Bible and Politics's topics - tribe.net

BIBLICAL EVIDENCE THAT BUSH IS ANTICHRIST

AMan-ManA — Thu, 11 Jan 2007 20:43:04 GMT

EXAMINING THE BIBLICAL EVIDENCE THAT BUSH IS ANTICHRIST

[Part 1 of 3]

Regarding “The End of Time” the Bible states:
"There will be signs in the heavens" (sky), which likely relates to the vast number of saucer-sightings since the 1st atomic test at Los Alamos NM. Also stating that ;
"There will be signs on earth" ... which likely relates to the many complex geometrical crop circles.
The Bible also makes reference to the rebirth of the State of Israel as a sign of the end, saying "The fig tree will put forth its branch" (Luke 21:29), and also that "One head of the beast came back to life from the dead" … again presumably The State of Israel which was revived in 1948 … an integral part of the Roman Empire ... referred to in the Bible as "The Beast" … (actually “monster” in original tongue).

Also an important signal is the prophesy of "Wormwood" -(Rev. 8:11) the word Wormwood is "Chernobyl" in Russian … a Nuclear Facility which could easily be depicted as a Fallen Star in metaphorical language (parables), being that stars are radioactive bodies as are reactors. Wormwood is an ancient medicinal herb (Artemisia Absinthium) which has been used for thousands of years to kill internal parasites and to make a liquor called Absinth, and is known around the world by several names.

It is possible that the world is much farther ahead in prophesy (1000 yrs.) than people are willing to accept having been conditioned and pre-programmed by intense institutional doctrine. They say that Anti-Christ must first set up his throne in Jerusalem. And the antichrist identity be revealed before Christ appears. The Bible states that a thousand years is a day and a day is a thousand years, so “The Day of The Lord” may be a metaphorical term relating to a time which is not measured, this time which is a metaphor and/or enigma.

I pointed out that Revelation speaks of a “new heaven” and a “new earth” ... and a "New JerUSAlem" ...Since it’s discovery America has been referred to as “The New World” !
A land which pursues the exploration of space (the “New Heaven”).

And one which fits the description of the "Promised Land" at least as well as Palestine (America being the worlds #1 producer of Milk ... it is said that the Biblical Promised Land "flows with milk.
America was the “Land of Promise” ... because it offered religious freedom to so many persecuted groups in Europe ... they migrated to "The Promised Land" that’s how Caucasians got here.

So wouldn’t then the "New JerUSAlem" be the power center of the New World (as is Washington DC) ? And wouldn’t this New JerUSAlem be the place where the antichrist sets up his throne ?
Revelation speaks of the New World having 12 gates, possibly the 12 main sea ports, which stretch from the Great Lakes to Seattle WA.

I was asked "If this is true then what about the bible
script which says that Christ will come on his white horse with all the armies of heaven and slay the wicked, and every eye will see him"
I realized that one such bible prophesy was fulfilled in the days of the crusades when the Christians took back Jerusalem, Revelation 14:20 says "The blood will run as high as the horses bridal". This event became documented history when forces led by the Knights Templar slaughtered Moslems to an extent which caused their horses to wade through rivers of blood 3 feet deep.
I am not suggesting that Moslems are evil either, only acknowledging the reality that they and Christians have been adversaries to each other since their origins, battling over control of Jerusalem.
To Christians Moslems are antichrist to Moslems Christians are the infidels. Actually to historians they are "half-brothers" locked in a sibling rivalry.

IS GEORGE BUSH “THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST” ?
In the Bible it becomes clear that the "Image of the beast" is "THE EVIL ONE", the "False Prophet" (Pope) and "The Beast" take second lead.
In Genesis it states that God made his sons in his "image" ... (like father like son). Therefore should we ask ... could the "image" of the beast be someone’s son ... made in the image of their father (like father like son)?
Project Disclosure (http://www.projectdisclosure.org) reveals that George Bush senior denied access of Extraterrestrial Info to President Carter when he was director of the CIA.

Copyright © 2006 Sacred WinePress: All rights reserved, no part of this text may be reproduced, stored in a database or other retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by any means, including mechanical, electronic, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without credit to the publisher.
[continued >>>]
_
_
_
_
_

posted in Bible and Politics - 2 replies

towards consistency

Margot — Thu, 02 Nov 2006 18:31:04 GMT

“The thought of Jesus being stripped, beaten and derided until his final agony on the cross should always prompt a Christian to protest against similar treatment of their fellow beings. Of their own accord, disciples of Christ will reject torture, which nothing can justify, which causes humiliation and suffering to the victim and degrades the tormentor.”
--Pope John Paul II

You are invited to join a new tribe dedicated to completely ending the United States of America's unconstitutional and immoral practice of and collusion in torture.

http://tribes.tribe.net/stopalltorture

posted in Bible and Politics - 0 replies

Solution for the Middle East situation--No Nukes Involved

gtpooh — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 21:28:17 GMT

I think that one thing we can all agree on is that the Middle East is a fucking mess. It has been for millennia. If the Bible is true, nearly 5 millennia. Three major religions and myriad smaller religions claim it as their "Holy Land". I think it is safe to say that the majority of the people on the planet belong to one of these religions. Therefore, the Holy Land, to me, could be considered EVERYONE's land.

