Notes on Reality Discussion Forum
Add Your Comment
Thoughtful comments for and against Christianity, the Bible,
Evolution and Creation are welcome however I've seen forums where
the discussion turns nasty; I will delete nasty comments.
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter.com
Time: Monday, May 07, 2007 at 21:03:24 (GMT)
The html simply calls up a perl script I wrote myself.
From: aarst tut.by
Time: Monday, May 07, 2007 at 02:00:15 (GMT)
higuys!What yourblog powered by?
From: Andeo Bianco
Time: Friday, November 10, 2006 at 00:55:19 (GMT)
Nice site! I've enjoyed visiting it. Thanks for ur work.
From: Don don@dontveter.com
Time: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 at 16:34:31 (GMT)
I need to add that the Old Testament prophecies regarding the Messiah were kind of confusing to people at the time. To some of the religious leaders back then it appeared as if there were two Messiahs, one who suffers and one who returns to free Israel from her earthly enemies. The ones who really thought the Messiah would really free Israel from the Romans were disappointed in Jesus particularly when he declared himself to be the Son of God, thereby making himself equal with God. That called for the death penalty.
From: Don don@dontveter.com
Time: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 at 16:27:10 (GMT)
In Old Testament times there were people who were predicting the future. The ones who were really speaking for God had their short-term predictions come true. The ones who did not have their short-term predictions come true did not end up in the Bible. I think this is a more precise way to say it and I'm going to go back and correct my text to make it right.
Jesus was crucified by the Jews because 1) he offended the religious leaders by pointing out how evil the religious leaders were. 2) Because many people were following Jesus instead of the religious leaders and the religious leaders were therefore jealous. 3) Probably the majority of Jews at the time thought they were pretty nice people because they were simply following the various laws of Moses, so they were looking for a military/political leader to free them from the Romans. What they really needed was liberation from sin, not liberation from the Romans.
From: Majid
Time: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 at 21:43:57 (GMT)
Hi Don
I am a muslim and I am sure you must be aware that we musim have hi respect for Jesus as one of mighty prophet of God. My comment here are not concerning jesus but the validation of Bible, the logic you have used to validates Bible does'nt make sense to me, " False prophets never got their writings into the Bible, they got stoned to death when their predictions failed."
We must not forget that the Jews have blood of many true prophets of God on their hands. If your formula is correct, "a murdered prophet was a false prophet". Then what would you say about Jesus, he was crucified, and charge was false calim of prophethood, and not to forget, according to Jews his prediction did fail.
Regards
Majid UK
From: Don don@dontveter.com
Time: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 at 20:30:52 (GMT)
Hi Harmony,
Thanks for your comments.
I think there is a fair amount of evidence for the eyewitness
accounts of Jesus' miracles. And there are Bible prophecies
that have come true and there are many other prophecies where
you can see that they are on the verge of coming true so this
validates the whole Bible. False prophets never got their
writings into the Bible, they got stoned to death when their
predictions failed.
Second, I think the Biblical explanation is logical within
itself. 1) God creates people with free will who are free
to love him or not 2) Some people don't care for God and his
rules at first but given some time on Earth they get sick of
a sinful world, a world without God and WANT something better.
3) God gives them what they want. Can you find a more
logical explanation of what's going on here on Earth (given
that there is a God, if you're an atheist I guess it
won't work for you.)
Third, there is no doubt that Christianity has a sort of
intuitive appeal for Christians. They WANT the whole thing
to be true. They LIKE to believe in it. It is as if they
sense a better future out there for them and for everyone
else and they want to be part of it. Historical accounts
and proofs are not really that necessary although as I say
there is a fair amount of evidence for them. Would you
like the Christian message to be true? Some do, some
don't.
"Islamists" is a word that has been used for the Moslems
who want to take over the whole world politically and who
are only too happy to use violence and terror in their
war against unbelievers so I think it is pretty appropriate.
From: Harmony kleptonic@gmail.com
Time: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 at 17:47:00 (GMT)
First off, I would like to commend you. You have - as your mission, it seems - put forth a great standpoint on what Christianity is all about with a very sensible interpretation of the Bible. Your site is pretty coherent, organized and well written. As far as Christian evangelism, I'm quite impressed.
However, there is still no way that I would ever convert to Christianity. What you fail to address is the key to believing. You have offered no reason on why that I should believe the Bible, (and such arrives Earth as the trial period, Jesus Christ and all the rest.) Your interpretation of the world is through the given fact that the Bible is true, and what is written in it is based on fact. Thinking scientifically, or even just plain logically, that's a little foolish. There is no way to prove that Christ turned water to wine, and all we have is someone else writing down that he did. If I'd been there, I'd have converted in a second and taken Jesus as my personal saviour.
But we come back to the fundamental issue that I wasn't there. And it's pretty hard to prove that there was such an occurrence. The Bible tells you and I that it happened. You believe it - I don't, because to me, the Bible has no more weight than any other book.
That's the true belief in the faith because I don't believe anything that the Bible says has more truth than what the Egyptians wrote. It means nothing to me, other than a book that written by a series of old dead men thousands of years ago.
That's the faith, and that's the part that you accept when you accept Christ.
ps.
"Let in unrepentant Islamists and they will go around crashing planes into buildings."
While you may be completely disregarding them in your opinion that they are all going to hell, I am personally against ignorance and hate on Earth and would like you to change this phrase around a little. 'Unrepentant Islamists' generally have very little to do with the crashing of planes into buildings. You don't say "Southern Christians" when referring to the KKK, so don't refer to extreme Arab terrorists as Islamic. There are millions of Muslims included in that statement you have just generalized them into all crazy plane crashing people. And "islamist" isn't exactly a word - it'd be better to use Muslim.
