Is the Bible the Word of God?

[chuteless 1]

ALL scripture is inspired and directed by God. This scripture is NOT referring to Hindu, Moslem,Buddists etc as you imply, for those false gods were not in existence whan that verse was written, and those gods are long since dead, while Jesus is alive forever.

The Book of Revelation was written by St. John the Divine in the year 66 A.D., the same year that Paul was killed. No scriptures were written after 66 A.D.

Kowing this first, ( and formost) that NO prophecy of the scripture is of any private inetrpretation, for theprophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but by Holy men of God who spoke as they were moved ( and directed ) by the Holy Spirit (2nd Peter 1:20-21)

As for God, His way is PERFECT (Psalm 19:7)

"And who as I should call, and (who) shall declare it, and set it in order FOR ME, since I appointed the ancient people, and the things that are coming and shall come, let them ( who I appointed) show unto them (Isaiah 44:7).

[pajarito 0]

Quote

there is very little "Reason" in the quote you provided..

once again you (the source you quote) mistakes 'faith' for 'evidence'.

What? ......You want proof that we're all not just blind men groping a big elephant?

Seriously, the Bible teaches that "no one seeks God." In Genesis, when Adam and Eve ran and hid from God because they now had knowledge of right and wrong (guilt and consciousness of sin; con = with; science = knowledge) and had broken trust with Him, they did not seek God. God had to come and find them (e.g. Grace).

“Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves. Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the Lord God among the trees of the garden. But the Lord God called to the man, “Where are you?” Genesis 3:7-9

I believe this also describes our inherent selfish natures. Our “natural” instinct is to “run away” from the things of God.

Paul also talks about this in Romans.

"There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one." Romans 3:11-12

The elephant analogy doesn’t fit with Christianity. All others are man’s attempt to reach God by their own efforts. In Christianity, it’s not man who is capable of saving himself. Only by the grace of God are we saved. If we are already (spiritually) dead in our sins, what can a dead man do? The grace of God is a crucial component. Otherwise, there is no hope. Until the law was written on our hearts, we did not know we were guilty. Our conscience tells us otherwise, however, whether you choose to admit it or not.

[chuteless 1]

Regarding your post about God creating the world in 6 days ( and resting on the Sabbath) you are only part correct.

God actually created the world in ONE DAY, which He saw fit to divide into six creative days, and not days of 24 hours.

However, The creation of the world in what we know to be of "six days" takes absolutely nothing away from the ONE DAY in which God created the heavens and the earth.

The Bible is also created through God's Divine authority and guidance into a parallel to one week as we know it.

Each number 6, within the 666 of Revelation 13:18, is symbolic of a period of time, and does NOT refer to any particular individual.

Everything God does, He does in a FULLNESS unto Himself, such as the creation of this world, and everything in it. He has designed everything to have its own FULLNESS. God is not a God of only a part of anything....but is a God of everything in its FULLNESS, and that is very provable.

Nothing is left to coincidence, as all things of God are His in their FULLNESS, including His Sacred WORD, The King James Bible.

If you remove a single letter from that Holiest of all Books, you automatically destroy the Divine layout that God had directed to its conclusion.

NO OTHER version has such a Divine layout....and they are NOT the WORDof God.

Almighty God, who hung the stars in the sky....billions upon billions of them, and ordered the planets to follow their course as He set them in, and that same God who created the mountains, the seas, the continents, etc etc etc etc......was also able to create the needed inspiration within the mind of selected men , and to guide them into writing a book as HE wanted it, without a single error.

Palmoni, one of God's angels was directed to guide the relationship between all numbers and letters in that book, and it is done with absolute perefec tion.
Palmoni is known as the Wonderful Numberer, or the Numberer of Secrets.

I can provide you with many examples, but have to go now, for I have to type some information that is part of another intricate and important aspect of these end times in which we are living, and refers to scriptures in Revelation. I don't have a computer of my own , I use the one at the local library, and my time ( 1 hour) is almost up

Bill Cole

[AlexCrowley 0]

Quote

You’re right in that the LDS version doesn’t fit in with Christianity (explained in link below). They’ll claim to be Christian religions as will Jehovah’s Witnesses but they’re not.

