A New Abraham and a New Earth

May 11, 2007 - 8:29am

Have you noticed the great evil that comes from religious exclusivity? Whenever one group of people claims that they have some kind of special arrangement with the Creator and all previous ways of relating to God are not to be tolerated, evil inevitably follows.

Zoroastrians gained power in Persia and promptly threw out the pagan religion of the Magi. Christians threw out the Pagans in Europe after stealing most of their holidays. Mayday, Christmas, Halloween, Easter – it’s all spiritual booty.

Jews have hated Arabs and denied their right to live in the traditional Biblical lands. Arabs returned their lack of hospitality with as much passion. They all give as good as they get.

Christians march into places where primitive peoples practice ancient faiths, some of them not practiced anywhere else in the world. And we tell them to forget their traditional ways and give their hearts to Jesus so they won’t burn in hell.

The Taliban persecutes infidels and destroys ancient Buddhist statues by blowing them to pieces with their tanks.

Everywhere you look, the children of God wage physical and spiritual war against each other. The blood never stops flowing, and the rest of the world looks on in amazement. When will we learn that you can’t force people to change their ways of expressing faith and devotion to the Creator?

At some point your spirit or your gut or your humanity must speak to your theology. At some point you look at your holy book, and you look at all the death and terror and ugliness that comes from fighting people with other holy books and you say, “To hell with it. I’m not doing this anymore.”

At some point you look at the sacred rituals of the people you have come to save, and you fall silent. You sit quietly and listen to their ancient songs and stories. You watch their bodies perform dances that predate Christianity and are about to pass out of existence. And you ask yourself, “How is it that I have eyes but did not see?”

At some point you look at the Dome of the Rock and the Temple Mount, then you look at the bodies littering the streets and the children living in squalor and you say, “Enough is enough! Burn every Koran and every Bible if we must, but the lot of them are not worth the lives of these children.”

At some point don’t you start listening to the spiritual stories of other people and find the beauty and the common ground in them? At some point don’t you realize that our myths are delicate, like environments? The oldest ones are very fragile, and many have already been lost. At some point don’t you come to understand that these things are worth saving?

HEY, RELIGIOUS GUYS!

Humanity is moving on, fellas. You can get onboard the tolerance train or you can stay behind, but this train is leaving the station. Humanity is going to a new place.

Your way has not worked, and anyone with an ounce of sanity knows that. Beat your chalices and your pulpits into ploughshares. Hell, beat your sacred books into ploughshares too, if that’s what it takes. Beat everything into plowshares, but you better get on this train.

It may take a century. It may take several centuries, but the Day of the Lord is coming. The year of Jubilee is at hand. This Ramadan will last all year, and we will party like it’s 2099. The Lord God Almighty, He who created the heavens and the earth does not need you. God can raise up children from the stones and from the dirt beneath your feet. He’s done it before. He can find a new Abraham, if that is His desire. There is always someone ready to hearken unto the voice of The Lord.

So come on guys, we’d rather take you with us. You’ve played such an important role in our history, and there is deep beauty and ancient wisdom in your traditions. We’ll listen to you. We’ll try to see the beauty that you speak of, if you’ll just quit yelling and shooting at us. Hell, we’ll even pitch in and help you rebuild the sacred monuments that hatred has torn down.

It would be sad if the children of Abraham were to miss this train and end up nothing more than a sad footnote in the story of humanity.

rlp

 

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 9:02am.

This post brings tears to my eyes. My denomination struggles mightily with these questions and I know we have both been injured by that. It hurts so bad to be around people who think they are doing "God's Will" by meddling in and destroying the lives of others. And all for no good reason.

The sad irony is that the people doing the most damage think they are good, holy people, but they refuse to see.

How long will the sword devour?

brotherterry

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 13, 2007 - 1:05pm.

Too Much Religion

Long ago someone pointed out to me that Christianity is not a religion. Not a religion? Well, look at how Wikipedia defines religion:

“A religion is a set of beliefs and practices generally held by a community, involving adherence to codified beliefs and rituals and study of ancestral or cultural traditions, writings, history, and mythology, as well as personal faith and mystic experience. The term ‘religion’ refers to both the personal practices related to communal faith and to group rituals and communication stemming from shared conviction.”

Most Christians do have certain beliefs and practices – in that sense there are some Christian religions – but that’s not what Christianity is about. It’s not the belief and practices that make me a Christian. “Codified beliefs” and “group rituals” can be pretty scarey. Stop there and you’re in big trouble. Jesus was always down on the people who had a religion but didn’t seem to have much knowledge of God.

Well, what I’m trying to do here is distance myself from the kind of notion about religion expressed in today’s news. You heard about some people planning to attack Fort Dix? I was charmed by a statement made by a relative who thought the problem was caused by religion:

“It’s fine to be a religion man,” said Murat Duka, 55, a distant relative of the defendants. “But if you get too much to the religion, you get out of your mind and you do stupid things.”

Told that the three brothers had been repairing the roof of the Philadelphia mosque, Murat Duka said he had done the same at local mosques and churches, and had also donated money to synagogues. “You’ve got to donate because you don’t know next life which one is the true story,” he said. “So you’ve got to be balanced.”

I’m with Murat Duka: “If you get too much to the religion, you get out of your mind and you do stupid things.” Right on: too much beliefs, too many practices, you can go crazy. It happens all the time. Check out recent events in the Episcopal Church.

My advice? Don’t get “too much to the religion.” Remember where your priorities are – and God’s.

(Blog at clwebber.com)

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 9:08am.

This makes me really sad that you wrote this. The road to tolerance is a dead end.

Jesus said, "I am THE way, THE truth, THE life, no one will come to the Father but by me" (emphasis mine)

There's now way around this. It came from His mouth.

-Ryan

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 12:05pm.

The road away from tolerance leads to hurt and hate but Jesus tells us to "Love one another". There is no way around that either.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 1:09pm.

Ryan, a friend asked me for directions to my house. I told him THE way. I looked it up on mapquest and found that there were 3 more ways. My way is still THE way to my house and I know that because it is THE way THAT I go home every day, but obviously it isn't the ONLY way.