From: anonymous
Time: Saturday, August 07, 2004 at 09:58:30 (GMT)
Hello,
May I recommend the URL
http://www.newphysics2000.org
for a deeper view on physics?
It explains Physics from the Schroedinger assumption:
Matter as wave (energy) phenomenon.
The good thing, it is not just speculation, the calculations are offered as FORTRAN programs. The result: The universe is a monolith
of rest photons and energy photons.
Nothing more but also: NOTHING LESS!
Light, so to speak.
What is not said in the pages mentioned above are the philosophical (theological) implications: Seemingly Schrödinger was totally right in assuming that eastern religions should be taken more in account. The Universe is ONE gestaltic whole.
Unfortunately, Schroedinger did not complete his work. This has been done now and is documented in the URL.
Kind regards, and Thank You for your GREAT WEBSITE!!
Hermann Ruwwe
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter.com
Time: Saturday, February 14, 2004 at 19:54:23 (GMT)
Let me add two relevant and interesting links:
http://www.gospelthemes.com/lovers.htm
http://www.new-life.net/celebt1.htm
As with all interpretations and opinions I don't flat out believe
anybody however these opinions are interesting and worth thinking
about because they run counter to the popular image you typically
get from Christians that anything that is fun must be a sin.
Don
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter.com
Time: Saturday, February 14, 2004 at 15:34:00 (GMT)
>Thanks for the replies. I will read up on Zechariah. I don't know
>where I got these ideas but I generally thought that drinking alcohol,
>eating meat, and sex were bad. Maybe I read one too many accounts of
>the end of the decadent Roman empire. I used to think that maybe the
>Romans were that way because they took those three vices to the extreme
>but even if I enjoy moderately drinking alcohol, eating meat and sex,
>doesn't it make me the same? In my mind I would want to do all that
>much more if given the free rein. But I force restraint on myself. I
>shouldn't qualify for heaven then I think. I would still have the urges
>- which are only under control while I am on Earth because I am afraid
>of the consequences.
I know where you the got the ideas. You've heard Christians and maybe
Christian ministers preach against drunkenness and lust. And
vegetarians blame the world's problems on people eating meat. Often
times listening to Christians you will get an unbalanced view of things
because they do give you an unbalanced view because they are either 1)
not careful about what they say or 2) they ARE unbalanced in their
beliefs.
There is nothing fundamentally wrong with physical pleasures, they are
gifts from God designed to make us happy and then we should praise the
Lord for them and that makes us even happier, so they can be a good deal
all around. Often times however people simply look to the pleasures
alone to make them happy and the problems with that are 1) they aren't
enough to really, fully satisfy you and you eventually end up feeling
empty and 2) you can become addicted.
It is given in the New Testament that there is wine "of a different
kind" in Heaven. Presumably it will taste better (everything should be
better) but I would guess that it does not have any serious
psychological or physical side effects.
Because large amounts of alcohol will cause problems and addiction
preachers often preach against it altogether but Jesus drank wine
and He was perfect. Some Christians decide they are going to be more
perfect than Jesus (not possible, it is pride and arrogance to think
you can be) and not touch any alcohol at all.
If you want to know God's view of sex, read the Old Testament book,
The Song of Solomon (also called the Song of Songs). There is much
poetry and metaphor there so you do need to search the net for
interpretations of this book and I listed some there. For instance
at SOS 5:1 we have according to some commentators God saying to the
two lovers something like (and I'm doing this without looking it up)
"Eat, oh friends, drink deeply, oh lovers". So God is comparing
making love to a feast of food and drink and approving of the whole
thing, encouraging them to have a good time. But if you take sex too
seriously you will be in trouble. And if you do it outside marriage
you will be causing problems. Quite often you will have Christians
who take it too far and say or imply that all sex is bad and so they
are going to be more holy, more perfect by not having sex at all.
Then you get the implication that all sex is bad.
Nobody is fit for Heaven to start with, but we get it because we
honestly want what God has to offer. Once in Heaven expect physical
pleasures but you won't be taking them to excess the way people often
do on Earth. You won't have any problem taking them to excess because
you will be perfect because you honestly want to do what God wants.
Don
From: Carl Schwinn csch2215@yahoo.com
Time: Saturday, February 14, 2004 at 03:00:55 (GMT)
Thanks for the replies. I will read up on Zechariah. I don't know where I got these ideas but I generally thought that drinking alcohol, eating meat, and sex were bad. Maybe I read one too many accounts of the end of the decadent Roman empire. I used to think that maybe the Romans were that way because they took those three vices to the extreme but even if I enjoy moderately drinking alcohol, eating meat and sex, doesn't it make me the same? In my mind I would want to do all that much more if given the free rein. But I force restraint on myself. I shouldn't qualify for heaven then I think. I would still have the urges - which are only under control while I am on Earth because I am afraid of the consequences.
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter.com
Time: Friday, February 13, 2004 at 19:46:44 (GMT)
>I myself eat meat everyday so I am probably not in a good position to
>say this, but would there be meat in Heaven? It would requiring killing
>animals. Should one give up eating meat? Do you think those terrorists
>who attacked the WTC towers with airplanes would have done that if they
>were vegetarian? I mean if you can't get yourself to kill a chicken or
>a fish how would you get the idea that it is ok to harm human beings who
>are far superior. I found your ideas very interesting so just
>wanted to discuss my questions here in this forum.