David Koresh is used as an example.

Yet the fact remains that these people believed, just as you do, using the same scripture as you do, that they were right.

I bring them into the mix to say that you are most decidedly NOT worshiping the same god that you claim. Yes, you agree that Jesus is the Messiah and in the written history within the book, but the actual God that you worship is different because you interpret his laws and lessons very differently.

This is the same as when the KKK try to justify their racism through scripture. The current anti-homosexual bullshit that the group from Kansas promotes.

All Christians.

Are you sure this is the same God you're worshipping?

I dont care about playing comparitive religion, because Christians play it themselves within their various sects.

To a protestant there can be no understanding of a Catholic, unless they've really softened up, since I heard that they disagreed with the whole virgin mary and graven images. Catholics god accepts and expects it, protestant god rejects it and says its a sin.

Catholics wholly reject divorce as a concept. Church of England accepts it. Yet Catholics justify their decision on it being a sin against God. If Church of England (Episcopalian) does not consider it sin then obviously it is a different God.

Are we not, at the end of the day, merely seeing one group of human's interpretations of God's rules here? If we are really to believe that all Christians follow exactly the same God then why so many sects?

Koresh is a christian to be embraced by your rules: he accepted the basic memes of Christianity, it's just that his method of worship was not popular. Those who survived the seige and walked away have said that they are still Davidians and some still worship that way. Just because you dont have millions of people behind you makes you fake? What did they say about gnostics and other early christians? What of coptics? Is religion now based on popularity of interpretation rather than faith in your God? doesnt that seem somewhat antithetical to the teachings of Christianity?

Just some thoughts.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[chuteless 1]

Some thoughts......is right!!!!!!!!!!!!!! But very little substance within them.

[AlexCrowley 0]

Bill, I'd love to hear your critique of them if there's so little substance.

I'm not trying to say that you, parajito, mockingbird or anyone is right or wrong. I'm merely trying to understand how Christians can all claim to be of one faith when quite obviously it's not true.

You yourself have stated that the KJV is the only true and pure version of the Bible, the rest are perversions (your words).

Parajito has been quoting the NIV quite extensively.

So, is Parajito a christian in your sense of the term? he's learned his religion from a perverted form of the scripture, according to the comments you have made within this thread.

Parajito, Bill has claimed that the KJV is the absolute word of God, every letter and sentence in the correct place. You use a different Bible. Bill believes that the KJV is absolutely correct because (among other things) London is the center of the universe. How do you reconcile your statement that you are all of the same faith when you obviously, from your statements within this thread, disagree.

You reject Jehovahs Witnesses, LDS and whomever else doesnt fit your template of belief. But how can you reject Koresh, who also would claim to be a Christian?

If its merely about extremes then who sets these boundaries?

It has nothing to do with logical games, or trying to mock anyone, it has everything to do with reconciling a number of contradictions that do not make sense to me as an outsider of your religion.

Feel free to call me a fool, blasphemer or whatever, but so far no one has tackled that question head on except to say 'ahh well those folks are wrong and I'm right'.

By the way, throwing insults at someone merely because they ask questions seems to reinforce the concept that Christianity is a religion based on ignorance and fear and that the Gnostics were correct.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[chuteless 1]

I NEVER said that London was the center of the Universe....just the geographic center of the planet, where the Universal/International Language ( also known as English) is spoken.

As usual, you dont have your facts straight.

The King James Bible IS the definitive WORD of God.

I am not saying that a person could not be saved by using one of the other versions, but they are not the WORD of God except in a paraphrasing manner.

I once asked a Mormon who was trying desparately to get me to use the Book of Mormon, if I could be saved by using the King James Bible ONLY. He paused and thought for a few seconds, and said, "Well, Yes"

I then asked him..."Then what need do I have for the Book of Mormon, if the King James Bible will be enough to get me into God's Kingdom?"

He quickly left without saying another word.