RLP, This is a wonderful post! Thank you for saying what so many people feel inside but have not said outloud.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 15, 2007 - 11:54am.

This is a bad analogy. In your analogy, you can't say "no one comes to my house except by the way I told you," because that would in fact be untrue. People do get there other ways. Jesus did say that no one - NO one - comes to the Father except through Him. He's the only way there.

However, I will say that one can argue exactly what He means by this. If people of other faiths are saved, then it is only because of His shed blood, not because they followed the rules of their faith. The real question for me is this: Do people have to call on Jesus by name and acknowledge by name that He is the only way to salvation (whatever salvation means) in order to be saved?

Chris

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 1:25pm.

Great post RLP! I put a link on my site at faithprogression.com

Submitted by rlp on May 11, 2007 - 1:46pm.

"The road to tolerance is a dead end." Boy I hate to think so. For the record, I'm quite aware of that little verse from John, but what did he MEAN by it. Forget what you've been told. Pulling the definite articles out and using them as a justification for converting the world to Christianity is pushing it a bit, don't you think?

You have some definite articles. I have the witness of history. When you do not allow others to worship God in their own way, great evil always comes. And evil cannot come from God.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 8:05pm.

From "HIS" mouth...really?

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 11:20pm.

I view Jesus' words in this regard as a symbol. Many spiritual traditions teach of a "bridge" which is used as a way to access the realm of Spirit. Jesus is "the way, the truth, [and] the life" for all those who fall within his tradition.

For the Egyptians (and this is a stretch I know but it'll illustrate my point), Osiris filled the role of "Risen God." He was "a way, a truth, and life" for the Ancient Egyptians. In fact, if you study the myths surrounding Osiris, you'll find a lot of "Christian" themes in it.

I dare you to open your mind.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 15, 2007 - 12:57am.

That's from John... John has always sounded to me like the gospel most likely to have been written while on 'shrooms. To quote something from Matthew, "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." So I'd take John with a grain or two of salt.

(And, if we're going to talk about Jesus' claims of exclusivity, Matthew also tells us, "...he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." So, unless you're Jewish, Jesus wasn't talking to you. In for a penny, in for a dollar, son. )

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 9:10am.

*no way (sorry spelling error)

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 9:31am.

(disclaimer:Gordon, forgive me if I'm putting words in your mouth with this post...)
Ryan,
I don't think RLP is saying that we all must just cease believing that Jesus is the only way to God. What I believe his point is is that we shouldn't allow this viewpoint to cause hatred of others or their religion in us. This type of "holy hatred" has led to a lot of bloodshed in the past as well as the present, and Christianity is not totally innocent.
The spanish inquisition. The crusades. Hell, to an extent even the Salem witch trials were fueled by this warped belief in our own righteousness before God.
We can't afford to let our beleifs lead to a justifiable hatred. The way that I see it is it is a professional disagreement. We must agree to disagree with the beliefs of others and, yes, try to see the common good in the religion of others.
This doesn't take away from Jesus. But we won't win anyone by arguing, putting down, mocking, or hating in the name of our God.

Regards,

Mark

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 3:53pm.

Well put Mark, I agree with you.

-Ryan

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 9:34am.

PS. the word "justifiable" should have been in quotes. I don't think we can use the bible to "justify" hating others for their beliefs. Just to clarify...

M

Submitted by Tripp Hudgins on May 11, 2007 - 9:38am.

I would recommend The Spiral Staircase by Karen Armstrong. Add it to your library if you have not yet read it. Astounding. I am working up a post about this same notion. As usual, RLP, you laid it out pretty well. And, if we are wise, we religious folk can get on the same train and still wear our collars. What do you say about that?! God is kickass.

Tripp Hudgins

http://www.anglobaptist.org

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 10:13am.

For me, religion is strongest when inclusive. I believe this message exemplifies that, though I certainly don't want to put my words in RLPs mouth.

I detest bloggers who toot their own blog within other's comments, and I'm not smart enough to know how to do trackbacks. But I do want you to know I quoted a substantial portion of your blog, giving full credit and links. It's a message I believe among the most important that we have and need at this time in our history. Thanks.

Submitted by kodi on May 11, 2007 - 10:16am.

Ryan, that is precisely why I am not a Christian. The one teaching of Christ I simply cannot accept is that "whoever does not believe stands condemned already." I would rather do good works and be condemned than judge others, as you urge us to do, and be saved.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 13, 2007 - 2:44am.

As always, it's about context. If you were to look at religion as the embodiment of a set of beliefs that express the same ideas but from the context of different cultural and linguistic constructs, you see there is no need for exclusion or condemnation whatsoever.

The teachings of Christ are fine; it's the interpretations thereof that can get awfully tricky.

Submitted by Lisa P on May 11, 2007 - 10:23am.

RLP, you rock. You have managed to say beautifully what I have been trying to get across to a couple of well meaning but harshly judgemental friends. God is so much bigger than anything we humans can manage to fit into our little holy books (or even our little brains). If we are serious about wanting to follow Jesus, then we must love everyone, regardless of how they choose to worship.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 10:48am.

RLP, I hope you won't be too terribly disappointed when you finally figure out that the "tolerance train" has room for everybody except Christians and Jews. A quick look at who can and can't be publically ridiculed right now in our own country without fear of outrage is just a small hint of what's coming. Does the tolerance train stop in France? I have Jewish relatives who left there (their native country) several years ago because anti-Semitism there had once again reached a point where they didn't feel safe. Go ahead...tell me they brought it on themselves.

I have little doubt that the human race is "moving on". I have equally little doubt that it is moving to a place where even you (with your current beliefs) won't be welcome. I agree with you that killing in the name of religion is unconscionable. I just think you're a little naive about where "tolerance" is heading.

And BTW, when was the last time Jews denied Arabs the right to live in traditional Biblical lands? Was it recently enough to explain the deadly attacks currently being initiated against them by Arabs? Recently, access to/restriction from traditional Biblical lands has been moving in the opposite direction.

