The Jeff Cumberbatch Column – A Nation Under Law – Part 2

Jeff Cumberbatch - New Chairman of the FTC

Jeff Cumberbatch – New Chairman of the FTC

BU shares the Jeff Cumberbatch Barbados Advocate column – Senior Lecturer in law at the University of the West Indies since 1983, a Columnist with the Barbados Advocate

A nation under law – […]– Part 2
By Jeff Cumberbatch

As the Kim Davis matter that I commented on in this space last meanders along in the US, there has arisen a novel constitutional theory in her favour, emanating mostly from untutored Republican presidential hopefuls, that the US Supreme Court is not the final arbiter of the interpretation of the Constitution and that the individual states, and perhaps even dissenting individuals, may decide rather to abide by a ruling that comports with their view of what the Constitution should intend.

Of course, one would have thought that this matter was settled since early in the nineteenth century when it was stated in a seminal decision and not questioned subsequently– “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial branch to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular causes must, of necessity, expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the Courts must decide on the operation of each…So if a law be in opposition to the Constitution, if both the law and the Constitution apply to a particular case, so that the Court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the Constitution or conformably to the Constitution, disregarding the law, the Court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty. If then, the Courts are to regard the Constitution, and the Constitution is superior to any act of the legislature, the Constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply…”

And as if to lend further support to their proposition, many of Mrs Davis’s supporters seek to rely on the old chestnut that the Supreme Court is not supposed to make law, as they argue that it did in the recent decision now under query, but merely to state what the law is. The conundrum here is that the law can only be what it is stated to be by the body charged with the exclusive jurisdiction to do – the Court. Since the constitutional framer of the law, the legislature, is not empowered to state what a provision means except by the use of the clear words it might employ in enacting the statute, it seems certain that this argument is using the expression “make law” in an unnatural and tendentious sense.

Of equal certainty is that the thinly-veiled thesis behind this new view is the theocratic sentiment that any law that is in agreement with Biblical injunction is undeniably superior to and overrides any man-made law; a view, though it might find favour with more than a few Barbadians, and while perhaps sound in theory, finds no application in practical reality, as I sought to show last week in my brief exposition of local laws that both coincide and conflict with this opinion. The inevitable consequence of this formulation ought to be that any identity of local legislation with Biblical injunction is owed rather to coincidence than parliamentary design.

A similar jurisprudential issue now arises in Barbados with the insistence of the Ministry of Labour that even with legislation in place to deal with labour issues, the Protocol signed by the constituents of the Social Partnership still has a role to play. Baldly so stated, of course, there is nothing immediately inaccurate about this.

However, it would appear that the policy may go beyond the mere assertion to contemplate a circumstance where, even if there should be an identity between the two or, even more intriguing, a conflict between them, the Protocol might still take precedence.

What else am I to make of the recent assertion by the Minister with responsibility for labour issues that “we operate under a different system in Barbados. It is not like in some other countries where employers come and they just look at the statute books; we remind our employers that it is not just our statute books, we have a protocol, a Social Partnership, and that guides the spirit of our relationship”?

If the Minister is simply making a point of statutory interpretation – that the provisions of any relevant local legislation should be interpreted, in a manner that lawyers are given to call, “de bene esse”, so as to have its provisions construed consistent with the intendment of the Protocol, the statement is irrefutable.

If, however, as I suspect, the statement purports a subordination of that legislation to the Protocol as a matter of law, then I cannot agree with it. And my disquiet is not owed solely to the validity of its operation in a context where there is a patent conflict between the two provisions in question, but even in one where there the provisions are identical.

The reality is that the Protocol has the status at law merely of a gentlemen’s agreement or one binding in honour only on those who are parties to it. In such a case, there are no legal sanctions that may be applied to any breach of one or more of its undertakings, although it would be expected that moral suasion should suffice to remedy any contravention.

A statute, on the other hand, is legally and morally binding, notorious, and universal in its application. To a society that claims adherence to the rule of law, the statute is an embodiment of good governance, and a representation, at least in theory, of the popular will. To subsume such an instrument under a gentlemen’s agreement would be to elevate the shadow of the thing above its substance.

Clearly, outside of the arguable jurisprudential illegitimacy of the official stance, there is much to be said for the process of mutually respectful social dialogue between industrial partners in the resolution of disputes, and few would deny the global application of this principle in that regard.

To the extent that statute incorporates this ideal, there is little need to refer for authority to the provisions of the Protocol that also do so. To the extent that it does not do so, however, then the legislation must abide the categorisation of being deficient and unsuited to the purpose of modern day industrial relations and should be immediately repealed and re-enacted in compliant form.

There should be, in my view, no need to create a hierarchy of protocol and statutory provisions in order to make this widely accepted point.

91 thoughts on “The Jeff Cumberbatch Column – A Nation Under Law – Part 2

  1. Why Is Scripture the Ultimate Standard for Morality and Ethics?

    Biblical Authority Devotional: Morality and Ethics, Part 1

    by Erik Lutz on March 22, 2011

    Erik Lutz, AiG–U.S., shows why only the Bible provides an absolute standard for morality.

    All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:16–17)
    Today’s big question: why is Scripture the ultimate standard for morality and ethics?

    According to Merriam-Webster’s, ethics is “the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation.” In the upcoming devotionals, we will consider what Scripture states about various ethical issues.

    But why start with Scripture? Although humans are given an inherent sense of good and evil (Romans 1:32, 2:15), that cannot ultimately be our guide for ethics. Without an absolute standard, morality would be relative and dependent on each individual. But morality is not a human invention; it flows from the nature of God, who is eternal and unchanging. Therefore, as much as we may want to, we cannot determine what is right and wrong on our own. Our Creator, the Source of all truth, has revealed what we need to know of right and wrong in His Word.

    Many secularists and liberal scholars acknowledge that the Bible is full of excellent moral teaching, yet ultimately they reject the inspiration or inerrancy of Scripture. This is just another example of how people want to pick and choose what parts of God’s Word they think are true and apply that to their lives as they see fit.

    However, if Scripture were not “God-breathed” truth and 100 percent reliable, how could we trust anything written in it? If any part of Scripture were false, then the whole would be suspect—especially since the Bible claims to be truth without error!

    Jesus Christ, the Son of God, regarded Scripture as the ultimate standard. He claimed,

    “Your word is truth” (John 17:17) and “the Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35).

    Today’s passage shows us all Scripture is truth from God and therefore must be our foundation in every area, “that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” The Bible is our basis for ethics.

    Psalm (119) is devoted to extolling the greatness of the Word of God and makes these claims of absolute, unchanging truth:

    The entirety of Your word is truth, and every one of Your righteous judgments endures forever. (Psalm 119: (160))

    My tongue shall speak of Your word, for all Your commandments are righteousness. (Psalm 119: (172))

    The writer of Psalm (119) explained how to live a moral life. He wrote, “How can a young man cleanse his way? By taking heed according to Your word” (Psalm 119:9).

    Have you been taking heed according to His Word lately, or are you relying on your own standard of “truth”?

    Today’s big idea: the Word of God is truth—the only foundation for right and wrong.

    What to pray: ask God to cleanse your heart according to His Word.


  2. Laws of God vs. the Laws of Man
    Compiled by Steven Montgomery
    October 12, 2002

    “The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted. Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it …. A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.
    — (American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Volume 16, Section 177)

    The idea persisted for centuries that the end of the state is the attainment of justice and that civil authorities act legitimately only when they follow the principles of justice.

    —-[Otto Gierke, Political Theories of the Middle Ages, trans. by F. W. Maitland (Cambridge, 1922), pp. 74ff.; cf. p. 172 for note by Maitland on the theories of natural law in the Middle Ages. “Men supposed,” says Gierke, “that before the State existed the Lex Naturalis already prevailed as an obligatory statute and that immediately or mediately from this flowed those rules of right to which the State owed even the possibility of its own rightful origin.

    And men also taught that the highest power on earth was subject to the rules of Natural Law. They stood above the Pope and above the Kaiser, above the Ruler and above the Sovereign People, nay, above the whole Community of Mortals.

    Neither statute nor act of government, neither resolution of the People nor custom could break the bounds that thus were set. Whatever contradicted the eternal and immutable principles of Natural Law was utterly void and would bind no one. The medieval theory declared ‘that every act of the Sovereign which broke the bonds drawn by Natural Law was formally null and void.’ … As null and void, therefore, every judge and every other magistrate who had to apply the law was to treat, not only every unlawful executive act, but every unlawful statute, even though it were published by the Pope or Emperor.” Ibid., pp. 75, 84. Cf. also, Carlyle, op. cit., I, 174; III, 32, 128; and Gierke, Johannes Althusius und die Entwickelung der naturrechtlichen Staats-theorien, 3d ed. (Breslau, 1913), chap. 6.]