I reject the Mormon doctrine, and the doctrines of Jehovah Witness, Buddists, Shintoists, Hindus and Moslems I reject even more so. Mohammed was a deceived, a liar and a murderer, but if he didnt become a follower of Jesus Christ, he will never see the kingdom of Heaven, and neither will any of those who call him a prophet, which he was not.

. I do NOT say any of them will never get to Heaven, for they will be judged by Jesus Christ, and that decision is HIS alone.

One thing I am sure of.....I am going to be there for all my sins are forgiven through the shed blood of Jesus.

Bill Cole

.

[beowulf 1]

Why is English the "Universal/International Language"? It isn't even the most spoken language on earth.

[AlexCrowley 0]

Thank you Bill, for weighing in on that. Generally when I"m discussing something I dont discount an entire argument because I confused 'center of the world' with 'center of the universe'. After all, both statements are obviously correct.

Your earlier quote:
"I have been stuydying the King james and comparing it to some of the more "modern' perversions, for over 30 years, and what I said is true, and I have NEVER said "jokingly" that it is the WORD of God, because I don't joke about anything so serious. "

I guess I misunderstood the meaning of 'perversion'.

per·ver·sion: n. 1.
1. The act of perverting.
2. The state of being perverted.
2. A sexual practice or act considered abnormal or deviant.


I'm guessing you dont mean the second interpretation...

per·ver·sion (pr-vûrzhn, -shn)
n.

A practice or act, especially one that is sexual in nature, considered abnormal or deviant.

Seems pretty strongly worded.

I know you'll misread this and consider that I'm being disrespectful again Bill. It frustrates me that you choose to be so dismissive with what I consider to be an important concept. Please note, I did not bring Buddhists, Hindus or any other religion into this conversation. I am only interested in being able to reconcile what I percieve as large and gaping flaws in the statements I commented on before.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

I'm sorry, you're saying David Koresh and yourself both practice the same form of Christianity?

I doubt that Koresh is practicing anything now.

You are twisting my words. What I said has no relation to David Koresh's cult.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

Koresh is a christian to be embraced by your rules: he accepted the basic memes of Christianity, it's just that his method of worship was not popular.

I could not embrace a person as a Christian brother who claims to be Jesus. No, Koresh did NOT accept the most basic teachings of Christianity. Even if he claimed to, Christ said that we would know a false teacher by his rotten fruit. Remember the words of Jesus that were quoted earlier in the discussion:

"Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name... ?' And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you who practice lawlessness."

"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits."

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[Zenister 0]

Quote

Quote

you are taking a VERY liberal definition of the word 'FACTS'.

there are very few facts that support ANY religious belief, and you will continue to lose any argument in which you assert your belief as 'FACT'

a 'Fact' can be proven. Nothing in the Bible qualifies..much less can be used as evidence that anyone is 'sacrificing eternity'

"Nothing in the bible qualifies" as a fact"??? Nothing in the bible can be "proved"??? Dictionary.com says that a "FACT" is:

"fact
n 1: a piece of information about circumstances that exist or events that have occurred; 2: a statement or assertion of verified information about something that is the case or has happened; 3: an event known to have happened or something known to have existed; 4: a concept whose truth can be proved."

The bible contains many facts... about people, places... but especially about Christ.

and as has been covered MANY times before here..

1. the circumstances you BELIEVE happened cannot be proven "Jesus is risen" is a belief, not a fact.

the basic conditions and culture common to the Christian mythos can be verified as face, but none of the events as related can be verified by any 'objective account' therefore you fail definition 2.

you BELIEVE the events of the bible happened as described, and that the motivations and meanings related in the characters and plots to be 'True' but you have no EVIDENCE to prove it, apart from the written accounts you take a gospel, and while there may have once been a Man named Jesus who inspired the core of your Mythos, their is no evidence to back your Belief in that Man as the "One True Messiah" and it is your Belief that fails definition 3.

No Concept of ANY religion can be proved, definition 4.

The only 'Facts' contained in your stories are those that relate the culture and the conditions.. there are no Facts that support your Belief in the Divinity of Christ.

