Without attempting to start the usual flame war...

I am reminded of a discussion I had with a minister when I was young about the quality of Christian music. I recall asking him if--aside from the earnestness of the singer and the message he or she was attempting to convey, was it...OK to say, "that's a really lousy song about how much you love Jesus"?

I remember him granting me permission but urging me to at least be polite about it. "It's not one of my favorites," was his suggestion. Well, regardless of the issues involved in Christianity, I must say after reading this piece several times..."It's not one of my favorites."

Best wishes, though, to Darcey on her journey.

Jesus did not have a crisis of faith. Jesus had a crises of physical fear and suffering-- which for Christians makes Him that much more a Diety, in that he proved, in this physical manefistation of doubt, the amazing duality of his humanity and Holiness.

The writers and readers of Salon seem to revel in doubt, ESPECIALLY when it comes to Christianity. Reasonable doubt then leads to multi-facted condemnation.

On an almost daily basis, Salon publishes a story meant to chip away at faith. Certainly there are many stories that would tend to support faith, but it is clear that Salon writers have an agenda-- in many ways no different than the agenda at Fox News-- to project a particular mindset on the readers and claim it is the interest of "fairness" and "truth"

If you believe that the disparity between "good" news about the GOP and "bad" news on Fox News is coincidence, then you might believe that the fact that Salon constantly publishes disparaging stories about faith is "coincidence."

There are other viewpoints that might be considered and discussed.

Case in point, on CNN.com yesterday, the head of the Human Genome Project, a multi-billion dollar, global enterprise involving a great many of the top scientists in the world, and a project on the forfront of understanding the very nature of humanity and how we came to be, explained why he believes in God. Why he is certain there is a God, and why he, as one of the world's top scientists, has valid, scientific reasons for that. He believes, as I do, that the ver DNA that makes up our nature is far too elegant and developed to have happened by chance.

Go read his comments at

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/03/collins.commentary/index.html

I heard in person a few speeches given at Stanford a few years back on the same subject and heard Standford's top scientists applaud the presentation and comment on its validity.

Why, I wonder, did that story not appear on Salon? I wonder.

Coincidence, I suppose.

I had a long conversation the other day about the difficulties of Secular Humanism. This person could not even define the nature of what a person was. Could you?

I can. Faith is very simple for me. The Ten Commandments aren't a rock group for me. They are a set of principles I live by. I spent some time in the wilderness, wondering and wondering. Confused. I had doubt. As maybe you have now.

I didn't sleep well then. I do now. I have read the Bible, the Koran, the Book of Mormon, most of the major works of Zen Bhudism, I've been hypnotised, delved into crystals and Eckenkar and many many other faiths. I have read hundreds of books on science, archeology, cosmology and evolution.

When I say I have no doubt about the personhood of Jesus Christ, that He died for my sins and offers belivers in Him everlasting Life, I say so not out of ignorance or blind, uniformed faith.

I do so as a scholor.

I sleep well, in the Peace of God.

How about you?

I would suggest that the Steinke not be so quick to dismiss other traditions out of hand. Christianity isn't the only game in town.

Shake it off, hon. Shake it off. Cast a much wider spiritual net. Much wider. Only you can do it for yourself.

I believe Salon did write about/interview Collins:

http://www.salon.com/books/int/2006/08/07/collins/index.html

"Case in point, on CNN.com yesterday, the head of the Human Genome Project, a multi-billion dollar, global enterprise involving a great many of the top scientists in the world, and a project on the forfront of understanding the very nature of humanity and how we came to be, explained why he believes in God. Why he is certain there is a God, and why he, as one of the world's top scientists, has valid, scientific reasons for that. He believes, as I do, that the ver DNA that makes up our nature is far too elegant and developed to have happened by chance."

Why do believers tell us again and again how their faith is so strong, how it is based on such depth of study, etc. and then the minute a prominent external authority validates their beliefs they run shouting 'look, look, a scientists believes too'? A person of true faith would need no external authority to feel confident, whether the Bible or the head of the Human Genome Project.

Furthermore DNA is a cobbled together mess which reflects its evolutionary origins and no more shows signs of intelligent design than the macro-organisms it underpins. I am amazed again and again by believers who in the face of genetic diseases, inefficiencies in energy production, junk DNA and countless other signs of our evolved, imperfect nature stand in such wonder at life's supposed 'perfection'. The fact something works is a sign of competence, perseverence and perhaps luck, but not the perfection and omnipotence one would reasonably expect of god.

I am much more naturally drawn towards honest, real-world expressions of religious thought & experience than predictable, dogma-driven sermons. (I don't really think it's Salon's responsibility to provide that sort of thing anyway.) I can really identify with some of Ms. Steinke's feelings, and her struggle to reconcile the horrors of human existence with its joys and simple pleasures... all of which are seemingly given to us by the same God. I especially appreciated the taxi cab driver's thoughts: "Religions are not directly from God. Religion is finite. God is not finite, but infinite." Even though I am an evangelical Christian, I find more and more truth in this point of view as I grow older. People are all too eager to imprison God within a doctrinal framework. But I don't think that's where God is. He's outside of the boxes we construct for him, not inside them. A discomfiting thought, perhaps; but in my opinion, ultimately a liberating one.