Solution:

I suggest we create an international society/organization whose sole purpose is to restore the Holy Land to the world. I think it would be possible to declare Israel and the surrounding areas the first International Preserve. In additon to establishing a fund to rebuilt and reclaim the most sacred of sites, including Solomon's Temple, the rest of the world could assist a majority of the people there to relocate to other areas. This would be especially helpful to refugees like the Palestinians. Over the next half century we could move all commerce out of the area and replace it with centers for all different faiths. The only industry permitted to remain would be the tourist industry. Various faith based organizations could create entertainment and re-inactments of all the events in religous history, right on the spot were the events occurred. (Unless a majority of the faith felt strongly about any representations of their prophets.)

The profits from this could used to end poverty and suffering, as was the command of all the prophets and the commandment of God, him/herself, in addition toexperienced organizations faciliating better "hajs" and pilgrimages. Tell me what you think.

Isa 2:1 The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.

Isa 2:2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, [that] the mountain of the LORD'S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.

Isa 2:3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.

Isa 2:4 And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

posted in Bible and Politics - 0 replies

Betty Bowers vs. Ann Coulter

Mon, 03 Jul 2006 03:07:21 GMT

www.bettybowers.com/coulter.html

posted in Bible and Politics - 2 replies

Toasting Political Christians

PuckerButt — Mon, 12 Jun 2006 05:14:12 GMT

Here's to The Moral Majority,
Apostles of Hatred and Fear:
As I watched Jerry Fallwell on TV last night,
I knew that the Anti-Christ was here.

The Golden Rule he has turned into Lead:
Now it only reads "Do Unto Others".
He wants to insure we have Crosses to bear
And supports laws to repress his Brothers.

His Dogma oozed out like Puss from Christ's Wounds
Reeking of Bigotry and Malice.
I'm certain his Holy Rituals produce
Vomit from Wine in his Chalice.

posted in Bible and Politics - 0 replies

Scout's admission of being Wiccan leads to turmoil

gtpooh — Mon, 15 May 2006 22:05:22 GMT

ANACOCO -- The camp is going well so far. Boy Scouts have gathered from around the area in khaki button-ups and red scarves, eager to earn their God and Country badge.

The leader in a room of about 20 Scouts decides to break the ice by showing how religiously diverse the gathering is.

By a showing of hands, he asks who belongs to the Baptist Church, the Catholic Church, the Methodist Church, continuing on until two boys are left who have not raised their hands. One of the brothers is called out to tell the group what church he attends. He replies, "I'm Wiccan."

Little did 12-year-old Cody Brown realize how much that answer would affect his life.

During the past six weeks, Cody and his 15-year-old brother, Justin, have waited with their parents to see how the controversy sparked by Cody's answer would play out.

Within 48 hours of Cody's confession, the troop committee of Holly Grove United Methodist Church in Anacoco was meeting to discuss the implications.

The church sponsors the boys' chapter, Troop 71. Pastor Doug Lewellyn was out of town at the time of the meeting.

"The number one scout law is to do your duty to God and your country," Troop 71 Scout Master Gene Doherty said. "They met to discuss whether or not the boys could live up to that because of their religion."

The conclusion was that they could not.

Doherty called Army Cpt. Todd Buchheim, the boys' father and a former Eagle Scout stationed at Fort Polk, to inform him that the boys no longer were welcome in the troop. The Buchheims said Doherty told them that if Cody had lied about his faith, the boys could have remained with no problem.

"I was trying to give them a head's up so that they wouldn't come to the next meeting and not be prepared for what was going on," Doherty said. "They've been so supportive of our troop, and they're good people."

Two days later, Doherty said, the committee held another meeting with the church's pastor and decided to contact the district United Methodist Church committee and the National Council of the Boy Scouts before anything official was done.

Doherty, however, had already acted upon the original orders and kicked the boys out of the troop.

"The boys had been in that troop for over a year, and it wasn't exactly a secret," said Aileen Buchheim, the boys' mother. The boys became a part of the troop when the family lived in Anacoco, but wanted to continue on after they moved to Fort Polk in August 2005.

"No child should have to be told in 2006 that they can't take part in a group because of their religion," Aileen Buchheim said.

The district church committee in Lake Charles agreed and overturned Holly Grove's decision to oust the boys from the troop on religious grounds.

"Our church's motto is to open our hearts, minds and doors to everyone because we all have to come to an understanding of God on our own -- these boys should be no different," District Superintendent Doug Ezell said. "We are just a sponsor for the troop, so if the Boy Scouts do not have a problem with them being there, we don't."

