.

The Sumerians were one of the earliest urban societies to emerge in the world, in Southern Mesopotamia more than 5000 years ago. For 5000 years before the appearance of writing in Mesopotamia, there were small clay objects in abstract shapes, called clay tokens,

.

Yet for all those thousands of years that have been the chronicals of human beings, have we learned anything?

Andrew, you sort of miss the point (and I think quite deliberately).
The REALITY is that the very people who spend so much time denouncing gays by USING the Bible (and quoting chapter and verse while doing so) DO, in fact, IGNORE much of the rest of the Bible, ESPECIALLY the HUNDREDS of laws–including the many OTHER “abominations”.
What Martin Sheen’s character is quoting is ENTIRELY ACCURATE, according to the Bible (well, with the exception of the pigskin/football analogy–most footballs tend to be made of cowhide or vinyl). Look up some of the laws. Eating shellfish is an “abomination” (Lev 11; yet I don’t hear Rick Warren or the other Evangelical pastors denouncing patrons of Red Lobster). Men and women can’t wear opposite gender-appropriate clothing since doing so is an “abomination” (Deut 22; this is used by evangelical women to excuse their wearing dresses and then suing if they work somewhere that a dress is impractical).
The Mosaic Law also holds very strict punishments for patently absurd situations. If your child curses you, then he/she’s to be put to death. Women aren’t allowed to enter the temple (by extension, church) for a certain period of time following childbirth (and it hasn’t nothing to do with the woman needing rest–she’s become “impure” and must be “ritually cleansed” before returning); even a woman’s menstrual cycle can prevent her from entering the temple until she’s undergone a ritual cleansing.
There is nothing “straw man” about this clip. When you REALLY have people who CLAIM to base their lives on a 2000+ year-old “holy book” and then CLAIM that book is infallible and that it must NEVER be questioned and must be used as a basis for the laws of THIS non-sectarian nation, then it’s a case of using their words against them. You may disagree with “The West Wing” but, in this case, the writer(s) of that script were dead-on with the words that Martin Sheen spoke.

why not? That’s sounds fun.

You are absolutely right, Teak. The Aborigines in Australia have no written language and pass stories down through generations and those stories also have value, although literature usually refers to written word.

And we have learned very little!

Do you have a problem with logical arguments, Andrew? I do not watch West Wing, 24 or South Park. I was responding to your comment.

However, I did watch the video and the character of the president in that episode made a lot of sense to me. The underlying discussion pertains to the Bible and the fundamental belief some hold it is all true, yet ignore what is inconvenient. Depending on your belief system, the Bible may be true in it’s entirety or it may be literature.

As Susan pointed out, there are many lovely verses in the Old Testament. The New Testament portrays the life and death of a wise and gentle man, but his divinity is not accepted by everyone.

Let’s see, athiest governments seem to have a problem with some of this stuff. I think the tally is 1 or 2 million dead at the hands of the Khmer Rouge, 5-10 million at the hands of Stalin’s dekulakization, and 16-40 million dead during Mao’s Great Leap Forward. Are we sure we don’t need any firm guidelines in place anywhere to keep people from drifting into a moral abyss?

Many Christian religions do not take the Bible literally. This includes the Catholic Church which does not even oppose evolution (although they selectively take some things literally, like the “virgin” birth). To relegate the Bible to the dust bin because some people take it literally is to miss a wealth of wisdom. I am not religious but I find the passage in Ecclesiastes, “To everything there is a season…” very powerful. Too many people I know are always trying to live in another “season” – young people missing their youth by rushing to grow up, older people making fools of themselves by trying to be young, instead of living each stage of life fully. (Eric Erikson comes to mind.)

