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."

So now gadgetlady jumps off. I'm very disappointed. I really would like to understand her persistence with regard to my above post.

That topic has been nearly beaten to death here, yet it still continues to come up and with such accusing innuendo. Several of us have said over and over that we do not need to have someone prove to us that the Bible is a word-for-word factual account of the words spoken to man by God. To accuse us of having a "salad bar" faith is really uncalled for and judgmental. And closed minded. And self-serving.

And like Ron says a lot, Where do you get this stuff?

Do you think when Jesus held up the bread, He was holding up a piece of his body? Or that it changed into His physical body as He held it up? Because if it didn't, then He didn't mean that literally the bread was His body, because it wasn't literally His body. So if when He did it He wasn't speaking literally about a hunk of flesh, it doesn't logically translate that He would expect us to speak literally about a hunk of flesh.

OK, I'm kind of thinking as I type this, so it may not be clear, so ask if it's not.

To me, the point is that I want to take communion to remember Jesus and the sacrifice He made for me. Whether or not the bread is His body doesn't matter to me, it's not the main point for me.

Does that make sense? (remember, it's Friday afternoon and I may not be thinking well! )

I know you addressed this to Gadgetlady, but I would like to answer you too if you don't mind.

If I am to believe in a God, and I believe that God is perfect, then I also have to believe the the means that God uses to convey the knowledge about himself to his creation must also be perfect. If it is not perfect, then we have nothing on which we can count on to base our beliefs. If Noah's story did not happen exactly as the Bible say's, then how can I rely of the accounts of Jesus being true and perfect. And if that is the case, how can I believe anything, because there is nothing to base it on that I can count on to be true. If the Bible is imperfect in one regard, it is suspect in all regards. That's why, fo me, and for most Conservative Bible believeing Christians, the Bible MUST be literal and true in all areas.

gadgetlady: I could and want to respond to your last post but I will refrain because I don't think that anything I say about it will change your mind about what you feel about what you read. I am glad that those of us who were intensely involved in that discourse took a moment to cool off, laugh together to relieve the tension and to bond. I wish you could have enjoyed it with us.

But I have a very serious question that I would really appreciate an answer to. You have gone on quite a lot about the Bible being literal and if we don't believe that the Bible is a literal tome, we're Christians without what? Direction? Anyway, my actual question is: Why do you think that the Bible MUST be taken as literal?

I for one do not believe that the Noah's Ark story is literally true. I am like Lisa on this, except I believe it with more conviction than she seems to. I do believe that it may be partially true or completely true to the people who wrote about it at the time. Maybe their view of the "world" was 100 miles square. Maybe all of the animals in that square totaled up to about 50, but the point is for me, it doesn't matter at all. I can still learn the lesson of Noah's Ark. I can still feel passionate about Noah and what God spoke to him, but to believe that the all of the earth was under water and that Noah's Ark held 2 of every animal on earth is pure folly.

I know you addressed this to Gadgetlady, but I would like to answer you too if you don't mind.

If I am to believe in a God, and I believe that God is perfect, then I also have to believe the the means that God uses to convey the knowledge about himself to his creation must also be perfect. If it is not perfect, then we have nothing on which we can count on to base our beliefs. If Noah's story did not happen exactly as the Bible say's, then how can I rely of the accounts of Jesus being true and perfect. And if that is the case, how can I believe anything, because there is nothing to base it on that I can count on to be true. If the Bible is imperfect in one regard, it is suspect in all regards. That's why, fo me, and for most Conservative Bible believeing Christians, the Bible MUST be literal and true in all areas.

But Ron, you have said more then once that it's not always literal, when common sense and context make it clear it's not. You have used the Bread/body example if I remember correctly.

I still don't understand how you reconcile that when you make statements like you do above.

And if that is the case, how can I believe anything, because there is nothing to base it on that I can count on to be true. If the Bible is imperfect in one regard, it is suspect in all regards. That's why, fo me, and for most Conservative Bible believeing Christians, the Bible MUST be literal and true in all areas.