    Life, faculties, production—in other words, individuality, liberty, property—this is man. And in spite of the cunning of artful political leaders, these three gifts from God precede all human legislation, and are superior to it. Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.
    –(Frederick Bastiat, The Law, pp. 5-6)

    “Unconstitutionality is illegality of the highest order.” –(Board of Zoning Appeals V. Decatur Company of Jehovah’s Witnesses, 233 Ind. 83, 117 NE 2nd. 115)

    “An unconstitutional statute is an utter nullity, is void from the date of its enactment, and is incapable of creating any rights.” –(Probst V. Board of Education Lands and Funds, DC Neb 103 F)

  3. Even though I am bound by an humanistic code and a Constitutional right of all having the right to the pursuit of life and liberty.Indeed it is equally hard to throw out or dismiss with good conscience the Rights of Kim Davis to a religious right to freedom of expression .The Constitution in any regard can not be trampled or made mockery in order to satisfy or guarantee any individual or group a law to suffice
    Mrs. Davis also has a guaranteed right by which she abide and the only alternative for rectification should be done by state govt whose has a legal duty to enact legislation to modify and guarantee that no individual rights given by the Constitution is taking away due to Federal laws.

  4. Law of God , LAW OF MAN, law on the street, Kim Davis is the worker is right , KIM DAVIS the Elected is WRONG ,she need to step aside, PUBLIC SERVANT can not take her WORK Personal, She MUST follow the LAW or go right back to JAIL.

  5. @Caswell @9:58pm,

    That was not at all my intention. I was merely seeking to point out the illogic of claiming still to be guided by Protocol after a statute has been enacted and claiming adherence to the rule of LAW!

    I note with respect your use of the word “prolix”. Touche!

  6. It is inevitable, that “THE END-OF-CIVILIZATION QUESTION: Does embracing homosexuality really cause societies to FAIL? Absolutely yes!!!

    Every study conducted by Anthropologist, Historians, Economist, Sociologist, over the course of ancient civilizations, conclusively reveal that most societies throughout history, even the wealthiest and mightiest, have eventually collapsed and died, as a direct correlation to deviation FROM monogamous (man/woman) family unions, to Homosexual behavior, as a direct affront to God’s order for a sound, family oriented society.

    It is one thing for a society to privately, without legalized consent, to practice Homosexuality, BUT, it is an entirely different matter, when as American has recently done, by their highest Court, grant this abominable so-called ‘RIGHT’ to same-sex marriage; and to have the President, Barack Obama, light up the White House,
    with the colours of the Gay and Lesbian standard, and say, as Obama did, I’m paraphrasing him, “…that Justice has prevailed today, like a thunderbolt…” it is safe to say, that history has never produced anything like Obama.

    To openly as Obama did, in “GLORIFYING” same-sex marriage, as sanctioned by LAW, no words can adequately describe what this man has done in bringing Almighty God’s judgement UPON America sooner than most think!!! Watch out for it!!!

  7. Can you name any of these societies, Zoe? And does this mean that the ENTIRE society became homosexual, thereby ensuring the end of heterosexuality there? Or was it just a few individual men and women? Does the right to same-sex marriage compel anyone to engage in it?

  8. @ Zoe
    …all due respect to you and your biblical scholarship ….
    But your assertion of “Absolutely yes!!!” on the question “Does embracing homosexuality really cause societies to FAIL?” …is flawed…
    Homosexuality is not a CAUSE of anything outside of ‘funny’ men and women…
    Indeed, homosexuality is the RESULT of the same shiite that cause societies to fail.

    What happens is that there are certain systemic social failings that, based on high level SPIRITUAL laws, inevitably lead to societal failure. In the process, there are multiple MANIFESTATIONS of trouble….

    For example, in the physical equivalent situation, if we maintain a continuously DIRTY environment, the consequence will be long term chronic illness, diseases, ill-health, and societal decay.
    Unless the damn place is cleaned up, children develop all kinds of diseases and conditions (through NO fault of their own, but due to the DIRTINESS of their elders)
    If this is ignored, things get even worse….

    Same shiite here….

    When a society allows UNRIGHTEOUSNESS to become endemic….
    When a GOVERNMENT can be complicit in stealing CLICO money
    When a PRIME MINISTER can be diverting $3.3M cheques from policyholders…
    When another can COVER UP this nastiness…
    When a Speaker can rob a pensioner and still continue to speak…
    When a former PM can be shown to have taken BRIBES from a leading BANKER
    When a LOTO can be on the payroll of a Four Seasons SCAM against taxpayers
    When a StinkLiar can hand MILLIONS to Maloney/Bizzy/Butch while milking little black land-owners with shiite taxes…..

    What the hell do you expect BBE to do….?

    That is NUFF SHIITE!!!
    It is ongoing and getting worse….
    …and no one is doing ANY cleaning…
    Caswell say it too stink for him…
    Walter run from the smell
    Islandgal prefers BLP shiite to DLP shiite

    ….and Bushie only stirring the whole thing with his big-ass whacker….

    YOU GOTTA GET DISEASES SKIPPA…. Spiritual afflictions!!! ….like bullers, wickers, JAs in leadership, poverty – even among the educated, violence for no reason, fear and trembling in the land….
    …and if there is still no clean-up, the damn place will self-destruct….

    Don’t mislead the blog by blaming the homosexuals. They are (largely innocent) collateral damage CAUSED by the real problem….. BRASS BOWLERY!!!

    Romans 1:18 says it all in unquestionable simplicity… need for any exegesis…. 🙂
    “…..For this reason God gave them up to dishonourable passions.
    For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature;
    and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another,
    …men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error….

  9. @Bush Tea

    Whether through inadvertence or, I daresay, ignorance, you have wrongly sourced the quotation in your last paragraph. It is in fact Romans 1:26 and not 1:18.

    And as a bad lawyer would, you are relying on a reference from the very source that is in issue to prove your point -a true case of “begging the question”.

    But, if indeed the real problem is brassbowlery as you say, then what is the cure? I ask since brassbowlery has been with us from time immemorial. Indeed, some would say that brassbowlery is inherent in man and there is none among us that is free! Romans 1:25 suggests that it might be that it might be because “we have exchanged the truth of God for a lie”. Is this the cure then? What is this truth? And Zoe, I do not need another prolix(!) copy-and-paste.

  10. @ Jeff
    so you expected to stop reading at verse 18….? ALL the rest of the chapter boss… um is too good to ignore…

    Bushie has no problem with being accused of ignorance cause he ain’t no damn lawyer; is not a product of Cave Hill; and in any case, has what is needed to wield a whacker….

    Also …and probably out of ignorance too, Bushie is NOT using Romans as any damn reference….else the bushman would have STARTED with the reference. That was for the benefit of Zoe and those others who are enlightened enough to appreciate the value of God’d word. For others, the point made above is built upon the KNOWN situation with ‘cleanliness’ in everyday life….and the CONSEQUENCES that LACK of cleanliness has for societal health and longevity….

    Then you proceed to ask “what is the cure?”
    shiite man!!…. Must Bushie repeat?….again ?

    Stop the damn thieving…
    Enforce the damn laws…
    Get the ‘learned’ people that you have been producing to live honest lives..
    Do something about CLICO
    Apply the damn LAW to everyone…
    Deal with the lotta CROOKS, BRIBE-TAKERS, oppressors of the weak…

    Operate in a manner that can stand the test of TRANSPARENCY….

    Either show where the above items are flawed ‘cures’, or tell us how you will otherwise make a difference at the Fare Trading Commission…..

  11. Below are several quotes that flesh out Unwin’s conclusions.

    “If the British anthropologist J. D. Unwin is correct in his assessment of society, this present generation in the Western world may be the last one. In his book, Sex and Culture, professor Unwin studied eighty ‘uncivilized’ cultures and compared his results with sixteen ‘civilized’ cultures extending over the last 4,000 years. He found that when strict heterosexual monogamy was practiced, the society attained its greatest cultural energy, especially in the arts, sciences and technology. But as people rebelled against the prohibitions placed upon them and demanded more sexual opportunities, there was a consequent loss of their creative energy, which resulted in the decline and eventual destruction of the civilization. Remarkably, he did not find any exception to this trend.”
    —Janosik, Daniel. “The Fate of Culture in J. D. Unwin’s ‘Sex and Culture’” in Christian Apologetics Journal,
 Vol. 10:1 (Spring 2012)

    Jeff, I trust that was not too ‘Prolix’.

  12. @ Bushie.

    It will take a natural catastrophe ( as occurred in Dominica ) to change Barbados from the den of iniquity you claim it to be.

    There are too many incestuous political and “business” relationships in “likkle Babadus”.

    Most if not all the well meaning “upright” individuals have already been tarnished by “Politics”

    There are also very few Bajans who have the leadership qualities to create a “Singapore”.

    So between you an me Bushie nutten much gine change except the BLP will win the next election…….maybe.

    And round and round we go.

  13. @ Hants
    You just described a terminally ill patient….
    Doctors have to do a similar thing every day to nuff Bajan BBs too..

