TEST TWO

A. Do you know of any building that didn't have a builder?

___ YES ___ NO

B. Do you know of any painting that didn't have a painter?

___ YES ___ NO

C. Do you know of any car that didn't have a maker?

___ YES ___ NO

If you answered "YES" for any of the above, give details:

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 15, 2001

Answers

B. Do you know of any painting that didn't have a painter?

_X__ YES ___ NO

The sunset

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), May 15, 2001.

SUNSET , ain,t GODS handiwork somethin!!

-- al-d (dogs@zianet.com), May 15, 2001.

Very Big Grin Al D.!

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 15, 2001.

A. Do you know of anyone who can make a building, a painting, and a car equally well?

____ YES _____ NO

B. If someone tried to sell you a painting as created by a famous, yet invisible, artist, would you buy that painting?

_____ YES _____ NO

C. Would you drive a car if the only information you had about the maker came from a collection of 2000+ year old texts?

____ YES _____ NO

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 15, 2001.

B. If someone tried to sell you a painting as created by a famous, yet invisible, artist, would you buy that painting?

Yet atheist's do it every day. Look under "missing link"

C. Would you drive a car if the only information you had about the maker came from a collection of 2000+ year old texts?

At least the Jews and Christians use a recorded text. You and other atheist's use a make believe text tittled 'Millions Of Years Ago' Kind of sounds a little like Star Wars intro "in a galaxy far far away..." .

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 15, 2001.

Firstly, missing links are not analogous to missing painters, in that no one is claiming the links themselves created the planet.

Secondly, most Christians and Jews believe that evolution offers an explanation of how their diety created existance.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 15, 2001.

Science seeks answers to "How?"

Religion seeks answers to "Why?"

They are not incompatible.

One does not have to be an atheist to believe in evolution theory.

-- (this is getting@old.fast), May 15, 2001.

TIGOF--

I agree with your last sentence but not your second. Where does J explain "why" for anything? For that matter, where do atheists explain "why"?

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 15, 2001.

One does not have to be an atheist to believe in evolution theory.

Micro no. Macro goes directly against God's word in Genesis 1 19-25.

19 And there was evening, and there was morning--the fourth day. 20 And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky." 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth." 23 And there was evening, and there was morning--the fifth day. 24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 15, 2001.

Lars, who do you mean by J?

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 15, 2001.

I see nothing in the passage of Genesis you quoted that precludes evolution.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 15, 2001.

Try reading it again.

Genesis 1:21 So God created...

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 15, 2001.

Same old argument.

Is the Bible literal or is it metaphor?

I vote metaphor.

Have a nice day.

-- (@theist..), May 15, 2001.

Sure, it says God created the animals. But it doesn't say how God created them. God could have made them from mud as he supposedly did with Adam, or he could have used evolution, or he could have done something completely different.

Look at it this way: if you use a bread machine to make a loaf of sourdough, it's still bread that you made, even if you used a tool. You still assembled the ingredients, you put them together, you caused them to become bread. Why couldn't God have done the same thing, using evolution to create existance?

I can't believe I actually have to point this out to you!

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 15, 2001.

or he could have used evolution,...

Only if he did it in one day as the Bible states.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 15, 2001.

You are a hopeless bible-thumper.

Do you ever think for yourself, or do you just follow the dogma of your religion?

-- (@theist...), May 15, 2001.

You are a hopeless atheist.

Do you ever think for yourself, or do you just follow the dogma of your atheistic religion?

Don't forget, God doesn't believe in atheist's.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 15, 2001.

Tarzan--

J = Jeezus. I forgot that there is a poster who calls himself J.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 15, 2001.

Tarzan is correct. God used a bread machine to create the animals. I think it was an Oster.

-- (mmm@fresh.bread), May 15, 2001.

LOL!

I only chose @theist... because you have branded anyone who doesn't believe in the Bible as the literal truth an atheist. You are wrong.

-- (@theist...), May 15, 2001.

There is a robot at MIT called VanGoGo that makes paintings. Perhaps its paintings can be said to have no painter in as much as the robot has no consciousness and the programmer did not know what sort of paintings it would paint and certainly did not paint them himself.

-- dandelion (golden@pleurisy.plant), May 15, 2001.

"God doesn't believe in atheists."

LOL!

Despite the fact that the statement is hilarious...

How the heck do you know what God believes?

-- (@theist...), May 15, 2001.

Do you know of any painting that didn't have a painter?

Anything by Jackson Pollack.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 15, 2001.

How the heck do you know what God believes?

He wrote a best selling book called the Bible.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 15, 2001.

Atheist Corner-

How do you know God didn't cause the animals to evolve in only one day?

Lars-

There's a lot more to religion than just Jesus.

Bread-

Where do you think we get animal crackers from?

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 15, 2001.

How do you know God didn't cause the animals to evolve in only one day?

Are you now stating you may be reconsidering your position on it taking millions of years for species to evolve?

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 15, 2001.

It says nothing in the Bible about whether or not God believes in atheists.

-- (@theist...), May 15, 2001.

It says nothing in the Bible about whether or not God believes in atheists.

By definition, an atheist does not beieve in God.

One of many places God clearly speaks to non-believers is John 3:36

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him."

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 15, 2001.

Tarzan--

I was just making the point that religion and/or Jesus does not (to my knowledge) address the question of "why"? Why is anything here? What's the point?

I think that should be the starting point of any religion or philosophy.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 15, 2001.

Not at all. I'm just trying to find out how you can put such limits on your supposedly omnipotent god.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 15, 2001.

I was just making the point that religion and/or Jesus does not (to my knowledge) address the question of "why"? Why is anything here? What's the point?

One can, after a little reading, be shown why.

Just a few examples....

In Genesis God would spend time with Adam in the cool of the day.