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[Mockingbird 0]

Hey everybody, do y'all think that the title of our thread is still relevant to what we are discussing? Maybe we could start a new thread called "What is Christianity?" or you know, something more general because we seem to be skipping around and only occasionally talking about whether the bible is the word of God. What do y'all think? Also, it's getting so long that if someone new wanted to get in on it, the length of posts they would have to read in order to catch up with us would probably deter them from trying. What do y'all think?

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[Mockingbird 0]

I just ran across something written by a "leading" hindu scholar by the name of Zaehner. ( I don't know anything about him, just that he said this...)

"To maintain that all religions are paths leading to the same goal, as is so frequently done today, is to maintain something that is not true. Not only on the dogmatic, but also on the mystical plane, too, there is no agreement. It is then only too true that the basic principles of Eastern and Western, which in practice means Indian and Semitic, thought are, I will not say irreconcilably opposed; they are simply not starting from the same premises. The only common ground is that the function of religion is to provide release; there is no agreement at all as to what it is that man must be released from. The great religions are talking at cross purposes."

Somewhat having to do with "what man needs release from, I also read this statement a while ago... by a Christian of course.

"Honesty should move us to reflect, in the light of our sin and rebellion, not why there is only one way to God, but why there should be a way at all!"

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Koresh is a christian to be embraced by your rules: he accepted the basic memes of Christianity, it's just that his method of worship was not popular.

What do you think it means for a person to be Christian and how would you know for sure if a person was?

[AlexCrowley 0]

Quote

Quote

Koresh is a christian to be embraced by your rules: he accepted the basic memes of Christianity, it's just that his method of worship was not popular.

What do you think it means for a person to be Christian and how would you know for sure if a person was?

In all honesty thats what my question is to you all.

To me a Christian is someone who believes in the religion described in the Bible and accepts Jesus Christ as the Messiah yadda yadda.

What I cannot fathom is the fact that each sect considers themslves the keeper of the truth. No one has tackled this head on, except to reject the more extreme examples as wrong.

My point isnt to mock anyones beliefs or even make a judgement on them. If no one understands my question about christian relativity and multiple instances of God that's fair enough, but I didnt think it took a great leap to see what I'm talking about.

I'm not trying to challenge anyones faith, I'm seriously just trying to reconcile how each of you interprets your Bible differently, with the exception of the main points. To an outsider there's a huge difference between a moderate Christian and a bigotted hateful bible-quoting group that call themselves christian, but according to the definitions put out by yourself, Mockingbird and Chuteless you are all of the same faith.

No one has answered regarding the question on those extremists who bomb abortion clinics in the name of the Christian God.

I realize these are ugly truths and not what most of you think. I'm sorry but my mind cannot accept 'well, we just happen to be correct, those OTHER guys just dont get it' because it comes across as the height of arrogance to assume that you have the one road to heaven if everyone is using the same book and coming up with slightly different answers.

To say that it doesnt matter is the difference between a burnt out church or dead doctor and a peaceful caring community.

Mockingbird, perhaps a better title would be "If the Bible is the word of the Christian God does Humankind have the mental tools and perspective to truly interpret its meaning?".

Judging from the conversation so far I'd say that its unlikely - not due to lack of intellect, but lack of perspective.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[Muenkel 0]

Quote

No one has answered regarding the question on those extremists who bomb abortion clinics in the name of the Christian God.

The bombers are murderers period. I don't know of any Christian faith that condones their behavior. They are no better than Islamic extremists who distort their religion and murder in the name of Islam.

_________________________________________
Chris

[AlexCrowley 0]

Quote

Quote

No one has answered regarding the question on those extremists who bomb abortion clinics in the name of the Christian God.

The bombers are murderers period. I don't know of any Christian faith that condones their behavior. They are no better than Islamic extremists who distort their religion and murder in the name of Islam.