    ….and do you know that the other brass bowls still eating the same fast-food shiite; still not exercising; still drinking every bit of alcohol they can get in their mouths…. and all got bellies like tubs?

    So you are correct …of course!
    Most likely we will become a formal part of the new Trickidad, Tobago and Brassbados.
    Who knows, the PNM may even exile Kamla back here to Cave Hill …from whence she came….

    There is no bigger curse than to be consigned to be a bowl of brass…..

  14. God’s Wrath on Unrighteousness.

    Roman 1: 18,19, 21, 24, 25a, 26, 27,31b

    “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against ALL ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the TRUTH* in unrighteousness, because what maybe KNOWN of God in manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (vv.18,19).

    “Because, although they knew God, they did NOT glorify Him as God, nor where thankful, but became FUTILE in their thoughts, and their foolish thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.” (v.21)

    FUTILE: (Gk ‘mataloo’) To make empty, vain, foolish, useless, confused. The word describes the perverted logic and idolatrous presumption of those who do not honor God or show Him any gratitude for His blessings on humanity.

    “Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, the the LUSTS of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves.” (v.24)

    “Who exchanged the TRUTH of God for a LIE…For this reason God gave them up to VILE passions. For even their women women exchanged the natural use (Heterosexual) for what is against nature.” (Lesbianism) (vv. 25a, 26)

    “Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use (Heterosexual) of the woman, BURNED in their LUST for one another, men with men (Homosexuality) committing what is SHAMEFUL, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.”(v.27)

    “…knowing that the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but ALSO approve of those who practice them.” (v. 31b) emphasis added.

    BTW, the Legal brain, Obama, said that this discourse is ambiguous, not clear at all regarding Homosexuality! Such is the case of rampant intellectual and linguistic dishonesty!

    Jeff, you ask what is truth? Truth by definition is absolute! Whether you believe that or not!!

  15. Sorry Jeff, your question was not, ‘What is truth.” But, “What is this truth.” Language presupposes logical distinctions!!

  16. @ Zoe
    Truth is what the boss says it is.
    The absolute truth is what the absolute boss says it is…

    …and you done know that BBE run things…. 🙂

    • How can we have an alignment in the arguments that seek to marry secular and non secular motives? Let us agree the state of play says we will have this debate until the end times whenever this eventuality occurs.

  17. @ Zoe
    Skippa…. if Bushie knew that you woulda gone down that “exegesis road” with Romans 1 – the bushman would have left out that bible talk yuh…
    What wrath of God what??!!
    …you ain’t see that Hants just explained the whole thing for you…?

    Hants said….”It will take a natural catastrophe ( as occurred in Dominica ) to change Barbados from the den of iniquity…”

    You must KNOW that he is right as shiite!!…. ent -it?

    …so therefore when God unleashes his ‘wrath against all unrighteousness….’ SURELY you can see that BBE is applying RADICAL SURGERY in order to save the brass bowl patient…?

    …like a surgeon has to resort to the knife after the BB patient ignores all the advice, all the encouragement, all the cajoling, …even the whacking ….. to persist with his brass bowlery …and then end up on the operating table and in intensive care….

    Boss man, wuh the surgeon only trying to save the idiot’s life….
    What wrath what??!!

    • @Bushie

      You need to appreciate there are the arguments taking place concurrently at the individual and the national level. We have to be careful not to retreat to a reductive positions, there is a lot more to Jeff’s ‘prolix’. Prolix is too harsh, more an exposition.

      Sorry Jeff, could not resist!

    • Yes Bushie, what humankind is experiencing will continue until the end of time as we know it. The temporal world will likely win out because if you accept this is a secular world we live in. Even those who profess to practice religion do so behind a veil of hypocrisy. Let us take the Catholics for example.

      Yes Bushie, posit is a better word!

  18. @ David
    Who needs an alignment?
    Why is it important that the goats in Lowdown’s farm have their philosophical theories correctly ‘aligned’ with Bushie’s top-man Hoad’s?

    ..those goats could have whatever theories they wish; give each other horns, degrees, butts and what ever the hell they want…
    …Hoadie will STILL milk their asses in the morning, cook one ever so often in a stew, and decide which ram getting the poo-nanie…. and when…

    The ONLY reason BBE even cares that we ‘align’ is because they possess this characteristic called ‘LOVE’ …that works even on brass bowl bajans…

  19. @ David
    No one can question Jeff’s posit. It is sound and beyond reproach.

    In such circumstances, skilled debaters tend to focus on the assumptions and foundational concepts that the proposer has taken for granted.

    …so even though it is clearly idiotic to pass a law that says ‘A’ … and then invoke a tradition that says ‘B’, such idiocy should not be surprising in an environment where CLICO seems to be a ‘fiat accompli’, CAHILL is a work in progress and mountains of other known ILLEGAL acts have been routinely taking place at the highest levels…

    The problem is therefore MUCH more basic than is portrayed here by Jeff…. It is like highlighting the ill-fitting underwear on an accident victim who clearly has spinal injury…

  20. Jeff

    Re: Your comment at 7:37 a.m.

    Most times when I read you work, I learn something new and I make careful note and use them when the need arise. I learn a lot from you. Prolix is just the latest example.

  21. To all the religious zealots

    The Bible is not the Constitution of the US A and the Constitution is not the Bible regardless of how many quotations religious zealots reference to prove their approval or disapproval of any subject the fact remains that the US A is a secular society which means they are differing racial !religious !and culture differences
    Therefore the founding fathers in their utmost wisdom wrote a bill of Rights with inherited guarantees solidfy on morals grounds with an equality to benefit all.

  22. @Caswell, that was just a friendly jab in jest. Thanks for your kind words.

    @Bush Tea, I agree that there are perhaps greater ills that I could expand on, but mine is just a weekly column of frequently fewer than 1200 words which itself is a concession on the part of the publisher of the Advocate. That is why I respect this blog as a necessary element of our democracy. Whether wrong or right, there is always a forum to express one’s views on a plurality of topics, even anonymously if one chooses. The modern politician has it much harder than those who were free from our question and whom we revered in the past…there is very little that may be hidden from public view nowadays with the existence of BU, however it might be explained away by partisan faithfuls.

    I ask again, this time in a different way, Is there any hope for Barbados in your futuristic thesis? And what must we do? Or are we damned and doomed, in your view?

    @David@ 1:01pm -For the second time today, touché!

    @AC, you are mostly right!

  23. The easiest job in Barbados is Government Minister. He has the power to get an expert opinion for everthing.

    If a Minister called Jeff Cumberbatch and said “” Jeff man I dealing wid this ting hey an people tellin me bout protocol overule leglislation. Dah is true?

    Jeff would give him the correct answer for free.

    Now don’t let me get started with the fact that a Minister has a permanent secretary who can be tasked to find the answers to any question.

    Of course you would have to be intelligent, personable and be guided by a desire to serve the people who elected you.

    • Hants

      They did not have to bother Jeff, they only had to read my column and on BU. I made that point some time ago. A sensible minister would have checked especially since I was so bold as to reduce that opinion to writing. But you see the problem here, we don’t have a sensible minister.

      Sent from my iPad


  24. @ Jeff
    Bushie respects the constraints under which you attack these issues, and indeed has great admiration for the extent to which you have been able to squeeze some blood from the Advocate stone so far in this regard.

    Hopefully you can forgive the bushman for piggy-backing on your contributions to get some extra whacking done… You must have noted that having to clean up the lotta shiite daily from Dompey and TWO resident ACs has taken a toll on the whacker… It is therefore refreshing to be able to whack some intelligent grass from time to time……it will be even more useful when you overcome your youthful (and misguided) dismissal of ‘things spiritual’ and begin to ask the REALLY important questions in life…

    …that will bring a whole new perspective to your musings….

    Is there any hope for Barbados…?
    Barbados has arguably been one of the most blessed places on this whole Earth… from multiple perspectives…
    With such a silver spoon in our mouth, we SHOULD have become a role model for other less fortunate (lucky / blessed) peoples…. a point of reference for social development, for leadership, education, and nation building.
    Instead, we have allowed ourselves to be distracted with selfish materialistic greed and, as a result, we now find ourselves even worse off than others who have endured hurricanes, floods, wars, racial strife and other REALLY challenging setbacks that largely eluded us….
    It can ONLY be described as brass bowlery.

    Unless we wake up to what is happening; get a grip of ourselves; refocus on a national vision for education, progress and restoration; and embrace LAW, meritocracy, fairness and rightness as national ideals…WE ARE DOOMED as a viable country…

    Critical to avoiding such doom will be the emergence of new enlightened LEADERS who are capable of implementing such change….

    You game…?

    • On the subject of vision please can anyone tell why the government decided to dig up Roebuck Street when schools reopened?

    • Somebody needed a kickback at this time. What other reason could there be.


  25. @Bush Tea, Sept 13,2015, to Jeff.

    Then you proceed to ask “what is the cure?”
    shiite man!!…. Must Bushie repeat?….again ?