Serious question here. Emphasis mine.

When I read that, every time it is stated, it sounds like - "The bible MUST be literal and true in all areas because if it is not, then the basis of my faith is on shaky grounds and I would lose one of the things I hold most dear... so I'm going to close my eyes to any other possibility because if I open them, I might see some scary things out there."

Is that how it is meant?

Some of the beverages that ya'll have included for the party have me wondering, am I the only bandster who was told not to have carbonated sodas? Did they just tell me not to drink them because of the calories?

My DH and I were on a plane a week or so ago and the flight attendant ran out of WATER, can you believe!? And so I tried to think of something quenching that didn't have caffeine and I came up with Sprite. I took two sips and remembered (like God speaking to me from the heavens) THOU SHALT NOT INGEST CARBONATED BEVERAGES. I gulped and asked her to bring me a vegetable juice (ugh).

I guess vodka would mix pretty well with that - hmmm and even provide some roughage if you include a stalk of celery and a twist. Sure can't hurt vegetable juice with that addition.

gadgetlady: I could and want to respond to your last post but I will refrain because I don't think that anything I say about it will change your mind about what you feel about what you read. I am glad that those of us who were intensely involved in that discourse took a moment to cool off, laugh together to relieve the tension and to bond. I wish you could have enjoyed it with us.

Hurtful, hateful behavior is rarely enjoyable for me. As a non-participant, it was really vicious. I have a frown on my face as I'm typing this, because it really was hurtful all around.

But I have a very serious question that I would really appreciate an answer to. You have gone on quite a lot about the Bible being literal and if we don't believe that the Bible is a literal tome, we're Christians without what? Direction? Anyway, my actual question is: Why do you think that the Bible MUST be taken as literal?

I think I explained this in my post last night. In a nutshell, if Jesus considered Old Testament history to be historically accurate, it makes sense that I should too if I profess to follow Him. If, on the other hand, He had given even a hint of its being allegorical, I would have a different opinion.

I for one do not believe that the Noah's Ark story is literally true. I am like Lisa on this, except I believe it with more conviction than she seems to. I do believe that it may be partially true or completely true to the people who wrote about it at the time. Maybe their view of the "world" was 100 miles square. Maybe all of the animals in that square totaled up to about 50, but the point is for me, it doesn't matter at all. I can still learn the lesson of Noah's Ark. I can still feel passionate about Noah and what God spoke to him, but to believe that the all of the earth was under water and that Noah's Ark held 2 of every animal on earth is pure folly.

So instead of global flood you believe local flood? That makes sense; thank you. I don't agree because I think the Bible is pretty specific about it (and Jesus cited it), but if you believe there was definitely a flood of some sort it make a bit more sense to me.

Some of the beverages that ya'll have included for the party have me wondering, am I the only bandster who was told not to have carbonated sodas? Did they just tell me not to drink them because of the calories?

My DH and I were on a plane a week or so ago and the flight attendant ran out of WATER, can you believe!? And so I tried to think of something quenching that didn't have caffeine and I came up with Sprite. I took two sips and remembered (like God speaking to me from the heavens) THOU SHALT NOT INGEST CARBONATED BEVERAGES. I gulped and asked her to bring me a vegetable juice (ugh).

I guess vodka would mix pretty well with that - hmmm and even provide some roughage if you include a stalk of celery and a twist. Sure can't hurt vegetable juice with that addition.

LOL-no I was told to avoid carbonation as well. So, bloody Mary's for everone!

So now gadgetlady jumps off. I'm very disappointed. I really would like to understand her persistence with regard to my above post.

That topic has been nearly beaten to death here, yet it still continues to come up and with such accusing innuendo. Several of us have said over and over that we do not need to have someone prove to us that the Bible is a word-for-word factual account of the words spoken to man by God. To accuse us of having a "salad bar" faith is really uncalled for and judgmental. And closed minded. And self-serving.