According to the Boy Scouts, it's up to the sponsors to make that choice.

"Boy Scouts own the program but does not control the unit," said Legare Clement, executive director of the Boy Scouts for southwestern Louisiana. "We partner with community organizations and churches as sponsors to present the program, which is actually a youth outreach for them.

"They approve leaders by our standards, but they have a right to choose members," Clement said.

Although there are no troops or packs sponsored by Wiccan circles, the national office informed Clement that any boy who believes there is a God -- not just the Christian God -- can live up to the creed.

"They said that we believe in more than one God, but that depends on the branch of Wicca, just like any other religion," Aileen Buchheim said. "We believe in one goddess and god with different names and aspects depending on the time of the year."

Not everyone embraced the church's decision, including some parents of troop members who, officials said, feared that their children would be preached to by the two boys.

The irony is that the original troop was founded on parallel circumstances.

Doherty said Troop 71 began as a half-Baptist/half-Pentecostal troop led by a Jewish man.

Although the children had no problems with one another, the parents wanted the troop separated because of religious beliefs, Doherty said. When Doherty needed a charter for his Cub Scout troop, the troop leader transferred the charter and ferried his children to Anacoco from Pitkin for years to avoid the split.

"I've seen what difference of belief can do to a troop even if we aren't here to do doctrine," Doherty said. "It's not right or fair, but it's there. The world just isn't ready for diversity when it comes to their kids. People fear what they don't understand."

After almost a month of noncommittal answers on the boys' status, Aileen Buchheim said she received an apologetic call from Lewellyn to invite the boys to the next meeting, which occurred April 25.

Lewellyn attended the scout meeting to talk to the parents and Scouts about why they all were welcome and how doctrine was not a Boy Scout topic.

Numbers were sparse, and two mothers allegedly came back to pick their boys up 10 minutes after Capt. Buchheim brought in his sons.

"This (the controversy) has weakened the group," Doherty said. "I will probably lose some parent support and some good boys over this no matter how it turns out."

This past week, he officially lost two.

Cody and Justin decided not to remain with Troop 71 after the ordeal.

"This was devastating," Aileen Buchheim said. "My husband puts on a uniform to fight for ours and other nations' rights every day, and yet this happens in our own backyard. We just wanted to make sure it was straightened out so no one has to go through this again."

In the meantime, Aileen Buchheim has filed paperwork to charter a local chapter of Spiral Scouts, a Wiccan-based scouting organization that accepts members of any background, belief or gender between the ages of 3 and 18.

About 15 children are already on the sign-up list if the charter is approved, she said.

http://www.thetowntalk.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060509/NEWS01/605090308/1002

posted in Bible and Politics - 0 replies

Religous Political Site

Carol — Fri, 23 Dec 2005 15:53:13 GMT

I love this place:
www.liberalslikechrist.org

posted in Bible and Politics - 0 replies

Bush nominates Alito

Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:52:51 GMT

Well the christians are positively giddy over this one.

I haven't heard his take on gay rights yet, but I'm sure it has something to do with concentration camps, reparative therapy and enforced heterosexual marriage.

At this time I would just like to say a big FUCK YOU to all the gay men who voted Republican, and continue to hold that party dear to their cold little hearts. Same with the gay christians. Get a fucking clue.

www.commondreams.org/headlin...1-15.htm

Published on Monday, October 31, 2005 by Think Progress
Samuel Alito’s America

This morning President Bush nominated 3rd Circuit Appeals Court Judge Samuel Alito for the U.S. Supreme Court.” Who is Samuel Alito? ThinkProgress has the facts:

ALITO WOULD OVERTURN ROE V. WADE: In his dissenting opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Alito concurred with the majority in supporting the restrictive abortion-related measures passed by the Pennsylvania legislature in the late 1980’s. Alito went further, however, saying the majority was wrong to strike down a requirement that women notify their spouses before having an abortion. The Supreme Court later rejected Alito’s view, voting to reaffirm Roe v. Wade. [Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 1991]

U.S. President George W. Bush (L) announces the nomination of U.S. Appeals Court Justice Samuel Alito (R) for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court at the White House in Washington, D.C., October 31, 2005. Bush nominated Alito to the Supreme Court on Monday in a move likely to set off a partisan battle with Democrats as he tries to right his struggling presidency. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

ALITO WOULD ALLOW RACE-BASED DISCRIMINATION: Alito dissented from a decision in favor of a Marriott Hotel manager who said she had been discriminated against on the basis of race. The majority explained that Alito would have protected racist employers by “immuniz[ing] an employer from the reach of Title VII if the employer’s belief that it had selected the ‘best’ candidate was the result of conscious racial bias.” [Bray v. Marriott Hotels, 1997]