In the new testament, Jesus speaks in Matthew 7:22-24 to those that try entering into the Kingdom of God without knowing him first.

One can see a pattern thoughout the Bible. God wants a relationship with His creation, which is us. Without it is rejection of Him and an eternal separation after death.

That is the answer as to 'why' that you ask.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 15, 2001.

All due respect AC (I am a closet Creationist, afterall) but your answer doesn't do it for me. Seems to me that Christianity (and probably all religions) takes it for granted that we are here, and then procedes to teach how we should live now that we are here.

What I would like to ask God (among other things) is: what's the point of this whole exercise?

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 15, 2001.

'God wants a relationship with His creation, which is us. Without it is rejection of Him and an eternal separation after death.'

AC,

That sounds like God is some kind of stalker. God wants you (relationship)and if he can't have you (rejection) then no one will (eternal separation after death).

-- Debra (Thisis@it.com), May 15, 2001.

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him."

Ah, but how can God have wrath for someone who He doesn't believe in?

-- (@theist...), May 16, 2001.

Lars: What I would like to ask God (among other things) is: what's the point of this whole exercise?

I was born with that question stickin' me in the gut, or so it feels that way. It was a real stunner when I discovered as a kid adults were not omniscient. They didn't know shit on a shingle from raspberry tarts. They/we bullshit our way through so many important questions with nary an impulse to look a little deeper, to put forth the effort necessary to earn(?) the right to have the answers revealed to us; or track down the holy grail, tear off the cover of that ultra-secret manual of life and find the answers ourselves.

So we speculate. Take a shot at guessing just how many friggin' beans are in this jar within a jar within a jar. I feel like I'm an inhabitant of a major league f*ckin' Petri dish sometimes.

Perhaps because we've been marooned on this gorgeous planet without a Hitchhiker's Guide (thanks Doug Adams) we learn to accept our imperfect knowledge of 'big picture' issues and this exerts a constant subtle pressure which leads us into the miasma of faulty thinking & half-assed sleepwalking through the days and nights of confusion, until one fine day we awaken to find the trail has ended. Life feels like one long night of the living dead – stuck in a loop.

"Shoot me now! NO! Take me home and shoot me!" (Bugs and Daffy)

Maybe the Bible is correct. Maybe God is a jerkoff with multiple personalities and a fly or fry policy. If that's the way it is, I'll be one pissed off hombre when the time comes to meet my Maker.

What the hell was my point? I have no idea. Urge to relieve myself. This toilet can be pretty handy for that.

-- Rich (howe9@shentel.net), May 16, 2001.

That sounds like God is some kind of stalker. God wants you (relationship)and if he can't have you (rejection) then no one will (eternal separation after death).

Debra

God is the creator of all. We were originally created to have a relationship with Him. We have always had free will to have or not to have a relationship with God. Before man kind sinned we freely choose to have a relationship with Him.

When Adam & Eve sinned by eating from the tree of knowledge many things changed. I will not get into all that did change here. (If you like I can discuss this with you in more detail at a later time.) God's law's were written in the Old Testament to show how we are sinners. With so many laws there was no way anyone could comply with all of them all of the time. Because of this, God, in the old testament demanded a sacrificial lamb for the covering of our sin on a periodic basis. The covering of our sin was a temporary fix. The law was written to show us we needed a savior from the consequences of the law which was eternal damnation.

In the New Testament, God sent a savior to us in the form of His son Jesus Christ, as He promised in Genesis 3:15. This savior, Jesus, became the final sacrifice for sin. Jesus is refereed to as the lamb of God for this reason and others. Another is because He went willingly to the cross. He easily could have escaped the 39 lashes with a cat-of-nine tails on His back; spikes driven into his wrists; and a Roman soldiers spear driven into His side. He choose to die because of His love for us.

I got kind of long winded here. Lets put it another way.

When each of us has a relationship with another person we are in essence making a commitment of sorts to them. God simply wants us to be committed to Him. Since He created us, that's not to much to ask.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 16, 2001.

Ah, but how can God have wrath for someone who He doesn't believe in?

Atheist

The believe I use is: to have confidence in; willing to support

NOT this believe: questioning of ones existance

God is well aware of our existance here. That is why He has prepared a place for us after death. An alternate location is available though for non-believers. We choose which location to attend by action or in action we take while still alive here on Earth prior to death.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 16, 2001.

You're trapped in your own religious dogma.

Jesus said God loves everyone, even the worst sinners.

Don't talk to me about eternal damnation. That is a construct of vivid imaginations and the influence of Dante's Inferno.

Somehow you've missed the entire 20th Century. Welcome to the 21st.

-- (@theist...), May 16, 2001.

Rich, you may not have had a point but I see it really easily. Why are we here? The question of the ages. I have to believe in something beyond our little four dimensions for spiritual advancement.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 16, 2001.

Atheist,

"God simply wants us to be committed to Him."

What does this commitment consist of? Specifically, what are we to do? From what I see (Biblically speaking, anyway), this "commitment" is impossible to understand.

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 16, 2001.

Jesus said God loves everyone, even the worst sinners.

Absolutely true. God is also a just and righteous God and that is why He must pass judgement.

If you had committed rape and murder and were convicted in a court of law would you expect the judge to give you clemancy simply because at sentencing you tell him he is a nice guy and because of that you expect him to overlook your deeds?

The judge will tell you it is because he is good and just that he must make you pay for your crimes.

Jude 1:14-15

14 Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men: "See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones 15 to judge everyone, and to convict all the ungodly of all the ungodly acts they have done in the ungodly way, and of all the harsh words ungodly sinners have spoken against him."

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 16, 2001.