    Stop the damn thieving…
    Enforce the damn laws…
    Get the ‘learned’ people that you have been producing to live honest lives..
    Do something about CLICO
    Apply the damn LAW to everyone…
    Deal with the lotta CROOKS, BRIBE-TAKERS, oppressors of the weak…

    Operate in a manner that can stand the test of TRANSPARENCY….

    Sorry BT, all of the above remedies you offer for B’dos, is nothing but plain ‘Good works’ none of which can SAVE anyone, as NO ONE, or any Country can be saved by cleaning up all of the ‘mess’ that you have correctly identified; as what is NEEDED, is ‘REPENTANCE’ first and foremost to God, and a surrendered heart and life to His Lordship, FAITH and TRUST in Jesus Christ our Lord.

    The fundamental, core problem IS* SIN, individually and collectively, and must FIRST be dealt with, according to God’s Word.

    REPENTANCE, meaning a turn away from SIN, in its varied manifestations!

    No amount of societal cleansing from all that you identified, can be effectively beneficial, without the CORE problem of SIN, being addressed FIRST!

  26. “RIGHTEOUSNESS exalts a nation, But SIN is a reproach to any people.” (Prov. 14:34)

    Laboring and Prospering with the Lord.

    “UNLESS the Lord builds the house ( man, woman, family, nation) they labor in vain who build it. UNLESS the Lord guards the city, the watchman stays awake in vain.” (Psa. 127:1) emphasis added.

    Any other humanistic, philosophical, good works oriented efforts, are simply ‘superficial’ applying a plaster to the ‘SORE’ without getting to the ROOT cause, SIN!!!

  27. “For by GRACE (unmerited favor) you have been SAVED through FAITH, and that NOT of yourselves; it is the GIFT of God, NOT of WORKS, lest anyone should BOAST.” (Eph. 2: 8,9) emphasis added.

    However, IF one is Saved, then GO and do good works, only then does it mean anything to God.

    “For we are His WORKMANSHIP, created IN* Christ Jesus FOR good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.”

    Any other sequence, applied by man-made efforts, is tantamount to the Cart pulling the horse!!!

  28. @ David who wrote ” why the government decided to dig up Roebuck Street when schools reopened”

    I just read this in Nationnews “the school had water tanks but they were solely to facilitate the toilets and were not used for washing hands or drinking.”

    How can you have people using toilets but no water to wash their hands? mmmmmm

  29. Steupsss @ Zoe
    Obviously Jeff was asking about ‘cure’ from his perspective as a citizen…and not from a spiritual angle..
    You need to stop interpreting everything from the perspective of your church dogma.
    If a man ask about water do you give him vinegar…?

    …where GP?
    you left him in Tibet? or did that big earthquake tek him during an intense exegesis…? 🙂

  30. Bush Tea September 13, 2015 at 10:41 PM #
    Steupsss @ Zoe

    “Obviously Jeff was asking about ‘cure’ from his perspective as a citizen…and not from a spiritual angle..”

    “You need to stop interpreting everything from the perspective of your church dogma.”

    “If a man ask about water do you give him vinegar…?”

    First Bush Tea, I do NOT have any Church Dogma, that’s man-made; I interpret from sound Biblical Hermeneutics, and Linguistic Exegesis!

    Secondly, a man might ask for water, not knowing he needs Vinegar!!

    “For the message of the Cross is FOOLISHNESS to those who are perishing, but to us who are being Saved it IS* the power of God.
    For it is written:”

    “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, And bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.”

    “Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made FOOLISH the wisdom of this world.” ( 1Cor. 1: 18,19, 20).

    The wisdom of the wise is often folly, the understanding of the understanding is often rejected. There is such a thing as the ignorance of the learned, the wisdom of the simple-minded. God’s wisdom rises in the Cross sheer above human philosophizing, which is still scoffing at the Cross of Christ, the consummation of God’s power.

  31. Think on this: “If my people who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and forgive their sin and I will heal their land.” (II Chronicles 7:14)

    Pray on this: Gracious Father, move your people, by your Holy Spirit to follow the guidance of II Chronicles 7:14 and bring healing to our land. In Jesus’ name AMEN!

  32. Again religious Zealots. Not everyone reads the Bible
    Not everyone reads The Koran
    There is also the aethesist and what about all other religiona whose doctrines are based on nature.
    Pray tell me how is one religion based on the teachings of the bible enough of a cure to heal the worlds problem
    Most Christians have a simplistic and narrowedminded thinking of the world just similar to those of ancient religions( although such thinking can be excused giving the limitation of acess ) however what religionist needs to reconigize is that the world has expanded way beyond biblical teachings and looking solely to the bible for answers limits one mind to realities and looking only to one source for answers.

  33. “That was not at all my intention. I was merely seeking to point out the illogic of claiming still to be guided by Protocol after a statute has been enacted and claiming adherence to the rule of LAW!”

    It appears that commentators perhaps out of deference for your scholarship are giving you a pass. I too will give you a pass because I recognize as you belatedly do that it might be necessary at times to resort to prolix to reinforce a point.

  34. Religion, i.e., Hinduism, Islam, et al world religions, are man-made, aided and abetted by Satan, keeping vast numbers of humanity is religious ritualism, bondage, that brings NO peace or liberation from the SIN-stained soul of man.

    Whereas, Christianity in its purest most simple Biblical form, IS* a living , life changing spiritual reality that has been, and continues to be experienced by every known ethic group of people across the earth, and IS* growing more rapidly than any other ‘religious’ faith.

    Peace, joy, and true purpose through the forgiving of our SIN, as we accept The Lord Jesus Christ, into our hearts and lives, is the common testimony EVERY where, in every country, it has NOTHING to do with religious formalism or ritualism, as is found in other world religions.

    Christianity IS a personal relationship with Almighty God, the ONE true and living God, through His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ.

    Choose this day whom you will serve??

  35. Point being looking to one source

    Stifles ! Stagnates! Confuses! creates indecisiveness! limits!

    Having unlimited choices

    creates rationality ! gives reason to Contemplate ! to understand! Stimulate ! Observe! decipher! differentiate! and most importantly to decide.
    Yes the bible is one source but not the only source man was created with the ability to think whether or not the choices made are good or bad making choices is a necessary apparatus for mankind survival.

  36. Only ONE source to Life and NOT Die! The Bible, God’s Word.

    “And the Lord God commanded the man (Adam), saying, ‘Of every three of the garden you may FREELY eat: BUT of the tree of the knowledge of GOOD and EVIL, you shall NOT eat, for in the day that you EAT of it, you shall SURELY DIE.”

    In the lush natural reserve (Eden) that God created, were found two trees, that are the KEY to EVERYTHING that follows in ALL human history. They were the physical means God used to transact spiritual realities. The tree of LIFE is associated with experiencing the LIFE of God, including immortality. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil, represents human autonomy, that is, SELF-RULE, an assumed independence FROM God in all areas of life.

    The Bible gives an account narrative, though briefly, what happened after Adam choose to DISOBEY God, and first DIE Spiritually, then physical DEATH, which followed on in ALL of his offspring, and the entire human race, bar NONE!

  37. Almighty God, created ALL things good. He created a perfect world. He did not create Adam to ever die, that is physically nor spiritually.

    The only ancient religious historical document, that gives an divinely inspired account, not in any great detail, but sufficiently implied reference, to the FACT that Adam was created, morally perfect, but, with FREE WILL moral agency, to CHOOSE, either to obey, his Creator, and LIVE, in perfect harmony with God, NEVER to die physically nor spiritually.

    God did not create Adam a robot; He created him morally perfect, never to die. But, He gave Adam volitional FREE WILL, as having the ability to Love his Creator. To freely obey requires CHOICE, as does the moral capacity to CHOOSE to disobey.

    “…the day that you (Choose) to (Disobey) you SHALL surely DIE.” (Genesis 2: 17b)

    This WAS the beginning of the entrance of ‘Original’ Sin, into the human race, when Adam freely choose to disobey his Creator, and he thus experienced the first DEATH, this is spiritual DEATH, for Adam was now for the first time, estranged FROM fellowship and perfect communion with Almighty God, his Creator.

  38. @ Mr. Cumberbatch

    Long time that we have not spoken.

    Congratulations on your recent appointment albeit that you are going to the place that I, given my recent encounters with LIME, and their ineffectual interventions on my behalf, now also refer to as the Fear Trading Commission.

    I must say that I enjoy your articles, here and elsewhere, because of the way your mind words and how you are able to arrive at a position.

    I should first state that I used your interpretation here quite selfishly.

    I saw that, while speaking here regarding a Protocol, you state “the reality is that the Protocol has the status at law merely of a gentlemen’s agreement or one binding in honour only on those who are parties to it

    You then went on to state that with regard to a Statute you state “A statute, on the other hand, is legally and morally binding, notorious, and universal in its application.