ALITO WOULD ALLOW DISABILITY-BASED DISCRIMINATION: In Nathanson v. Medical College of Pennsylvania, the majority said the standard for proving disability-based discrimination articulated in Alito’s dissent was so restrictive that “few if any…cases would survive summary judgment.” [Nathanson v. Medical College of Pennsylvania, 1991]

ALITO WOULD STRIKE DOWN THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT: The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) “guarantees most workers up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for a loved one.” The 2003 Supreme Court ruling upholding FMLA [Nevada v. Hibbs, 2003] essentially reversed a 2000 decision by Alito which found that Congress exceeded its power in passing the law. [Chittister v. Department of Community and Economic Development, 2000]

ALITO SUPPORTS UNAUTHORIZED STRIP SEARCHES: In Doe v. Groody, Alito agued that police officers had not violated constitutional rights when they strip searched a mother and her ten-year-old daughter while carrying out a search warrant that authorized only the search of a man and his home. [Doe v. Groody, 2004]

ALITO HOSTILE TOWARD IMMIGRANTS: In two cases involving the deportation of immigrants, the majority twice noted Alito’s disregard of settled law. In Dia v. Ashcroft, the majority opinion states that Alito’s dissent “guts the statutory standard” and “ignores our precedent.” In Ki Se Lee v. Ashcroft, the majority stated Alito’s opinion contradicted “well-recognized rules of statutory construction.” [Dia v. Ashcroft, 2003; Ki Se Lee v. Ashcroft, 2004]

posted in Bible and Politics - 0 replies

when u die..

Sat, 06 Aug 2005 23:14:01 GMT

..what is your preferred choice for what happens next?

posted in Bible and Politics - 5 replies

Political Corruption in Canada

Byron — Tue, 13 Sep 2005 20:01:04 GMT

My family has been destroyed, we're left without even basic human rights. When the Government & Legal
system are the Organized CRIME in CANADA, they honor CHILD RAPEST.
The Federal Government is allowing the Credability & Reputation of the
Police & The Legal System, to be distroyed to protect ONE Corrupt Lawyer,
Politician, Judge, Child Rapest & now member of THE ORDER OF CANADA .This
man has broken every law he swore to protect. Because this X-Justice
Minister and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, raped and impregnated my
12 year old sister, and covered it up his entire career, no one will help
us. To this day, no lawyer will represent me and the legal system will do
nothing to help. The last lawyer I asked to represent me, told me, if any
lawyer tried to represent you, it would mean the end of their career. Visit
my web site at http://maxpages.com/sexualabuse ask all your friends to e-mail our Prime Minister, Mr. Paul Martin, and ask him for Justice. pm@pm.gc.ca
Byron Prior Tele# 709-834-9822
66 Readers Hill Crescent
Conception Bay South
NL., Canada
A1W-5B4

posted in Bible and Politics - 0 replies

New test on Church & state?

kip-Cherone — Tue, 02 Aug 2005 20:27:34 GMT

or just another class for students to learn about one aspect of our heratige?

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/01/education/01bible.html?incamp=article_popular

posted in Bible and Politics - 0 replies

The Bible and the Constitution

gtpooh — Fri, 01 Jul 2005 06:59:20 GMT

We are having a discussion in !*Politics*! in which one dolt said:

"have you actually read the "Ten Commandments" - these are as close to unalienable rights as you're going to find." (Hey, mr. you oughta put this in your tribe as well, it's just too precious.)

I, actually, HAVE read the Ten Commandments. I offer them here for your enjoyment.

1. I [am] the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

3. Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the
LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day [is] the sabbath of the LORD thy God: [in it] thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that [is] within thy gates: For [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them [is], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

5. Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.

6. Thou shalt not kill.

7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.

8. Thou shalt not steal.

9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that [is] thy neighbour's.

Discussion: Which of the Ten Commandments influenced the Bill of Rights?

posted in Bible and Politics - 0 replies

The Great Commission

gtpooh — Thu, 23 Jun 2005 00:17:45 GMT

Cross posting this from . . .well, somewhere else. <laugh> I can't keep my tribes straight some days. :)

The quotes below are refering to what is known as "the great commission". So, Christians do actually believe that Jesus has commanded all believers to take over & dominate the world, for christ. In order to accomplish this task, they need to abolish the separation of church & state in the US & around the world. Which is why they so desparately want to get so involved in politics.

Matthew 28:19-20
"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen."

http://cwww.reformed.com/pub/greatcomm.htm

http://www.gcachurches.org/

http://www.thewords.com/english/thegreat.htm

google search "the great commission" - http://www.google.com/search

--------

"Christians have an obligation, a mandate, a commission, a holy responsibility to reclaim the land - for Jesus Christ - to have dominion in civil structures, just as in every other aspect life & godliness. It is dominion we're after not just a voice. It is dominion we're after not just influence. It is dominion we're after not just equal time. It is dominion we're after. World conquest. That's what Christ has commissioned us to do."