Eve

This "commitment" is relationship. He yearns to have relationship with us. His law is designed to show us how far we have strayed from His love/realationship he/we once enjoyed with Him. His written word is our users manual to get back on track with Him. If we follow it, we regain that which we gave away when original sin was committed.

He doesn't want to send us to hell. Hell was created by God for the fallen Angels from heaven. It will be a place shared with them for those that choose not to believe in Him or His message.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 16, 2001.

How quaint.

-- (@theist...), May 16, 2001.

Atheist,

What does this "relationship" consist of?

What rules do we follow? Everything, going back to the Torah? And how often should we do these things?

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 16, 2001.

What rules do we follow? Everything, going back to the Torah? And how often should we do these things?

Relationships are not based on rules. That is not to say we should ignor them either. Relationships are based on love, committment, trust, forgiveness, understanding.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 16, 2001.

Atheist,

But the Bible has "love rules" -- e.g., love your neighbor, love your enemy, etc. And if we don't naturally feel love toward, say, Josef Stalin, how do we force this emotion?

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 16, 2001.

Atheist,

To the extent you were just referring to love of God, what do we do there? How do we show it? What do we feel? What are we supposed to feel?

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 16, 2001.

Eve, I'll attempt to answer. If you fill your heart with love, you won't be "forcing" anything. It comes from within you.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 16, 2001.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks Maria.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 16, 2001.

Wait a minute. You say that God has prepared a place for those who believe in him and his message. Then, God proceeds to distribute that message in an extremely half-assed way (to put it generously!), to the point where even those who believe in him and his message can't agree on exactly who or what he is. To compound this error, God has prepared a place for those who don't believe in him or his message, including (presumably) those who existed before his message was put together in any sort of form, those who never actually had access to his message, those who were unpersuaded by the rather lame attempt at spreading his message, and those who thought they believed in him but were really listening to the wrong message.

Are you SURE you're not an anti-xian troll?

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 16, 2001.

Maria, Atheist,

Believe me, my love, when it comes naturally, is very strong, intoxicating, long-lasting or permanent, etc. etc, depending on the nature of the relationship and the other person. But how do I force myself to "love" an enemy, for example? I don't even know what that means.

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 16, 2001.

...to the point where even those who believe in him and his message can't agree on exactly who or what he is.

How so?

...God has prepared a place for those who don't believe in him or his message, including (presumably) those who existed before his message was put together...

Expound these thoughts please.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 16, 2001.

But how do I force myself to "love" an enemy, for example? I don't even know what that means.

I don't think you are but I must ask. Are you stating that you look at God as your enemy?

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 16, 2001.

Atheist,

God as my enemy? Absolutely not. I'm not even sure what "God" means, so there's no way I could possibly leap to the next step and make a judgment about him/her. That wouldn't make any sense.

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 16, 2001.

Eve-

I'll go you one better. How do you fill your own heart with love? Emotions, by definition, are spontaneous. If you deliberately fill yourself with any emotion, love, anger, whatever, is it truly an authentic emotional experience?

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 16, 2001.

Eve,

On another thread where I wanted to understand an atheist's point of view, you wrote (and I paraphrase) that you value life because this may be all there is, and you need to cherish the moment. Well, that to me sounds as if you have the love necessary to embrace your neighbor and your enemies.

You also wrote (and again I'm paraphrasing) on another thread that a person's values are at the heart of our being (pointing out that it wasn't the emotions). Emotions come out of the values we have, not the other way around. So if you value life, your emotions just follow. You couldn't be "forcing" love if you value life. I guess what I'm saying here, is that I don't understand your confusion on this "love thy neighbor" rule. It seems to me that you already do.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 16, 2001.

Not to speak for Eve, but there's a big difference between a deep, emotional connection with your neighbor and not wishing for them to die.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 16, 2001.

Atheist Corner-

Those who believe in God can't agree on what his message is or even who he is. For instance, you read what you suppose to be his message (the Bible) and interpret it literally to the point where you believe that evolution precludes God because it's not mentioned in Genesis. Others read it from a more metaphorical perspective (or at least less literal) and see evolution as a possible tool God used for creating life on earth. You all believe in him, you have all read his message, but you interpret and convey it differently.

On a larger scale, look at the differences between churches. The Catholic church considers Mary, and other saints, to be capable of intercession in the lives of believers. Many Protestants consider this to be a violation of the first commandment. The Mormons believe in God and his message, but believe that this message includes an extra testament created by the lost tribe of Israel on the North American continent. The Jews believe in God and his message yet don't believe in the divinity of Jesus. Mormons, Jews, Catholics, and Jehovah's Witnesses all have what they believe to be divinely commanded dietary restrictions that Protestants don't have. You all can't even agree on what to eat after church (or even which day is the Sabbath), yet you all believe in him and his message.

As for the bit about those who existed before the message was put together, John 14:6 pretty much says it all.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 16, 2001.

Tarzan, your comment on love and emotion was well put.

Maria, yes – I said and believe those things. And thanks for your "faith" in me. :) But because I have the capacity to love doesn’t mean I should love Josef Stalin or a kidnapper of my children. Or that even if I should, that I’d ever be able to force it. And even if I was able to somehow force it, as Tarzan said, it wouldn’t be genuine – meaning there’s be a form of self-deceit involved. Or just plain deceit if I conveyed it to someone as if it was genuine.

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 16, 2001.

The longer I spend exploring the spiritual realms, the more experiences I have, the more apparent it becomes to me this is a vast, multi-layered system of which our species has precious little knowledge & which appears to be beyond our measure. We don't have the tools. We don't have the capacity to absorb very much at all.