    That is quite informative and I just wondered if you might care to reaffirm your statement “to the extent that statute incorporates this ideal, there is little need to refer for authority to the provisions of the Protocol that also do so.”

    But more specifically that part where you state that “to the extent that it does not do so, however, then the legislation must abide the categorisation of being deficient…”

    Of course, Mr. Cumberbatch, I know you to be a man of your word, unlike ** and ** the so called super luminaries at ***, and a man who does not employ a Law for the Medes and another for the Persians, so I KNOW THAT WHEREVER YOU GO, no one will ever be able to say that the FTC or any entity can cause you to shift from your stance when you know something to be an injustice.

    And yes, you already know that I was/am referring to the absence of the incorporation into the Laws of Barbados of that Protocol of Immunity under the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramus believing as firmly as I do in your statement that “the legislation must abide the categorization of being deficient..”


    Exclusive: Joseph Farah offers interpretation of oft-cited Romans 13
    Published: 7 hours ago

    Ever since I can remember, I’ve been attacked by people who call themselves “Christians” for suggesting civil disobedience is not only a justifiable course of action against unjust governments but one that is required by genuine, God-honoring believers.

    When I saw Kentucky County Clerk Kim Davis attacked in the same way for refusing to participate in the clear violation of God’s laws with regard to marriage, an institution He invented, I decided it was time to set the record straight – once again.

    The so-called “Christians” who take this “government-first” position cite Romans 13 as their scriptural reference. Here’s the relevant part (Romans 13:1-7):

    “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

    “Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

    “For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

    “For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

    “Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.

    “For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.

    “Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.”

    Some make the point that Paul was talking to Roman believers, and Rome, after all, was a tyranny that was persecuting them – feeding them to the lions, crucifying them, making sport of them in the Colosseum.

    At first glance, it might appear to make some sense to suggest Paul, an apostle, was suggesting that Christians should never disobey government authorities. And didn’t Jesus Himself say we should “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s”?

    To that question, of course, the answer is, “Yes, He did. But that’s not all Jesus said. He also said: ‘and unto God the things that are God’s.’”

    Big difference. Because all things are God’s.

    And it should be clear from scripture that’s what Paul was saying, too.

    Peter was commanded by the high priest, Ananias, and the elders and leaders of Israel to stop preaching the Gospel. He answered: “Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard” (Acts 4:19-20).

    In other words, if given the choice of breaking God’s commandments or the commandments of earthly rulers, Peter said there was no choice.

    Peter was later imprisoned by these same rulers for continuing to preach. When an angel of the Lord freed him, he went right back out and preached, again. Confronted by Ananias and the other rulers of Israel, Peter responded: “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).

    Well, you might say, Peter and Paul had disagreements, no? Not on this matter.

    Paul was also arrested by Ananias – brought before him and beaten. What did Paul say?

    “God shall smite thee, thou whited wall: for sittest thou to judge me after the law, and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law?” (Acts 23:3)

    The elders and rulers said to him: “Revilest thou God’s high priest?”

    Paul responded: “I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people” (Acts 23:5).

    In other words, there’s a time for speaking evil of the ruler of your people. That time is clearly when the ruler of your people stands between you and your God.

    Those who seek to end the debate about civil disobedience on the basis of Romans 13 do so by citing scripture that is out of context. David, a man after God’s own heart, raised up an army to oppose Saul. Peter disobeyed authorities. Paul did.

    Using the entirety of Romans 13, rather than simply the first seven verses, helps bring clarity to Paul’s point. Paul goes on in that very same chapter to explain that it is the law of God, not the law of men, that is sacrosanct.

    Further, I would point out that those who cite only the first seven verses of Romans 13 regarding civil disobedience and make doctrine of it are in very poor company historically.

    America’s founding fathers, all of whom were very knowledgeable of the scriptures, rose up in rebellion against their rulers.

    Do you know who cited only the first seven verses of Romans 13 to make the case that national leaders must be obeyed by Christians?

    Adolf Hitler.

    When the Germans took over Norway, the Nazis published a schoolbook misapplying Romans 13: “What are those called in Romans 13:1 who God has set over us? Have you considered that your parents, your school teachers (your principal), policemen, police chief, judges, the priest, the bishop, the county commission, the state government, are the authorities who are installed by God, and that you owe them obedience? … Overall, we owe the Fuhrer and the government obedience. If you set yourself up against the authorities and against the state, you are standing against God’s structure and are subject to punishment.”

    Should Christians always obey government?

    The answer is obvious. That’s not what the Bible instructs.


  40. “Should Christians always obey government?”

    ‘Whose image and inscription is this? Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s’.

  41. @ balance
    …perhaps what Caesar deserves may be the gallows….
    In which case, should THAT not be ‘rendered’ unto him…?

  42. @Zoe, Balance’s reference @6:06am is far more apposite to the issue under discussion than the tendentious philosophizing by Mr Farah in your extract. His goes directly to the biblical resolution of the conflict. Mr Farah’s argument is seeking principally to justify Mrs Davis’s conduct and thus far more subjective. If one is seeking to justify an infringement of legislation, then that justification must be inherent in the legislation itself and not based on subjective belief.

    Should the citizen pay taxes or tithes? Or both? Or neither?

  43. @ Jeff
    Sir, you keep short-changing yourself in your respect for, and treatment of ‘laws’ made by fallible fools as if they were ‘absolutes’. All Caesar is able to decree is that, to the extent that he is able, his will shall be the enforced…
    In the overall scheme of things…. to what extent has Caesar REALLY been able to persevere…. ?

    A man of you intellect MUST be able to see past the superficialities of such ‘laws’….

    This is like us giving the youth parliament leave to enact their own ‘laws’ to govern their youth operations…
    What would stop them passing a ‘youth law’ to pay themselves $1m each per month?
    ..or from lowering the age of consent to 8 so that they could have more fun?

    But in the overall (ADULT) scheme of things such ‘laws’ would be laughable…. just as our mock laws are laughable from the more enlightened SPIRITUAL perspective.

    We are only demonstrating that we are totally unworthy of being considered for future appointment in the higher parliament….. 🙂

  44. Jeff Cumberbatch September 16, 2015 at 8:50 AM #

    @Zoe, Balance’s reference @6:06am is far more apposite to the issue under discussion than the tendentious philosophizing by Mr Farah in your extract. His goes directly to the biblical resolution of the conflict. Mr Farah’s argument is seeking principally to justify Mrs Davis’s conduct and thus far more subjective. If one is seeking to justify an infringement of legislation, then that justification must be inherent in the legislation itself and not based on subjective belief.

    Sorry Jeff, Mr. Farah’s ‘rightly dividing’ of God’s Word in its proper contextual application, is sound hermeneutically, its your ‘natural’ mind that simply cannot, will not, does not understand the things of God, and his Word.

    For it is written:

    “But the natural man (psuchikos de anthropos) DOES NOT receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are FOOLISHNESS to him, nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” (1 Cor. 2: 14) emphasis added.

    The ‘psuchikos’ man, like you Jeff, is the spiritually unregenerate man, while the ‘pneumatikos man, is the renewed man, ‘Born Again’ of the Spirit of God.

    The inability (oude gar dunatai) of the mind of the flesh to receive the things of the Spirit untouched by the Holy Spirit. Certainly the initiative comes from God whose Holy Spirit makes it possible for us to accept the things of the Spirit of God. they are no longer “foolishness’ (moria) to us as was once the case.

    Today one notes certain of the ‘intelligensia’ who sneer at Christ and Christianity in their own blinded ignorance. “He cannot know them” (ou dunatai gnonai). He is not able to get knowledge (ingressive second aorist active infinitive of ‘ginosko’). His helpless condition calls for pity in place of impatience on our part, though such a one usually poses as a paragon of wisdom and commiserates the deluded followers of Christ.

  45. Avoid Worldly Wisdom.

    “Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you seems to be wise in this age, let him become as a fool that he may become wise.”

    “For the wisdom of this world IS FOOLISHNESS with God. For it is written: ‘He catches the wise in their own CRAFTINESS>” (1 Cor. 3: 18,19) emphasis added.

    Craftiness. Gk. panourgia (pan-oorg-ee-ah); Versatile, cleverness, astute knavery, sophisticated cunning, unscrupulous conduct, evil treachery, deceptive scheming, arrogant shrewdness, and sly arrogance. Used only five times in the NT. It refers to Satan’s deceiving Eve ( 2 Cor. 11:3); the Pharisees trying to trick Jesus (Luke 20:23); the deception of false teachers (Eph. 4:14); the self-entrapment of the worldly wise ( 1 Cor. 3:19); and the improper method of presenting the gospel ( 2 Cor. 4:2)

  46. Since the occult can be interperted as a belief in the “spirit world .Then one”s belief in Christianity can be define as a derivative of the occult since similar beliefs and traits are design to belief in the dead as having super natural power from a supernatural source especially Christianity recognition of the resurrection and Christians belief of being able to communicate with a spiritual source who has been known to be dead and no longer lives in this world in the flesh

  47. @ AC
    …your above makes about as much sense as someone surmising that since you are clearly a jackass based on the level of your thinking, …then surely you must also have four feet and a damn tail….