On Star Trek they have their "replicators" to make food, no actual
living things are killed but the molecules are arranged to be just
like real food. I would expect the same in Heaven. There is nothing
wrong with a good meal, especially if it's Italian cooking. :-)
God said after the Flood that eating meat was OK. He actually
required the Jews to make animal sacrifices as in Passover where
a lamb is sacrificed. The Passover sacrifice was pointing to the
death of Jesus in the future.
Terrorists just like to be nasty, it has nothing to do with eating
meat.
>Do you imagine a world without Jews? I keep reading that Jews have a
>low birth rate and small families in comparison to Christians and
>Muslims. And there is high degree of intermarriage even in places like
>Israel. Not to mention so many liberal and moderate Jews converting to
>Christianity these days especially in the NY/NJ area. What are your
>thoughts on that? I feel there would be a war between Christians and
>Muslims at that point - maybe WW3.
The Jews are God's chosen people. The usual interpretations of Bible
prophecy have God returning the Jews to their land of Israel in the
last days when the whole world will be against them and Jesus (the
Messiah) will show up at the last minute and save them. This is
based largely on Old Testament prophecies. In particular, see
Zechariah chapters 12 through 14. Even now you can see the world
becoming anti-Semitic. Then Jesus will rule the world from Jerusalem
and Israel will be the most important nation in the world. I'm kind
of running behind on my Bible prophecy page :-) If you want to know
more, say something here and I will say something right away
otherwise I will not be getting to that page in the near future.
Don
From: anonymous
Time: Friday, February 13, 2004 at 03:44:46 (GMT)
One last comment.
I myself eat meat everyday so I am probably not in a good position to say this, but would there be meat in Heaven? It would requiring killing animals. Should one give up eating meat? Do you think those terrorists who attacked the WTC towers with airplanes would have done that if they were vegetarian? I mean if you can't get yourself to kill a chicken or a fish how would you get the idea that it is ok to harm human beings who are far superior.
I found your ideas very interesting so just wanted to discuss my questions here in this forum.
From: anonymous
Time: Friday, February 13, 2004 at 03:17:55 (GMT)
Do you imagine a world without Jews? I keep reading that Jews have a low birth rate and small families in comparison to Christians and Muslims. And there is high degree of intermarriage even in places like Israel. Not to mention so many liberal and moderate Jews converting to Christianity these days especially in the NY/NJ area. What are your thoughts on that? I feel there would be a war between Christians and Muslims at that point - maybe WW3.
From: Don don@dontveter.com
Time: Monday, November 10, 2003 at 15:55:12 (GMT)
This is a test.
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter.com
Time: Thursday, August 07, 2003 at 23:02:26 (GMT)
Hi Ilona,
you said:
>How do you view Jesus? I get mixed messages, like maybe you
>haven't made up your mind.
>Is he simply a special man? Is He the Son of God in the sense of
>being God?
>I am not sure from your statements, and it would help conversing
>with you on the pertinent points to know.
What confuses you? Unless it's the description of the trinity
as being like a computer system :-) Somehow God has three
parts, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit and I thought the
computer system analogy was pretty clever. Nobody understands
it completely now but when we do I'm hoping I'm right, sort of
like buying a lottery ticket :-) Once upon a time St. Patrick
was trying to explain to the Irish what the Trinity was like and
he took a shamrock with it's three leaflets and said the trinity
was like that. My computer analogy is more up to date for
techies and more detailed too.
>through the oddity of checking my links I see that you had some
>return discussion :)
Miracles do happen!
>I will try to join in again on some of the ideas you presented.
>
>For now, I think that it is difficult to use ideas of science
>which aren't proven to discount the Bible concepts.
There is very little conflict between science and the Bible,
much less than most modern people think. A lot of the problem
comes from an INTERPRETATION from the young Earth creationists,
they are a rather vocal group and get all the attention.
>In ideas of death and decay predating Adam: how would that be
>proven? If you take the time chronology of the Bible and hold it
>against something like carbon dating or certain geological ideas
>there are problems that arise.
There are lots of fossils around, they're old, buried deep.
There have been too many different species over time to think
that they could have all been on Earth at once. I have not
looked into radioactive dating in detail, generally I think it
is reliable because many Christian scientists who understand it
think it is reliable, they seem rational, as opposed to the
young Earth creationists who ignore rational evidence.
>First, if the account of Noah's flood is true, and there were
>world-side catastophic events that might have changed how these
>scientific readings would read; they might have been far
>different.
Except there is no evidence for a world wide flood. The young
Earth creationist interpretation of the text is an
INTERPRETATION they make because they believe in a young Earth
to start with. The word that gets INTERPRETED as high mountains
could just as easily mean low hills and the word the Earth
could mean the local area or the whole planet. But when you
have a bias to start with you interpret it to fit your bias.
>How would you really know how things were pre-flood, let alone
>prior to Adam?
Rocks and fossils. Also ice in glaciers. You can go to the ice
in glaciers and count back at least about 14,500 years layer by
layer like tree rings. And there is still much more ice below
that level.
>Say if things were not perfect, but that was prior to the
>creation that we know? IOW, the imperfection was connected with
>that chaos, or the "dark and void waters" that are described,
>isn't the creation at its inception still considered good and
>perfect?
Depends on what you mean by good. Early in Genesis we have God
saying his creation was good. But then, for instance, take the
super-deterministic version of creation where everything from
0 to infinity popped into existence at once. In the end it is
good, the good guys live happily ever after and the plan God
used to get the good guys to the happy ending (that already
exists from his perspective) was good.
>Maybe our ideas of perfect are the problem. Often in the Bible
>that word has connotations of "complete".
>
>I don't know if that makes a difference.
>
>But the Bible account is that death and decay of this creation
>entered through the time of Adam.
No, death and decay IN HUMANS started because of Adam and Eve's
sin. The Greek word used there refers to people, not all life.