I, too am not religious, but I find great wisdom in the stories and writings of previous cultures. Another of my favorites, the Hindu tale “The Blind men and the Elephant.” (This is the second time today I have posted a link to this at this site! It is the most powerful thing I have read about human’s search for truth. Epistemologically speaking it speaks volumes. How’s that for high faluting vocab?)

http://www.wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view_unit/1/?letter=B&spage=3

I find it enlightening to learn how people have struggled with the sames issues for thousands of years.

too late. and a good reason to say i am outa here

never watched it (never watched a LOT of shows)

tried once and got bored (must have been the ONE weak episode)

just don’t have the patience for most TV anymore

BernieO You are correct sir. The RCC has always held that tradition holds equal weight to Scripture and this has been the Bane of Protestants for centuries…chuckle…
Open dialog in a free society keeps the fores of THEOCRACY at bay…Provocative article…Hmmmm…
Beati Pacifici
Blessed are the Peacemakers

The burning of “witches”, the genocide of the Cathar’s…It isn’t the belief that god exists or doesn’t. It is merely us looking for an excuse.

Cogito Ergo Creare
I think therefor I create

It all begins with the HAND PRINT on the wall of the CAVE…It is the EVIDENCE OF EVERYTHING…imho

We want to stand upon our own feet and look fair and square at the world — its good facts, its bad facts, its beauties, and its ugliness; see the world as it is and be not afraid of it. Conquer the world by intelligence and not merely by being slavishly subdued by the terror that comes from it. The whole conception of God is a conception derived from the ancient Oriental despotisms. It is a conception quite unworthy of free men. When you hear people in church debasing themselves and saying that they are miserable sinners, and all the rest of it, it seems contemptible and not worthy of self-respecting human beings. We ought to stand up and look the world frankly in the face. We ought to make the best we can of the world, and if it is not so good as we wish, after all it will still be better than what these others have made of it in all these ages. A good world needs knowledge, kindliness, and courage; it does not need a regretful hankering after the past or a fettering of the free intelligence by the words uttered long ago by ignorant men. It needs a fearless outlook and a free intelligence. It needs hope for the future, not looking back all the time toward a past that is dead, which we trust will be far surpassed by the future that our intelligence can create.

Electronic colophon: This electronic edition of “Why I Am Not a Christian” was first made available by Bruce MacLeod on his “Watchful Eye Russell Page.” It was newly corrected (from Edwards, NY 1957) in July 1996 by John R. Lenz for the Bertrand Russell Society.

If he is calling God, a conception derived from the ancient Oriental despotisms, he is not much of an agnostic.

the link:
http://users.drew.edu/~jlenz/whynot.html

Yeah, the shortage of gunfire and dearth of car chases tends to let most viewers slide away from TWW.

But let us not forget the witch burnings, The Inquisition, and The Crusades. All done in the name of religion. So using religion as a moral compass does not prevent genocide any more than atheism does.

LOL!

Let’s not forget the eradication if the indigenous populations of North America using of combination of gun shot, applied starvation and biological warfare.

In God we trust baby LOL.

Too true! After all those ‘pagan savages’ got what they deserved. Meted out of course by the morally superior Christians.

Very true, candimarl. People have always been able to find “good reasons” to torture and kill each other, both religious and secular.

3rd time to try posting a comment…sheesh! am I on a list or somthin?
The Cathars were Heretics…like the Bogomils…
The Albigensian Crusade must be considered in Historical and Theological context…Sheeesh!

Elise, you seem to be the one that has difficulty understanding logical arguments. Please re-read my postings and cite for me where I once questioned the content or validity of the comments set forth in the clip. In your attempt to defend those comments you completely miss my main point that scripted fictional characters on T.V. should not be held up as infallible sources of wisdom. Regardless of the content, the whole exchange in the clip is a classic straw-man set up, therefor, while it may be entertaining, it is a shallow and pathetic substitute for a real debate between real people about real events and issues.

If there was an actual debate between Martin Sheen (a real person, and certified nitwit) and Billy Graham in his prime about the biblical issues dealt with in the clip, Rev. Graham would kick Martin’s skinny little butt to the curb.

Also, I have again not once questioned the content of the above exchange, I just have serious issues with the format. Substantive debates are not scripted.