Our species is so bloody pompous. We know next to nothing of what 'is'. Each day I am humbled at the complexity of life, magnified exponentially by the presumption of those layers which hide from my senses. More and more and more. Scratch and claw through one spiritual rock formation and there appears another. And another. Exploration and discovery are wonderful! But the road is not linear and part of my mind demands a straight line! What's the goal? Where’s the finish line? What's beyond that next curve? Which fork do I take? What fools these mortals be.

I understand all too well the yearning for finality, for answers, guidelines, ways and means to find and return home. The impulse to accept speculation for absolute truth can be overwhelming. One's heart and mind can endure only so much pain, I guess, before giving in, giving up, going along with whatever 'way' is handy or clean or makes enough sense to lead us to dispense with healthy skepticism in return for the promise of safety, security, an eternal hug. Lars question continues to worm its way through me. Proof. Is definitive proof attainable? Is it possible I could be completely, unequivocally convinced by a messenger offering the truth, the whole truth and nothing but? Is there a holy fireman out there who can quench the fire of skepticism within me? Today, my answer is NO WAY. Subject to change.

-- Rich (howe9@shentel.net), May 16, 2001.

From Tarzan's black and white world, "big difference between a deep, emotional connection with your neighbor and not wishing for them to die"

-- not a fan (of Tarzan@the.ape.man), May 16, 2001.

Rich, we DO have the tools. The big one -- the crucial one -- is REASON. Reason is our conceptual faculty -- the thing that allows our minds to conceptualize -- which is a way to reduce the fantastic complexities of the world to manageable concepts, principles, basic truths -- of course, with the help of philosophy. Individually, we can't possibly know everything. But, there's no need to know everything, if you're talking details. There's a division of labor for that -- a mechanic to fix my car, etc.

The important thing is that the potential for learning and knowing enough to attain purpose, happiness and fulfillment in our lives, is there -- and hopefully, with time left over to contemplate the big issues if we wish.

I know this is too general to really put across in one small post, Rich; but I hope it helps.

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 16, 2001.

Eve, I can't relate very well to Stalin so I'll take your "kidnapper" example. Hypothetically, some kidnapper took my kids and killed them. I would be completely devastated. Wouldn't be able to eat and at moments even find it hard to breathe. But I move on through this world. What would get me by? The knowledge of spiritual justice, karma. This murderer is my enemy but I couldn't hate him. I would hate his deeds but not him. I would allow society's laws and spiritual laws to deal with his misdeeds. In the spiritual sense, if I let the negative feelings grow, I don't advance my spiritual soul. Further, if I seek out against my enemy, I, in turn, extract bad karma on myself for my own negative actions. Hate or wishing harm onto others doesn't do any good; it only promotes the negative cycles. You stop the cycle with your own inner peace.

No self-deceit in it if you truly value life. Now if, as Tar notes, you just don't wish for life to end (in particular the murderer's life), then I did misunderstand you on the other thread. Love comes in many shapes and sizes. If you value life, the only emotion you feel for life is love. And yes, I believe we all are spiritually connected, that's the true source for our values.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 16, 2001.

Rich, just enjoy the ride! You're straight line path sounds too boring, take all the twists and turns. The adventure in getting there is part of the fun.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 16, 2001.

Maria, you've made several juicy points that I'd love to get into (and, if I understand what you're saying, I agree with some), but for now --

You said,

"This murderer is my enemy but I couldn't hate him. I would hate his deeds but not him."

This I'm completely unable to do. If someone's mind led directly to, and resulted in, the act, how can you possibly sever the two and hate one and love the other? This whole notion has really always been mindboggling to me. I mean, without the mind, there IS no act.

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 16, 2001.

Eve, reason is a tool and a good one. You know where I stand in this regard, I hope. But its use is dependent upon us having a solid foundation of understanding about what it is the tool is to be used upon. I'm talking basic building blocks of life here. I posit that we as species do not have that solid foundation in the - for lack of a better term - 'big picture' areas of existence. So oft times the product achieved through my applying reason isn't worth a whole hell of a lot, IME.

That's where I'm coming from. Lars posed a question. It is that question and its offspring to which I addressed my prior post. I have experiences I simply cannot tolerate placing on a shelf while I wait for my reason to evolve to the point where it can produce results worth a damn.

So I discuss these events with others. I read, listen to opinions, meditate, cogitate and postulate what these things might be. But my reason is really not equipped to adequately deal with these occurences. No way, no how.

-- Rich (howe9@shentel.net), May 16, 2001.

Tarzan

I don't have much time today to address your concerns properly. I will however leave this with you.

On a larger scale, look at the differences between churches.

Matthew 7

13 "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

As you say John 14:6 pretty much says it all.

John 14

6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 16, 2001.

Atheist Corner-

That may be true, however, in the case of chuches, religions, and faiths, those different gates are all built on belief in God and in God's message. It's almost as though the almighty were playing a shell game.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 16, 2001.

Eve, after I typed my post I thought twice before I hit the submit key. It talked about my beliefs too much and I wanted to keep it more about "love thy neighbor". C'est la vie.

"This murderer is my enemy but I couldn't hate him. I would hate his deeds but not him." (Actually I wasn't completely accurate. I meant to say that I hated the fact that my kids had died. If his deeds did not result in death, I wouldn't hate the deeds. Hope I explained that one.) The effects of his actions (and his willful mind) will be judged by karma, not me. There needs to be balance. Only after he resolves his actions and pays back his debt, can his soul evolve. If I react to his misdeeds by doing more harm or even promoting hatred, I hurt myself more than I hurt him. This hatred within me will inflict bad karma on me and therefore *I* cannot evolve. It benefits me (a purely selfish thing) to help him evolve and stop the cycle of negativity.