Here we have another case of people interpreting a word the
wrong way.
People also make the mistake of thinking that "death and decay"
means the "second law of thermodynamics" but that doesn't make
sense, the second law is unavoidable given the Big Bang at
the beginning of the universe.
>It comes down to a choice of whether we choose to believe that
>the Bible is giving us reliable information. That is why I
>started as I did: our quest for answers and those of us who
>look for God's revelation to us.
Obviously some people don't like the information the Bible is
giving so they call it fairy tales in order to make it easy to
avoid. Other people like what the Bible says. But science and
the Bible ought to be consistent.
>Personally, I think that because our knowledge base in science
>is so small compared to what *can* be known, that it would be
>an impossible quest for someone to wait until they had all the
>science to start thinking about God.
People always want to speculate no matter how little they know,
it's fun!
>You have to start at the place where you think that it could be
>reasonable to believe in God.
Mostly it is an issue of some people want him and some people
don't.
>How would one find out real evidence of death and decay before
>Adam? How does one corroborate the timetables? The science is
>just not there.
Yes it is.
>The science can only go on what seems reasonable, as well.
People are always speculating based on what they know. Some
people will recognize that there is guesswork and faith in
science and some don't, some think they know it all.
>So at least in terms of mans relating to the God of the
>universe, and of having life untouched by disease and death, I
>think it is best to go on the Bible account if one is going to
>go on to understanding Christ.
But there are different INTERPRETATIONS of the Biblical
account.
From: Ilona
Time: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 at 22:50:53 (GMT)
question:
How do you view Jesus? I get mixed messages, like maybe you haven't made up your mind.
Is he simply a special man? Is He the Son of God in the sense of being God?
I am not sure from your statements, and it would help conversing with you on the pertinent points to know.
Thanks:)
From: Ilona
Time: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 at 22:43:52 (GMT)
through the oddity of checking my links I see that you had some return discussion :)
I will try to join in again on some of the ideas you presented.
For now, I think that it is difficult to use ideas of science which aren't proven to discount the Bible concepts.
In ideas of death and decay predating Adam: how would that be proven? If you take the time chronology of the Bible and hold it against something like carbon dating or certain geological ideas there are problems that arise.
First, if the account of Noah's flood is true, and there were world-side catastophic events that might have changed how these scientific readings would read; they might have been far different.
How would you really know how things were pre-flood, let alone prior to Adam?
=====
Say if things were not perfect, but that was prior to the creation that we know? IOW, the imperfection was connected with that chaos, or the "dark and void waters" that are described, isn't the creation at its inception still considered good and perfect?
Maybe our ideas of perfect are the problem. Often in the Bible that word has connotations of "complete".
I don't know if that makes a difference.
But the Bible account is that death and decay of this creation entered through the time of Adam.
It comes down to a choice of whether we choose to believe that the Bible is giving us reliable information. That is why I started as I did: our quest for answers and those of us who look for God's revelation to us.
Personally, I think that because our knowledge base in science is so small compared to what *can* be known, that it would be an impossible quest for someone to wait until they had all the science to start thinking about God.
You have to start at the place where you think that it could be reasonable to believe in God.
How would one find out real evidence of death and decay before Adam? How does one corroborate the timetables? The science is just not there.
The science can only go on what seems reasonable, as well.
So at least in terms of mans relating to the God of the universe, and of having life untouched by disease and death, I think it is best to go on the Bible account if one is going to go on to understanding Christ.
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter.com
Time: Friday, May 09, 2003 at 18:53:13 (GMT)
>The first question as a human being you
>should ask your self is way we as humans don't get along with
>each other? The answer may I suggest is due to our lack of
>intelligence. We as human beings have not evolved to a stage
>where we can think rationally enough to resolve issues in a
>just and fair way. We are too compelled to act in self interest
>and ignore the needs and just rights of others.
I don't see the problem as a lack of intelligence. Very
intelligent people can be very nasty and selfish.
If you mean physical evolution, I don't believe in that to
start with. If you mean social evolution I know that some
social evolution can improve conditions on Earth. I think
Biblical morality works and the more people who believe in
it the better off society will be, so there is a kind of
evolution here. Western culture has been dominant because
Western Civilization follows Biblical morality to a greater
degree than other cultures. But I see much of Western
Civilization giving up on Biblical morality so I won't be
at all surprised to find that it falls just like ancient Rome.
On the other hand I believe it is possible with the help of
Jesus for absolutely everyone to give up their selfish nature
and behave the way the God of the Bible would have us behave.
No one is handicapped by lack of intelligence.
>In the case of the natives and the whites in the last century
>the white folks felt totally justified in poplating and using
>this land. Where as the natives felt equally justifed in taking
>up arms and fighting back. This scenario has taken place
>through out this world as long as humans have been around.
Yes, I think American Indians were treated badly and I can't
really blame them too much for fighting back. On the other hand
if the Europeans and the American Indians were behaving the way
God wants all men to behave things would have been fine.
>The issue that has brought the Muslims to the lime light
>these days is the Israili-Palestinen issue. The issue that
>both sides are not willing to resolve is that each has a right
>to live.
There are very few Christians or Jews who think the Palestinians
don't have a right to live, there are so few they are
irrelevant. On the other hand it is pretty clear that the Arabs
are out to destroy the Jews. At least the Arabs who make the
headlines are saying that. Plus I have heard it said that the
Koran clearly states that infidels can be offered the chance to
convert to Islam but if they don't then they should be killed.
>You have heard and understand the American and British point of
>view on this issue. Now hear what Muslims think on this
>issue. (Research the following on your own you will not hear
>it on Christian TV.) The land of Palestine was occupied by the
>sun worshippers before Moses.