Oh for Cryin out LOUD…Pagans killed Christians too…sheeesh!
I as a Catholic find the Great Grass Hut apologetics to be particularly tedious…
Here’s what you have as a result of what we in the West call Progress Aaaaandd some of it came from the Horrific Behemouth The Roman Catholic Church…
1. Universities ( the oldest of which is Paris)
2. Indoor Plumbing and Sewers thanks to the Romans and continued by their successors…The Church
3. Mail
4. Outlawing the common practice of Infanticide and The Pagan Practice of HUMAN SACRIFICE…
5. Literacy
The list goes on and on…Can we have a little perspective here based on rational observation and Historical Fact?

the written word evoves as short hand for picto grams…The first “writers” were actually image makers…chuckle…Picture Making Artists seeking common accord through satisfaction of recording events…chuckle…Of course with development of alphabets we have become verbose…
Hence a Picture still speaks a thousand words…Very economical in communicating abstractions and philosophical complications…chuckle…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wkVVFUfVXI

Hmmm…I have always enjoyed philosophical debates between a Jesuit and a Rabbi…GodSquad is a classic…

indoor plumbing pretty much went out after Rome fell (as did the formula for concrete). Back during… what was that time called again?…. oh yeah the dark ages…. or in layman’s terms, back when the catholic church had a death grip on everything.

In your attempt to defend those comments you completely miss my main point that scripted fictional characters on T.V. should not be held up as infallible sources of wisdom.

considering how little is known about the man from Nazareth or his…. “DAD”, they may very well be scripted fictional characters.

Are you kidding me?…The Roman Empire Became Catholic with Constantine…Yeah he moved the Capital outta Rome as she was being overtaken by Barbarians…chuckle….But the Empire continued…As did Expansion…
Byzantines were ill equipped due to LOCATION to contain the resentment resulting from this…
The DARK AGES you refer to were the result of Squabbling for real estate by increasingly powerful Duchy’s and Family Clans vying for Power… Aaaaand of course the economic stresses of that…Pagan Rome fell gradually…Christian Rome actually lasted a long time…The legacy of which we still enjoy.
Trying to separate the two is humorous…ROME continued…just changed the state church in a pragmatic fashion…Which of course is a very ROMAN trait…chuckle…In fact one of the empires’ great strengths….
And in terms of the DEATH GRIP you describe…lol…Christendom was united CATHOLIC which means universal…there were no alternatives…JUST HERESIES…
Christian Alternatives did not exist until Martin Luther with a little help from Herr Guttenberg’s handy invention.The Printing Press…

Billy Graham in his prime about the biblical issues dealt with in the clip, Rev. Graham would kick Martin’s skinny little butt to the curb

Does any human have an edge over another in an attempt to rationalize ones inability to come terms with the problems with self awareness?

It depends on what you mean by “known”…
If you mean FACTS…Archaeological records?
It is an absurdity…chuckle…There is plenty of “knowledge” as well a rich history of study and Philosophical/Theological debate…
Ever read Augustine, Aquinas?
Hmmmm….the Jews have a wonderful record of philosophical arguments against the heretic Jews that were the early Christians…
Most folks don’t spend a millenia philosophically combating a FICTION…Sheeesh!

So I guess the point you are making is as long as the secular political administration of Byzantium existed, then your list is true. But the catholic church is located in Rome, and once the secular political administration of Rome collapsed and moved east, the religious administration of the church was all that was left. The areas it sought to control, which by the way wasn’t Byzantium, moved away from science and learning as piety became the preferred course of action. We don’t call them the dark ages because of some sort of regional atmospheric condition but rather because the failure of civilization and the stagnation of the human mind. Now if the catholic church was capable of doing the things you listed it would have done so, and European civilizational wouldn’t have had to languish a few centuries while waiting for effective secular political administration to be reestablished and the lights to go back on.

You’re changing the argument. Tsk tsk tsk. very dishonest of you. Judaism has always had to deal with the messiah worshipers. It’s one of the downsides of both creating the concept of a messiah and then leaving his show time ambiguous. But that little problem of their’s tells us nothing about the man from Nazareth or his…. “DAD”.., and at the very least demonstrates how they (Jews) have to to deal with active imaginations since Jews haven’t recognized a messiah, yet. Correct me if I’m wrong but an active imagination is the foundation of all fiction.