You are free to hate your enemy but it does you personally little good to do this. How do you benefit from this hatred? In my mind hatred is like a cancer that grows, feeds on itself, and promotes further negativity in your life. Yes I hate some of thing that happen around me but I learn to accept them. Recently a friend of my daughter and son was murdered while working in a Subway sandwich shop. He died instantly. Sad, really sad. Luckily the police caught the guys. Now, they have to answer to society and karma for their deeds. I found peace in knowing that this boy isn't gone; his spirit lives on. I hope I helped my daughter in understanding this incident. Also, placing myself in his mother's shoes, I can't say that I would hate these guys. This hatred would hurt me more than it would hurt them. Do you think they could be affected by my hate? Nope, not one bit. All it would do is eat away at me.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 16, 2001.

What kind of karma did you get when you offered to trade government secrets with Tarzan?

-- Treason Season (secret.sam@treason.com), May 16, 2001.

Maria, I agree. The people who lost loved ones in the OK City bombing struggle with this contradiction, very vocally - not that they all agree by any means on things like the death penalty. But they all struggle to make the distinction - how can I value humanity at the same time as I hate what McVeigh has done - and not be torn apart by this hate? So then "Love your enemy" becomes a reminder that although I may hate the deed, I am connected to all my brothers and sisters, to all of humanity. This is a Value (in your sense, Eve) that I hold, not an emotion. Indeed "thoughts can kill" (and I can go crazy with hate and despair) if I forget this. I can speculate about how McVeigh got caught in this tangle and did not make these distinctions.

If I take "love your enemy" as a value instead of literally as an emotion, then it works. Of course, picking and choosing the parts of Christian teachings which work for me as profound metaphors (and many of them work very well) instead of literally, makes me a heretic, but so be it.

-- Debbie (dbspence@usa.net), May 16, 2001.

Maria,

“I meant to say that I hated the fact that my kids had died. If his deeds did not result in death, I wouldn't hate the deeds.”

I can think of all kinds of deeds I would hate short of murder. But (re what you said later) I agree with you -- I wouldn’t let it consume me. When we went on vacation several years ago, my house was broken into, and most of the things that were stolen were my kids’ things –- including keepsakes and irreplaceable things. For a while I hated the person AND the act – but I let it go -- by repressing it. I had to, to keep my sanity.

If someone murdered my kids, yes – I’m sure I’d have an all-consuming hatred for a while, anyway. I’d think that it was natural to feel this, and we shouldn’t deny those feelings – at first, at least. At some point, though, we have to get on with our lives, so then we try to repress the feelings. And I think that’s natural and healthy too.

There’s been one person in my life who has gone out of her way to make life difficult for me. My feelings towards her eventually turned to hate. But I’ve controlled it. I’m able to put it away in a “box.” In other words, it’s repressed – it doesn’t bother me -– just when her name comes up (maybe once a month or so) – then, for a half hour or so some of the old feelings might start to bubble up, after which I realize what’s happening to me and stuff it again. But, you know, I'm ok with that -- it works for me.

“The effects of his actions (and his willful mind) will be judged by karma, not me.”

Why not you? Is it, then, because your religion won’t allow you to? We judge people frequently in our daily lives, and it comes very naturally for me. I see it as a good thing, too. I mean, many times when you interact with someone new you have to try to judge their character and conduct, don't you?

Debbie,

In terms of my not allowing hatred to consume me, see my answer to Maria.

“how can I value humanity at the same time as I hate what McVeigh has done”

Try to separate “humanity” in general from the “exceptions.” That’s what I do. In other words, we can value humanity, yet judge individuals and respond to them emotionally. And in action (other than emotionally) as well, as long as we don't harm them or otherwise violate their rights. You know, there's lots of little ways we judge and actually mete out justice that have nothing to do with violations of rights or breaking the law. For example, if you judge someone did a relatively poor job painting your house (but they didn't necessarily violate the contract), you take your business elsewhere the next time. They lose your business -- and that's a form of justice.

In any case, Debbie, how do you feel connected to evil people? And why would you even want to? In what way is it a “value” for you to feel a connection to an evil person? I don't follow you here.

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 17, 2001.

Eve, a pastor at a funeral I attended (mental note: I gotta get out more) -- a pastor did the best job healing the survivors that I've ever personally witnessed. The deceased had been an abusive alcoholic who had abandoned two wives and four children. He had been a drain on his parents his entire life until they died of old age. He died as the direct result of his vices without ever once apologizing.

So there we were, standing over the grave of this horrid fellow and feeling weird about trying to grieve for someone so repulsive. I had never met the man, because everyone who had urged me to stay away from him.

The pastor looked around at the handful of survivors who cared enough to show up and said, "I didn't know this man. Everyone I asked told me what kind of life this man led. There are hard feelings against this man. Some of you have asked me what I thought about the salvation of this man."

He went on to say that this man was born a tiny, naked infant just like the rest of us were. He said no one could point to a reason this man's life ended up being a waste by anyone's standards. He just wanted us to remember that this man had been a child too. He reminded us that this man had been loved as child and had needed that love just like the rest of us had. He said if we couldn't forget or forgive what the man had done, try to remember and forgive the child he had been.

-- helen (p@ss.the.kleenex), May 17, 2001.

Eve, I meant "judge" in the court room sense. A verdict will be handed down and the murderer will have to pay back his debts. I won't be handing out the sentence. But I absolutely judge people in the strictest sense. I draw conclusions and opinions every day and sometimes they change just as often. My first impressions are usually wrong!

I thought a little more about the separation of deed and mind. The mother of the murderer, for example, loves her child yet finds the deed reprehensible. Even in my real life relationships, I hate some of the things that friends and family do but I don't love them any less for it.

I suspected that you had a person in your life "torturing" you. Burying it doesn't make it go away. (Sorry if that sounds so trite, but it's so true.) At this point I would contemplate the situation to find the way to deal with this friend. It may be as simple as a heart-to-heart discussion or treating this person in a more embracing way. As difficult as that sounds, opening your heart to this person will change her behavior towards you as well as your own viewpoint.

