Recently, we saw the growing fight over canine Christians as religious organizations fight to augment their ranks with recruitment of other species.
The inter-species move may reflect recent polls showing a sharp increase in Americans who say that they are not part of any religion.
Given the known violent propensities of this species, the effort to recruit religious rabbits may alarm some citizens.
It is not simply a matter of Baptist Bunnies hopping into Sunday services. The move sparks a race for the rabbits with different faiths claiming particular breeds, struggling over American Fuzzy Lops and American Sables.
The Britannia Petite and Sussex rabbits has been claimed by the Anglicans.
The Florida White is an Evangelical breed.
The Californian Rabbit is strictly New Age.
The German Grey is a protestant stronghold.
The Siberian Rabbit is known Russian Orthodox. 
As herbivores, the Hindu faith may hold a certain appeal for the mammals.
[Kudos to Patty C for the three additional pictures of observant bunnies]
Clint,
I’m just asking if you’ll read it and telling you I will read the book of your choice. Take the time you need to find a book title for me and for you to read my book title.
seamus,
That was fabulous!!!
‘otterly’ amazing…
http://s177.photobucket.com/albums/w221/jiloru/more%20animal/?action=view¤t=Praying_Kagura_pt__II_by_Photo_Cap.jpg
http://www.google.com/images?q=tbn:RgBbrKbSIxiZZM::www.all4humor.com/images/files/Praying%252520Cat.jpg
http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/ap/69810737-002b-4fb0-8549-0600a3b82e59.h2.jpg
http://animalphotos.info/a/2008/06/13/pair-of-otters-poke-upper-bodies-out-of-water-one-looks-like-hes-praying/
Clint,
I reject parts of it as having nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus and everything to do with the editors and after the fact contributors biases and personal political and/or financial concerns. The Bible wasn’t written by God. It was written by men. But I’ve explained this already and so has Mike S. Jesus’ message was simple. God is love. Any part of the Bible that contradicts that is simply put in by men with an earthly agenda. One can get a lot of value from Christ’s teachings if one is patient and diligent enough to weed out the garbage to get as close to the source as possible. Without the historical context of knowing how the Bible got to be as it is, the Bible is a terribly conflicted and violent book and open to misuse. This would be a much easier task if Christ had written himself, but we have to deal with what we have. Taking it all wholesale is the flaw of Fundamentalism and the Biblical literalism. The very same thing can be said about Muslim Fundamentalism, Jewish Fundamentalism and Hindu Fundamentalism. Religious works are not, by their very nature, intended as historical fact. For much of the history of all the above mentioned religions, they were not taught that way either. Fundamentalism is a recent distortion of allegory and parable aided by after the fact actors in an effort to get people to abdicate their free will to serve some agenda of men. It preys upon fear, divisiveness and hatred of the other. Again, the problem isn’t the teachings of Christ. It’s what men have done with them. Have you ever wondered why there is no Fundamentalist Buddhist movement? I think it’s because of two factors. The historical Buddha did indeed create records of his teachings. These teachings rely on a logic, a set plan to make your life better and improve the lives of those around you now, based in the premise that the root of all suffering is desire. The 8 Fold Path has not changed since he first delineated it. It does not require “belief”. It presents itself as a logic. The structural difference makes Buddhism resistant to the kind of after the fact manipulations seen elsewhere and particularly the most egregious flaw of Fundamentalist anything in relying on indirect materials and methods. All religious traditions have something of constructive value to offer. It’s just that some are more difficult to extract that true value from because of the acts of men trying to control other men instead of teaching them to seek enlightenment and true freedom in their hearts.
Buddha,
But you do reject the authenticity of certain parts, correct?
Gyges,
I’m not insulted. I have a guy who comes on my site consistently and practices his hobby of blaspheming…that tends to get a little insulting. I am only noting the general tone of people that comment on this blog. Other than the occasional “evangelistic” drive-by, I think I’m the only Christian that comments here. I’ve just noticed the general view of Christianity here is a that of a joke at best. My motive is just to see people’s thoughts not to courageously defend the faith from the vicious onslaught of the heathen. 🙂
Clint,
It’s not “what parts”, it’s the application of the whole. One might be able to turn on a drill, but it’s not going to work as advertised if you use it as a hammer. I’m not going to retread the proper use of parable as a teaching tool or the history of the document as subject to outside and remote historical forces again.
Seamus,
One of these days, you making me dragon’s breath is going to ruin a monitor. Not that I plan action, but just so you know.
I’ll tell you what’s insulting about this post, that rabbit is clearly facing Mecca, and is no doubt part of some terrorist sleeper-cell.
Clint,
I’m honestly trying to figure out what exactly is so insulting about this post and the comments following it. Before your comment it was mostly discussion of how cute rabbits are.
Clint,
I did not know, “Paul wrote the “love chapter” from the presupposition that Jesus’ resurrection is historically reliable and deserving of our faith.”
The choice was cherry picked if you will because it’s what I find attractive/smart.
No taunt was intended. Each of us creates our own reality, and creators are sometimes called….
Jill,
I would love to–How fast would you expect me to read it? I’m moving to Korea soon. Can you give me a couple of days to choose a book?
CCD,
It is interesting that you would bring up 1 Corinthians 13. Two chapters later Paul writes:
“But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God…If in this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.” (1 Cor 15)
Paul wrote the “love chapter” from the presupposition that Jesus’ resurrection is historically reliable and deserving of our faith.
And your sarcasm is duly noted. 🙂
Clint,
I agree with everything rcampbell said. I’ll make a promise to you. If you will read the following book I will read the book of your choice on christianity. Here’s a link and some info on the book:
“What is the story of Jesus’ birth? How did Judas die? What did Jesus say when he was crucified?