A picture can speak a thousand words. When I see a fresco of God touching the outstretched finger of Jed Bartlett on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, I’ll reconsider my previous position.

That’s an interesting question, but it sets up a possible infinite feedback loop of a debate about debating.

The picture on the Sistine chapel is an artists conception of God. Whose to say that he also didn’t paint his conception of Jed Bartlett?

The lord works in mysterious ways

“Whose [sic] to say that he also didn’t paint his conception of Jed Bartlett?”

Wow! Are you trying to tell us that Michelangelo knew (in the biblical sense) Jed Bartlett’s mother? I would love to see that displayed on the ceiling. Perhaps Michelangelo had a mirror over his bed and could paint it from memory.

Ehemmm…Pointing out obvious flaws and challenging you to clarificaton is not changing the argument…Or dishonest.
You have a tendency in the heat of rhetoric to rely on superficial and vague but fashionable blathering…Who is being dishonest…I just asked a question…A very Socratic one…What do you mean by “known”

rflmao….Andrew191…too funny

My point is this Wild Child…Save the Grass Hut Apologetics for Adolescents and Fashionistas…You make a fool of yourself and evidently need to actually study history…Particularly Western Civilization…And Western Philosophy…lol
Sorry but it’s full of Romans and Catholics over 1000 years…You might need to drink your way through it…chuckle…

If Michelangelo knew. (LOL) There would have been no need for the conception. It’s funny how faith works that way.

The only fool in the room is the guy who though I made an argument about saving grass huts you foolish foolish boy.

Perhaps if he had studied his western civ (like I did) he would have picked up on that.

3rd time to try posting a comment…sheesh! am I on a list or somthin?

The Omniscient Spam Filter moves in dark and mysterious ways. I’ve heard there is an Oracle somewhere in Tibet that understands its secret workings.

What do I mean by known. Hmmmmm, well let’s put it this way. I know… there was city in a place the ancient Greeks called Troy. I know this because archaeologists found the ruin of a city there. But the boat ride Odysseus took back home from the war he supposedly fought there, pure fiction. A fact which makes all accounts of the war suspect. A fact which makes his existence, very very suspect.

ehemmm…Nope! I use Grass Huts as shorthand for revisionist anti-imperialist blather…Aaaaand yours has been rife with ANTI-CATHOLIC BIAS not based in history but revisionism…which is currently fashionable..I suppose you’d rather all of Europe crumble to disciples of Allah back in the day…Of course they may anyhow…we shall see…Secularists cave at their own peril…

lol…yeah..I am Spamalottin…

I just said we Christian Americans wiped out the Indians using some fairly deplorable means. Any elaboration beyond that was purely speculative on your part. Having assumed something within your own mind that for whatever reason you then attributed to me, once again you made an ass of of you… but not me?

But please, keep up the good work. The day is young.

lol…OK you don’t want to own what you say as Anti-Catholic when it is..( eyes rolling here )
so be it…The Day is young indeed…and this was entertaining. BTW…as a descendant of Irish Immigrants escaping from Britains own campaign of MICK extinction…Anti-Papists are an old and familiar prejudice…on both sides of the Atlantic…

Hmmmm…lol…
Was the Apostle called Peter a fiction?

even were I actually to make a grass hut argument that was in some way anti catholic about the genocide committed here by the hands of my forefathers, it would be ridiculous for two reasons. 1. This country was settled by protestants and they did most of the dirty work. 2. It’s your turn to be ridiculous today (LMAO) and you’re doing one hell of a job too I might add.

Doesn’t “called Peter” answer your question for you?

It’s just a damn shame it was only a tv show. I’d vote that guy into office for 6 terms if it were real.

I REALLY miss the show and think it is part of why bush’s ratings stayed up as long as they did, some of the more “ignorant” of the masses thought it was the real thing.

If we had a President like Bartlett, our nation wouldn’t be hurting right now.