Debbie, I agree with your interpretation of "love". I too don't take words from the bible literally but listen to the "spirit" of their meanings.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 17, 2001.

Tarzan

It's almost as though the almighty were playing a shell game.

Man plays the shell game. Very much like a defense attorney trying to get his/her client off the hook we twist and turn God's word, the Bible, to suit our own desires.

We use things like: true meaning was lost in translation; written by falable men; the Bible doesn't apply to todays world, etc., etc.

If we took the Bible for it's literal meaning, that would mean we would need to conform to it's message. Most will never do that because it's too uncomfortable for them to admit there is something more powerful/important than themselves in this universe. That is the real problem and that is why the Bible often refers to His remnant. Only a remnant of the world will be saved by way of accepting God and His son Jesus.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 17, 2001.

-

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 17, 2001.

That's the problem, Atheist Corner. All of these different ways have arisen from the same message and the same diety. Your god inspired them all, yet your god will punish everyone but those who have the correct beliefs. Your god sounds like a tricky fellow.

I'll ask again: are you sure you're not an anti-xian troll?

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 17, 2001.

It has been well said that "religion" is man's way of trying to deal with his guilt. Different religions have different ways of attempting to rid themselves of sin and its consequences. They fast, pray, deny themselves legitimate pleasures or chasten themselves, often to a point of inflicting pain. This happens because they have a conception of what they think God (or "the gods") is like. They then go about to establish their own righteousness, being "ignorant of the righteousness which is of God." The "Good News" of the Christian faith is that no one need suffer the pains of religious works. His blood can cleanse our conscience from the "dead works" of religion (Hebrews 9:14). Jesus took our punishment upon Himself, and He is the only One who can save them from sin and death. See Acts 4:12.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 17, 2001.

Yet the author of their concept of God is God's message. You said that all that's necessary is to believe in God and his message. Yet, according to you, God set up his gospel to be so open to interpretation that the vast majority of those who attempt to follow it will miss the mark and be sent to hell anyway. All he's waiting for is a chance to say "Gotcha!" to believers and unbelievers alike.

Wow. You are the ultimate troll, an anti-xian who pretends rather convincingly to be a Bible-believing Xian. My hat's off to you, sir!

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 17, 2001.

...God set up his gospel to be so open to interpretation that the vast majority of those who attempt to follow it will miss the mark and be sent to hell anyway.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Seems clear to me.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 17, 2001.

Oh come on, Atheist Corner. They all believe that.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 17, 2001.

Without specifics, how do I answer you?

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 17, 2001.

helen,

I appreciate your thoughts. But, if this man did the harm, what good does it do to forgive him as an infant? The infant did no wrong, in any case. So, I'm not sure I understand.

Maria,

“I thought a little more about the separation of deed and mind. The mother of the murderer, for example, loves her child yet finds the deed reprehensible. Even in my real life relationships, I hate some of the things that friends and family do but I don't love them any less for it.”

My love for my sons knows practically no bounds, is very forgiving, runs as deep as any love anyone can imagine, and more. But if my son ended up torturing and murdering someone – let’s say, a child –- just for kicks –- and laughed about it -- had no remorse –- then my son would suddenly be someone so different from who I thought he was - - well, I'm not sure if my "love" for him would ever be quite the same again -- if it remained at all. But in these family situations, we have a whole, deep, rich context to work with -- relationships that span a lifetime. And knowledge of character, other actions, etc. So, you've got a good, tough point here, Maria; one that's well worth exploring more.

But before we get too involved in a mother's love, the original question I posed was how we're to "love" an enemy. How?

"I suspected that you had a person in your life "torturing" you. Burying it doesn't make it go away."

If you can “bury” it successfully, then -- couldn't that be enough? How do you do make it just "go away" -- that is, without "burying" it? I mean, by making it "go away" or just "letting go" of something (and, you know, with some things, I think I already do this to some extent) do we try in some sense to pretend it never happened?

To sum up -- what's the practical difference between successfully repressing something and just "letting it go"?

I really appreciate your suggestions, Maria – -- actually, I tried it to some extent, but it was an extremely tense meeting to say the least; and it didn’t improve things between us; in fact I think things got a little worse. There are many ways to approach someone, though, I know – but given my own emotional state regarding this person – I don’t know how productive it would be right now. Keep in mind, though, that these feelings of mine don’t come up unless her name comes up – so I really believe this is something I can live with. But, hey – I really am open to suggestions. And maybe sometime I'll employ some more things along the lines of what you suggest.:)

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 17, 2001.

Eve, being able to forgive is beneficial to the one who forgives. You might wait until the person dies and still not be able to forgive. I mentioned one way forgiving another might be aided. Since I never knew the man, when I think of the deceased I think of a little boy who had no idea what his future would hold. People who were hurt by this man felt a great deal of peace after being led to think of him this way. It's a mechanism for the living with no useful purpose for the forgiven if they have passed away. It may not work for you.

-- helen (serious@gain.oh.no), May 17, 2001.

helen,

Assuming it's not a child (where we should obviously be much more flexible and forgiving, generally), I almost ALWAYS am very eager and willing to forgive if the person realized he/she did wrong, apologizes and/or is willing to make efforts to change, etc.

But if they're unrepentant -- if they don't deserve forgiveness, why do it? As you suggest, for psychological reasons -- our own mental health. Maybe that would work for some of us. But I think it would have the opposite effect on me. It would be like pretending they did nothing wrong in the first place. So my first concern would be -- how do I forgive myself for forgiving them?

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 17, 2001.

That's the problem, Atheist Corner. There is no good answer.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 17, 2001.

Kind of a self fulling prophecy you have there Tarzan.