  48. @ Bush Tea, if your “higher parliament” is located in a theocracy, then I am afraid that you must immediately count me out! You must also instruct me sometime as to the manner of enforcement of your spiritual laws.

    @Zoe, if you were advocating a thesis that you wanted as many others as possible to agree with or follow, would you not first seek to exclude those whom you knew would question it by trivializing all their opinions as those of uninitiated men who think themselves wise but are not so in fact…at least according to you?

    As Bush Tea used to say” What psuchikos what”!

  49. whatever ! a some what expected hypocritical response from a deputy dawg who always question the God head figure three persons in one God call the Trinity
    Or are you now conceding that the three headed God head is not an imagation but a deity within itself to be one God

  50. @ Jeff
    “You must also instruct me sometime as to the manner of enforcement of your spiritual laws.”
    Fair enough….

    …but if you don’t see with your own eyes – the kind of results we are getting in ALL areas of life … a time of unprecedented wealth, ‘knowledge’, ‘learning’, information, high-technology and supposed ‘enlightenment’, …then you must have another viable explanation other than the obvious…. that BECAUSE said ‘unprecedented knowledge’ is at variance with THE spiritual laws, the results we see reflect what is dictated by THE all-pervasive spiritual laws and NOT what we would expect having applied our best human skills and laws…

    For example, while it may seem very wise to us to be welcoming and engaging with homosexuality, and while we all may pass ‘laws’ to legitimise and normalise the practise, in reality, the consequences for society do not seem to reflect a movement towards utopia… Indeed we are seeing growing despair, conflict and hopelessness….
    Which ‘Law’ then, do you see being ‘enforced’ in this case sir?
    It all seems very clear to Bushie right now….
    But if you (and most others) are in need of more forceful ‘instruction’ into the realities of life, then unfortunately, we won’t have very long to wait….

    When smokers ignore advice to stop; ignore initial warning signs; and refuse the loving advice of friends, they often are finally ‘instructed’ by the cruel enforcement of mother Nature… ..some even come to see the folly of their previous thinking…

    Hopefully when it comes, we will take the enforcement in the spirit given….

  51. @ Zoe
    If you had studied Mathematics instead of theology, then you would have known that you cannot start from the basis that 1 plus 1 equals 2 in order to prove that 2 plus 2 equals 4.

    Besides, you yourself barely understand these scripture verses that you quoting ..and yet you somehow expect that unbelievers will be somehow moved by them…?

    This is why Bushie asked you and your side kick GP those basic questions that sent you back to exegesis 1.01. (still awaiting the answers… 🙂 )
    Answer Bushie this…
    Why do you think it is that Jesus made it his business to lime with fishermen, bushmen and other block- people? He could easily have made an impact in upper society….

  52. @ Jeff,

    “Zoe, if you were advocating a thesis that you wanted as many others as possible to agree with or follow, would you not first seek to exclude those whom you knew would question it by trivializing all their opinions as those of uninitiated men who think themselves wise but are not so in fact…at least according to you?”

    “…at least according to you?” No, Jeff, according to the Word of God, ‘rightly’ divided, the Word forever settled in Heaven, will judge you!

    @Bush Tea, Lest the BU family forget, it was YOU Bushie, who openly stated here, that “I WILL BE GOD” you went even beyond Lucifer, who said, “I will be LIKE the Most High” (Isaiah. 14:14b)

    PRIDE. the word ‘pride’ means ‘inordinate self-esteem, conceit, vanity, self-exaltation” or “to be lifted up in smoke. The opposite character quality is humility, modesty, lowiness and meekness.

    Proverbs 16:18- PRIDE goeth before destruction an an HAUGHTY SPIRIT before a fall.” Certainly applicable to Satan and the angels who fell, and of course, to such arrogant self-appointed gods, like Bush Tea!

  53. @ Zoe
    Sometimes you can be such an ass…
    …so if God ‘gave his only begotten son, so that those who believed in him could have everlasting life’ how did you think that these believers will achieve this ‘eternal life’ feat?
    …cod liver oil?

    Perhaps it is time for you to stop this exegesis shiite and use some common sense.. cause the boss bushman has gone to prepare a place for bushmen, …so that where HE IS, so they shall be also….while you will be back in Nepal on some mountain trying to work out how the Trinity adjusted when Jesus was dead…. LOL ha ha

  54. Bush Tea September 16, 2015 at 9:03 PM #

    @ Zoe

    Sometimes you can be such an ass…
    …so if God ‘gave his only begotten son, so that those who believed in him could have everlasting life’ how did you think that these believers will achieve this ‘eternal life’ feat?
    …cod liver oil?

    “…how do you think that these believers will ‘ACHIEVE’ this ‘eternal life'”

    Achieve, verb, PERFORM, execute. The GIFT of eternal Life, in Christ, is NOT achieved, it CANNOT be worked FOR or achieved.

    “And this IS* the testimony: that God has GIVEN US ETERNAL LIFE, and this LIFE is in His Son. He who HAS the Son HAS LIFE; he who does NOT have the Son does NOT have life.”

    “These things I have written to you who BELIEVE in the name of the Son of God, that you may KNOW that you have ETERNAL LIFE, and that you man continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.” (1 John 5: 11-13) emphasis added.

    The ‘Gift’ of ‘Everlasting Life’ which IS* given, (not achieved!) and received at the point of the ‘New’ Birth, being “Justified” ‘Saved” and never ceases, as is emphatically confirmed in numerous instances in the New Testament, where believers ARE grammatically said to HAVE EVERLASTING LIFE, as a ‘Present Possession’.

    Therefore, in 1 John 5: 11-13, the apostle uses the present indicative tense, in the Greek, which means the believer HAS* EVERLASTING LIFE, NOW* it never ceases, at physical death, (goes into soul sleep, NO, NO, NO!) because he POSSESES Jesus Christ NOW!

    Bush Tea, your problem as I’ve said to you before, is that you have an add-mixture, other un-scriptural, mystical, spiritualistic beliefs, ALL mixed up with the Word of God, the Bible!!!

    Cannot work, Bushie!!!


    Nation pummeled by weather oddities on Jewish New Year
    Published: 4 hours ago


    An Israeli National Parks worker says a number of strange and frightening weather events, including one that came just as the nation was celebrating the Jewish New Year, have caused alarm.

    Extreme heat, sandstorms and floods all have been reported.

    “It felt like the apocalypse, the rain has been torrential, there were about 10 lighting strikes in seconds, and even with your windshield wipers on high, it was impossible to see anything.”

    That report in the Times of Israel from Mark Katz described just one of the recent developments: flash flooding and hail that hit earlier this week just as the nation was celebrating the new year.

    Breaking News Israel cited Job 38:22-23 in its report on the weather: “Have you entered the storehouses of the snow, or have you seen the storehouses of the hail, which I have reserved for the time of distress, for the day of war and battle?”

    The report said several “extreme” weather conditions have appeared since the beginning of September. The weekend events arrived just as the Shemitah year was drawing to a conclusion.

    The WND Superstore’s library on end times writings is all available online, from “The End” to “Apocalypse and the End Times” and “The Harbinger,” “Isaiah 9:10 Judgment” and “The Shemitah.”

    A report over the weekend said the “worst dust storm in Israeli history” had hit.

    “The Environmental Protection Ministry reported that in several parts of the country, air pollution levels were at their worst in the country’s 75-year history. Air pollution in Jerusalem was 173 times higher than average, 51 times higher in the Negev, and 32 times higher in the Galilee.”

    More than 600 people were treated for conditions “related to the weather,” the report said of the storm, which also affected Lebanon, Syria, Egypt and Cyprus.

    The weather “confused scientists and meteorologist[s], who are caught by surprise by the unprecedented phenomenon.”

    In July in Iran, the city of Bandar Mahshahr recorded a heat index of 164 degrees.

    The news agency noted: “Where do we find this extreme weather in biblical prophecy? In the tiny, three chapter long book of Malachi, we find a clear reference ‘to a day that will burn like a furnace,’ (Malachi 3:19).

    “In a recent blog post, Rabbi Lazer Brody, popular Israeli author and lecturer, reminded his readers of the prediction of Jewish sages, that, as redemption gets closer, ‘God will remove the sun from its covering. The righteous shall heal in its heat but the wicked shall be doomed in it,’” the report said.

    From bugs to earthquakes to fires to winds to rain to smoke to heat, there are reports of extremes around the globe, too.

    A blogger created a montage of reports:

    Breaking Israel News reported that there now are forecasts of “a second ice age within 15 years,” and the “End of Times blogger known as Tomer Devorah lists close to 20 biblical sources of dramatic changes in the earth that have been prophesied since ancient times.”

    The report said Rabbi Nir Ben Artzi, a mystical rabbi from southern Israel who publishes a weekly column about world events, “connects all these news stories about extreme weather to the coming redemption.”