Hmmm…OK call me ridiculous…You have made Michaelangelo (Catholic) and the Cistine Chapel (Cathoic again) inane in an attempt at silly secularist humor…You have countered my aruments through silly reductivism which reveals a lack of substance…(dark ages drivel) Do you think independently…or just regurgitate fashionable theories you picked up along the way? Hate to say it but that Guns,Germs & Steel guy doesn’t have all the answers…chuckle..although it was fun to watch…

I’m not exactly sure how my comments about an artists conception of the face of God (or for that matter his conception of the face of Jeb Bartlett flawed though it may be) that he painted on the ceiling of a church can be viewed as anti catholic. I was at least willing to concede that he might be getting divine inspiration for the job, and you might want to consider getting yourself a series of skin grafts as the one you are sporting right now apparently is missing quite a few layers.

I was using the distinction between his Jewish name of origin…And The Later Greek translation of the name Jesus gave him.
He was Called Peter (Greek) even though he was a JEW…sheeesh!
The Apostle PAUL was called PAUL even though he adopted the later to distinguish himself from his JEWISH SAUL name of origin after is conversion to the New Jewish Faith…later called Christians…another Greek Word.
Which was the langua franca of the Roman Empire…
So again I pose the question…Was the apostle “known/called” as Peter a fiction ?

well, according to you they made up his name. Again, doesn’t that answer your question?

LOL! But the RCC defined heresy then. The Cathars’, etc., big sin was believing in reincarnation, which would render the Church’s role pointless. Heresy was/is a political tool.

An historian, Gerhard Herm, said that “History is just that, his story.”

Point number 4 — human sacrifice . . . what is the auto da fe — burning the heretics at the stake, if not human sacrifice?

Hmmmm…I don’t think I am the one suffering from a thin skin…Just the one enjoying socratic challenge…
Nobody made up the name Peter…sheeesh!it is a greek translation of the one Jesus gave him aramaic) which means ROCK.
You have dodged the question again…which is tedious and reveals a lack of rhetorical skill…
Plumbers working under the Vatican to find a leak stumbled onto a grave site directly under the Bronze Crypt constructed over the alleged tomb of Peter.
And Hey ancient graffiti marked it as Here Lies Peter…And what d’ya know…Bones of an old man lying in there…approx age at death…70 yrs….And DNA analysis shows he’s a semitic Hebrew from Palestine…and Carbon Dating shows he dates from around 80AD…But I guess it’s not OK to employ logical Conclusions as to his identity…Maybe he was just an old Jewish grave digger who had a heart attack on his way out of the catacombs…
Well now I’m off to lunch…This was in the papers BTW…Globally

I replied at the bottom of the thread.
And no…

yes, that’s highly conclusive. (ROFLMAO) Oh by the way, here’s the other place they dug up “called Peter”

Possible Ossuary of Saint Peter in Jerusalem

“At almost the same time that the Pope announced to the world that he had found the tomb of St Peter in Rome, 1500 miles away there was another discovery of an ancient grave, on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem. In 1953, two Franciscan monks were digging in a cave when they discovered hundreds of first century ossuaries – coffins from the time of Jesus and the Twelve Disciples. (…) These Catholic archaeologists believe they had found the earliest physical evidence of a Christian community in Jerusalem, including some very familiar Biblical names. (…) But one of them was a potentially explosive find. It read: “Shimon Bar Yonah” – Simon, the Son of Jonah: the original Biblical name of the Disciple Peter.” [16]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Peter‘s_tomb

Claiming that Christian Americans wiped out the Indians is gross hyperbole and distortion. More people with native American heritage live today than at the time Columbus arrived. There were large native American subcultures that existed and dissappeared before the arrival Europeans. The Anasazi were all gone and the Mayans were mostly gone, there are unclear reasons for this, but Europeans were not at fault.