Submitted by rlp on May 11, 2007 - 1:48pm.

I suppose we will see what the future brings. Neither you or I can know for sure. In the meantime, we can hope and pray and seek to be vessels of change. Dreaming's not such a bad way to bring about reality. It just takes a long time with some issues.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 15, 2007 - 10:49am.

If the tolerance train doesn't have room for Christians and Jews, I'm pulling the "emergency stop" cord until it does. But I'm not holding the train for anybody that doesn't want to buy the tickets to get on.

I'll hold the train for RLP.

Peter Eng - dornbeast@yahoo.com

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 10:54am.

We are not God. Therefore, we must accept that God is going to do some things that rub us the wrong way. Otherwise, we can be convinced that he is merely a figment of our imaginations.

In this case, we are talking about God expecting people to accept him and his son Jesus. Whether this appeals to us or not is immaterial. The question is, "Is it true?"

I am against hate, I am against judgmentalism, I am against proselytization, I am against exclusion, I am even against 95% of evangelism. But to say that "humanity has moved on" and that the train to take is Tolerance... that doesn't sound like we are choosing God's way, it sounds like we are expecting him to choose ours.

RLP... I love your writing... and I will continue to love it. But I believe you have swung too far in the opposite direction. It's like walking into a hot room and turning the thermostat down to 50 in protest. You should react to hate, exclusion and killing by working against hate, exclusion and killing. Jesus did not teach those things, so we are in a good position to work against them.

But to strip away the heart of Jesus' message in the process is folly. Instead our goal as Christians should be this: to stop presenting ourselves as "God's favorite people" who are asking the world to follow US, and start presenting ourselves as surrendered people who are inspiring the world to join us in our surrender, and our continued search for the heart of God.

-A different Ryan

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 4:09pm.

Well put.

- the first Ryan

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 15, 2007 - 12:04pm.

Hear, hear! We Christians have developed too much of an "Us vs. Them" kind of mentality. It's us (the holy, righteous, perfect, happy ones) against them (the unchurched, lost, pagan, fallen sinners). We need to turn them into one of us, like a Borg assimilation.

We've got to turn away from this. God loves everyone, Christian and non Christian, with more passion than we could conceive. He doesn't love Christians more, and we tend to think He does.

I love Derek Webb's words: "There are two great lies that I have heard - the day you eat of the fruit of that tree, you will not surely die, and that Jesus Christ was a white middle class republican, and if you want to be saved, you have to learn to be like Him." That sums up our mentality pretty well - that's what we need to change.

But, as you so well put, let's not, in the process, dilute Jesus' message. The only time Jesus spoke of urgency was when he sent out his disciples to preach His salvation. Why would it be so urgent if everyone else was going to be saved anyway?

Chris

Submitted by id est on May 11, 2007 - 10:58am.

... but why does your tone sound so militant? It sounds like the same kind of anger and judgementalism you are denouncing. With that approach, I think you are likely to rally those who already agree with you ("Yeah! You tell 'em, preach!"), but are unlikely to turn the hearts and minds of your opponents. Or perhaps you believe they are beyond repentence, and "stand condemned already," because the train is leaving the station?

Submitted by rlp on May 11, 2007 - 1:52pm.

Militant? How about passionate. I get this kind of response fairly often. I make a passionate or sometimes angry post about something that I think is wrong and the response is that somehow I've become judgemental and angry.

There is a difference. We all have to judge the world around us. And if we see an injustice or an evil, it is okay to be passionate in our response. You don't see me burning any buildings or dragging any specific people through the mud. I'm looking at the world and humanity. I make no apology for my passion in this matter.

Submitted by Satchel Pooch on May 11, 2007 - 10:59am.

Amen and amen and keep preachin' it, brother man.

This is one of those issues where I feel farther away from some of my fellow Christians than from non-Christians.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 11:13am.

Beautiful. Thank you. I'm an unrepentant pagan who nevertheless believes in Christ, and it's essays like this that are exactly why I continue to read and love your blog. :)

Submitted by longhairedweirdo on May 11, 2007 - 11:16am.

Nod.

A man told his two sons to work in the vineyard. One said "Sure, I'll do it!" but, you know, it is not by actions that we are saved, so he didn't bother to do anything.

The other said "no way, pop, I've got a GameBoy and a new cartridge and work sounds boring." (This might be a mistranslation from the original; I don't think there were enough new Gameboy cartridges back then to make this a realistic story). But he realized, geez, what the heck, I might as well help dad out, and went to work... even though he didn't speak the proper words, and even though it is not by our actions we are saved.

Even the apostles got this one right, first try... the boy who did what his father wanted, not the boy who spoke the proper words, was the one who did right.

Jesus didn't come to the world to set up a test, will you speak the magical words and be given the prize; that was Groucho Marx(actually, it was the duck... never mind). He came to ask folks to transform their hearts through love, and hold true to the principles he brought. He was the way, the way that all true paths lead, and if you come to the father, you have followed the path he laid out.

To believe that Christianity, the human institution, is the One True Way is to fall victim to idolatry, to mistake a human attempt to craft a path with the path itself.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 11:49am.

well said, longhairedweirdo!

Submitted by Lisa P on May 14, 2007 - 10:34am.

Yes! Wonderfully put.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 11:36am.

Gordon,

This may be your most powerful post yet. Thank you for saying what needs to be said. I only wish that it didn't fall on so many deaf ears.

Tom

Submitted by Stacy McKenna Seip on May 11, 2007 - 11:44am.

You manage synchronicity with my parish so often it's eerie. Pastor Todd spoke of the dangers and sadness of exclusivity this past Sunday.

I have long believed that my religion is not about the rules or laws or rituals, but about the very basic tenets of being good to each other, of making life better for all by loving and helping each other, and that such a thing is what God is striving for. It seems inconceivable to me, the surety so many have about texts written by men and translated over millenia as being the literal word of God and that they think it justifies hatred and exclusion and condemnation, when the basic tenets of all the major faiths lead to the same basic truths about celebrating the creation in all its glory, and all of the people in it.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 11:44am.