Right. But according to the definition of Christian used earlier they have every right to consider themselves part of the group. Does the fact they're extremists alter the fact that they justify their behavior using scripture and follow the rules of the book? Just because you, me or a Christian may find it abhorrent, we're still back to 'who gets to decide who is a christian'? and the fact that Christians worship different Gods (capital G)

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[Mockingbird 0]

Chris is right-- abortion clinic bombers can't justify their behavior using scripture, because there is no scripture that condones murder... or acting on your anger. ("Be angry, but do not sin.") (I'm assuming that those bombers acted primarily in anger against abortionists.) I don't see the difficulty in understanding this, Alex. Do you think we're going to say, "Oh sure, they are Christians just because they give mental assent to the same teachings in the Bible that other Christians believe"? Obviously, you have to walk the walk, not just talk the talk; if your life doesn't match up with what you say you believe, you're obviously a farce. That doesn't mean that Christians are perfect. But committing something as obviously wrong as murder is a dead giveaway that you do not have the love and the life of God inside you. I thought we covered this when we talked about hypocrisy. Maybe you skipped a few posts accidentally? Read the letter of James, the half-brother of Jesus... or the first letter of John.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

and as has been covered MANY times before here..

1. the circumstances you BELIEVE happened cannot be proven "Jesus is risen" is a belief, not a fact.

the basic conditions and culture common to the Christian mythos can be verified as face, but none of the events as related can be verified by any 'objective account' therefore you fail definition 2.

you BELIEVE the events of the bible happened as described, and that the motivations and meanings related in the characters and plots to be 'True' but you have no EVIDENCE to prove it, apart from the written accounts you take a gospel, and while there may have once been a Man named Jesus who inspired the core of your Mythos, their is no evidence to back your Belief in that Man as the "One True Messiah" and it is your Belief that fails definition 3.

No Concept of ANY religion can be proved, definition 4.

Wow, Zenister. You sound downright dogmatic
1) How do you know that Paul Bunyan is a legendary character, while Paul Revere is a true, historical character?

2) What evidence do you have that Jesus Christ was merely a good man and not "divine"?

3) What evidence do you have that the earliest followers of Jesus (as well as 1st century secular historians) are not trustworthy?

[AlexCrowley 0]

Quote

Chris is right-- abortion clinic bombers can't justify their behavior using scripture, because there is no scripture that condones murder... or acting on your anger. ("Be angry, but do not sin.") (I'm assuming that those bombers acted primarily in anger against abortionists.) I don't see the difficulty in understanding this, Alex. Do you think we're going to say, "Oh sure, they are Christians just because they give mental assent to the same teachings in the Bible that other Christians believe"? Obviously, you have to walk the walk, not just talk the talk; if your life doesn't match up with what you say you believe, you're obviously a farce. That doesn't mean that Christians are perfect. But committing something as obviously wrong as murder is a dead giveaway that you do not have the love and the life of God inside you. I thought we covered this when we talked about hypocrisy. Maybe you skipped a few posts accidentally? Read the letter of James, the half-brother of Jesus... or the first letter of John.

Ok, here's where I disagree, those bombers who have gone on the record believe that they are fighting a war. It isnt done in anger, it's to save the lives of many unborn humans. In their minds THEY are walking a walk that they percieve most pro-life Catholics simply give lip service to. God doesnt have an issue with war, they're fighting one - I only percieve it as murder because I am outside what they believe. The same way I think that the Roman Catholic church breaks several commandments, the same way I think protestants did themselves a huge disservice by ignoring the rest of the Christian Canon.

Who, other than your God, has the ability to discern which of you, or your sects are correct? Many have rejected religions you personally do not consider Christian, a Jehovas Witness feels the same about you as you feel about them (ie, not real followers of Christ).

I just think that perhaps there needs to be a better definition of Christian, other than the one thats been used so far in this discussion to attempt to understand if the Bible is the Word of God.

If it were the Word, wouldnt you imagine that there may be less confusion of its actual meaning?

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

Ok, here's where I disagree, those bombers who have gone on the record believe that they are fighting a war. It isnt done in anger, it's to save the lives of many unborn humans. In their minds THEY are walking a walk that they percieve most pro-life Catholics simply give lip service to.

