Hi Narrowgate

I don't think your minister is a wolf in sheep's clothing , I think he's just deceived , I agree with you on progressiveness though , people like Marcus Borg, explains away the restriction , kind of like Elvis , he's still with us in spirit, then we have John Domenic Crossan who does not believe in a objective mind independent God but rather believe that the concept of God is a good one to believe in , so because Crossan is an atheist he rejects a physical resurrection and miracles , then yes we have the others you mentioned.

but there are also True ministers in the progressive movement and i pray they don't break but stand firm on the True Jesus , the Jesus who raised the dead, heal the sick, preformed real miracles , who rose victorious from the dead in a Real Physical Body , the Exclusive Jesus who God Glorified again, Who was Glorified from the foundations of the word.

Yes NarrowGate, progressivism teaches another false Jesus 

I am thankful that there is a WIDE spectrum of theology within the Christian church.  Maybe where you were did not fit you but it does bring others into relationship with GOd.  We all have to find where we are at home in faith.  SOmetimes that is by trial and error.

Mind you I also disagree with much of your warning.  Which is also find.  We are merely on different points of the spectrum of Christian thought.

We all tread paths unique to our personal relationship with Christ and with god. Perhaps more maturity, clearer discernment, a more thorough readiong of Scripture and deeper faith will one day help you find a spiritual home with the UCC? If not, wherever you go, god will be with you as you journey.

Uh, Narrowgate...

As a denomination, The United Church of Canada hasn't taken the Bible as the literal word of God for quite some time. In fact, I think that one could argue that the relevant section of the 20 Articles of Faith, part of our founding and written in 1925, doesn't take the Bible as the literal word of God - "given by inspiration of God," I believe is the phrase.

Questioning our faith, what scripture says, how we live it out - even core beliefs - has been part of the DNA of the UCCan for as long as I've been alive (the late 1960s). This isn't something new for us.

Universalism - believing that all are saved by God's grace, through no action of their own - is discussion and debate that Christ's followers have been having for a long, long time. There are even scriptural arguments for it, that have as much sense as the arguments against it.

From my perspective, a sound Christian church should encourage one to explore Christ's presence - in one's life, in the world, and in scripture. Part of that search for Christ should, in my opinion, be to question and doubt; to realize that there are moments of certainty and moments of wonder - everywhere - including in the God inspired library we call the Bible. And that that's part of our faithful journey, too.

(By the way - I also know of Progressive Christian congregations in The UCCan that are quite Christ-centred.)

Narrowgate, your suggestion to always think about what is being taught is an extremely important one. We should never stop thinking about what our community of faith is teaching and how it is living. I hope your journey takes you where God needs you to be.

Christ's peace - Richard

Hi narrowgate,

While that is your decision to make and it appears that you made an effort to make a reasonably informed decision I would be interested in knowing what sources helped you to come to the conclusion that the whole of "Progressive Christianity" is false-teaching.

That might be true of some streams under the "progressive" banner.  I would not say that it is true of all streams.  In fact, I would like to point out that it is only within the last 150 years that there has been a narrowing emphasis on the Bible as "the literal" word of God.

Previously theological reflection on scripture as being the "literal" word of God was more elastic and contrary to modernist thought inhabited more what the Scripture was about than it did the words employed to discuss what the Scripture was about.  There was not, until the reaction against higher criticism, a traditional Christian understanding that there was a one to one correspondance between the content of the Scriptures and the words used in scripture.

Progressive Christianity does encourage individuals to not rest on tradition.  That isn't anything new.  Since you were attending a United Church it is a pretty safe bet that you had rejected the traditions of Rome for a more Protestant interpretation of scritpure.  Now either the Protestant Reformers were right to encourage doubt in the Roman Catholic System or (from the Roman Catholic point of view) they were heretics to cast doubt on the tradition of the day.

Questioning tradition is the only way one avoids the error of traditionalism.

Doubt is not the enemy of faith.  Faithlessness is the enemy of faith.  I would not want to be a part of any Church if it merely advanced traditionalism.

One of, I believe, the best traditions to come out of the Protestant Reformation was the sense that the Church is reformed and always reforming.  In that sense it always questions and always challenges tradition to determine whether or not the truth of the tradition exists as truth outside of tradition.