RLP was certainly not addressing this merely to Christians and Jews but to people of all creeds and faiths.

It is hard for any logically-thinking person who examines religious belief to escape the conclusion that much of the conflict in the world can be traced back to a "my god is better than your god" argument. If only each person could spend one day on the international space station looking down on our small, fragile planet ... I truly believe most would come to the conclusion that these religious wars and imaginary borders are so irrelevant as to be laughable.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 11:58am.

"This Ramadan will last all year..."

Aw, man! Does that mean we don't get to eat?

-Amanda

Submitted by rlp on May 11, 2007 - 1:54pm.

lol,

Metaphorically speaking, of course. I know you're being silly with this. It does bring up an interesting point. You can't push a metaphor too far. They bear weight, but not that much. ;-)

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 3:31pm.

Oh, some of us just don't know when to quit. :)

-Amanda

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 12:49pm.

Well, the neighborhood bully, he's just one man,
His enemies say he's on their land.
They got him outnumbered about a million to one,
He got no place to escape to, no place to run.
He's the neighborhood bully.

The neighborhood bully just lives to survive,
He's criticized and condemned for being alive.
He's not supposed to fight back, he's supposed to have thick skin,
He's supposed to lay down and die when his door is kicked in.
He's the neighborhood bully.

The neighborhood bully been driven out of every land,
He's wandered the earth an exiled man.
Seen his family scattered, his people hounded and torn,
He's always on trial for just being born.
He's the neighborhood bully.

Well, he knocked out a lynch mob, he was criticized,
Old women condemned him, said he should apologize.
Then he destroyed a bomb factory, nobody was glad.
The bombs were meant for him.
He was supposed to feel bad.
He's the neighborhood bully.

Well, the chances are against it and the odds are slim
That he'll live by the rules that the world makes for him,
'Cause there's a noose at his neck and a gun at his back
And a license to kill him is given out to every maniac.
He's the neighborhood bully.

He got no allies to really speak of.
What he gets he must pay for, he don't get it out of love.
He buys obsolete weapons and he won't be denied
But no one sends flesh and blood to fight by his side.
He's the neighborhood bully.

Well, he's surrounded by pacifists who all want peace,
They pray for it nightly that the bloodshed must cease.
Now, they wouldn't hurt a fly.
To hurt one they would weep.
They lay and they wait for this bully to fall asleep.
He's the neighborhood bully.

Every empire that's enslaved him is gone,
Egypt and Rome, even the great Babylon.
He's made a garden of paradise in the desert sand,
In bed with nobody, under no one's command.
He's the neighborhood bully.

Now his holiest books have been trampled upon,
No contract he signed was worth what it was written on.
He took the crumbs of the world and he turned it into wealth,
Took sickness and disease and he turned it into health.
He's the neighborhood bully.

What's anybody indebted to him for?
Nothin', they say.
He just likes to cause war.
Pride and prejudice and superstition indeed,
They wait for this bully like a dog waits to feed.
He's the neighborhood bully.

What has he done to wear so many scars?
Does he change the course of rivers?
Does he pollute the moon and stars?
Neighborhood bully, standing on the hill,
Running out the clock, time standing still,
Neighborhood bully.

~ Bob Dylan

Submitted by rlp on May 11, 2007 - 1:58pm.

Great song, and I get the meaning. I own the CD, as a matter of fact. Look, I think I spread my condemnation of religious tolerance around pretty good. I didn't let any of the children of Abraham off the hook. Hell, I even brought in the Zoroastrians for good measure.

I don't know the answer to the Israel/Arab problem. I think there probably isn't an answer. Hatred often comes to that. But I also know that there are Palestinians who used to have land and homes, and those were taken away from them. Period. I mean, that's what happened. And there are Jews whose homes were taken away from them in WWII and who have lived in the land for half a century now. You can't rip their homes away either.

There are many Jews and Arabs seeking a peaceful solution to something that is impossibly complex. And there are many who just hate the other.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 12, 2007 - 9:41am.

Do you think the Israeli/Palestinian problem is religious intolerance or racial intolerance? I think that most Israelis are secular Jews, and there are some Palestinian Arabs who are Muslim, but also a minority that are Arab and Christian. Like you said, it's a really complex problem, so it's probably a mixture of both.

-Andrew

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 1:04pm.

As Ryan quotes: Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, the life, no one will come to the Father but by me". I don't dispute this. However, the method by which this Grace is given to mankind is by no means spelled out. Different Christians have very different beliefs on this topic and most modern views on it have wandered far from what those in the early church believed. "By me" does not have to mean "by me via the mechanism of professing my belief in the Trinity in a particular fashion", or being baptised in a particular way, or anything else WE say it might be. As Christians, all we can do is live our lives as Jesus taught and that will make us the kind of people we need to be to receive grace. I know that there are folks out in the world who imitate Christ much better than I, ones who have not read a bible, sung a hymn, or been dunked in a river. How could I say I am more "entitled" to grace than they are. This does not contradict the duty of christians to stand witness to their beliefs, it merely puts us on notice not to try to be a lawyer or a judge with regards to God's actions.

- Terry @ jifc

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 15, 2007 - 7:06am.

Er, I'm kind of uncomfortable with co-opting all the "good" non-Christians out there and calling them Christians, though. Why can't they just be good people? I guess I balance the waytruthandlife with "My father's house has many rooms."

There is room for all of us, no matter what we call ourselves -- and no one who is truly doing their best to love and be loved should be seen as a Christian by default. That seems very "limiting and limited," to quote Madeline L'Engle.

Kate

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 15, 2007 - 12:09pm.

Kate - I'm totally off topic here, but since you quoted Madeline L'Engle, I had to say something. About a year ago, I bought "Walking On Water" by L'Engle at Half Price Books. When I got home and opened it up, I discovered that it had been autographed!

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 1:09pm.

Amen v'amen. Baruch Hashem.