See how the idea of situational ethics (you can compromise your right principles in order to accomplish something you think is good) and relativism has caused so much confusion in the world!? An old saying goes, "It's not right to do wrong to someone in order to get a chance to do right." I assure you that an abortion clinic bomber never took the time to ask God for guidance as to how he/she/they could best save the lives of unborn children (or, if they did, they ultimately decided not to follow his guidance); nor did they follow the principles that scripture teaches for how best to affect one's world! God doesn't "tell" an honest seeker to do something wrong.

Oh, but in this postmodern world, what is "wrong"? What's "wrong" for me to do may be "right" for you to do, right? Why do we even bother to have laws any more, since laws are based on values, and values are all relative?! [/sarcasm!] Compromise has taken us down this path. The fruit of relativism is confusion. No wonder you have so many questions as to who is Christian and who isn't, who, besides God, can discern between this and that. You are looking for absoutes in an "everything's relative" world. If you will forget all the relativism crap and look through God's eyes, which He has given us the privilege of doing by revealing His mind to us in the pages of scripture, you will be able to see more clearly.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[smiles 0]

Quote

the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but by Holy men of God who spoke as they were moved ( and directed ) by the Holy Spirit (2nd Peter 1:20-21)

Ezekiel was directed by the Holy Spirit to write about the destruction of Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar?



SMiles

eustress. : a positive form of stress having a beneficial effect on health, motivation, performance, and emotional well-being.

[GTAVercetti 0]

Wow, this is alot of stuff!

As we can see from pajarito and my discourse on ONE prophecy...there are many different views on the same thing; by both Christians and Jews. I think that point a a dead horse...so I will move one.

Quote

Chris is right-- abortion clinic bombers can't justify their behavior using scripture, because there is no scripture that condones murder... or acting on your anger. ("Be angry, but do not sin.")

This is not directed directly to you Mockingbird, but to most Christians who probably feel this way.

So, let me look at this statement. If, anyone who murders is unjustified, then are you saying that many of the soldiers of our country who have been involved in a war and have killed are not Christians? Or how about police who have to kill a person?

Or is murder alright because it was for country and what they believe in? Because if you look at abortion bombers, they are killing for what they so strongly believe in.

It does not matter if that killing is done in defense or because your commander said so. According to the Jesus, ANY KILLING is wrong.

Therefore, if you comdemn abortion bombers, then you really should comdemn ALL murderers, whether that murder was "right" in your eyes or not.

And if you think that soldiers who have kill to defend their beliefs can be justified, then you must justify abortion bombers as well.

Do you condemn soldiers, police officers, a homeowner defending his family? After all, as horrible as it is to say, the one's who have killed, ARE killers.

My point is not to question your patriotism or whatever, but it is to enforce Alex'a point. I assume (and if I am wrong, then I apologize) that you do not endorse any abortion bomber, but that you probably (like most Americans -- and a great majority of Christians) endorse and celebrate that our troops defend our country -- even with the death they may bring.

So, which version of Christianity is correct? If the one which condemns abortion bombers and supports troops is right, what about those that comdemn both troops and bombers who kill? Are they wrong?

So, I guess I just ask what Alex asked: which version of it is right? They all interpret the Bible a little differently...this book which is supposed to perfect and clear and the Word of God. If it IS perfect, why are we so fractured? Would not a perfect book be so clear and free of interpretation that we would all get it right away?

Whew...long post. My hands are tired.

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

It does not matter if that killing is done in defense or because your commander said so. According to the Jesus, ANY KILLING is wrong....

Vercetti, WHEN are we going to agree on something???

Killing in the line of duty (soldiers, police, etc.) I know is a tough one for many people. I'm sorry, but I just see a huge difference between murder and killing "in the line of duty." Loss of life at another's hands is horrible, and I hate war. I hate the fact that people kill with the backing of their authority or without. When an islamic extremist cuts off an enemy's head with malice and forethought in front of a camera, it simply cannot be justified in any civil society. The same goes for an abortion bomber-- he does it with premeditation and malice, not in self-defense or for any just cause.

I guess I trust the law when it stipulates that one act of killing is "lawful" and another is "unlawful".... although I don't like either kind!

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"