I claim to be a Calvinist and yet I don't insist that the only true Church looks today as Calvin's Church in Geneva looked.  I believe that the true Church still exhibits classical benchmarks of the Protestant Reformation and that is the challenge of tradition as tradition.

It could.  It does not of necessity undermine Jesus' final work on the cross.

Does Jesus' final work on the cross undermine earlier covenants with God?

Taking as given the Trinitarian nature of God are any earlier covenant made with God not also understood as covenants made with Jesus?  Even if those covenants were struck prior to the birth of Christ?

Either the gift of grace is free or it is not.  It is not "free" with conditions as conditions become part of the cost to receive.

That may be true of some streams under the Progressive banner it is not true of all streams under the progressive banner.

This is probably as good a time as any to point out that while the term "Progressive" is all the rage lately it is a relatively "new" use as a descriptor and as yet it is not narrowly defined.  Despite what Wikipedia or those who read it think.  There is no set, formal definition of what Progressive Christianity is.

Well so much for the open mind.  For interest sake, do you and this Minister share an understanding of what Progressive Christianity is or do you assume that you know what your Minister thinks or even that your minister knows what you think?

If you are in the habit of thinking of people as wolves in sheep's clothing without doing the requisite work of determining if they are, in fact, wolves then good luck on your search to find a new Church.

Some of it may be.  Some of it isn't.  Some of it just as much as you are.

Again a list of your sources consulted would be a real help if that is what you hope to accomplish.  Even if it is just to post a link to the Wikipedia page.

Amen to that.

Grace and peace to you.

John

We progressives don't say "beware of traditionalism" because most of us are aware that spiritual evolution, like natural evolution, is a progression in which past stages are not invalidated or left behind but carried forward into the next stage. In other words, we are aware that the authoritarian or traditionalistic stage of spiritual evolution is a valid stage in the progression of spirtuality, that everyone evolves at their own speed and on their own path, and that it is perfectably acceptable, natural, and valid for people to be on different paths and at different stages in their lives.

Unfortunately, at any stage in the spiritual progression, there are absolutists who believe that their stage is THE absolutely true and valid stage. What is unfortunate about the absolutist stance is not only that it makes absolutists intolerant of all others. The most unfortuante thing about absolutism is that it keeps the absolutist from progressing!

As I just said, the handicap of absolutism applies not only to traditionalists and fundamentalists but to all stages, even the most advanced ones. Nobody knows where psychological or spiritual evolution might yet lead us or where we might ultimately arrive.

Hi Narrowgate ---I am a Christian,  was a U.C. C. 35 years ago . They where not following the Bible then Ether.By the way welcome to wondercafe, you will find, if your here that long, many will not agree with you. Mostly you will find it's because they push there Idea that the Bible, is made up. There are many Wolfs here so on your guard Brother.  God Bless---airclean33.

narrowgate, before even reading all the way through your opening post, I find an error in your statements.   You say that the UCC thinks that the Bible is just another book on par with books written by (several different authors).   Having been in the UCC for 70 years, and devoted much of my time to study, including those authors that you mention, I have never met or heard anybody claim that the Bible is just another book on par with those books.   I have met some of the scholars that you mention, and I have the impression that they would be shocked to hear such a statement.  They certainly don't consider their works on par with the Bible.

Part one of your opening premises is false.   "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour."

A wolf in sheeps clothing....wouldn't it look odd?  Wouldn't you spot it like a mile away?  What would you call it...A cross-dresser?  Terribly sorry, God gave me/us such a lovely sunny day it makes me a bit of a nit wit. 

Praise God!

I agree.  How can anyone ask you to question or be skeptical of a book that is so perfect that it only has a few hundred direct contradictons and spawned only a few thousand different doniminations?

Further, it is unconscionable that people in a spiritual leadership role ever advise you to doubt.  Their job is to tell you what to believe, and your job is to believe it.  Period.

Narrowgate, I hope your spiritual journey eventually finds you in the company of people who believe exactly what they are taught to believe, by ministers who let only one possible interpretation of the bible guide them, and that they hate all of the people they are supposed to hate.

We don't yet live in a utopia of intolerance, but in the name of Jesus, we will one day!

A wolf in sheeps clothing....wouldn't it look odd?  Wouldn't you spot it like a mile away?  What would you call it...A cross-dresser?  Terribly sorry, God gave me/us such a lovely sunny day it makes me a bit of a nit wit. 