- Joey (the token Jew)

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 1:23pm.

The requirement that there can only be one way is a reflection of the human ego.

The logical conclusion to free will is the ability to find more than one path to the same destination.

I rejoice in the spiritual fulfillment of my Christian neighbors and friends. I grieve over their inability to rejoice in mine.

In any spiritual philosophy that preaches peace, the very existence of violence by any of its proponents speaks to one thing: human ego. If I can find peace without using their philosophy, if I can find ways to overcome my own ego and live in peace with my neighbors, and if I can find fulfillment despite unreasonable forces of contradiction, then the only possible conclusion is: yes, if your religion does not preach tolerance, it is false.

Franklin Evans
madfedor@yahoo.com

Submitted by Anonymous User (not verified) on May 11, 2007 - 1:33pm.

RLP,

This pagan begs to offer you one correction: most Christian holidays were accomodations to the need to give the new converts time to assimilate. It is not true, not directly, that the holidays are spiritual "booty", because the imposition was as often as not from the leaders of the culture/tribe/nation forcing their subjects to at least look Christian. The point of their (the leaders) conversion was political, and even economic in that the growing Christian powers were quite prepared to cut off trading routes and partners if the conversions didn't take place.

You should investigate Celtic Christianity. The assimilation was almost entirely voluntary, much to the chagrin of the church leaders of the time.

A good overview reference with decent academic chops is A HISTORY OF PAGAN EUROPE, Prudence Jones & Nigel Pennick, Barnes & Noble Books ISBN 0-7697-1210-7. Your local B&N is likely to have a copy.

Franklin Evans
madfedor@yahoo.com

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 1:34pm.

Very sorry. That should be ISBN 0-7607-1210-7.

Submitted by rlp on May 11, 2007 - 2:03pm.

Yeah, I'm exaggerating a bit for style. I know what happened. I actually don't give the Church as much credit as you. She neither stole like a bandit or carefully thought out what she would leave. I think the people just refused to give up some things and they worked their way into Christianity. We had to find a way to keep the Easter holiday, for example.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 9:24pm.

Thanks for the clarification. I hope you'll understand that I find myself working against the opposite trend: fellow pagans who don't give the Church any credit, or even just the benefit of the doubt where it is deserved.

Franklin

Submitted by rlp on May 11, 2007 - 11:14pm.

You know, a few years ago I stumbled across a pagan blog that really touched me. The guy said something like, "Quit ragging on the Christians and the Bible. Until we've produced some literature that lasts 2,000 years, we can't say anything. We need to understand that we are neo-pagans and we are the new kids on the block."

You know, that's true. And it is also true that paganism is in our bones, our dna. There is no Christianity without paganism. Period. Abraham was a pagan. From Ur of the Chaldees, or so they say. The religions of the Word are built upon the religions of nature.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 12, 2007 - 7:14am.

I find, and have found, my most profound moments of thought in reading the Torah (my children all attended Hebrew school; I've been to the bema for all of them) and the time I actually studied the NT with a knowledgeable person. I often browse in the Christianity section at Barnes & Noble, where I came across the following in the translation of the Nag Hammadi library:

http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/trimorph.html

Trimorphic Protennoia

I am the Invisible One within the All. It is I who counsel those who are hidden, since I know the All that exists in it. I am numberless beyond everyone. I am immeasurable, ineffable, yet whenever I wish, I shall reveal myself of my own accord. I am the head of the All. I exist before the All, and I am the All, since I exist in everyone.

It goes on for a while, and is redundant as are many such writings. It speaks to me in the deepest corners of my thought... and it seems to be topical to your essay as well. I hope you're glad I thought of it. ;)

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 12, 2007 - 7:15am.

Gah, sorry. That one was by me.

Franklin

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 1:37pm.

I love this post. Makes me frown, makes me smile, makes me think -- that's the point, right? Reminded me of a new song by David Wilcox about the religion-motivated confilct in the Middle East. I've copied below -- sorry if it's too long.

--Cerabee

All three brothers loved their father, but he's brought them here today
To see these papers and these lawyers, and divide the old estate
All three feel that they're the favorite, he loves each of them the best
But these documents he gave them, will now put them to the test

So they open all the writings, that will prove the rightful heir
To this home that they remember, and the right to settle there
Their own sister is a prisoner, they don't see her face to face
They've not heard her song of beauty, or felt the movement of her grace

She lives live behind those bars of steel and waits for her release
Will she die or will we see
Jerusalem In Peace

Each one looks at what he's given, and he studies what he's shown
They hold their maps that show possession, of this place they've called their home
At first they sigh with satisfaction, when they see what's on their maps
Each one's given all he wanted, but the boundaries overlap

So do you wish us to be brothers? Father help us understand
Or will we each kill off the others? to claim this same piece of land
Do You mean there to be hatred? In this place you built to last
And will faith just die a prisoner? In the dungeon of the past

She lives behind those bars of steel and waits for her release
Will she die or will we see
Jerusalem In Peace

She lives behind those bars of steel and waits for her release
Will she die or will we see
Jerusalem In Peace

Jerusalem is sending her voice from inside the prison of disbelief
Stand up you people of the one God to bring about her release

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 1:44pm.

Ok, major problems here:

"Christians march into places where primitive peoples practice ancient faiths, some of them not practiced anywhere else in the world. And we tell them to forget their traditional ways and give their hearts to Jesus so they won’t burn in hell."

What exactly are we to make of world evangelization? And of the examples of Paul going into the greek synagogues, looking at their idols addressed to an "unknown god" and then telling them that he knows of the known God, the one and only God.

Are you disagreeing with Paul here RLP? Are you saying that we should promote a harmonization of religion, in which so much tolerance is allowed that we end up with syncretism in religion. It is not arrogant to preach one Gospel if we believe in one Bible that preaches one Bible.

This post is very troubling...

Submitted by rlp on May 11, 2007 - 2:06pm.

I do come from an evangelical tradition, and I'm well aware of the full ramifications of what I'm saying. I do love the story of Paul in Athens because he didn't condemn them to hell. He shared his own beliefs with them and praised their efforts to find God through their idols and pagan religion.