    “In nearly every weekly message, he warns that God is demonstrating His mastery over nature.”

    Artzi wrote: “The forces of nature: every place with evil will go up in flames; there will be earthquakes, floods, winds, storms and volcanic eruptions. God is thinning out the impurities in the world and burning them.”

    The floods over the new year in Israel closed Eilat Airport and grounded flights, officials reported.

    Roads were closed because of the flooding across wide swaths of Israel.

    “Witnesses reported hail the size of ice cubes.”


  56. @ Zoe
    Your problem is that you are an ass…
    Asked you a simple question ..and you talking shiite bout ‘achieve’…

    Bushie don’t need no damn English lessons….
    So how does GOD give eternal life to believers WITHOUT converting them from physical beings…? …Does HE use cod liver oil then? …JA !!

    When Jesus promised his disciples that ‘where he is, they also shall be…’ are you thinking that these disciples will somehow be able to PHYSICALLY join him in his spiritual realm?
    ….or do you just not believe Jesus…?

    When he answered Nicodemus that those who enter God’s kingdom must be ‘born again’ OF THE SPIRIT… was he talking about duppies?

    You are such a pretentious fraud that you can’t even see that the very GOSPEL (good news) that Jesus brought to this world …is that he (through supreme sacrifice) has provided a WAY for physical (temporary) humans, who believe in his word to follow his lead in becoming BEGOTTEN sons of God …..He being the first (and so far) only begotten son….
    Shiite man … the man said that over and over and over…

    You are too full of yourself, with your shiite exegeses, and trying to show-off how much Greek and Hebrew you know….. and only making yourself look foolish…

    Bushie done with your ass…
    …or as David would put it … You may have the last word… 🙂

  57. both bush shite and Zoe far fetched explanation of Jesus intention takes one into the realm of the spiritual world a world of occult doctrines and theories,
    Yes Humans are designed physical and spiritual . The physical meaning the flesh and the spiritual meaning one equipped with morals that exhibits love towards one another ,But in no way does the two combined was designed to be influenced by the supernatural or drawn from unexplained objects or symbols having principles and doctrines that reflect a component to the occult or the souls of dead people.
    Whether one choose to believe or not all modern day religions are a branch of the occult having similarities to occultism to capture and adore the the soul /s of the dead by a source call pray

    • @Bush Tea

      If religion and a belief in God is just that a belief, how are you and others so committed to debating in absolute terms?

  58. @ David
    Bushie cares NOTHING about religion OR about ‘belief in God’.
    The ONLY thing that is important is REALITY.

    Everybody can believe in what they want (and generally that is what we all do).
    What Bushie is prepared to debate …. and to speak about in absolute terms, is reality.

    The Reality is that:
    We find ourselves existing in an unlikely world. one which is intricately balanced in multiple interdependent ways….change ANYTHING a bit and we get chaos…
    Either it just accidentally happened, or it was CREATED by (what has to be) brilliant and super-human engineering.

    Only an illiterate jackass, unaware of the interwoven brilliance of Nature, could conclude that our intricate and complex world could possibly be ‘accidental’…. So ANY RATIONAL analysis immediately must identify the existence somewhere, and in some form, …
    …of Big Boss Engineers.

    These are simple obvious FACTS of observation and deduction David.
    It matters not what any JA believe, or indeed, how much exegesis is done… or in what language…

    Level two:
    If we agree that such Big Boss Engineers are around ‘somewhere’ (exists), then it is logical that they MUST have some kind of RATIONAL intent in mind in building the project called ‘life on earth’…
    ..wuh cuh dear.., even AC has some kind of rational intent behind the shiite that she writes..
    ..and SURELY BBE must be brighter than even Ping Pong, Grenville and Walter…. (“real-real” bright fellas)

    How is it even possible to avoid being ‘absolute’ in the face of such obvious FACTS about our existing world…? …So Bushie tends to be absolute…

    Level three:
    It then only remains for us to SEEK to understand the thinking behind BBE’s ‘plan’.
    but surely we must do so ….FROM BBE’s PERSPECTIVE.
    …not from AC’s and Dompey’s (for obvious reasons)
    …not from Zoe’s …for even more obvious reasons… 🙂

    LOL …not even from the perspective of the bright boys like Ping Pong and Walter … cause those fellows understand some of the natural designs.. but our natural senses are not designed to understand SUPER-natural perspectives…. so a new ‘sense’ (spirit) is needed for that … ha ha ha
    Um too sweet doh…

    • @Bush Tea

      We have engaged in this matter over the years and anybody except a JA will admit it is sound deductive reasoning. If course a logical conclusion based on a deductive premise is just that, deductive. Let the debate continue!

  59. Honesty is a philosophical and psychological receptacle which cannot be alter
    One can debate to convince self and mostly resort to conclusions of denials to escape
    Honesty being a written code has alluded most those whose acceptance of christian teachings as the only source.Hence when a truth is presented one of occultism that lends it self to religions represented by similar rituals and doctrines truth and honesty is thrown out and denial takes root

  60. @Bush Tea, You as you so often do, read into Scripture, what is neither explicitly stated, nor remotely implied, we are strongly forbidden and warned NOT to do that!

    “…who believe in His word to follow His lead in becoming the BEGOTTEN sons of God.”

    NO WHERE in Scripture, God’s Word, do we ever find the redeemed Children of God, EVER “…becoming the BEGOTTEN sons of God.”

    We are ADOPTED through the Only Begotten Son of God, THE LORD JESUS CHRIST!

    Believers Are Adopted Through the Only Begotten Son

    And how is it that God has brought this kind of adoption about for us as believers? Well, again, our passage tells us, beginning at verse four: “But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, ‘Abba, Father!’ Therefore you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.”

    And we read the same thing in Romans chapter three, verses 23 to 25: “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith.”

    So we are justified by the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, and we are also adopted by the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. The one transaction, redeeming us, buying us out of the slave market of sin – that is the picture here – that one transaction between God the Son and God the Father has wrought both legal acts on our behalf: justification and adoption. Not only have we been declared not guilty by God the Judge, but God the Judge has adopted us as His own sons!

  61. God’s Only Begotten Son
    by Henry M. Morris, Ph.D.

    “For God so loved the world, that He gave His ONLY begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16).

    One of our favorite Christmas Scripture verses is I John 4:9: “In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent His ONLY begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him.” The marvelous incarnation in human flesh of the ONLY begotten Son of God is not the end of the story, of course. The next verse explains that we have life through Him because God “sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins” (I John 4:10). Our heavenly Father gives us eternal life instead of the eternal hell that we deserve because His ONLY begotten Son died in our place for our sins. “For He hath made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him” (II Corinthians 5:21).

    The Only Begotten of the Father

    Consider, though, the significance of this revelation that Jesus Christ is the Father’s “ONLY begotten” Son. This unique phrase is used with reference to the Lord Jesus just four other times, and all five verses contain vitally important truths concerning Christ. These verses are as follows:

    “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the ONLY begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth” (John 1:14).

    This is the key verse of the Incarnation, assuring us that the man Jesus, who dwelt among us for a time, was also the eternal Word who was “in the beginning with God” and that He “was God” and that “all things were made by Him” (John 1:1-3). He was God the Creator manifest in the flesh.

    “No man hath seen God at any time; the ONLY begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him” (John 1:18).

  62. Zoe is just dense… as are most who have been brainwashed with some shiite religion over the years.
    Bushie’s 8.30 AM response was in anticipation of Zoe’s 8:36 AM comment 🙂

    Look joker, ‘adopted’ and ‘begotten’ are not mutually exclusive. Your shiite semantics does NOT faze Bushie…
    ‘begotten’ simply means something like ‘unique’ or ‘one of a kind’ – which Jesus clearly is so far…. Did he not promise that he is but the ‘firstborn of many other future children of God….’?

    …but for you to then quote a scripture which says the VERY OPPOSITE of what you are seeking to argue …is nothing less than asinine…

    “God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, ‘Abba, Father!’ Therefore you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.”

    ..what did you think that a “HEIR OF GOD” – made possible through the way provided by Christ meant? …steupsss … why does Bushie even bother…?

    shiite Zoe…. you may be reading too many of AC’s posts… or is it just ‘that time’ of the month…?
    LOL ha ha ha

  63. Question: “What does it mean that Jesus is God’s only begotten son?”

    Answer: The phrase “only begotten Son” occurs in John 3:16, which reads in the King James Version as, “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” The phrase “only begotten” translates the Greek word monogenes. This word is variously translated into English as “only,” “one and only,” and “only begotten.”

    It’s this last phrase (“only begotten” used in the KJV, NASB and the NKJV) that causes problems. False teachers have latched onto this phrase to try to prove their false teaching that Jesus Christ isn’t God; i.e., that Jesus isn’t equal in essence to God as the Second Person of the Trinity. They see the word “begotten” and say that Jesus is a created being because only someone who had a beginning in time can be “begotten.” What this fails to note is that “begotten” is an English translation of a Greek word. As such, we have to look at the original meaning of the Greek word, not transfer English meanings into the text.