The answers to those questions vary depending on which Gospel you read, says Bible scholar Bart Ehrman.
Ehrman is the author of Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (and Why We Don’t Know About Them). He says that each Gospel writer had a different message — and that readers should not “smash the four Gospels into one big Gospel and think that [they] get the true understanding.”
“When Matthew was writing, he didn’t intend for somebody … to interpret his Gospel in light of what some other author said. He had his own message,” Ehrman tells Fresh Air’s Terry Gross.
In the Gospel of Mark, for instance, Jesus dies in agony, unsure of the reason he must die and asking why God has forsaken him. But in the book of Luke, Jesus prays for forgiveness for his killers. The two stories offer very different accounts, says Ehrman, yet many people tend to merge them.
“They put the two accounts into one big account,” says Ehrman. “So Jesus says all the things that he says in Mark and in Luke, and thereby robbing each account of what it’s trying to say about Jesus in the face of death. … What people do is, by combining these Gospels in their head into one Gospel, they, in effect, have written their own Gospel, which is completely unlike any of the Gospels of the New Testament.”
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=101389895
Let me know what you’d like me to read and I’ll do it.
Clint,
I agree with everything rcampbell said. I’ll make a promise to you. If you will read the following book I will read the book of your choice on christianity. Here’s a link and some info on the book:
“What is the story of Jesus’ birth? How did Judas die? What did Jesus say when he was crucified?
The answers to those questions vary depending on which Gospel you read, says Bible scholar Bart Ehrman.
Ehrman is the author of Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (and Why We Don’t Know About Them). He says that each Gospel writer had a different message — and that readers should not “smash the four Gospels into one big Gospel and think that [they] get the true understanding.”
“When Matthew was writing, he didn’t intend for somebody … to interpret his Gospel in light of what some other author said. He had his own message,” Ehrman tells Fresh Air’s Terry Gross.
In the Gospel of Mark, for instance, Jesus dies in agony, unsure of the reason he must die and asking why God has forsaken him. But in the book of Luke, Jesus prays for forgiveness for his killers. The two stories offer very different accounts, says Ehrman, yet many people tend to merge them.
“They put the two accounts into one big account,” says Ehrman. “So Jesus says all the things that he says in Mark and in Luke, and thereby robbing each account of what it’s trying to say about Jesus in the face of death. … What people do is, by combining these Gospels in their head into one Gospel, they, in effect, have written their own Gospel, which is completely unlike any of the Gospels of the New Testament.”
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=101389895
Let me know what you’d like me to read and I’ll do it.
“What makes Christianity so detestable and contemptible to you”
That brand of dogma isn’t attractive any more. See 1 Corinthians 13
“Why must it be a vice to take the entirety of Jesus’ words at face value?”
Weeks ago Mike Spindell eloquently composed that the message was hijacked.
“I enjoy this blog very much and I learn many things….People here are obviously very intelligent”
Yes I concur, whole heartily!
Buddha,
“It’s not the tool itself, which has value, it’s the misuse of the tool that’s the problem.”
What value does it have and how do you personally determine which parts have value?
Clint,
What rc said plus I’ve already gone into great detail about what’s wrong with interpreting the Bible literally. It’s not the tool itself, which has value, it’s the misuse of the tool that’s the problem.
RC,
Good job.
Clint
1, March 16, 2009 at 8:09 am
I genuinely want to know where some of the contempt for religion comes from….
Mine comes from theists ignoring the reality that, by definition, faith requires the suspension of reason, logic and even proof to the contrary. That is true regardless of that in which one invests “faith”–religion or anything else. What is frustrating and causes some of the contempt (your word) is hearing people of faith claim otherwise. Some of us simply cannot conveniently suspend those traits to accept religion on its all-or-nothing terms. Philosophy and Ethics cover virtually all the same behavioral issues but make no such demand. Nor do those disciplines inflict fear or damnation or vengeance or guilt.
Contempt also arises from seeing theists continually trying to interject their religion into our sectarian government when our Founders so obviously sought its seperation.
Gyges,
Also, my views are very different from most here, but I enjoy this blog very much and I learn many things–otherwise I would not come back. People here are obviously very intelligent and have thought out their philosophies very well. I genuinely want to know where some of the contempt for religion comes from (specifically the Christian one), but I’m certainly not tallying up “persecution points.” 🙂
Gyges,
I chose this post because of the humorous disdain. It seemed fitting. And, I don’t think I answered my own question–all who are Christian claim to follow Christ. That is a blanket description.
Buddha,
I think what Mike said about the Religious Right is helpful and applicable to different perspectives. They cherry-pick from the Bible and create a religion of their own desires and agenda. Is it possible for one to be in stark opposition to the Religious Right and do the exact same thing? Why must it be a vice to take the entirety of Jesus’ words at face value?
Gyges,
I will state explicitly that my issues are not with Christians or Christ, but with Fundamentalism and Organizational Dogma. Christ was groovy dude and a wise teacher. A rebel and a free thinker. Fundamentalism is a tool of men by men that distorts His teaching of love, compassion and tolerance into something divisive. The nature of carpentry is joining, not dividing. The function of a fisherman is to feed the hungry, not chastise them for not having any fish or a net. Unfortunately, fundamentalism can infect ANY religion, not just Christianity. Literalism applied to a subject that is antithetical to literal interpretation.
So take that anyone who accuses anti-Christian bias, be they troll or the simply mistaken.
And I’m glad you picked up the Amber books again, btw. They are classic.
Clint,
As a post script: I wonder why you chose this post to comment on us (I include myself because of our past exchanges) “detesting” Christians.