That would be okay. Tell people what you believe. Talk with them. Listen to what they believe. Neither Paul nor Jesus ever told an unbeliever he or she was going to hell. We should take a cue from their style.

If a theology of exclusion (my way or the highway) leads to grievous evil, I think you should look carefully at it. I stand by that thought.

Submitted by AdamF on May 11, 2007 - 1:58pm.

It all really comes down to 1 Corinthians 15, doesn't it? The resurrection? What if the tomb really is empty? What if Jesus really is the only one who offers true life?

It is amazing how much all the great myths have in common. And I think there is some truth to be found in other stories, certainly. But they can't all be true. Just doesn't work.

I don't know. I'm still learning a lot. And I'm willing to err on the side of grace. But I don't tell others about Christ because Christ makes me feel good or I FEEL its true. I think there's great convincing evidence that the resurrection historically happened. I think people should know about that.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 2:04pm.

How come the message so often narrows down to 'my way or the highway'?

How come Jesus as the way, the truth, the life, can't be embraced inclusive of everyone's heritage. Sure, some basics might need to be changed. But I do believe that Jesus has alternate routes to the roof.

Presbyterian Gal

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 2:11pm.

Is "one Bible that preaches one Bible." a slip of the keyboard ? I don't remember the Bible saying anything about "the Bible." My biggest despair with modern American religion is the setting up of the Bible as an idol. God is not contained in the Bible. My personal beliefs tell me that the Bible is the best tool I have for learning more about God, but that is as far as it goes.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 2:23pm.

www.reverendrockstar.com

I love listening to the spiritual stories of people and their journey of faith. That's why I don't like watering down faith by making it one big "smoothie of religion." The problem with this "everybody wins" blend of inclusive spirituality is that you rob the distinctive elements that make that particular faith so rich.

The problem is not a theology or religion- the problem is people. Humanity is fallen. All the more glorious the work of the cross of Christ!

"Real Live Preacher" writes, "...your humanity must speak to your theology..." and "humanity is moving on..." The difference here is that in his view, humanity defines theology. Biblically, however, we don't define God, but God defines us.

www.reverendrockstar.com

Submitted by rlp on May 11, 2007 - 2:36pm.

Hey rev,

First things first. NOWHERE do I advocate the abolishing of religious traditions and the creation of some sort of religious smoothie, as you put it. I'm for letting our various traditions live and thrive in peace. So please don't put those words in my mouth.

You and I would have quite a conversation. For one thing, I very much appreciate the feel of your comment. You came to talk and discuss. Thank you for that. Your view is the view of my own people, those that I grew up with. I know well the dangers of letting your humanity define the Bible.

BUT, I would claim that we all do this already. Even you. No one reads the Bible cleanly. We bring our humanity to it. And sometimes we all - even you - say "no" to the New Testament. We go with our guts. We go where the Spirit leads.

That's why women are allowed to cut their hair in Christian churches. That's why we allow divorced and remarried persons to join us and minister in our churches. The New Testament speaks clearly against these things.

That's why there are no longer any slaves in our nation, though the New Testament clearly allows slavery. In fact, there is an entire book of the New Testament (as you know I'm sure) that advocates for sending slaves back to their masters.

And yet, our humanity has moved us beyond those things. I believe God's Spirit working in humanity has moved us beyond them. And I think it is happening again with the issue of exclusivity.

Submitted by AdamF on May 11, 2007 - 2:56pm.

Do you think there are essential things that aren't negotiable though? Not cultural things, but things like objective truth? Things like the resurrection?

I don't know, maybe I'm just confused about the original post and what your actually saying.

Submitted by rlp on May 11, 2007 - 3:22pm.

Yes I do. But I don't know for sure how to determine them. At our church we preach the only gospel we know. We are sinners saved by the grace of God in Jesus Christ, who died and rose again.

Most things beyond that are up for serious discussion. And the idea that God may work in the world in different ways in one of the things we could talk about.

Submitted by AdamF on May 11, 2007 - 5:26pm.

Gotcha. I get that. I think wherever you find truth, it's ultimately God's truth. Anything that's true belongs to God.

I like Rob Bell's analogy of what it means to tell others about Christ, is that it's not making them agree to a set of beliefs but inviting them in to something, something big, something ancient. It's like inviting them to jump on a trampoline with you.

Well, I won't call all into it of course, it's in the book Velvet Elvis for anyone interested.

Thanks for making us think Gordon.

Submitted by Geodog on May 12, 2007 - 1:52am.

Amen on the original essay, rlp.

Hopefully on topic, some of the most interesting science fiction takes on the question, if there is intelligence life on other planets, did JC die for them too? Or will / has G-d send/t someone of their own species to those planets? Makes one think about claims of exclusivity ...

Peace,
Geodog

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 14, 2007 - 7:41am.

Throughout it's history the church has been evolving. As you mention, for too many years scripture was used to justify racism and slavery, subjugation of women, child abuse...

The lectionary this past week was Peter at Joppa. The Lord commanded Peter to eat that which scripture had told him was unclean. He fraternized with people who scripture said were unclean. Peter examined scripture in light of new understanding, reason, and experience and said, "we got it wrong."

The church has been doing that for 2000+ years. No longer can we say, "The Bible says it, I believe it, and that settles it," because it simply isn't true.

We have no way of knowing what Jesus actually said. The accounts of Jesus and his life, death and ressurection were written generations later by people with an agenda. Even the method by which scripture was cannonized is suspect.

We must continually ask ourselves, does this fit with what I know to be the nature of God. Is it full of grace, mercy, compassion, justice, love, forgiveness. Where scripture agrees with these things we should embrace it. Where it does not, we must reject it.

Is God creator of all people? Does "he" not love "his" children equally?

Perhaps it is not the belief "in" Jesus that is of primary importance, but rather the faith "of" Jesus that we shouold all be striving for.

Submitted by revscott on May 11, 2007 - 3:00pm.