I'm not sure they were all sun worshipers, maybe some but I
think they worshiped other gods as well, Baal for instance.
>These same sun worshippers convereted to Jews after teachings of
>Moses.
Not in our history books. It started with Abraham, then his
descendants were in Egypt for a while before God through Moses
brought them out. God ordered the Jews to kill all the pagan
people in the land at that time but the Jews didn't do that,
many were left there and caused problems later.
>About 1900 years ago these same people found them
>selves following Jesus.
Not in our history books. In 70 AD the Romans destroyed the
Temple and the Jews were scattered around the world. Only a
small number of Jews at that time ever believed in Jesus.
>Then around 1300 years ago these poople converted to Islam.
>There was no mass exodus i.e Sun worshipers, Jews or Christians
>were not forced out. (The pressure to convert may have been
>present at all 3 of these times.)
OK, some time later Islam moved in and the local inhabitants
were mostly converted to Islam.
>Now we enter the 20th century. Jews that have suffered thru out
>the centuries in Europe, manage to convince the British in 1918
>that a Jewish home land ought to be created in Palastine, in
>exchange for jewish help in the War. (Belfore Agreement). The
>problem is that Palastine at this time has only a 2.5% Jewish
>population. The rest are Muslims and Christians. So the
>British who occupied Palastine between the 2 world wars allow
>mass immigration of Jews from Europe bringing the Jewish
>population significantly higher. In 1948 the Jews, who still
>are a significant minority, with the help of the British arms,
>force the majority population out of Palastine. Hence the State
>of Isreal is born. Populated mostly by the Europion Jews after
>evicting the native population.
I don't recall why the British were invading the area in 1917,
they were invading what was the Ottoman Empire, I know that.
Maybe the Ottoman Empire was on the losing side in World War
I. I don't think they were invading to create a homeland for
the Jews and they certainly did not need help from the Jewish
population.
>The Palstinians ever since have been struggling to establish
>their homeland. Muslims support their just struggle. Sometimes
>using violence, which by the way, most Muslims condemn. Not
The Moslems who get the headlines are the only ones we hear
about. For the Palestinians I would suggest that they should
try non-violent civil dis-obedience like that advocated by Gandhi
or better still do as Jesus said "Love your enemies".
>only the Muslims but most of the world finds Isrealis on the
>wrong side. There have been 140+ UN resolutions calling upon
>Isreal to act on this issue. USA’s unwavering support of
>Isreal without any regard to human rights of the Palestinians
>and against all International laws against occupation, has
>unfortunately put US on the wrong side in the minds of most
>around the world.
Well to start with I don't much care for the UN. Plus one old UN
resolution was that part of "Palestine" was to go to the Jews
but Arabs have never recognized that.
In the Old Testament we have it stated that:
1) God gave the land of Israel to the descendants of Abraham,
Isaac and Jacob as an inheritance forever.
2) God was going to kick the Jews out of Israel for their bad
behavior just like the exile in Babylon only longer.
3) After they were without any land of their own for quite a
long time God said he would bring them back, not because they
were good but because God wanted to prove his power to all the
nations of the world.
4) The whole world will unite against Israel and they will very
nearly capture it when Jesus returns to destroy the invaders.
5) Jesus rules the world for 1000 years from Jerusalem.
6) God also told Abraham "I will bless them that bless thee
and curse them that curse thee". Thus America is on the right
side. It also explains why the Arabs are cursed, not just by
losing all their wars with Israel but they are also cursed by
poverty and petty dictators.
>Switching the subjects on you a bit. I you really are interest
>in finding out what Islam is or is not, I suggest that you take
>a more scientific approach. Read the Koran yourself. Not rely
>on misinformation on TV.
Well, no I haven't read the Koran myself. I have never heard
anything good about it. If I have Islamic doctrine correct then
God adds up your good deeds and your bad deeds and if the good
outweighs the bad you get to Heaven otherwise you go to Hell.
This is not sensible or fair. With the God of the Bible all you
have to do is honestly want to give up your selfish (sinful)
nature and God will forget your sins and make you perfect in
Heaven. This is fair and makes sense.
>After all there are more than one million people (Christians) in
>USA alone that have read the Koran and have decided to embrace
>its teachings. More people all over the world convert to Islam
>than any other religion. There must be a reason. Find out, If
>you Dare!
1) From what I can tell there are not a very large number of
ethnic Europeans (nominally Christians) in America who have
become Moslems. Most Moslems in America appear to be ethnically
African and it appears to me they convert to Islam simply as a
way of rebelling against white European culture.
2) I kind of doubt that more people to convert to Islam than
anything else but the numbers argument doesn't matter, it is
flat-out given that most people will reject Jesus.
3) Islam is inconsistent in that while it recognizes Jesus as a
prophet it won't recognize what he said and did. I say God
approved of everything Jesus said and did by raising him from the
dead. Any revelation from God ought to be internally consistent.
Islam does not appear to be consistent with the Bible so it can't
be right.
4) What matters is that what we have from the God of the Bible
makes sense. Everyone really ought to give up their selfishness
and love each other. Plus Bible prophecy is working out as
expected, God has brought the Jews back to their home land and
the world is uniting against Israel. And then I see a lot of hate
in Islam rather than love.
Finally, if you think my perspective on Islam is wrong then
please go ahead and tell me what I should know about Islam.