Praise God!

airclean,

Does made up mean phooey or does made up mean written, assembled, canonized, etc?

I would never say the Bible is phooey. It contains the cornerstones of faiths, note the plural.

The Older Testament alone is a story from creation to Judaism's encounter with Hellenism. It is a variety of literatures- myth, saga, law, proverbs, political history, love poems, prophetic oracles, court stories, apocalyptic visions.... Its authors are storytellers, bureaucrats, prophets, priests, scribes, visionaries... Add to that the 27 Newer Testament books that were canonized... 

It was written, by many people during a span of time. We have no originals. It was assembled in non-chronological order. There are more writings, among them the Apocrypha and Intertestamental writings. What we have was canonized with much debate....

My devotion to God does not require me to deny or ignore history as it relates to the Bible.  

Hi rev John---You wrote-------------

Either the gift of grace is free or it is not.  It is not "free" with conditions as conditions become part of the cost to receive.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------airclean -----------Here is the hole vers------- Let's remember that God's gift of grace is free to everyone but they need to make the choice to accept it or not.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------airclean-----Shell we look at Gods word?---------------------John3:16------------------

-It does say God Loves the world, It also says that the offer is to those that believe in Christ Jesus. So you do have to do something to be saved. You must believe in Jesus . God Bless------airclean33

Uhm,

Progressive? We couldn't have that could we if people learned to move ... they could fall off the edge!

Then what would we do with the institution of stone cold angels ... gothic forms that there is suggestion ... they would be bought down ... meteroric eh? Now that's not conservative but liberal change ... souls free to think in a world of free religion without people telling them there're going to 'elle for wondering about something much bigger'n themselves? This happens when the noodle case breaks down ... the mace is good for that prescribed by God's of old .... be cautious of there teaching ... pedagogue Eris (old word for dissonance ... to wake the dead?).

The world is a cesspool one has to pick and choose fecundity as you go .. tis a paean ... bucolic ... sometime baccarolean thunder as the higher powers RIP'eL over what goes on down Eire ... in the pithy portions ...

Hi, airclean -

I think that the parable of the sheep & the goats in Matthew 25:31-46 might offer another interpretation.

Christ's peace - r

Does anyone know the nature of arrested light (ultra conservative spectra)?

It creates a Black Hole Phenomena ... sort of like  amine devoid of most anything ... very hungry to learn ... will consume anything and crap out the foul for the slower, or Sloe Jinn Spirits! Such is the fertility at the bottom end of a sole singularity ... isolated from the alternate sort ... a passionate dimension that learns little until it gotten over with ... everybode needs a breat a Eire ...

Hi SG----You wrote--------

The Older Testament alone is a story from creation to Judaism's encounter with Hellenism. It is a variety of literatures- myth, saga, law, proverbs, political history, love poems, prophetic oracles, court stories, apocalyptic visions.... Its authors are storytellers, bureaucrats, prophets, priests, scribes, visionaries... Add to that the 27 Newer Testament books that were canonized... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------An yet the Old Testment is a witness For the New Testment. We find Jesus in the old  First many times . then we see Him in the new . John1:1 and all the way through the first ch, in John tells you that.I am not just sure what you want to do here SG . when you start to call the Old Tesment  Myth, would you explain a littel more?I desagree with you that it's Authors,  are stortellers.  airclean33

Hi SG----You wrote--------

The Older Testament alone is a story from creation to Judaism's encounter with Hellenism. It is a variety of literatures- myth, saga, law, proverbs, political history, love poems, prophetic oracles, court stories, apocalyptic visions.... Its authors are storytellers, bureaucrats, prophets, priests, scribes, visionaries... Add to that the 27 Newer Testament books that were canonized... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------An yet the Old Testment is a witness For the New Testment. We find Jesus in the old  First many times . then we see Him in the new . John1:1 and all the way through the first ch, in John tells you that.I am not just sure what you want to do here SG . when you start to call the Old Tesment  Myth, would you explain a littel more?I desagree with you that it's Authors,  are stortellers.  airclean33

Hi RichardBott-------------Would you mind showing me why you think, The sheep  and Goats is another Interpretation?

Sure, airclean. :)

In the parable, the Son isn't just talking to the people who believe in him. He's talking to all the nations. He doesn't say, "You believed in me." He talks about acts of caring and compassion.