- George Grant - "changing of the guard" pg 50-51

"Our goal, as christians, is to dominate society"

- Pat Robertson

"The church should be a disciplined charging army christians, like slaves & solders ask no questions. We are fighting a holy war"

- Jerry Falwell

"Christianity & Democracy are inevitably enemies"

- R.J. Rushdoony "Independent Republic" pg 122, 1964

posted in Bible and Politics - 1 reply

When The President Talks to God

gtpooh — Thu, 16 Jun 2005 13:06:36 GMT

Bright Eyes rocks The Tonight Show with a scathing attack on the President. This video has caused quite a stir in the blogosphere.

The Lyrics in Question:

When the president talks to God
Are the conversations brief or long?
Does he ask to rape our women's rights
And send poor farm kids off to die?
Does God suggest an oil hike
When the president talks to God?

When the president talks to God
Are the consonants all hard or soft?
Is he resolute all down the line?
Is every issue black or white?
Does what God say ever change his mind
When the president talks to God?

When the president talks to God
Does he fake that drawl or merely nod?
Agree which convicts should be killed?
Where prisons should be built and filled?
Which voter fraud must be concealed
When the president talks to God?

When the president talks to God
I wonder which one plays the better cop
We should find some jobs. the ghetto's broke
No, they're lazy, George, I say we don't
Just give 'em more liquor stores and dirty coke
That's what God recommends

When the president talks to God
Do they drink near beer and go play golf
While they pick which countries to invade
Which Muslim souls still can be saved?
I guess god just calls a spade a spade
When the president talks to God

When the president talks to God
Does he ever think that maybe he's not?
That that voice is just inside his head
When he kneels next to the presidential bed
Does he ever smell his own bullshit
When the president talks to God?

I doubt it

I doubt it

http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2670176?htv=12&htv=12&htv=12

posted in Bible and Politics - 2 replies

Court clears way for rude Samaritans

gtpooh — Wed, 18 May 2005 22:29:09 GMT

People are under no obligation to rescue strangers in peril, a court has ruled.

The NSW Court of Appeal yesterday dismissed an appeal by a man who was stabbed after being refused sanctuary in a fast-food restaurant.

In early 1998, Eron Broughton, then a teenager, was out in Sydney's CBD when he and three friends were threatened by a knife-wielding gang.

Mr Broughton and his friends sought refuge in a Hungry Jack's restaurant on George Street, but the guard pushed them back into the street, where Mr Broughton was stabbed 10 times.

Mr Broughton nearly died and claims to suffer ongoing psychological problems and physical pain because of the attack.

He sought damages in the NSW District Court in 2003, claiming the security guard's actions led to his injuries.

But the then 24-year-old lost his claim after the judge found the security guard could not have foreseen the stabbing.

In yesterday's decision, Justices Ken Handley, David Hodgson and John Brownie said the security guard's first responsibility was towards the restaurant's customers and employees, whose safety may have been threatened if the gang had followed Mr Broughton's group inside.
AdvertisementAdvertisement

Justice Handley said that "a stranger is not obliged to … rescue those in peril".

"In general the law does not impose legally enforceable duties on one citizen to help another," he said.

"The moral commandment to love one's neighbour is not enforceable by law."

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Court-clears-way-for-rude-Samaritans/2005/05/18/1116361618792.html

posted in Bible and Politics - 1 reply

Catholic Church Says Lying is All Right

gtpooh — Tue, 17 May 2005 06:48:32 GMT

This is so bogus! But it's Doctrine.

Mental Reservation

The name applied to a doctrine which has grown out of the common Catholic teaching about lying and which is its complement.

The Catholic Doctrine on Lying

According to the common Catholic teaching it is never allowable to tell a lie, not even to save human life. A lie is something intrinsically evil, and as evil may not be done that good may come of it, we are never allowed to tell a lie. However, we are also under an obligation to keep secrets faithfully, and sometimes the easiest way of fulfilling that duty is to say what is false, or to tell a lie. Writers of all creeds and of none, both ancient and modern, have frankly accepted this position. They admit the doctrine of the lie of necessity, and maintain that when there is a conflict between justice and veracity it is justice that should prevail. The common Catholic teaching has formulated the theory of mental reservation as a means by which the claims of both justice and veracity can be satisfied.

The Doctrine of Wide Mental Reservation

The doctrine was broached tentatively and with great diffidence by St. Raymund of Pennafort, the first writer on casuistry. In his "Summa" (1235) St. Raymund quotes the saying of St. Augustine that a man must not slay his own soul by lying in order to preserve the life of another, and that it would be a most perilous doctrine to admit that we may do a less evil to prevent another doing a greater. And most doctors teach this, he says, though he allows that others teach that a lie should be told when a man's life is at stake. Then he adds:

I believe, as at present advised, that when one is asked by murderers bent on taking the life of someone hiding in the house whether he is in, no answer should be given; and if this betrays him, his death will be imputable to the murderers, not to the other's silence. Or he may use an equivocal expression, and say 'He is not at home,' or something like that. And this can be defended by a great number of instances found in the Old Testament. Or he may say simply that he is not there, and if his conscience tells him that he ought to say that, then he will not speak against his conscience, nor will he sin. Nor is St. Augustine really opposed to any of these methods.