Don
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter.com
Time: Friday, May 09, 2003 at 15:16:47 (GMT)
Mussalman,
I'm going to take your note and try and cover it point by point and get
a response posted by tomorrow. In the meantime if you like please
consider one particular item on my pages, go to:
http://www.dontveter.com/notes/biblogic.html and if nothing else
skip to the part about "Will Any Religion Do?" where I compare
Christianity with Islam and other religions. Then tell me if I have
a fair representation of Islam there. It is what I have been hearing
on Christian TV from Christians who were former Moslems.
Thanks for you note,
Don
From: Mussalman
Time: Friday, May 09, 2003 at 00:57:00 (GMT)
Don,
Its quite interesting reading your and Ilona'a comments on Muslims or Islam.
Why don't you for a moment take off you Christian hat and put on the Human hat.
The first question as a human being you should ask your self is way we as humans don't get along with each other?
The answer may I suggest is due to our lack of intelligence.
We as human beings have not evolved to a stage where we
can think rationally enough to resolve issues in a just and fair way. We are too compelled to act in self interest and
ignore the needs and just rights of others. In the case of the natives and the whites in the last century the white folks
felt totally justified in poplating and using this land. Where as the natives felt equally justifed in taking up arms and
fighting back. This scenario has taken place through out this world as long as humans have been around.
The issue that has brought the Muslims to the lime light these days is the Israili-Palestinen issue.
The issue that both sides are not willing to resolve is that each has a right to live.
You have heard and understand the American and British point of view on this issue.
Now hear what Muslims think on this issue.
(Research the following on your own you will not hear it on Christian TV.)
The land of Palestine was occupied by the sun worshippers before Moses.
These same sun worshippers convereted to Jews after teachings of Moses.
About 1900 years ago these same people found them selves following Jesus.
Then around 1300 years ago these poople converted to Islam.
There was no mass exodus i.e Sun worshipers, Jews or Christians were not forced out.
(The pressure to convert may have been present at all 3 of these times.)
Now we enter the 20th century.
Jews that have suffered thru out the centuries in Europe,
manage to convince the British in 1918 that a Jewish home land ought to be created in Palastine, in exchange for jewish help in the War. (Belfore Agreement).
The problem is that Palastine at this time has only a 2.5% Jewish population.
The rest are Muslims and Christians.
So the British who occupied Palastine between the 2 world wars allow
mass immigration of Jews from Europe bringing the Jewish population significantly higher.
In 1948 the Jews, who still are a significant minority, with the help of the British arms, force the majority population out of Palastine.
Hence the State of Isreal is born. Populated mostly by the Europion Jews after evicting the native population.
The Palstinians ever since have been struggling to establish their homeland.
Muslims support their just struggle. Sometimes using violence,
which by the way, most Muslims condemn.
Not only the Muslims but most of the world finds Isrealis on the wrong side.
There have been 140+ UN resolutions calling upon Isreal to act on this issue.
USA’s unwavering support of Isreal without any regard to human rights of the Palestinians and against all International laws against occupation, has unfortunately put US on the wrong side in the minds of most around the world .
Switching the subjects on you a bit.
I you really are interest in finding out what Islam is or is not,
I suggest that you take a more scientific approach.
Read the Koran yourself. Not rely on misinformation on TV.
After all there are more than one million people (Christians) in USA alone
that have read the Koran and have decided to embrace its teachings.
More people all over the world convert to Islam than any other religion.
There must be a reason. Find out, If you Dare!
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter.com
Time: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 at 19:50:23 (GMT)
Jesus is quite important in the scheme of things. He had a nice
cushy "job" there in Heaven but he cared enough about sinners on
Earth to leave the cushy surroundings of Heaven and come here to
live among us and tell us how to live. And in those days Earth
was pretty much what most of us today would regard as a slum.
Not only did he live here but he was assigned to die here. Why?
I am not happy with one of the common traditional explanations
so I am going to start with other reasons and then mention the
traditional one.
Christ's death makes a number of important points that could not
be made in any other way. First, as noted above Christ cared
enough to come here and die to help us find God. Second, his
death showed just how many people hate God and what He has to
offer, it makes the nastiness of sin really, really clear to
everyone. All Jesus did is go around telling people that they
needed to repent but so many people did not like that that they
arranged to put him to death just so they didn't have to listen to
him anymore.
The next consideration is that Jesus did all sorts of miracles
here on Earth including bringing a number of people back to
life. Now if it was only Jesus doing these things with some
magic powers of his own then he still ought to be good and dead
because once you're dead, how can you help yourself? But having
been dead God had the opportunity to do a miracle Himself by
bringing Jesus back to life and thereby endorse everything
Jesus said and did here on Earth.
Plus, of course the death and resurrection of anyone is a very
remarkable event given that everyone else who dies just stays
dead. It gets attention.
The next consideration is that if God can bring Jesus back to
life He can do it for everyone else too and indeed Jesus was
saying just that while he was on Earth. The event gives hope.
There are people who believe in re-incarnation or people who
just think everyone goes to Heaven because God is so nice He
wouldn't toss anyone into Hell. If either case was true there
would be no point to Jesus coming to Earth, suffering on the
cross and dying because everyone was going to Heaven anyway, but
his suffering and death shows there is a Hell that God is trying
to keep people out of.
More in the next day or two or three.
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter.com
Time: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 at 15:55:57 (GMT)
For your concept 1 you say everything was perfect. Given the
scientific evidence there was plenty of death and decay going on
long before Adam and Eve showed up. The only perfection that
was really required is that the Garden of Eden had to be perfect
for a little while.
You also talk about pre-destination. What the latest in modern
physics seems to be saying is that the whole physical universe
has been planned from beginning to end. There is a perspective
from which it is all finished. Someone God knows what everyone
decides and prays for and then built the physical world around
it. God knew from the beginning there would be a fall. In
fact, it is all designed to show the angels and us that sin
can't work. (Ephesians 3:8-10) So sometimes people ask what
would have happened if Adam and Eve didn't sin. But that
doesn't make sense because a major point, if not the only point
is to show that sin doesn't work.