And like Ron says a lot, Where do you get this stuff?

So now BJean attacks.

You know, I have a family to feed (literally; I just made them a late lunch), I homeschool my kids, and I run several businesses. I am not averse to answering questions and participating, JUST NOT RIGHT NOW!!!!! I called it "salad bar" faith because I couldn't think of a better term to classify what took me a paragraph in another thread to define.

I'm a very even-keeled person, but you're out of line on this one.

I keep wanting to call you "BJ".

My surgeon never specified. I gave up carbonation because - well - I was down to caffeine free Diet Coke anyway, and what's the point other than eroding my organs?

I have had the occasional sip of DH's Route 44 strawberry limeade.

On flights I always go with apple juice. More carbs than I'd prefer, but have them fill the cup with ice so I'm not really getting more than a few ounces.

The calories are one reason. Some people also have reduced tolerance for the carbonation, and (I perosnally have not come across any evidence of this) some surgeons believe the carbonation can expand and lead to stretched pouches.

Ron, will you agree that our perfect, all wonderful, all knowing God did not physically write the Bible? Will you agree that God spoke to MAN or MEN and that those MEN wrote down what God said to them? And would you agree that MEN are not perfect, like Jesus?

If all of the above are true, then why can't you understand that the Bible wasn't written by God, it was written by men and was inspired by God. I don't care what the Old Testament says, men wrote that too. Get it????

Why can't you understand that people who love and respect the teachings of the Bible do not have to have the Bible be perfect, like Jesus, because nothing, nothing, nothing is?

I don't think you understand what believing the Bible literally really means.

With the account you referred to about Jesus referring to eating His body and drinking His blood, the context makes it crystal clear that He was not referring to canibalism. With the Noah account, there is no clear indication it is not to be taken literal, there is no other clear meaning, and jesus himself gives it credibility by referring to the day's of Noah.

Because you understand what to Bible says literally, does not mean you throw all logic and reason out the window. Everyone make a joke about the "context" thing, but we do exactly the same thing in almost every conversation, book we read or TV show we watch.

The other side of the coin it the alligorical understanding of scripture which in a nutshell means that you can make scripture to mean anything you want it to mean. That makes "truth" a joke!

We look at everything in the Bible to mean exactly what it says, except, when it is crystal clear by what is said, to whom it is said, under what circumastances it is said, etc. that it has another meaning. This is the rare exception rather that a common occurance pertaining to anything of theological value.

But Ron, you have said more then once that it's not always literal, when common sense and context make it clear it's not. You have used the Bread/body example if I remember correctly.

I still don't understand how you reconcile that when you make statements like you do above.

Serious question here. Emphasis mine.

When I read that, every time it is stated, it sounds like - "The bible MUST be literal and true in all areas because if it is not, then the basis of my faith is on shaky grounds and I would lose one of the things I hold most dear... so I'm going to close my eyes to any other possibility because if I open them, I might see some scary things out there."

Is that how it is meant?

Some people need hard and fast rules. They can't tolerate gray area or uncertainty. I'm not saying that is Ron, I don't know him, but I know people who fit what I am saying.

I heard a sermon once comparing faith to those bars on a playground, where you swing from one to the other, hand by hand. That faith is the between times, when you don't have a firm grip on either and there is uncertaintity. Learning to trust God during that time.

gadgetlady: you called my serious question to you an attack? If so, that explains a whole lot.

Hurtful, hateful behavior is rarely enjoyable for me. As a non-participant, it was really vicious. I have a frown on my face as I'm typing this, because it really was hurtful all around.

But you seem to be scolding only us, and not Ron. This would come across as true if you had ever said a word against him. Every single time that I have seen you jump into this thread, you've scolded us for attacking Ron, but you've never scolded Ron for attacking us.