Similar to a patient going in to see a doctor but then refussing to tell the doctor where it hurts.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 17, 2001.

Kind of a self fulling prophecy you have there Tarzan.

Make that a self fulfilling prophecy.

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 17, 2001.

If I went to see a doctor and the doctor did nothing but give me a pamphlet telling me to follow it and come back in six months, and if, after following the pamphlet to the letter I came back in six months to hear the doctor say, "No! You did it wrong! Now you will die!" I would not go back to that doctor.

Your god is supposed to be perfect. Yet this same god and his message inspired a dizzying variety of interpretations, the majority of which will send its believers to hell through no fault of their own. Instead of the God of the Gaps you seem to worship the God of the Gotchas, as in "I know it seemed like the right way but it wasn't, and now you'll burn in hell for all eternity for having guessed wrong," This is certainly not a ringing endorsement for your alleged religion.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 17, 2001.

God of the Gotchas

Show me a 'Gotcha'

-- Atheist Corner (Truth or@Consequences.con), May 17, 2001.

Re-read my post. The ultimate "gotcha" is right there in HTML.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), May 17, 2001.

Eve, is it possible that you may have offended someone without your ever knowing it? Is it possible to know exactly what someone else thinks or knows? Is it possible that you may think you know how someone feels about something you've said or done, and yet be wrong? "Forgive us as we forgive others."

Some of the people who hurt us don't know to what depths the pain they cause reaches. That doesn't make what they do ok, it just means that they may not ever realize an apology is necessary. Most people reflect what they have been taught about human interaction through their own experiences. If those experiences are largely negative, if their own feelings are not recognized and responded to appropriately, then they truly do not know what they do.

Ok, so you have one bad apple who knows exactly how s/he hurts you and doesn't give a damn. I'm not saying you have to forgive that person. You could try. Even if you manage to forgive that person, you still don't have to associate with that person.

No behavior arises out of a vacuum. Every behavior has a lifetime of experiences behind it. Children are taught empathy by being shown empathy. I'm not sure there is any other way to do it.

-- helen (abc@b.c), May 18, 2001.

helen,

You've said some wise things; thank you for trying to help. I think at this time, I'd have to fill you in on the facts, but it gets pretty personal. Maybe we can continue this through e-mail.

In general, though, I'll repeat some things for open discussion:

How can we love our enemy?

How can we love God if we have no concept of him/her to begin with?

Should we try to forgive everyone, whether they deserve it or not? If so, why? And how can we do this without feeling we did something wrong by the sheer act of forgiving someone who doesn't deserve it?

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 18, 2001.

Eve, "But if my son ended up torturing and murdering someone . . . had no remorse -- then my son would suddenly be someone so different from who I thought he was - - well, I'm not sure if my "love" for him would ever be quite the same again"

For me the answer is easy. I would never stop loving my children, no matter what they did. They would need punishment for their actions but my love doesn't die. Absolutely, they look different in my eyes. I'd question my teachings, but try to renew and rebuild the child before me.

"If you can "bury" it successfully, then -- couldn't that be enough? How do you do make it just "go away" -- that is, without "burying" it?" Burying it isn't enough. And I think you know that when you say only when someone brings up her name do these bad feelings come to the surface. Burying it is like trying to hide it, pretending it isn't there, turning a blind eye. It doesn't solve the problem. In business, we can decide to do nothing about a situation. It's a very bad decision because the problem doesn't resolve itself on its own, but gets worse. We need to take action to remedy the problem. We make the problem go away by finding a way to make it better, by fixing it. Why wouldn't you do the same in your personal relationships? Don't give up. Even though your first encounter didn't work, try another but from a different angle. Maybe start with the positive aspects of your relationship and go from there. I know it's frustrating. Sometimes I just throw up my hands and walk away. But I always come back to try to improve the situation.

In my mind, "letting it go" is a way of resolving it and releasing the negative emotions. I can't "let go" until I've tried to make amends, or understand my reactions and corrected *my* side of the issue. To me "letting go", different from burying, requires action on my part.

Hope you find what you need.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 18, 2001.

Maria,

[...I would never stop loving my children, no matter what they did. They would need punishment for their actions but my love doesn't die. Absolutely, they look different in my eyes. I'd question my teachings, but try to renew and rebuild the child before me.]

Maria, I didn't say at all that my love would evaporate -- just that it wouldn't be the same. I would never give up on my kids. If I read you right, it actually looks like we probably agree on this one.

[Burying it is like trying to hide it, pretending it isn't there, turning a blind eye. It doesn't solve the problem.]

I disagree. When you know that you're burying it and know why you're burying it -- you're not pretending anything at all. You're just deliberately getting it out of the way so you can function. It's a practical solution, when nothing else has worked. I will keep thinking of ways to fix this one -- but there comes a time when we have to admit failure at something -- when things are in fact out of our control. At some point, in some situations, we have to realize that nothing more can be done, and that it may be time to move on.

Maybe I used the wrong term -- I said "repress" -- which might imply subtle, subconscious processes of pretending something's not there. I should have said "suppress" -- a deliberate, conscious decision to "box something up" in order to function, when there's nothing else you can do.

Thank you for your help, Maria. Some really good points throughout.

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 18, 2001.

Maria, to expand a bit -- another way I know I haven't been pretending is that when the feeling comes back, I'm not surprised in the least. You know, when her name comes up I know the feeling will come back, and it always does -- right on schedule. After a short while, I'm usually able to box it right up again (it DOES take an effort) and get on with my life.

To clarify, this is not someone who's doing anything to me right now. It's someone who did a terrible thing to me one time, realized it, knew she shouldn't have done it -- but never apologized. The facts aren't in dispute. I tried to talk with her, but it just got worse. Yes, it could have been due to some real or perceived wrong that I did to her at some point. But she never mentioned this. So, there's not much I can do.

