Someone recently passed this article on to me, which I posted on another board. It was promptly removed. So sad . . .

Frightening News from France

Once again, the real news in France is conveniently

not being reported as it should. To give you an idea

of what's going on in France where there are now

between 5 and 6 million Muslims and about 600,000 Jews,

here is an email that came from a Jew living in

France. Please read! Will the world say nothing - again - as it did in Hitler's time?

"I AM A JEW -- therefore I am forwarding this to

everyone on all my e-mail lists. I will not sit back

and do nothing." Nowhere have the flames of

anti-Semitism burned more furiously than in France:

Lyon, a car was rammed into a synagogue and set

on fire. In Montpellier, the Jewish religious center

was firebombed; so were synagogues in Strasbourg and

Marseilles; so was a Jewish school in Creteil - all recently.

A Jewish sports club in Toulouse was attacked with

Molotov cocktails, and on the statue of Alfred

Dreyfus in Paris, the words "Dirty Jew" were

painted. In Bondy, 15 men beat up members of a

Jewish football team with sticks and metal bars. The

bus that takes Jewish children to school in

Aubervilliers has been attacked three times in the last 14 months.

According to the Police, metropolitan Paris has seen

10 to 12 anti-Jewish incidents PER DAY in the past

30 days. Walls in Jewish neighborhoods have been

defaced with slogans proclaiming "Jews to the gas

chambers" and "Death to the Jews."

A gunman opened fire on a Kosher butcher's shop

(and, of course, the butcher) in Toulouse , France;

a Jewish couple in their 20s were beaten up by five

men in Villeurbanne , France . The woman was

pregnant; a Jewish school was broken into and

vandalized in Sarcelles , France . This was just in

the past week.

So I call on you, whether you are a fellow Jew, a

friend, or merely a person with the capacity and

desire to distinguish decency from depravity, to do,

at least, these three simple things:

First, care enough to stay informed. Don't ever let

yourself become deluded into thinking that this is

no t your fight. I remind you of what Pastor

Neimoller said in World War II: "First they came for

the Communists, and I didn't speak up, because I

wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and

I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Jew. Then they

came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up,

because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me,

and by that time there was no one left to speak up

for me".

Second, boycott France and French products. Only the

Arab countries are more toxically anti-Semitic and,

unlike them, France exports more than just oil and

hatred. So boycott their wines and their perfumes.

Boycott their clothes and their foodstuffs. Boycott

their movies. Definitely boycott their shores. If

we are resolved we can exert amazing pressure and,

whatever else we may know about the French, we most

certainly know that they are like a cobweb in a

hurricane in the face of well directed pressure.

Third, send this along to your family, your friends,

and your co-workers. Think of all of the people of

good conscience that you know and let them know

that you and the people that you care about need

their help. The number one best selling book in

France is "September 11: The Frightening Fraud,"

which argues that no plane ever hit the Pentagon."

John 12:24 says "except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone; but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit." If that is to be taken literally, how can it bring forth much fruit if it is dead?

Matthew 13:31-32 states that "The kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed... is the smallest of all seeds but when it is grown it is the greatest of shrubs and becomes a tree." If we take that literally, what of all the seeds that are smaller than mustard seeds? And what about the fact that mustard is an herb, not a shrub? And that mustard seeds certainly don't grow into trees?

John 12:21 states that "The same came therefore to Phillip, which was of Bethsaida of Galilee, and desired of him..." Bethsaida was in the province of Gaulontinis, not the province of Galilee.

And to borrow again...

Genesis 6:15: Noah's ark was 300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits in size. We know that a cubit was approximately 18 inches, yielding a volume (if perfectly rectangular, the most voluminous possible shape of three unequal dimensions) of 1,518,750 cubic feet. Into this, you must fit two of each of the 30,000,000 species on earth, plus the food to keep all of them alive for a month.

The author of the flood myth simply didn't understand the extent of faunal diversity in the world. As for the volumetric problem, you don't have to try to fit them to see that it won't work. You can simply calculate that it wouldn't fit by adding the volume of the average sized animal's body, multiplied by the number of species. Excluding bacteria, but including all insects, there are more than 30,000,000 species of land animals on earth. Multiply that volume by two, and add in the volume of food required to keep both of each species alive for as much as twenty years (see below), and its pretty obvious that this isn't going to work. Then there's the time it would take to gather up the 30 million species.

If you gathered a male and a female of one species every ten seconds, it would take about ten years to gather up 30 million of them. And mind you, you've got to go to Antarctica to get penguins, the Arctic to get polar bears, Asia to get tigers, Australia to get kangaroos, Africa to get gorillas, South America to get tapirs and agoutis, etc., and you have got to get them back with an adequate supply of their required food and put them in the Ark within ten seconds. Then when the flood's over, you've got to take another ten years to put them all back at the rate of a species every ten seconds.

