Ex Nihilo

John 20:29--"Jesus said...blessed are they who have not seen me and yet still believe."

Paul is a true and faithful apostle of the gospel of Jesus Christ, no matter what anti-scriptural alpacas posit.

How so?

Wonderful post Shaggy...as they say, there is no testimony without there first being a test and when ones faith has been through the fire, it comes out as strong as steel. God bless you and your journey.

why not a wizard?

Praise God!

Apologies for being too familiar Brother Devon. Since we're on a formal basis, please my full name as well: Meister Mithrandir, mustachioed man-at-arms,master of mirth &merriment, and meritorious monk of mountain magick....or MMMMMMMMMMM for short. Ps: get some rest dude

Dev, did you read the posts above? he never said he wanted both the "Dr" and the initials at the end. He just wanted one and MD said that some folks would take umbrage to the use of Rev Dr instead of Rev Insertnamehere, DD. I pointed out that least one prominent minister preferred Rev Dr Burntswamp's method over MD's. The reverend doctor even said he didn't want both...before you go refuting arguments, at least take time to know what the argument is.

I think the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Would bisagree with that.

I am a Christian Universalist. I dont believes that means every path leads to God, just that eventually God will draw all people to the right path, either in this world or the one to come. I also don't believe that God accepts all traditions or religions, just that he accepts all his children and will not allow any one of them to be lost forever. Having said that, I believe god is a god of revelation and relationship not religion. He asks you to respond in faith as he has revealed himself to you and that he can use any spiritual or religious path to call one home. Certainly, some paths lend themselves more easily to his revelation of himself as the very essence and embodiment of love, both within and without the "Christian" brand. Wicca, as I understand it, worships and communes with a single divine source, often represented as god/goddess deities. They live in the harmony of the natural music of the earth, and wish no harm on anyone. I think that gives God plenty to work with, maybe more than can be found in many Christian congregations and confessions. CS Lewis once remaked that a good Muslim is closer to God than a bad Christian. God is love, those who respond to that love, no matter their affiliation, are operating in the salvific work of God. Wiccans, Christians, whatever. I believe we are all one in Christ Jesus, loved by him ans his father with an undying love. If Christ can love and accept all people just as they are and condemning none (whille always praying and calling them to reach higher), what kind of a follower would I be if I did not do the same.

Amen!

Very powerful...I loved it.

It's been a great winter out here in the Rockies but I could use a little spring. I miss those looong rains back home. I haven't seen it even so much as sprinkle in months. I'm starting to feel like the kid in Ray Bradbury's "All Summer in One Day".

Happy New years!

Many thanks and many happy returns!

"And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid. And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger." Here's hoping that all have a warm, snuggly, and most of all a Merry Christmas! God bless you all!

Maybe it's not the end...maybe it's just time to wake up! http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7z6dxQVhE8o

then why did you bring it up? I never said one was better than the other.

how do you figure? Are you saying that communist regimes are lesser examples of statism? I would disagree, they were certainly more violent. At last count the blood Stalin (50 million) and Mao (100 million!) Spilt of their own people far exceeds Hitler (9 million). Moreover, Nazi Germany may have evil and corrupt, but at least certain citizens had a modicum of freedom and self-determination.Further, I take issue with the idea that Nazism is a regime of the "right". When one moves along the right axis of the political spectrum away from the center, one becomes increasingly more conservative and finally becomes identified as reactionary. To be conservative means to be "disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change." That means that conservatives uphold the status quo. Reactionaryism seeks a return to a previous state in society, prior to the current status quo. On the left is liberalism that eventually moves to radicalism, which wants to break totally from the past structures and seeks societal and political changes at the root level that creates a new order. While Hitler appealed to German conservatives' nationalistic ferver and desire for an orderly (ie, hierarchical) society in order to gain power, his ultimate gaol was a new order that had nothing to do Germany's past: an aryan empire based on a deranged twisting on norse myrjolgy and ethos....thus he was a radical and therefore leftwing. While I agree that Franco and, to a degree, Mussolini were right-wing authoritarians, Hitler is not an island in their archipelago. Lastly, this discussion of which side of the left-right axis is more or less violent and/or authoritarian shows a limited view of the political spectrum, which consists of both a left-right axis AND also the rarely discussed authoritarian-libertarian axis. The further up the axis you move, the more likely you are to adopt statist measures to impose, by force, your will on society. The further down the axis you go, the more likely you are to oppose force of any kind. I, for example, am a libertarian. I support those on the left or right so long as they do not seek to force their will on me and try to remove obstacles from the full enjoyment of my god-given freedom. This may be a helpful link to understand the nuances of the political spectrum: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum

very cool!

Not looking for an argument; just an opinion

It is? I don't see how. The first poll deals with limits of personal liberty with regard harming oneself, implicates a situation where one's harming of one's self may have a deleterious effect on a innocent (or at least nonconsentual) third party (the preborn baby), and queries whether that contextual factor, by itself, changes the respondent's views on the ethics (or morality) of the activity. My set of questions merely extends the situational construct to include contemplating the limits of personal liberty with regard to harming third parties, implicates whether dependence/independence is a mediating/aggravating factor, and queries whether that contextual factor, by itself, changes the respondent's views on the ethics (or morality) of the activity. To me, it appears to be the logical next step in inquiry. That being said, I would sincerely like to know your thoughts on the question if you'd be willing to volunteer them.

Oh no! Not that lot!!!