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 18, 2001.

Eve, I don't know the original text of "love your enemy" before translation. But if it's anything like the English, then Jesus (whoever or whatever you take him to be) probably said it like that for shock value. Retribution against the enemy was the prevailing ethos of the time, from what I understand.

From what I've seen, Eve, you seem to put in a reasonable try at resolving conflicts; in practice, you have a handle on its meaning - doing so in a mature way. I've seen you do it.

When you say repeatedly that no way, no how, do you understand "love your enemy," I think you DO understand it, you just don't like it - or you don't like the wording of it, as the wording flies in the face of certain principles you hold dear. Trouble is, "love your enemy" is not meant literally anyway. I've heard no one say they think it means please act with the same warmth of feeling and desire to be close, towards your "enemy" as you do toward your intimates.

I have my own spin on what it means (for me) and would not try and speak for anyone else, but in a few words, I take "love your enemy" to mean opposition can be a good thing, and to hold understanding and awareness as a higher goal than retaliation (even when retaliation is only in the mind).

So... if its meaning is so loose, then why don't people quit saying it? Immaturity? People pumped up with their own righteousness? People love quoting the Bible for whatever reason? Or because there IS a core of truth in it? All of the above but mostly the latter IMO and it's much the same reason that Shakespearean verse appeals down through the ages. It has a lot of depth in how it is interpreted.

Waffle words... or just my perception that most things where humans are concerned are not black or white.

-- Debbie (dbspence@usa.net), May 19, 2001.

Debbie,

Thanks for your take on the "love your enemy" precept.

I feel that if it was really meant as a precept -- something that people could actually, literally follow -- then it would have been clarified. IN the Bible. FOR the common folk.

The way it's laid out, nobody really knows what it means -- and to actually "love" our enemy (in the sense we'd love a friend, e.g.) makes no sense at all -- so we're just left to ignore it or to try to interpret the "love" right out of it, to bring some meaning to it.

I don't mean this to come off as a rant, Debbie, but it makes me angry to see well-meaning people trying to follow impossible precepts (like this one) to avoid eternal hellfire. To the extent they accept the notion of hell -- the whole thing sounds like a kind of mental torture to me. Nothing a good god would ever want.

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 21, 2001.

If you love your enemy, or to put it another way turn the other cheek, as Jesus said, it means that you are prepared to die rather than strike your enemy.

-- (.@...), May 21, 2001.

I won't attempt to explain the concept of 'love thy enemy' as it relates to the bible. I can do so as I practice it. Love thy enemy ties in directly with forgiveness. I cannot forgive those who attempt to injure me unless I find love for them first. Love transcends base emotions such as anger and therefore I have to find that place from which to heal myself and embrace the offender.

I'll give a recent example. I rent a small apartment in a vacant house which is for sale. The listing agent has repeatedly been discourteous to me. Time and again I've offered to cooperate with him on showing the place to prospective buyers. Courtesy dictates he call ahead to let me know he's coming. He’s yet to do so. Since appealing to courtesy hasn’t worked, I mentioned the Virginia Landlord/Tenant Act, which outlines that reasonable notice must be given the tenant prior to entering the dwelling, except in cases of emergency. His response was to threaten me with eviction. A lovely man.

The listing agent poses a threat to my pets. He's a scumbag who might think nothing of calling the county animal control manager, (who carries a gun and is known to shoot dogs on sight), open the door to my place, let the dogs out and leave the animal control man to shoot my dogs - which he'd have to do as Bingo would never go with him peaceably.

My immediate impulse is to kick this guy's ass in order to thwart the threat. Shattering a kneecap would work. Nobody f*cks with my family.

I'm dealing with anger, dread, physical threats and BS already tendered. If I don't forgive him, the next encounter with this guy could lead to violence. I have to love my neighbor for my own well being.

So I focus on this man and visualize him as a child of god; one of us, not one of THEM. I break down the barriers we've each erected and surround him with love. I remember that I've done some crappy things over the years and this makes forgiving him easier. I realize I know nothing of his life. Perhaps he's suffering tragedy of one sort or another, which fouls his mood and robs him of sensitivity. And loving him gets easier still.

I've found I cannot afford to repress anger. It tears me up physically, comes back to bite me in the ass emotionally, and leaves me in the position of being mere seconds away from acting in a way which would harm another, potentially resulting in my incarceration.

So I practice love thy enemy as best I can – for my own sake.

-- Rich (howe9@shentel.net), May 21, 2001.

So then Maria, by your own wording you are an alcoholic and promise to practice all those principles in each of your affairs. Now we know who keeps making accusations regarding drunks. How else would you know the principles of AA?

-- catching on (one@down.2togo), May 21, 2001.

Maria, helen, Debbie, Rich, and alla y'all else whom I missed...

Rich, thought-provoking points; if I get some more time soon I'll probably want to discuss them.

I don't have time to comment in detail right now, but because of your help, after years of estrangement, I e-mailed this person just a few minutes ago, in hopes of reconnecting. Although, I'm not persuaded of the Biblical perspective, you've gotten me to introspect some more and re-evaluate some of my thoughts and emotions. Thank you all so much -- and 30-second hugs for each of you. :)

Thanks for your comment, "@", but I'll pass on it. It's just too self-sacrificial for me.

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 21, 2001.

Catching on, I'm sorry I've offended you so much. Please accept my apology.

Eve, good news.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 21, 2001.

Eve, now you need to duck and cover just in case your email was not well-received. This is probably a bad time to confess that I concentrate on forgiving DEAD people. The living forgiven often do not appreciate my efforts.

-- helen holds her breath (the@rest.of.the.story), May 21, 2001.