Then there are all kinds of ecological questions; how are many delicate marine species going to survive when the salinity of the oceans is reduced by two thirds, as it would have been if a worldwide flood of nearly five miles in depth had occurred? How are species going to survive that require mature ecosystems which themselves require centuries to mature?

If the Bible is only partially literal (I assume you believe in the literal resurrection), how do you determine which other part(s) are not literal?

we know it is not to be taken literally.

So you agree with the position that it is perhaps not best taken literally?

My point exactly, Wheetsin. The story of Noah is beautiful and there is much to be learned from it, but to declare that if we don't take the words literally then we can't possibly understand it is pretty odd to someone like me who has had the benefit of teachings from the Bible her whole life. I don't believe I ever, EVER, thought that Noah and the ark were absolutely real. It's a wonderful lesson, but impossible as a reality.

Some of you seem to be from the group who tried to declare that they had found "THE ARK" on Mount Ararat a while back. It must be pretty important to some people for them to go to so much trouble. Why can't you just have faith and read and study the Bible for what it is?

The rule of interpretation used by virtually students of the scriptures is that you take everything literally except where the context makes it obvious it is not literal, as with the above examples.

The problem with this "rule" is this....who gets to decide which passages should be taken literally and which should not?

My church, at one time, literally interpreted an obscure passage about women covering their heads to pray. For I don't know how many generations, Catholic women wore weird looking lace doilies on our heads when we went to Mass.

The Church of Christ cites one passage from the Bible as evidence that musical instruments should not be permitted in church.

There are scriptures that say women should not cut their hair, and some Fundamentalists would not dream of doing so because they read that as a direct order from God.

See my point? Who's to say that any of these sects are wrong, or that yours is right?

I dunno. The specifics about the ark are pretty, well, specific. If I just wanted to tell a nice story or a "wonderful lesson", I certainly wouldn't go into that much detail, cubits and all.

Furthermore, in Matthew 24 Jesus spoke of the ark and of Noah as very real. I'm much more inclined to take Jesus' word for it.

Like I said, gadgetlady, to each his own.

I dunno. The specifics about the ark are pretty, well, specific. If I just wanted to tell a nice story or a "wonderful lesson", I certainly wouldn't go into that much detail, cubits and all.

Furthermore, in Matthew 24 Jesus spoke of the ark and of Noah as very real. I'm much more inclined to take Jesus' word for it.

Specific though they may be, the dimensions of the Biblical ark would not physically hold two of every species of animal known to man.

Furthermore, in Matthew 24 Jesus spoke of the ark and of Noah as very real. I'm much more inclined to take Jesus' word for it.

So a story in the Bible is true because the Bible says it's true? It would literally be impossible to fit two of every species on Earth on a boat the size of the Ark, not to mention all the different foods that the different species require. Plus, how would you keep the carnivores from eating all the other species? Just say, "Oh well, one less species"?

Specific though they may be, the dimensions of the Biblical ark would not physically hold two of every species of animal known to man.

But it would physically hold two of every kind, which is what Noah was told to bring. Did Noah have to bring both German Shephards and Dalmations? Or was "dog" sufficient?

If you'd like more information about it, go to http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2004/0324ark.asp.

Did Noah have to bring both German Shephards and Dalmations?

German Shepards and Dalmations are not separate species, they are separate breeds, which is an entirely different thing.

But it would physically hold two of every kind, which is what Noah was told to bring. Did Noah have to bring both German Shephards and Dalmations? Or was "dog" sufficient?

If this is true, then you would have to believe in evolution, which you don't. So which is true, Noah's Ark or evolution?

But it would physically hold two of every kind, which is what Noah was told to bring. Did Noah have to bring both German Shephards and Dalmations? Or was "dog" sufficient?

No, it wouldn't hold "two of every kind". Two elephants, two giraffes, two antelopes, two buffalo, two cows, two horses, two kangaroos (hey....how did Noah manage that, since there are no kangaroos in the Middle East?).

Plus, how would you keep the carnivores from eating all the other species?

The Bible says that prior to the flood, neither animals nor humans were carnivores. In Genesis 1, God gives man specifically plants to eat, not animals; this is reinforced throughout the early chapters of Genesis. In Genesis 9, after the flood, man is then given animals to eat.

gadgetlady: At one point you asked how one is to determine which parts of the Bible are literal and which are not. If you have faith you can glean most everything that is intended to be conveyed from the Bible.

If you insist that the Bible is to be taken as literal, and you must determine which parts are literal according to today and which parts are not, won't you be consistently confused? Continually questioning different words and phrases? That is of course, unless you are absolutely certain that your interpretation of the Bible is the only accurate interpretation.