More tomorrow or the next day. I have never been able to figure
out the traditional Christian interpretation that Christ had to
die for our sins in the sense of paying a penalty for us as in
the traditional analogy: You go speeding through town. You
get caught by the police. You go before the judge and are found
guilty, the fine is $50 but you can't pay so you go to jail.
But someone is there in the court room who volunteers to pay the
fine for you. Now I can see how Christ had to die for our sins
in other senses of the phrase but not in the sense of this
analogy.
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter.com
Time: Monday, February 24, 2003 at 19:03:49 (GMT)
After you submit a comment you get a page that is neatly formatted
showing you what you said but there is no chance to go and re-write
it. I used to write things up offline and then when I got it right
I pasted it into the window. The whole set-up here is like Daystar.
I did want to make this more sophisticated but I haven't gotten around
to that yet.
Is there a way to get to Delphi by way of the net or is Delphi some
special service?
Forums are often like a football game, a guy sort of thing where the
object is to win by making the other guy lose, that is a motivating
factor especially for guys but Christians ought to be very nice.
Now I just went off and took a look at your latest page:
http://www.geocities.com/reflectpool/Doctrine.html and I saved it and
I will come up with some comments maybe by tomorrow. One thing I could
say now is that no one understands the trinity for sure, however :-)
I'd like to guess:
Consider your PC. It has a system box with lots of memory and
processing power. It does most of the thinking that goes on in your
PC but that's not enough. To interact with it you need something you
can lay your hands on, like a mouse, a keyboard, a screen, a microphone
and speaker. The screen and the keyboard have a little processing power
built-in but not much compared to the CPU. The third thing your PC
needs is cables to connect the parts or these days some people have
wireless connections for these parts. Now especially in the wireless
system you need a little processing power but not much compared to the
system box with the CPU.
So now I will guess that God is like the system box with most of the
memory and processing power. Jesus is the material body that was here
on Earth that we could interact with (like your screen, keyboard, mouse,
etc.) And the Holy Spirit is like the connections, whether they be
wires or wireless. All distinct entities with some thinking ability
built-in but all necessary to form one complete God just like the parts
form one complete computer.
But that's only a guess.
From: anonymous(afraid to say)
Time: Sunday, February 23, 2003 at 14:49:09 (GMT)
Nope. The back and then post produces dbl. posting.
From: me again
Time: Sunday, February 23, 2003 at 14:47:53 (GMT)
OK. What I could really use is preview and back button on the "posted" page.
Ah well. You can get used to my crazy punctuation and typos and I can get used to remembering to select the url on the back button.
:) Otherwise you may not find dbl. posting so cute. Almost did it again.
wait.... the posting page is the preview, right? I could check it and go back to the form page. I check this out next time. It seems that I am making up in quantity what I lack in quality on these posts.
From: me again
Time: Sunday, February 23, 2003 at 14:47:30 (GMT)
OK. What I could really use is preview and back button on the "posted" page.
Ah well. You can get used to my crazy punctuation and typos and I can get used to remembering to select the url on the back button.
:) Otherwise you may not find dbl. posting so cute. Almost did it again.
wait.... the posting page is the preview, right? I could check it and go back to the form page. I check this out next time. It seems that I am making up in quantity what I lack in aulity on these posts.
From: Ilona
Time: Sunday, February 23, 2003 at 14:33:39 (GMT)
Just wanted to add:
I don't really think you want to study them, it tends to suck you into a reactionary state of mind. And there really is so much obfuscation going on in such circumstances ( the manipulation and the saving-face tactics) that I don't know that the real person is very exposed for examination, anyway.
What I wonder is how much of this is true of internet interactions as a whole. Or is it mainly found on specific formats...
don't know.
From: Ilona
Time: Sunday, February 23, 2003 at 14:27:28 (GMT)
Sorry it's taken me so long to get back to you.
I think the difference is that your conversations on creationism vs evolution have probably taken place within the more well-mannered types of forums peopled with those of intellectual motivations.
I have oth spent time in the past year on Delphi. Land of trolls and sharks..... or maybe they were pirhanas? Maybe it was simply the larger scale, but I also think that there was a gauntlet mentality.
We expect Christians to have certain standards..... but come to know that this is something needing ..hmm.. re-creation?
I have always admired Francis Schaeffer, but I think his compassionate attitude and style of discussion is something I would more like to emulate myself. Sometimes, christians, and those who hold the philosophical and scientific theories compatible to them, can become sort of calloused. ( me included).
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter.com
Time: Saturday, February 15, 2003 at 15:21:26 (GMT)
The double posting is cute. I used to hang out at Daystar where it
happened from time to time and I looked at their code and never figured
it out, oh, well, no problem.
Sure, the Iraqis will get tired of us if we hang around there a while
but we won't, we want to get out as fast as possible.
You said that you found nasty young Earth creationists somewhere?
Where would that be? I'd like to study some, I've seen plenty of
nasty evolutionists at Daystar but never a nasty young Earth creationist.
From: Ilona
Time: Saturday, February 15, 2003 at 14:59:30 (GMT)
sorry about the double posting... am not sure how that happened... I think I refreshed the page or something.
From: Ilona
Time: Saturday, February 15, 2003 at 14:57:54 (GMT)
Don said:
"true Moslems are supposed to hate Christians and
Jews and kill them. They quote chapter and verse from the Koran. I
think one big effect of Islamism will be to turn many Moslems into
Christians although of course other Moslems will simply hate us more,
Now Saddam is a nasty guy and I think most Iraqis will welcome us the
same way the French welcomed the Allies at the liberation of Paris."