    So what does monogenes mean?

    According to the Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BAGD, 3rd Edition), monogenes has two primary definitions. The first definition is “pertaining to being the ONLY one of its kind within a specific relationship.” This is its meaning in Hebrews 11:17 when the writer refers to Isaac as Abraham’s “only begotten son” (KJV). Abraham had more than one son, but Isaac was the only son he had by Sarah and the only son of the covenant. Therefore, it is the uniqueness of Isaac among the other sons that allows for the use of monogenes in that context.

    The second definition is “pertaining to being the ONLY one of its kind or class, unique in kind.” This is the meaning that is implied in John 3:16 (see also John 1:14, 18; 3:18; 1 John 4:9). John was primarily concerned with demonstrating that Jesus is the Son of God (John 20:31), and he uses monogenes to highlight Jesus as uniquely God’s Son—sharing the same divine nature as God—as opposed to believers who are God’s sons and daughters by adoption (Ephesians 1:5). Jesus is God’s “ONE and ONLY” Son.

    The bottom line is that terms such as “Father” and “Son,” descriptive of God and Jesus, are human terms that help us understand the relationship between the different Persons of the Trinity. If you can understand the relationship between a human father and a human son, then you can understand, in part, the relationship between the First and Second Persons of the Trinity. The analogy breaks down if you try to take it too far and teach, as some Christian cults (such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses), that Jesus was literally “begotten” as in “produced” or “created” by God the Father.

  64. Question: “What does it mean that Jesus is the ‘first-born’ over Creation?”

    Answer: In a letter to the church at Colossae, the Apostle Paul gave an intriguing description of Jesus. In it, he explained Christ’s relationship to God the Father and to creation. Some have claimed that Paul’s description of Christ as the first-born of creation means that Jesus was created — not eternal, not God. Such a doctrine, however, conflicts with the rest of the Bible. Christ could not be both Creator and created; John 1 clearly names Him Creator. Let’s take a careful look at the passage where Jesus is called the first-born.

    Colossians 1:15-21

    “And He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities — all things have been created by Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; so that He Himself might come to have first place in everything. For it was the Father’s good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven.”

    Jesus is God

    Christ’s relationship to His Father begins with the phrase “the image of the invisible God.” The word “image,” meaning copy or likeness, expresses Christ’s deity. This word involves more than a resemblance, more than a representation. He is God! Although He took on human form, He has the exact nature of His Father (Hebrews 1:3).

    The “Word” of John 1:1 is a divine Person, not a philosophical abstraction. In the incarnation, the invisible God became visible in Christ; deity was clothed with humanity (Matthew 17:2). God is in Christ: visible, audible, approachable, knowable, and available. All that God is, Christ is.

    Jesus is Lord of Creation

    The description “first-born of all creation” speaks of Christ’s preexistence. He is not a creature but the eternal Creator (John 1:10). God created the world through Christ and redeemed the world through Christ (Hebrews 1:2-4).

    Note that Jesus is called the first-born, not the first-created. The word “first-born” (Greek word “prototokos”) signifies priority. In the culture of the Ancient Near East, the first-born was not necessarily the oldest child. First-born referred not to birth order but to rank. The first-born possessed the inheritance and leadership.

    Therefore, the phrase expresses Christ’s sovereignty over creation. After resurrecting Jesus from the dead, God gave Him authority over the Earth (Matthew 28:18). Jesus created the world, saved the world, and rules the world. He is the self-existent, acknowledged Head of creation.

    Finally, the phrase recognizes Him as the Messiah: “I will make Him [Christ] My first-born, higher than the kings of the earth” (Psalm 89:27).

    Six times the Lord Jesus is declared to be the first-born of God (see Romans 8:29; Colossians 1:15, 18; Hebrews 1:6; 12:23; Revelation 1:5). These passages declare the preexistence, the sovereignty, and the redemption that Christ offers.

    Thus, the phrase “first-born of all creation” proclaims Christ’s preeminence. As the eternal Son of God, He created the universe. He is the Ruler of creation!

  65. @ Bush Tea, You are blatantly guilty of repeatedly using the utterly erroneous FALSE interpretation of text, by READING INTO, ‘EISEGESIS’ what is simply NOT there, grammatically, by syntax, or the basic rules of contextual analysis!

    Question: “What is the difference between exegesis and eisegesis?”

    Answer: Exegesis and eisegesis are two conflicting approaches in Bible study. Exegesis is the exposition or explanation of a text based on a careful, objective analysis. The word exegesis literally means “to lead out of.” That means that the interpreter is led to his conclusions by following the text.

    The opposite approach to Scripture is eisegesis, which is the interpretation of a passage based on a subjective, non-analytical reading. The word eisegesis literally means “to lead into,” which means the interpreter injects his own ideas into the text, making it mean whatever he wants.

    Obviously, only exegesis does justice to the text. Eisegesis is a mishandling of the text and often leads to a misinterpretation. Exegesis is concerned with discovering the true meaning of the text, respecting its grammar, syntax, and setting. Eisegesis is concerned only with making a point, even at the expense of the meaning of words.

  66. The ritual of communion brings with it a symbolic fom of occultism whereby bread represents flesh and wine represents blood both symbols are widely used by occults in their seances or quest to indulge with the spirit world
    There is no denying that there is a common thread of the occult which lends itself christain religious doctrines and theories rooted in mystery and the spirit world

  67. @ Bush Tea, Language presupposes LOGICAL distinctions!

    Only Begotten, and ADOPTION, are logically distinct, as shown from God’s Word,

    Reason is NECESSARY, for revelation to be coherent.

    But your PRIDE, Bush Tea, prevents you FROM admitting when your wrong, in ARROGANCE of PRIDE, you then come with Ad Hominem, rather than deal with the TRUTH, lacing your ‘Eisegesis’ with Red-herring distractives!

  68. “But your PRIDE, Bush Tea, prevents you FROM admitting when your wrong…”
    Pride shiite!! ever see a bushman – a man whacking all kinda nastiness and foolishness all damn day long – having problems with pride…?

    If anything Bushie should be ashamed!!

    …for wasting time arguing with someone who is capable only of running for some damn ‘cut and paste’ quotation from some equally idiotic ‘scholar’ like Henry Morris…

    Since you don’t know the answer to the question asked earlier about why Jesus CHOSE to lime on the blocks with fishermen, and arrogant bushmen….It was because he could not stomach the pretentious Pharisees and Scribes who knew all the damn scriptures, languages, exegeses, and laws …and who understood not one shiite.
    ….while the bushmen and fishermen ‘got it’ and became his disciples….

  69. How about the burning of incense complete with the clangingi lof bells. A ritual widely performed in the Catholic and Anglicn churches to cleanse or protect against evil. baptism with the initial cross in the head was also a symbol of protection used by the occult as a protectionbagainst evil spirits

  70. When Organized Religion Becomes a Cult

    The distinction between cult and religion lies squarely in how those leaving or those wanting to leave are treated
    Cults claim exclusivity, are highly secretive, and authoritarian. To many of my atheist friends, religion fits the bill. What distinguishes religion from cults is the ability to question without being shunned and ability to reject dogmatic tenets without being shunned
    Many religions make exclusive claims to truth. There is nothing wrong with that. Many systems of philosophy do the same. Kantianism’s categorical truths are, for example, incompatible with utilitarianisms balancing of harm and good.
    The harm stems from a system that shuns and ostracizes adherents that don’t accept their exclusive claims to truth. That is where conventional religion becomes a potentially harmful cult. Forcing people to conform by using the subtle threat of social alienation is a form of coercion.
    People leave religion because of the seemingly restrictive lifestyle, conflicts between science and literal biblical interpretation, ethnocentrism, sexism, dogma, intolerance or boredom. Those may all be legitimate reasons or just misapplication of religious principles but the bottom line is those are personal choices people make about whether to follow a particular religion.
    Any religious community can become a cult. It’s not about how faith is expressed in a community but more importantly how people are treated if they want to leave and disbelieve..
    The historical roots of three monotheistic religions, namely Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, are founded on the story of Abraham, a man who was willing to question authority and refute the superstitions of worshiping material objects. This story is the foundation of monotheism and should serve as an example of how nonconformists should be embraced.
    According to Biblical lore, through a process of logical deductions and observation of the universe around him Abraham began to question the validity of idolatry and recognize that because the universe is so complex it must have a designer. Abraham was unafraid to challenge the mores of his time and to question authority. This is the historical underpinning of monotheistic religions.
    Religious communities and society as a whole should allow wider expression and diversity, allowing all to feel welcome and comfortable.
    In order to prevent crossing the line from religion to cult, communities need to purge themselves of dogma, intolerance and ostracizing those with different beliefs, so their adherents have true choice on how to live their lives.

Leave a comment, join the discussion.