Thanks for this, Gordon.

Bonhoeffer spoke of "religionless Christianity," a faith that leaves behind empty ritual and clings to that which gives life in the name of Christ. The church can no longer make truth claims on its own weight anymore - the world has left the church behind in terms of automatic validity. This is both an obstacle and a blessing - an obstacle because the work of proclamation becomes more difficult, a blessing because only things that matter are those which are authentic and life-giving.

We are "religion guys," as you said, but only because Christ has spoken to us. No blind loyalty here - at least, none for myself, and I sense much of the same from you, Gordon. We follow because Christ invited and continues to invite us to follow, sometimes with the church, sometimes in spite of her failings, many of which you laid out excellently in this piece. Thanks for this - as always, you've gotten me thinking (and on a Friday afternoon, no less...)

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 3:44pm.

How do you reconcile your beliefs with the Old Testament?

Submitted by rlp on May 11, 2007 - 4:02pm.

I don't. Why would I? I'm a gentile Christian.

Submitted by AdamF on May 12, 2007 - 11:16am.

How does the Old Testament inform your view of the New Testament?

Submitted by rlp on May 14, 2007 - 11:32am.

It's the foundation of everything Christ did and taught. And I don't discount it. My answer had more to do with the way the question was asked. "How do I reconcille my beliefs with the Old Testament?" I don't do that. The New Testament is my first authority. I reconcille the OT with the NT.

Submitted by AdamF on May 14, 2007 - 4:26pm.

That's a great way to put it.

Submitted by rlp on May 14, 2007 - 11:33am.

Not completely. But many parts are. You can't deny that. If you worship on a Sunday, for example, you've pretty much set aside one tenth of the 10 commandments in favor for a worship based on the resurrection. My point is, I don't reconcille my Christianity to the Jewish scriptures.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 15, 2007 - 1:16am.

"My point is, I don't reconcille my Christianity to the Jewish scriptures."

That's a pity.

Because Jesus did.

Matthew 5:17-18
Think not that I am come to destroy The Law (Torah), or The Prophets (Nevi'im): I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from Torah, till all be fulfilled.

Matthew 10:5-6
"5": These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:

"6": But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Matthew 15:24
"...he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

*^*^*

What would Jesus do? More than that, what did he actually do?

"You can't deny that."

I have no need to. Jesus did it for me.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 15, 2007 - 7:30am.

Proof texting never works. Proof texting from Matthew about the nature of what it means to be faithful between Christianity and Judaism is even more problematic. Matthew wrote against the Pharasaic community because of the anxiety the destruction of the second temple and the second diaspora caused on the faithful. Matthew wrote with an agenda to describe what fidelity meant for Christ believers and set the Pharisaic community up as straw men to show what genuine faithfulness meant in comparison. Matthew wrote to primarily Christ believing Jews. His voice is not the only voice in the New Testament. Paul specifically tells those who overly follow the legalism of the Levitical code to cut their own genetalia. Paul speaks against Peter and James in Galatians.

Just stop proof texting and start reading the documents in their entirety.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 15, 2007 - 8:24am.

"Matthew wrote to primarily Christ believing Jews."

Makes sense, given that Jesus was a Christ believing Jew.

"Paul specifically tells those who overly follow the legalism of the Levitical code to cut their own genetalia. Paul speaks against Peter and James in Galatians."

So... In a dispute where Saul of Tarsus contradicts Jesus, you believe Saul wins, and Jesus loses?

Huh. Wonder why they print Jesus' words in red, and Saul's in black.

I'm of the opinion that, as a Christian, Jesus wins. I believe when it comes to Saul, my previous quote from Jesus shows he knew Saul was on his way: "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." (emph. added)

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 15, 2007 - 8:40am.

Oh, and before I forget:

"His voice is not the only voice in the New Testament."

It's true. There are many voices in addition to Jesus' in the New Testament.

It's almost as if the Lord wants us to use the intelligence He gave us to choose between following Jesus, and following someone else, eh?

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 15, 2007 - 11:15am.

Matthew wrote the Gospel of Matthew
Mark wrote the Gospel of Mark
Luke wrote the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts of the Apostles
John wrote the Gospel of John (and maybe the Johannine epistles and maybe Revelations)

Jesus did not write a Gospel. God did not write a Gospel. Humans color the words ascribed to Jesus in red. If you pick and choose what you follow and you don't follow, that is up to you but the whole thing is canonical. Arguing that it is Divinly inspired to go against the canon is hubris. God is in there, but it isn't signified by red ink.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 15, 2007 - 1:58pm.

"Jesus did not write a Gospel."

We don't know that. We only know there is no gospel accepted at this time to be written by him. We could well find one in the future.

"Humans color the words ascribed to Jesus in red."

True. Because some humans believe the words ascribed to Jesus directly are more important than the other words. These humans are widely called, "Christians", because they follow Christ. Other humans don't think what Christ said is very important.

What part of this is difficult to understand?

(I don't mean to imply all Christians have red letter Bibles. However, I would say it is a defining feature of Christians that they value the teachings and words of Christ above others -- even if that "other" is someone widely revered, like Saul of Tarsus.)

"If you pick and choose what you follow and you don't follow, that is up to you..."

Interestingly, I would say the same to you. We are enjoined to judge not, but you do seem determined to turn your back on the words of Jesus, because you find the words of others more comforting to you.

"Arguing that it is Divinly inspired to go against the canon is hubris."

Wouldn't you agree the words of Jesus are the embodiment of "canon"? Can you not see that arguing that Jesus' words and teachings should be ignored because they're terribly inconvenient to you is also, "hubris"?

In fact, it would seem you believe that in a dispute between yourself and Jesus on doctrine, you win, and Jesus loses. There's another word that starts with "h" for that variety of belief. Also one that starts with "b".

Such matters, of course, are between you and the Lord.

Submitted by Peter Ellis on May 16, 2007 - 1:31am.

True. Because some humans believe the words ascribed to Jesus directly are more important than the other words. These humans are widely called, "Christians", because they follow Christ. Other humans don't think what Christ said is very important.