Now, to be honest, I think God's love is greater than *any* act of mine - believing or acting. I just think that the text from Matthew offers a view that differs from John's.

Christ's peace - r

Hi Richard Bott ----I don't agree there is anyway to God except through Christ Jesus . I don't think you can earn it , by anything you can do. It's a gift to you from GOD . But what you believe is yours to believe . I think what you gave me to read , Has to do with . Rev19:11-21------Rev 20: 1-16.  Jesus is comeing back and will sort those who's names are in the book of life , from those who are not.As the Book of Mattew says  in vers 25:31

THat is a CHristian overlay on the Hebrew Scriptures.  And so, I would suggest, does not honor them for what they are.

Airclean - if it's a gift to me from God, then it's God who decides to give it to me - regardless of my belief or my actions. 

"Through Jesus Christ," is a phrase that can be understood in a variety of ways. Does "through Jesus Christ," require an action or belief on my part, or does JC get to make the decision who is "through" him?

That's the thing - I think we need to struggle with what each of us interprets scripture to say. I do it though my experience and life, you do it through yours. Each of us is teaching what we understand the scriptures to say. Hopefully, both of us are doing it failthfully, in service to God - as best we understand that service.

Am I *wrong* when I read and pray and understand what the scripture is saying to be different than you do? Am I wrong to share those understandings, in the same way that you share those understandings?

Christ's peace - r

But GW, Jesus seemed to honor them as Gods word, he quoted from it many times , Jesus also said the OT testify of Him

Hi airclean33,

By all means let's.

You open with John 3:  16 and the following:

If belief in Jesus is a requirement then it isn't grace, it is a reward for right belief.

Which indicates, to me at the very least, that the belief John is speaking of is a gift of the Holy Spirit.  

Placing the onus on the individual to believe, if belief is a simple matter of human choice makes belief a work and we are not talking about grace we are talking about wages earned.

If belief is a gift of the Holy Spirit then it is a gift of grace and nothing is required but God's willingness to give it.

Which is where we find ourselves with the quote.

God's gift of grace is free or it is not.

If God's grace is free there is no need for the word "but."  If God's grace is not free then the word "but" is appropriate.

Jesus invites the Apostles with "come and follow me" which many interpret as Jesus appealing to the free-will of the Apostles.  That appeal is trashed by Jesus in John 15:  16 when Jesus states, "You have not chosen me but I chose you."

Now the same use of the word but applies.  Either the Apostles chose Jesus and the "but" is not necessary or the Apostles didn't chose Jesus and the word "but" is vital.

I await your rebuttal.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Hi Richard Bott--- You Wrote---

Am I *wrong* when I read and pray and understand what the scripture is saying to be different than you do? Am I wrong to share those understandings, in the same way that you share those understandings?

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------airclean----Richard -- I can not say how GOD works with you.God will use us as He wills.We may fight it and I have ,or we may do it. I don't fight GOD these days I just try and do as He says and relize I am not perfect. May God walk with you Richard. and may He help us both, to walk His way. airclean33.

Hi rev john---------------If we read a little more of John------------------------------------

	Jhn 3:16	For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, (that whoever believes in him )should not perish but have eternal life.
	Jhn 3:17	For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the (world might be saved through him).
	Jhn 3:18	He who believes in him is not condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.

Again John what you believe is up to you. I believe in Jesus as my savior. God Bless John.   airclean33

Hi SG--- You wrote------------One can disagree that the satyrs and nephilim as well as the Leviathan are mythological creatures.-------------------------------------------------------SG as not, to get this wrong ,are you now saying . The Bible is not true when it talks of these? SG I really have no problem with anyone thinking what they want . But You have posted things about the Bible, that I am not in agreement with.I understand many don;t see Gods Word the same.The Old Testment I believe to be (very) inporten for a Christian to understand ,as much as He or She can . As a Christian I know my lord came from there , and the teachings can help us understand our walk with Him.  God Bless .

Good advice. My little Baptist church does exactly that.

Should we not also look for truth and wisdom in other places where it may be found? Does God speak only through the Bible?