Such expressions as "He is not at home" were called equivocations, or amphibologies, and when there was good reason for using them their lawfulness was admitted by all. If the person inquired for was really at home, but did not wish to see the visitor, the meaning of the phrase "He is not at home" was restricted by the mind of the speaker to this sense, "He is not at home for you, or to see you." Hence equivocations and amphibologies came to be called mental restrictions or reservations. It was commonly admitted that an equivocal expression need not necessarily be used when the words of the speaker receive a special meaning from the circumstances in which he is placed, or from the position which he holds. Thus, if a confessor is asked about sins made known to him in confession, he should answer "I do not know," and such words as those when used by a priest mean "I do not know apart from confession," or "I do not know as man," or "I have no knowledge of the matter which I can communicate."

All Catholic writers were, and are, agreed that when there is good reason, such expressions as the above may be made use of, and that they are not lies. Those who hear them may understand them in a sense which is not true, but their self-deception may be permitted by the speaker for a good reason. If there is no good reason to the contrary, veracity requires all to speak frankly and openly in such a way as to be understood by those who are addressed. A sin is committed if mental reservations are used without just cause, or in cases when the questioner has a right to the naked truth.

The Doctrine of Strict Mental Reservation

In the sixteenth century a further development of this commonly received doctrine began to be admitted even by some theologians of note. We shall probably not be far wrong if we attribute the change to the very difficult political circumstances of the time due to the wars of religion. Martin Aspilcueta, the "Doctor Navarrus," as he was called, was one of the first to develop the new doctrine. He was nearing the end of a long life, and was regarded as the foremost living authority on canon law and moral theology, when he was consulted on a case of conscience by the fathers of the Jesuit college at Valladolid. The case sent to him for solution was drawn up in these terms:

Titius, who privately said to a woman 'I take thee for my wife' without the intention of marrying her, answered the judge who asked him whether he had said those words that he did not say them, understanding mentally that he did not say them with the intention of marrying the woman.

Navarrus was asked whether Titius told a lie, whether he had committed perjury, or whether he committed any sin at all. He drew up an elaborate opinion on the case and dedicated it to the reigning pontiff, Gregory XII. Navarrus maintained that Titius neither lied, nor committed perjury, nor any sin whatever, on the supposition that he had a good reason for answering as he did.

This theory became known as the doctrine of strict mental reservation, to distinguish it from wide mental reservation with which we have thus far been occupied. In the strict mental reservation the speaker mentally adds some qualification to the words which he utters, and the words together with the mental qualification make a true assertion in accordance with fact. On the other hand, in a wide mental reservation, the qualification comes from the ambiguity of the words themselves, or from the circumstances of time, place, or person in which they are uttered.

The opinion of Navarrus was received as probable by such contemporary theologians of different schools as Salon, Sayers, Suarez, and Lessius. The Jesuit theologian Sanchez formulated it in clear and distinct terms, and added the weight of his authority on the side of the defenders. Laymann, however, another Jesuit theologian of equal or greater weight, rejected the doctrine, as did Azor, S.J., the Dominican Soto, and others. Laymann shows at considerable length that such reservations are lies. For that man tells a lie who makes use of words which are false with the intention of deceiving another. And this is what is done when a strict mental reservation is made use of. The words uttered do not express the truth as known to the speaker. They are at variance with it and therefore they constitute a lie. The opinion of Navarrus was freely debated in the schools for some years, and was acted upon by some of the Catholic confessors of the Faith in England in the difficult circumstances in which they were frequently placed. It was, however, condemned as formulated by Sanchez by Innocent XI on March 2, 1679 (propositions 26, 27). After this condemnation by the Holy See no Catholic theologian has defended the lawfulness of strict mental reservations.

http://newadvent.org/cathen/10195b.htm

posted in Bible and Politics - 2 replies

Photo links

vicente — Sun, 15 May 2005 23:39:57 GMT

http://bushspeaks.com/home.asp?did=59&dir=f

http://www.jesusdressup.com/#

http://www.jesusoftheweek.com/jesii/220/index.html

http://www.jesusoftheweek.com/jesii/212/index.html

http://bushspeaks.com/home.asp?did=25&dir=b

http://bushspeaks.com/home.asp?did=67&dir=b

http://bushspeaks.com/home.asp?did=172&dir=f

http://bushspeaks.com/home.asp?did=197&dir=f

posted in Bible and Politics - 0 replies

"The Bible as weapon in the culture war "

Sun, 15 May 2005 17:30:18 GMT

From the Chicago Trib. Note that the author is not only a member of the Clergy, but a retired bishop.