How about these words ascribed directly to the Lord?

"Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day [that] I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt"

Or if you insist on it being in Jesus' words and not his Father's words, there's these:

"This is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for you and for many, for the forgiveness of sins"

Surely the entire message of the New Testament is that Jesus has come to make a new covenant - a new agreement - between God and humanity. *All* will be saved who follow Jesus, and not only those who follow the Old Testament rules, which describe the old covenant.

Reconciling the Old with the New testament isn't heresy or blasphemy (however coy you are about throwing coded accusations), it's direct instructions from God and his Son. What more do you want?

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 3:50pm.

Sorry. That was vague. I mean how they tore down Asherah poles and the high places of Baal worship. As I read the accounts, I get the impression that it was a good thing to get rid of these things.

Submitted by rlp on May 11, 2007 - 4:11pm.

Well, you can't really expect me to be specific about exactly how various groups have persecuted other groups. This essay isn't a historical treatise like that. There is the issue of keeping things to a reasonable length.

Here's how it works. In this essay I say that religious people have hurt others in the name of their religion and at times in trying to convert them. I offered a few examples, mostly just for show.

Now you can buy my premise or not, but an essay like this assumes you have a reasonable opinion on the matter. My purpose is not to build that case. If you disagree, good enough. It's a big world and we all have our ways of thinking about things.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 16, 2007 - 2:39pm.

No, I didn’t mean that YOU were being vague. That was directed towards my own comment, when I said, “How do you reconcile your beliefs with the Old Testament? How do you reconcile your beliefs with the Old Testament?”

I was not happy with your answer, but I’m probably not smart enough to debate you anyway.

Still, I hesitate to board the tolerance bandwagon. Just because some religious people have hurt others in the name of religion, does not mean that God's people should stop preaching the exclusive, narrow way of Jesus.

That’s completely different from blowing up a busload of nonbelievers! Such an atrocious act does not cause the victims to go to heaven.

But if (motivated by love) I can somehow block the gates of hell, I will. Everybody who passes by me towards a Christless eternity should at least HEAR the words of life. If that’s offensive, I can deal with that. It’s better than holding hell’s door open for someone so that they don’t get upset that I care about what God says and whether they have eternal life.

Craver-Vii.blogspot.com

Submitted by rbarenblat on May 11, 2007 - 4:23pm.

Yeah!!

This is one hell of an essay, and I mean that in the very best way. :-)

Seriously -- this is powerful nonfiction, this is excellent preaching, and this brings tears to my eyes and makes me exult with joy at the same time. I am so grateful that you're out there saying things like this. God, why is this so radical?

Shabbat shalom, and blessings to you, Gordon.

***
"Why write unless you praise the sacred places?" -- Richard Howard

Submitted by LutheranHusker on May 11, 2007 - 7:50pm.

RLP, this topic has been on my mind ever since last Sunday. Those of us in traditions who use the Revised Common Lectionary for Sunday morning scripture readings heard Jesus say this last week: "I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another."

As I read your post, I couldn't help but think, "as Christians, what ARE we known for?" Yes, the Christian church performs some of the greatest acts of mercy and kindness, but we're also known all too often for being bigoted, hateful, spiteful, and unwelcoming.

There's a song by Derek Webb...one of my faves...called "t-shirts." I think it speaks very eloquently toward your own very eloquent essay, rlp. Here's the lyrics:

They'll know us by the t-shirts that we wear
They'll know us by the way we point and stare
At anyone whose sin looks worse than ours
Who cannot hide the scars of this curse that we all bear

They’ll know us by our picket lines and signs
They’ll know us by the pride we hide behind
Like anyone on earth is living right
And isn’t that why Jesus died
Not to make us think we’re right

When love, love, love
Is what we should be known for
Love, love, love
It’s the how and it’s the why
We live and breathe and we die

They’ll know us by reasons we divide
And how we can’t seem to unify
Because we’ve gotta sing songs a certain style
Or we’ll walk right down that aisle
And just leave ‘em all behind

They’ll know us by the billboards that we make
Just turning God’s words to cheap clichés
Says "What part of murder don’t you understand?"
But we hate our fellow man
And point a finger at his grave

They'll know us by the t-shirts that we wear
They'll know us by the way we point and stare
Telling ‘em their sins are worse than ours
Thinking we can hide our scars
Beneath these t-shirts that we wear

http://lutheranhusker.blogspot.com

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 11, 2007 - 7:58pm.

Amen!

Submitted by KQ on May 12, 2007 - 12:12am.

RLP: yes, yes, yes; a thousand times, yes.

Submitted by Anonymous User on May 12, 2007 - 1:05am.

"I am The Way" can be read in (at least) two ways. One is the "my way or the highway" reading. The other one says "When you get there and look back, you'll find that I was with you, even if you didn't know it".

There is only one way to God - and that is to seek God with your whole heart. And when you find God, you will see that Jesus led you - and so did Moses, Abraham, Muhammad, Utnapishtim, Quetzalcoatl and the Great Pumpkin. Maybe you only had eyes for one, and the others spoke to you in the languages of Babel - but they were still there for you along the Way if you needed them. And God is still there for you, even if you deny His existence, and instead go in search of enlightenment or Nirvana.

I can say this - and believe it firmly - even though I'm sure that my understanding of God (such as it is) would be condemned as heresy and atheism by approximately everyone except myself. For one, I don't believe he exists! Not in the form of a personality, or anything that it makes sense to pray to. Straight-up humanist reductionist scientist all the way, me. Miracles? Burning bushes? Don't make me laugh. However, holiness - ah, now that I can recognise where I see it, and I can see that it's worth seeking. So I'm there, kinda. Most of you probably don't believe I'm looking for the same thing as you are, but that's OK, I'm cool with that.

Submitted by Peter Ellis on May 12, 2007 - 1:13am.

Bah, login didn't work. Long-time lurker, very very occasional poster. Just wanted to say I'm not afraid to put a name to the comment above.