Revelation Revolution

Taken from an article which I have lost (sorry):

>...Thomas Jefferson that the final book of the New Testament is “merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy, nor capable of explanation, than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams.”<

This is an interesting point considering the attitude of some of the early Church Fathers who decided what books would be included and which excluded from the Bible. Eusebius, one of the chief supporters and apologists for Constantine (also the Bishop of Caesarea which we today call Israel), was quite clear in stating that there was no way in which the text could be accepted as an actual revelation and taken literally. It simply contradicted everything previously taught in the Gospels. He also was convinced that the John who wrote the book of revelations was the Apostle John .

He agonized over including the text in the Canon until finally he decided to include it in both lists, the accepted AND the rejected. It is hard to consider that to be a vote of confidence in the authenticity of the work.

Nevertheless, this highly questionable book, which some Fathers of the Church rejected outright, has not only become part of the Canon, it has become the single most important portion of the entire Bible for a significant number of American Christians.

As for me, long before I ever heard of the name Eusebius, I stated, to the intense distress of some family members, that I felt that Revelations was wrongly included and should never have been part of the Gospels, or any part of the Bible. It was more an emotional than a reasoned response, but I am pleased to say that as I have learned more about the history I find more and more reasons to believe that I was correct.

This is yet another reason I find myself so deeply opposed to the beliefs and actions of the Religious Right. They obsess about this one Book more than the rest of the Bible put together. When they do consider the other Books, it is often to interpret them in the light of Revelations; of Revelations taken literally.

No wonder their theology and mine are at such loggerheads.

I find myself much more in agreement with Mr. Jefferson. I have come to doubt all the miracle stories, although I do not necessarily reject them out of hand as he did. Miracles not withstanding, I can certainly agree that I am a Christian in the sense that our third president was a Christian. That is, I believe in the teachings and guidance of Jesus whatever his actual nature might be.

It is a painful irony to note that those of the Religious Right, who so often and so loudly proclaim their love and worship of Jesus, allow his teachings to be completely overshadowed and even poisoned by the bizarre imagery of the Book of Revelations, which, from the very beginning, has been regarded as suspect and even unacceptable.

Darwin's Doubts

Smithsonian magazine posted an article about a letter from Darwin on the New Testament. The brief 

letter states: 

     

                  Private

Nov. 24 1880
Dear Sir,
I am sorry to have to
inform you that I do
not believe in the Bible
as a divine revelation
& therefore not in Jesus
Christ as the son of God.
Yours faithfully
Ch. Darwin

Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/letter-about-darwins-belief-god-just-sold-nearly-200000-180956726/#oD515Tuf2v32b8b9.99

Interesting, but only tantalizing.  No clear answers.  Was Darwin, like Jefferson, a philosophic ( though not religious) Christian?  Was he fully agnostic?  A reluctant atheist?  A complete nonbeliever?  We know he felt that if there was a God, He was beyond human comprehension, but did he believe at all?  We still do not know.

"On the other (hand), I cannot anyhow be contented to view this wonderful universe, and especially the nature of man, and to conclude that everything is the result of brute force. I am inclined to look at everything as resulting from designed laws, with the details, whether good or bad, left to the working out of what we may call chance. Not that this notion at all satisfies me. I feel most deeply that the whole subject is too profound for the human intellect. A dog might as well speculate on the mind of Newton. Let each man hope and believe what he can. Certainly I agree with you that my views are not at all necessarily atheistical."

Yes, not necessarily...but...What could you believe, Dr. Darwin?  What were your hopes?

The world wonders.

Second Amendment, Third President

Speaking of the Second Amendment, it's time to draw your own political cartoon again!

First panel: A woman is sitting up in bed. Her husband is standing in the doorway in his pajamas with a smoking gun in his hand. She asks "Did you get him? Did you get the burglar who was breaking in?"

He replies, "Well, Sweetheart, the good news is that the person who was sneaking into the house is dead and I still got 25 rounds of my extended magazine."

Second panel: The wife asks, "What's the bad news?"

He replies, "That person breaking into the house… was our daughter trying not to get caught sneaking in after curfew."

Third panel: The wife then states, "At least you don't have to reload, in case the next one IS a burglar."

If you don't get it, "A gun in the home -- thus available for self-defense -- is 22 times more likely to be used in an assault or homicide, an accidental shooting or a suicide or attempted suicide." So, if your goal is a safer family, you might want to rethink the gun.

And I repeat, I am a gun owner who enjoys recreational shooting. However, my guns and ammunition are stored separately and safely. I do not feel the need for the "protection" of a firearm and I am disgusted by the idea of "defending" myself against the US Army by shooting down our soldiers in the streets. I have no "bug out plan" and I do not anticipate the end of civilization.

Yes, Jefferson said, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it's natural manure." But he also said that Blacks "are inferior to the whites in the endowments both of body and mind". In other words, he wasn't always right.