Hi Blackbelt ---Thank you for answering gordw. I could not have said better. God Bless Brother. -------airclean33

Revjohn makes a point that it worth repeating. The pre-Protestant faiths Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy certainly take the Scriptures seriously, but not so slavishly that they would deny, for example, evolution.
Still, they remain conservative and rooted in tradition.
I hope you find a spiritual path that suits you. I for one do not think there is only one path.
May the Lord be with you.

narrowgate,

welcome to WC, a near perfect model of paradise ;3

in my limited time on this planet, i have learned a few things that have served to help me enjoy life more and live life more fully:

-- where do my feelings and thoughts come from?  they are generated by me and belong to me and are my responsibility.

--  when being a part of a group i can take more than one approach, one way of looking at them and if i don't feel comfortable or right, i examine that (see above).  i also try not to expect this group to appeal to everyone

-- i do believe that there is a group for everyone, just not every group is for all people.  that applies to congregations as well.

--  all interaction, all meaningful communication requires risk -- risk of rejection, risk of hurting, etc etc.  and that is worth it -- agape requires active involvement

--  all of what i perceive, of what i think is real and not real, true and not true, is mediated by my experiences, my upbringing, my language, my physical self, my current emotional state, etc etc and that others won't automatically be perceiving the same as i am.  in fact, there are aspects of the world that aren't 'important' or that don't even 'exist' because of these things and that other people will be different in that respect as well

--  i always try to remember to laugh and not to take myself too seriously

To me, living my life as one where I love God and neighbour, no matter whether the neighbour is different from me, is the narrow gate!  It is Christ's way. It's difficult  for many to do given there are so many different theological interpretations and different religions out there, and so many say, "We're right, we're chosen", etc....so many wars faught in the name of religion. If you ask me, I doubt anyone has a perfect interpetation of scipture (and people like Marcus Borg are working to make it clearer, so we understand it's language and cultural context authentically...that's what he feels called to do..which is brave if you think about it because certain views are so culturally ingrained and they may actually be false teachings carried over for many years...he knows he will be hated for trying to do this work...people say horrible things about him. He seems to me like really decent older man that's committed his life to studying scripture and he's not forcing anyone to believe his work..non-Christians have never even heard of him for the most part...but everyone's heard of Billy Graham, Pat Robertson, 100 Huntley Street, etc. God gave Marcus Borg a smart brain and he's using it, and I think it's good he's putting his work out there--take it or leave it)...but, if we manage to find that common thread that crosses cultures and denominations, to love and respect one another, to see everything through that lens...that to me is the narrow gate. God is love. Jesus came to teach that. Tolerance and forgiveness is part of the deal. We don't have to believe everything our minister believes and we can question what they teach, but to call them a wolf in sheeps clothing is unfair...they're not hiding any agenda, which is to me what a wolf in sheeps clothing does. A wolf in sheeps clothing is dishonest. I don't see progressive Christianity as dishonest. It's not preaching anything counter to loving God and neighbour.  I see preaching God's love when someone or some larger group is really seeking power, domination and financial wealth of this world as dishonest, such as I see with some of the more fundementalist groups who are heavily influencing politics of the world powers....but that's my view...and we are asked to love and forgive even our enemies...so even those who we suspect are wolves in sheep's clothing!.

To me, taking the view that I am automatically saved without doing anything else--even if my denomination condones wars and killing and persecution of non-Christians (which mine doesn't condone, just speaking hypothetically)-- just because I believe Jesus died on the cross for our sins, to believe we are chosen and everyone else is hell bound so their lives don't matter, is most likely the wide gate...it's human's uglier nature to hate others who are different and to judge them... working to understand and love those different from me, working for a vision of the world where everyone gets along and doesn't hate and kill others who think differently (or turn their backs on the suffering caused by this behaviour), I believe is what Jesus died for so we would understand...whether we take it literally or symbolically, I believe the meaning of it is the narrow gate. If we don't get that, I believe we're missing the whole point. You don't have to believe that, but I believe that.

 If you don't want to attend UCC, you don;t have to. Why not leave it at that? This "progressiveness" you speak of is nothing new. It's not like nobody knew it would be questioned, and that's fine. You're free to go somewhere else if you're more comfortable, but then I think, if you're convinced this new view is so wrong, why go to where you're preaching to the choir?...but there are many good people at UCC,  everyone is on a journey, and God loves us all. Who knows, maybe we'll all be wrong and need forgiveness! I think it's more than likely that we'll all be wrong about something.

