Under Communism, the Orthodox church was severely restricted. Membership in the Communist Party was mandatory for many jobs, and that precluded church attendance. The result is the Russian people lapsed into superstition. This Apple logo business is only the tip of the iceberg. It’s a lot worse than this.

Seriously – look this up at http://freepussyriot.com

The original definition was restored in the 1st century with the Christians.

Did you know that when building airplanes they don’t check the accuracy of every single piece? Rather they use statistical analysis to test x pieces of each batch and use those findings to determine with reasonable accuracy whether there is likely to be defects in the batch. If there is a problem, they take a larger sample. Math to the rescue.

Since, by and large, the scraps and early manuscripts are remarkably identical to current copies, we can say, with a certain degree of accuracy that the bible as a whole has a high degree of fidelity within its pages. Despite it being copied. Before printing, this is what scribes did. They took this very seriously.

This is why it’s rare that the fidelity of the copies are challenged in any meaningful forum. It is, simply put, a book with by FAR the most number of ancient manuscripts. The sheer volume of scraps and manuscripts alone speaks volumes.

How church leaders chose to twist the teachings is another matter.

I’ve known kinder, wiser and more friendly reptiles.

P&G was thuswise possessed of the devil and must be reviled. See for thine selves!

http://www.yourememberthat.com/files/69a605caf44e73c6.jpg

Before they were found, the earliest available were from the 10th century. It was found that remarkably, the copies of copies of copies we have today, are essentially unchanged, with the exception of a few scribal errors ( typos, etc. ). Sure, we don’t have a FULL list, but out of the tens of thousands of scraps, we haven’t found much in the way of major errors. If there were, there are PLENTY of people today that would LOVE to make a VERY public mission of exposing it.

When you think about this, the oldest copies were before Christianity became the state religion (in other words, more likely open to manipulation by political leaders) and yet the copies we have today are still relatively intact. Goes to show you that despite going through a long period where you were burned alive for owning a bible and the church had ultimate authority and tried to keep people in the dark regarding the book, the actual text we have today largely remained intact.

You combine this with the remarkable candor of the biblical accounts, the archaeological confirmation of much of the bible chronology (keeping in mind that archaeology is not an exact science, and there is still disagreement among archaeologists themselves) and other documentary accounts from other historians (which we must remember would have some bias) and you have a book that can be confidently stated as being quite historically accurate.

I don’t doubt the religious hypocrisy that exists in much of religion out there, but more often than not, these church officials aren’t following the book they preach about.

What a bunch of orthodox clowns.

It’s funny, we have more evidence of accuracy of the bible than books that document the history of Alexander the Great or Napoleon, yet no one doubts much of what was written about them.

I’m guessing Newman’s Own, since Paul went to the big banquet hall a little while back.

Hardly. It defines it.

It’s a damn myth.

If a god wanted to communicate with a world they created and did no better than this, I’d call bullshit. In fact, I’m calling bullshit.

Conservatism is all in one’s reptilian brain.

from London Daily Mail 28 December 2010
“Political allegiances could be hard-wired into our brains, neuroscientists believe.
Researchers have found evidence that the brains of conservatives are a different shape to those of Left-wingers.
Scans of 90 students’ brains at University College London uncovered a ‘strong correlation’ between the thickness of two particular areas of grey matter and an individual’s political views…
Self-proclaimed right-wingers had a more pronounced amygdala – a primitive part of the brain associated with emotion…
It is an almond-shape set of neurons located deep in the brain’s medial temporal lobe.
However, those aligned to the left had thicker anterior cingulates – which is an area associated with anticipation and decision-making.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1342239/Brain-study-reveals-right-wing-conservatives-larger-primitive-amygdala.html

OTOH, replacing it with what amounts to a murder weapon, or even attributing said murder weapon with magical mystical powers is whats bizarre.

Imagine if the events of Christ’s life (or insert your favorite religious or great teacher here) had happened during the Western Expansion period of the US (Think Wild West) Would people today be wearing mini nooses or revolvers as jewelry, and claiming they had mystic powers?

The point is that you will face Almighty God covered with the stain of your sin…and your excuse? “I never bothered to find out the truth and thought it was all mythology. I never used logic nor reason to see where the evidence pointed so have rejected your Son and what He did for me”

Please, reconsider and examine the evidence, or ask God to reveal the truth to you. You may well be surprised. .

Here is a hint, when someone asks a question about your beliefs, starting by denigrating theirs isn’t a sound strategy for communication. I realize the tone of the site has been heated and nasty in the past, and while I am guilty of joining the fray myself, I was attempting to change the tact and shoot for reasonable conversation on the topics. It seams MDN likes to stir up the political debate, I was trying to adjust the tone and have actual conversation. A pipe-dream I guess…

Your ad-hominem attack weakens your position. You tell me people are people first, accuse me of labeling/stereotyping and then do the thing you are taking me to taks on? WTF..

Now onto your assertions:

I am the furthest from being a ‘Dupe’ of the media as you can find, I am a vocal and frequent critic of it, and if you knew me in person you would agree. I neither trust it, nor celebrate it, it is not a driving factor in my ideology.

We agree on abortion then, good. The only place I see a role for government is ensuring that those doctors are legit and licensed, the facilities to code, no different than any other medical facility.

Me being forced to buy car insurance does not protect you, it protects your insurance company. It does not reduce accidents, it makes no one ‘safer’, it is a gift to the insurance industry. In decades of driving I have never caused nor been behind the wheel of an accident, my being forced to buy insurance doesn’t make anyone safe, my alert and responsible driving habits do. The government IS saying to me, get car insurance OR ELSE. There are fines and charges and potential loss of driving privileges hanging over my head if I do not comply.