I:
Actually, from what I am able to read from it, Moslems have a belief that all will turn to Islam... it is the accepted methods of accomplishing this that sorts the Muslims into different forms.
"Islamism will be to turn many Moslems into
Christians "
- I have thought this, myself. Due to the conflict of the idea that Islam is a "peaceful religion" and its exposure through the increasing terrorist actions.
"I think most Iraqis will welcome us the
same way the French welcomed the Allies "
Here I disagree. For several reasons, I do not think this will happen. Already, the Afghanis have become less enamored... and they were under a particularly repressive form of Islamic government. In Iraq, Americans are viewed as the instigator of many of their problems.... I do not think this will vanish, but increase, in the face of war conditions.
From: Ilona
Time: Saturday, February 15, 2003 at 14:56:53 (GMT)
Don said:
"true Moslems are supposed to hate Christians and
Jews and kill them. They quote chapter and verse from the Koran. I
think one big effect of Islamism will be to turn many Moslems into
Christians although of course other Moslems will simply hate us more,
Now Saddam is a nasty guy and I think most Iraqis will welcome us the
same way the French welcomed the Allies at the liberation of Paris."
I:
Actually, from what I am able to read from it, Moslems have a belief that all will turn to Islam... it is the accepted methods of accomplishing this that sorts the Muslims into different forms.
"Islamism will be to turn many Moslems into
Christians "
- I have thought this, myself. Due to the conflict of the idea that Islam is a "peaceful religion" and its exposure through the increasing terrorist actions.
"I think most Iraqis will welcome us the
same way the French welcomed the Allies "
Here I disagree. For several reasons, I do not think this will happen. Already, the Afghanis have become less enamored... and they were under a particularly repressive form of Islamic government. In Iraq, Americans are viewed as the instigator of many of their problems.... I do not think this will vanish, but increase, in the face of war conditions.
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter.com
Time: Friday, February 14, 2003 at 19:24:27 (GMT)
Test five.
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter.com
Time: Friday, February 14, 2003 at 19:18:53 (GMT)
Test four.
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter. com
Time: Friday, February 14, 2003 at 19:04:23 (GMT)
I've decided Islam is a religion that includes human sacrifice, like the
old pagan religions of Central and South America and so forth. It is
lucky for us that most Moslems don't read the Koran (like most US
"Christians" don't read the Bible) or they would all be after us. I've
seen a number of former Moslems on Christian TV who are now Christians
say over and over that true Moslems are supposed to hate Christians and
Jews and kill them. They quote chapter and verse from the Koran. I
think one big effect of Islamism will be to turn many Moslems into
Christians although of course other Moslems will simply hate us more,
I think it all depends are whether or not they are headed to Heaven or
Hell in the end.
Now Saddam is a nasty guy and I think most Iraqis will welcome us the
same way the French welcomed the Allies at the liberation of Paris. The
Islamists and the other Arabs will hate it. Moslems in general ought
not to feel like we are after them militarily but on the other hand they
must give up hating their neighbors and members of other religions and
especially the Jews.
From: Ilona
Time: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 at 17:05:05 (GMT)
Hi! Somewhat delayed by an unforeseen web "event". The server that I have my free childbirth site on repeatedly dumps my site. Took me some time to rebuild it. But it looks and works better now.
So, where should we start in the discussions? I have no presently pressing opinions. Although, like everyone else, the Iraqi situation makes me uneasy.
I heard a bit of a discussion on the radio the other day: a Muslim man called in and was protesting that when Hitler waged war it was not labeled "Christian", but that the present terrorist situaion was labeled, "Islamic". I thought the moderator answered well when he stated that many who were not "Christians" in motivations participated in the Nazi war effort, but which of the attacks in this present situation are not Muslim?
I did not hear the rest of the comments, but it does raise an interesting dilemma: so we ignore that Islam, as a religion is directly instigating terrorist/war acts?
OTH, I understand the Muslims uneasiness with the spectre of being grouped and villainized. I ponder where the Christians response is in all this.... how narrow a path in speaking the truth about Islam and between becoming persecutors or vigilantes?
From: DDC
Time: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 at 01:01:36 (GMT)
Ok from the link
From: Anónimo
Time: Monday, February 10, 2003 at 20:47:44 (GMT)
Testing from The Lost World:-)
From: Don don@dontveter.com
Time: Monday, February 10, 2003 at 20:05:54 (GMT)
Third test.
From: Don don@dontveter.com
Time: Monday, February 10, 2003 at 20:03:24 (GMT)
Second test.
From: Don don@dontveter.com
Time: Monday, February 10, 2003 at 19:08:23 (GMT)
Testing.
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter.com
Time: Monday, April 08, 2002 at 18:21:39 (GMT)
A test of the system.
From: Don don@dontveter.com
Time: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 at 07:54:26 (PST)
http://www.gimp.org
abc
http://www.gimp.org, http://www.gimp.org
http://www.gimp.org/temp,xyz=?,pdq
From: Don don@dontveter.com
Time: Monday, February 19, 2001 at 11:47:37 (PST)
a phony: http:// and another not so phony: http://nowhere.
yet another test line
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter.com
Time: Monday, February 19, 2001 at 11:41:51 (PST)
A test of ordinary text.
Happy President's Day
From: Don Tveter don@dontveter.com
Time: Monday, February 19, 2001 at 11:32:06 (PST)
This is a test of comma: http://www.gimp.org,
and this is without a comma: http://www.gimp.org