Hi Inannawhimsay---I like what you wrote.

Mike, it getting so I don't need to post here anymore...

All I need to do is read your posts and post "What he said"

I have yet to disagree with you on anything...maybe there will come a time when you will extol

the beauty of bagpipe playing...THEN I could post a negative comment

HG,

What a sacral comment ...

IW,

Liked that one on Paul Gildings comments on "threat at the door of civilization" ...

How does one deal with that as a social question in an antisocial realm?

Its enough to drive one out of a mortal realm into the other's side ... then one doesn't have to think about IT ... the wisdom of de athe ...? Is that posthumous ... or just a' post oleic ... chemical polymer connecting imposibilities? Chi-ite for a following creation? Sets some to giggling about bean part of the embrionic other side ... then there could be an Ayre ID pathe there ... and seeds don't grow in a trod on area of conflict ... supported by the ga'Mos of m'n ... a dark Set of 4'sis ... in competitive rather than co-operative environment! Os'hite of the highs of man denying the underlying forces of understanding ... thys Taurus of Minos ... power of the freed mine vs the freed emote "v" as a Niche for hiding denied thoughts ... de Lucianal eh!

How did you draw this conclusion? You may be right, but a quick glance at the passage (Matthew 25:31-46) doesn't make this immedately apparent.

Hi, Ran -

I took it from v.32: "All the nations will be gathered before him..." (NRSV).

(Quick addition: That's interesting - as long as I can remember, I've read it this way... hmmmm...)

Christ's peace - r

Jesus is love. Jesus is not theology. Theology helps us compare and contrast and affirm our beliefs about who Jesus was.  This is how I see Jesus.  Denomination doesn't matter. It's in the heart. The meaning matters.

Jesus is the woman towing a drowning man to safety after the tsunami.

Jesus is the AIDS activist dying in a hospital bed.

Jesus is the human rights protester who gets killed by bullets.

Jesus is the person on death row for a crime they didn't commit.

Jesus is the stranger who stops to give you a hand if you trip and fall.

Jesus is the starving child in a war torn country, forgotten and hated because she is not like 'us'.

Jesus is the kid getting beat up at school because he's gay.

Jesus is....

That makes sense. Thanks.

It's interesting that this passage - Jesus will judge all the nations according to their actions - is mentioned in the same discussion as RevJohn's emphasis on grace alone - nothing we do makes any difference. How should we hold these two ideas together?

You see, this is why I love you INFPs.

*grin* Ran - that, my frien', is the joy of trying to connect scripture and our lives.

For me, how I live (and for that matter, what I believe), has the feeling of being a response to my experience of God's overwhelming love and grace. I want to love, and act on that love, because I am Loved.

This would be another interesting thread to get into!

Christ's peace - r

Perhaps God's grace should be revealed through our actions. Perhaps those who have received the most grace are most responsible to let their light shine brightly.

Hi narrowgate, I am sorry you felt that you had to leave your local church. The United Church aims to be a "big tent", "wide spectrum", "welcoming" and "affirming" church. Depending on your location, perhaps you have been able to find another United Church congregation that will welcome you?

I don't really know what the label "Progressive Christianity" refers to, but I always regret it when a Christian feels obliged to leave their church, for any reason.

I have had to do so myself several times, because I moved to a new location. However I did once reluctantly decide to switch congregation (and therefore denomination, since it was a small town).

Whether United Church or not, I do hope you have found (or will find) some way to remain part of the corporate body of Christ.

Narrowgate: In my longer post I wasn't suggesting that you should leave. On the contrary, so I am sorry if it came across that way. You're always welcome. Everyone is welcome. I was just saying if you don't feel comfortable, it's not a problem if you search for another denomination. But I was also suggesting that when people leave because they disagree with something, they are no longer there to share their views.

ty airclean33, i do try sometimes :3

oh, the audience was quiet :3

perhaps those who believe in the conspiracy theory of some conspiracy wanting to diminsh the global population aren't off track?  a kind of triage...

then what of Christianity in that world?  and/or those of us who believe the 'poor' should be uplifted to my level; could that, in fact, lead to where we are today?

oh, the delicious irony of it all; i think i hear some protons laughing and underneath it all, the screaming chaos...

EDIT:  here is the video that WB mentioned

i like his attitude a lot :3