You left out seat belt laws, which like insurance laws are there to protect insurance companies. As are helmet laws.

Bottom line, they restrict freedoms. If these are truly there to protect us, why is smoking legal? Why are other forms of risk taking celebrated and condoned? I agree it is sensible and smart to wear a helmet and wear seat belts, I practice it myself, but lets be honest about why it is a law. It is law because insurance companies wanted it to be and they lobbied to make it happen.

On to Obamacare: I also disagree with the mandate, but there is much I like. I have college age kids, I like that we can keep them under an our insurance until 26. I also like the elimination of riders. As a former business owner I know first hand how awful it is to get insurance that works for you when you are not in a group plan. I talked to 16 different providers, EVERY single one wanted to rider my wifes Asthma, and allergies. (pre-existing condition) Leaving me with no coverage for the expensive drugs she takes every day, no coverage for emergencies related to those conditions, no coverage for doctor visits treating those problems. I asked everyone of them what they were good for if they could not address the most pressing needs I had for coverage in the first damn place. Why would I pay them $900+ a month if I wasn’t getting anything back each month at the pharmacy? I couldn’t figure it out, I went with medical savings account instead.

At any rate, I fail to see a difference between these mandates, logically they are not different, I reject the mental gymnastics needed to adopt your position in this case.

the push notifications from the app is the reason many of us even come here… If not for them i’d never think to read MDN anymore.

As far as the “article”… leave Apple alone.

Both the concept of hell, and rejection of homosexual marriage, are simply a given when talking about most religions. If they’re not part of your particular belief system, well I suppose KingMel wasn’t talking to you. But “Letter” was advocating a literal reading of the bible, so we know exactly what he believes, no “prejudice” involved.

Warning: some people might find it a bit spicy and hot.

I also don’t care about abortion. Women can have as many as they like. 5, 10, 15 a year. I couldn’t possibly care less. Just don’t ask me to pay for them.

The difference between auto-insurance and health-insurance is that you being forced to have auto-insurance protects me. In order to exercise the privilege to drive on the road, you must prove that you can accept the responsibility of the destruction you may cause. With health insurance the government is stepping in and saying, “You will either get health insurance for yourself or else.” Very different. Also, near as I can tell, the only change with Obama care is that if I cannot afford health insurance now, I still won’t be able to afford it, but… I will be fined $600, or $700 by the government for not having it. 2000 pages of gobbledygook just to tax me in the end.

I’m not in the faith crowd, and I fail to understand how after all these centuries people can still believe this crap. What have all those years of faith done for mankind other than cause wars and division?

It is not right for you to try to censor us based on your belief in some higher power, I say it is a fairy tale, it wields no power over me. So what if you think I will anger your imaginary friend.

Typically I would say nothing and ignore have your fairy tale beliefs, but when you start using it as an excuse to control my speech, buddy we have a problem. Your insistence on imposing the rules of your faith on others is offensive and unacceptable.

BTW: MDN knows exactly what they are doing, getting more page views. They will selectively censor a few posts, likely this one, but the arguments will rage anyway. With each click and refresh, advertising revenue increases.

Now onto your other statement…

Just to clarify: Are you for ending farm subsidies? Energy Subsidies? Are you for reducing our out of control defense budget? How about ending tax exempt status for religious organizations? Federal Pell grants? Are you really saying NONE, or just targeting the specific programs you have disdain for?

Serious question, trying to have a reasoned discussion. My views may differ, but I am trying to understand your point of view.

Seems Man has no problem taking those rights away from other men (and women), despite believing (allegedly) those rights somehow originate from a higher power.

The rights recognized by the US constitution are the result of thousands of years of social and political history. For much of that history supposedly moral humans violated each others rights far worse.

The 10 Commandments are a good example: it says “you shall not”. Of the six non-religious ones, those are really no-brainers (and yet “moral” religious people violate them constantly). The US Constitution and bill of rights OTOH does not say “you have the right” which implies granting–it effectively says “the GOVERNMENT shall not”.

Of course, people have as much problem following the ideals of the constitution as they do their own religion.

You say you disagree with the religious right, yet you lump yourself into the conservative camp and this helps to enable them.

You sound like a libertarian or independent to me.

How is the GOP going to get the message that the religious rule is not acceptable to most people in this land if you and Greg and others keep supporting them.

This is one of the bind-boggling conflicts I do not get with the GOP. On one day a GOP member will get up and complain about “the individual mandate” to have health insurance as being government overreach, but with the next breath will talk about banning abortion. As if telling women what they can and cannot do with their bodies ISN’T overreach.

How about auto insurance? It is legally required that you have it, where is the outcry and rush to remove this government overreach? Seatbelt laws?

Consider the Procter & Gamble logo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procter_%26_Gamble#Logo_controversy) controversy. For over a hundred years the company logo was a moon and stars. In the late 70′s rumors started circulating that the logo was a satanic symbol. Despite massive efforts on the part of P&G to track the source of the rumors, get injunctions against those responsible and that no evidence linking P&G to the church of Satan was ever discovered, the company stopped using the logo in 1985. None the less, the controversy continues to this day with the company prosecuting several Amway distributors last year for reviving and spreading the rumors.

It is a shame. The P&G logo was beautiful and had significant historical context. I would like them to bring it back.