CHURCH AND STATE

Political pulpit
The Bible as weapon in the culture war

By John Shelby Spong
Published May 15, 2005

In recent years the Bible has emerged as a major force in the political arena.

For example, devotees of the Scriptures have quoted this sacred source to justify religious support for the war in Iraq. In fundamentalist Christian communities this war is seen as bringing peace to the Middle East and securing Israel's establishment, which they believe are the conditions for the coming of "the rapture" and thus the end of the world.

It is worth noting that part of the code language used by these millenarians is that in the rapture "no child is left behind!"

The Bible regularly is quoted by conservative Christians to argue that what they call "the homosexual lifestyle" is contrary to Scripture. Politically this takes the form of seeking to amend the Constitution to discriminate against our citizens who are gay or lesbian.

In this basic charter nearly every previous attempt at amendment has been to expand freedom. Now these Bible quoters want to reverse that trend, failing to see that if today's majority can amend the Constitution to discriminate, then no one is safe from tomorrow's majority.

In recent weeks the Bible has been at the center of the debate focusing on end of life decisions.

No less a person than Rep. Tom DeLay, the majority leader in the House of Representatives, has attacked people seeking to follow their loved ones' advanced directives to withdraw artificial life-support systems.

Our nation's judiciary has been called "anti-religious."

When leaders seek to intimidate the presumably independent courts, the first step toward a totalitarian government has been taken.

The Supreme Court has been called "anti-religious" by blocs of Christian voters, Catholic and Protestant, because it has not been willing to overturn Roe vs. Wade. In that campaign the high court has been labeled as anti-life, anti-God and ultraliberal.

Are these critics not aware that seven of the nine Justices on this Supreme Court were the appointees of conservative Republican administrations? Are we to believe that to be religious or Christian is to stand politically to the right of Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush?

I find two things abhorrent in these clearly related incidences.

First, the idea that citizens with a particular religious position can seek to impose their religious agenda on the whole body politic violates everything I believe about the separation of church and state.

I want the religious beliefs of all our citizens to be respected and their right to practice their religious values in their own way to be protected by law, and I do not want the particular religious beliefs of any part of this nation imposed on the rest of the people by law. The very reason this nation was founded must not be compromised by the zealotry of some of our citizens.

Second, as a believing and practicing Christian who exercises public leadership in a recognized Christian institution, I am appalled at how little of the biblical scholarship of the last 200 years has entered the minds of members of this new generation of would-be religious leaders, to say nothing of our citizens.

Is it rational, for example, to assert that a book that we now know was written between 1000 B.C. and A.D. 135, is in fact the eternal and unchanging "Word of God?"

Does a moral God send a series of plagues on the Egyptians or stop the sun in the sky to allow more daylight so that Joshua can continue to slaughter his enemies? Should a book be called the "Word of God" when it calls for homosexuals to be executed, defines women as property, approves of slavery and suggests that Jews ought to be persecuted?

The Bible inevitably reveals in its pages the common assumptions of the time in which it was written. It believes that the Earth is the center of the universe and that God lives above the sky, keeping the divine record books current on the chosen people's behavior and intervening on occasion to open the Red Sea, pour down manna from heaven and dictate the 10 Commandments.

It reflects a time in history when people knew nothing of germs, viruses or tumors and treated sickness as if it were divine punishment that could be offset by offering sacrifices to please the angry Deity.

Demons of the unknown
Whatever did not fit into their categories of knowledge they regarded as supernatural miracles. Epilepsy, they believed, was caused by demon possession and deaf muteness by the devil tying the tongue of the victim.

Many of the liturgical practices of the church today continue to encourage this premodern mentality. In liturgy, the Bible is carried in procession elevated above the people to elicit acts of devotion. When its words are read in worship they are introduced or concluded with some reference to the claim that they are the "Word of God."

People quote its verses in debate to prove that their perspective is in fact God's will. Hands are laid on this book when we vow to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Today we are experiencing the Bible being used by religious and political leaders to enable them to define the morality of birth control, abortion, racial and sexual discrimination and even acts of aggression against our "enemies."

To oppose this mentality, they not so subtly assert, is to oppose God and thus to be anti-religious. These are nothing less than the steps people take on the road to transforming a democracy into a theocracy, which is to walk in the direction of the cruelest form of government that human beings have devised.

Theocracies always turn demonic because they justify everything in the name of God.

Non-religious people and people whose religious tradition is different from the prevailing point of view should be alarmed at these trends, especially when their voices, raised in protest, are dismissed as anti-Christian.

That is why I urge those who like myself are Christians, steeped in this religious tradition that we love, to speak publicly in powerful opposition to this current use of religious power.

Varied religious voices need to remind the leaders of this nation that no single person speaks for and no single perspective captures the ultimate truth of God.

All any of us can ever do is to "see through a glass darkly." There is no single pathway into the realm of God, and no eternal code of unchanging truth has ever been captured in any revered book of antiquity.