Since Pete died in ROME…you are just using a variation of Relic quiblling…RFLMAO…But I guess you must pull out all the stops…to avoid answering directly.
Obviously by relying on WIKI…You prove my point. Ossuaries real and fake are well known in the field…lolmany are dubious…
Nobody has yet to prove the Catacombs under Rome to be FAKE…sheeesh! Smoke another joint Wild Child…and give it UP…

When I was a little kid playing cowboy’s and Indians and it was my turn to be the cowboy, I wasn’t shooting back at the Anasazi or the Mayans. There is no gross hyperbole in a practice that was so ingrained into American political being during it’s time that it lives on today as a kids game.

the Cathars also espoused Marianism…like it or not it is a heresy.
Aaaand of course the RCC defined heresy…Kinda goes with the mission and you are stating the obvious…Jews defined Heresy as well…Why was Jesus taken to Pilot?….Next…

another White Guilt litany…Oh Brother!

I never said the catacombs were fake. It’s just that a find of bones in a city (Rome) that could be from a place (Judea) under the political control of that city (Rome) which at the time was in armed conflict with that place (Judea) and the political powers that controlled the city (Rome)were known for capturing combatants (Jews.. from judea) and sending them back to the city (Rome) where they could be sold into slavery….. isn’t all that spectacular.

Especially since they dug up “called Peter” in Jerusalem. I mean what more proof do you need LOL?

NOPE!…It was judicial punishment by the legal governing authority…Not a Tribal Practice to appease the GODS…Sheeesh!
Primitive Pagans practiced Human Sacrifice…Even the Romans found the practice deplorable…Give Me A Break!

I think you missed the I was shooting the Indians part. It was fun

Andrew, who is an infallible source of wisdom? Certainly, no one. The original purpose of debate is a search for Truth in the exchange of ideas.

Mark Twain wrote a little book, Letters From Earth, and I believe the writer of this show borrowed many of his argument from Twain. In whatever venue ideas are presented, writings of recognized genus or panthers TV, the idea isn’t always to persuade, but to lead one in the direction of questioning.

The ancient Greeks used the methods of questioning their students in a certain direction and, in doing do, open their minds to ideas.

It is a reminder of the type of pretentious, sanctimonious, and straw-man type drivel that made “West Wing” nothing but leftist pablum This presents an emotional response which is in no way helpful in discovery of what is, ultimately, true or false.

You are very defensive and that sometimes indicates a closed mind. You minght want to work on that.

Poor Peter. Not to be a camel looking for under what tent the mir went but, thanks for the exchanges, WorkingClas Artist and WildChild. I wish you both a happy holiday season and a thanks for all the wonderful comments you both post.

you too bro. It has been one wild year. May the next one be even wilder

The ultimate attitude and response of someone who has been backed into a rhetorical corner. Ignore the merits of the argument and attempt to discredit the messenger with catty digs and a passive aggressive posture, both of which indicate a desire to shut down the debate by changing the subject from a questionable use of an insipid T.V. show to prove points, to the new subject of my character and motives. It is a childish and silly attempt to get the last word in as you head for the tall grass; a cowardly parting shot.

I would welcome anyone to chime in with their own impressions about who is closed minded and prone to “emotional” responses in the context of the previous posts.

Romans 15:4 explains the relationship between the NT and the OT. Some laws changed drastically, the NT is a new covenant.

“For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope

Romans 15:4 explains the relationship between the NT and the OT. Some laws changed drastically, the NT is a new covenant.

“For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.”

Were you shooting at casino owners?

Atheists deny there is a God, however they offer no proof of the absense of a creator. It is as untenable as the belief in God speaking from a logical point of view.

Did you choose to become atheist? If so, you are claiming “free will” which I contend allows the possiblity of a greater being. Do you judge your actions or the actions of others as good or bad because that has no meaning in the context of atheism.

Since you demand proof from from those who believe in God, it is not unreasonable for me to demand proof he doesn’t exist.

You have taken the word faith and ascribed to it only the meaning in the context of religious beliefs. Christianity is the major religion in the world, but it most certianly isn’t the only one so when your argument is based on the belief of one part of a mirad of choices, you have inadvertantly shown your disdain for that religion and your argument is dimminshed.