The Bible did not drop from heaven fully written.

A tribal text

It is rather a record of a particular people's attempt to walk through history making sense out of their experience of the divine. The Bible begins in a prejudiced mentality in which one ancient tribe assumes that its God is bound by the limits of its tribal views.

This story grows, however, until it reaches a consciousness that acknowledges all people as God's people. It transcends the portrait of a prejudiced deity when people hear God say "love your enemies, bless those who curse you."

It escapes the texts that denigrate those who are different and calls its readers to learn that in the God experience there is no division of ethnicity, gender or economic servitude that can finally be sustained.

God is no tribal chief

It explodes the primitive image of God as a supernatural tribal chief leading the people in acts of vengeance and ultimately reaches a place where God is viewed as analogous to the life-giving wind, identified with the transforming power of love and seen as calling all people into the fullness of their being.

That is when our faith story ceases to be subservient to its tribal origins and reaches toward a universality in which our God is seen as beyond every barrier and boundary.

The Bible: a weapon to enforce conformity to a narrow religious mentality?

No! The Bible I read quotes the Jesus I serve as saying that he came so that all might have life and have it abundantly.

John Shelby Spong, the retired Episcopal bishop of Newark, N.J., is the author of the recently published "The Sins of Scripture: Exposing the Bible's Texts of Hate to Reveal the God of Love" from HarperCollins and other books and essays on belief. www.johnshelbyspong.com

posted in Bible and Politics - 1 reply

Woohoo, Brazil Just Says NO to Christian Ideology--even when it costs them US dollars!

gtpooh — Sun, 15 May 2005 06:21:21 GMT

Keep Your Money

May 10, 2005 - Brazil has rejected $40 million in U.S. funds for
fighting AIDS. The move is seen by some observers as a rejection of Washington's head-in-the-sand linkage of neo-con morality and foreign aid.

''Biblical principles are their guide, not science," Pedro Chequer,
director of Brazil's AIDS program told media outlets on
Wednesday. "This premise is inadequate because it hurts our
autonomous national policy." Acting in accordance with a 2003 federal law, U.S. Congress demanded that Brazil publicly condemn prostitution before accepting the funds from the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID.

Prostitution is a legal industry in Brazil and a key civic player in
fighting the spread of HIV/AIDS.

Jacobson said Brazil's sex industry plays a crucial role in the
battle against AIDS in part through its role in helping the
government review donation assistance. "Brazil has taken cutting
practical approaches and they were not going to adopt an approach
based on ideology," Jacobson said in an interview on Friday.
The U.S. government globally seeds its conservative ideology with
tools such as the so-called global gag rule, a measure that blocks
U.S. family planning assistance to foreign NGOs that perform
abortions in cases other than a threat to the woman's life, rape or
incest.

But Jacobson says that unlike the the global gag rule, the demands
relating to prostitution appear to be applicable to domestic
organizations, such as U.S.-based charities with international
operations.

Kelly Hearn, AlterNet

This came from the Yahoo group Spiritual Atheists. I've asked for a link.

posted in Bible and Politics - 4 replies

Holy Crap!

Vaughn — Thu, 12 May 2005 16:00:26 GMT

It's Bible and politics!
Remember that old Reeses peanut butter cup advertisement-
"You got your politics in my Bible!"
"You got your Bible in my politics!"
Go go Gwenny!
Yay!

posted in Bible and Politics - 8 replies

Protect the Children

gtpooh — Fri, 13 May 2005 21:31:04 GMT

Okay, this is a great idea: http://www.tribe.net/action/Trackback/threadId/c39120d1-d9c3-445d-8250-76650255b050

posted in Bible and Politics - 2 replies

Jesus: "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's,"

cortelyou — Fri, 13 May 2005 06:15:39 GMT

"Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's"

This is a bibical quote that has kept many Christian from taking an active role in government.

However I assume the current religious right is using this guys interpretation:
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/20/story_2000_1.html

posted in Bible and Politics - 5 replies

Politicizing Christianity

Rocky — Fri, 13 May 2005 20:07:01 GMT

Politicizing Christianity -

"... The Rev. Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State recently quipped: "The good news is that the Christian Coalition is fundamentally collapsing. The bad news is that the people who ran it are all in the government." He noted, for example, that when he goes to the Justice Department, he keeps seeing lawyers formerly employed by prominent right-wing fundamentalist preacher Pat Robertson.... "

http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/view/196/1/76/

Other Bible search engines

- CATHOLIC - http://www.scborromeo.org/index2.htm

- JESUS in RED http://www.ccel.org/bible/phillips/JBPRed.htm

- TORAH - http://www.torahteacher.org/

http://www.blueletterbible.org/

http://www.biblestudytools.net/

http://www.biblegateway.com/

- Greek / Latin tools - http://gainsford.tripod.com/dict.htm

------------

http://www.ffrf.org/about/bybarker/

posted in Bible and Politics - 1 reply