I am a follower of Zen and have no dog in this race. I am merely an observer. The Santa argument is specious, so I’m not going to address this fairytale. I will go back to quantum physics again. I have never seen a quark nor has anyone else. Tests in a laboratory, however, prove it’s existance through empirical data. God is unknown and unknowable, if He indeed exists, therefore taken on faith.You can’t escape the element of faith in this particular discussion. Denying the existance of something unknowable is to take a leap of faith.

To repeat my earlier argument, If we assume there is no God, the Universe is nothing more than a machine grinding out a future which is determined at the moment of the Big Bang and every word or action has been predetermined and the presence of free will is an illusion. Pretty bleak.

You really should study re-incarnation. Not only does it offer a logical explanation for why we travel the paths we choose, it gives a realistic way to avoid a logical paradox.

I do love reading the Bible and keep on on my coffee table along with Zen meditation and a book containing the most loved poems of the English language and another of Dylan Thomas poetry. I am often inspired by each of the books and my inspiration is not deterministic. Without beauty, the world is just space. I don’t know where the beauty comes from, but I do believe my recognition of it would be dimmed or non existant if I felt life offered me nothing but blackness or nothingness when I die.

I lived sans TV for about four years and found I could survive with libraries, the Net and magazines.
The voided space fostered desires to create a new personal universe expressed in stories or essays, which surprisingly for the times (W. Bush years), mirrored hope and a sense of continuity.

I don’t think it is as crucial to believe in religion as it is important to believe the duality
of human nature–recognize and accept we come from the primitive and can by force of will, mold a better world. Physically, Man has gone about as far as we can go without scientific intervention (and Lord save us from those meddling control freaks).

Humans come into being with an instinctive urge to
unite with a cosmic force. We, in our simplicity,
call it God. In every humanoid culture, in every age, the God-force has exerted its influence–for better or for worse.

Proper names and tenets may change, the need will not until evolution breeds it out of our species. This will not happen in the foreseeable future. In the meantime, some good people will exhibit signs of intelligent life on earth. And isn’t that novel? Savor those moments.

I think the real test would be to encounter extraterrestrials and find they believe in a supreme being. That would validate, IMO, the existence of a universal power. Good and evil
concepts arise from a societal desire to hold a community together.

To repeat my earlier argument, If we assume there is no God, the Universe is nothing more than a machine grinding out a future which is determined at the moment of the Big Bang and every word or action has been predetermined and the presence of free will is an illusion. Pretty bleak.

Actually, that is a false dilemma. The universe could be something entirely beyond our capacity to grasp. Does that imply there is a God–no. Does it imply there isn’t–again no. Questions concerning a deity do not tend to edification and the Tao that can be spoken of is not the true Tao.

You have COMPLETELY missed my point, and It’s getting a little irritating for me to have to keep repeating it. I never once disputed the accuracy of the statements in the clip, but the nature of the format in which they are presented is a classic straw-man set up, it’s scripted by writers with an obvious bias, and it’s not a level playing field for the characters. While you may walk away from it with the warm smooshy feeling that your hero has trounced the vilain, it’s still just fantasy and an artificial, biased presentation of a hypothetical event.

I believe without any reservation in the FACT of evolution. However, I would be very upset if there was a fictional debate on T.V. between a world renowned biologist defending evolution, and a ten year old bible schooler defending creationism. Both participants could state actual facts and accurately quote any source they wanted to. The scientist would obviously kick ass, but it would be a flimsy victory with no value. On the other hand, an average writer could construct the debate so that the little bible thumper kicks ass. YEAH! It doesn’t really matter though, does it? It is still just an imitation of reality, just like the sets, characters, dialogue, and plot of “The West Wing”.

I’m glad you got the chance to post all of your issues regarding the bible, but it was not appropriate or honest to couch your lengthy diatribe within your claim that I somehow “missed the point”. You may be shocked that I actually agree with the issues presented in the clip, but I would never cite a segment of a fictional T.V. show in a research paper or my doctoral dissertation, so now I’m back at the beginning when I state that it is rather indulgent to post the clip and give it merit beyond mere entertainment.