California court destroys marriage

I condemn the court's recent decision to redefine marriage as "an institution as old as humankind" on constitutional and religious grounds. The Constitution guarantees equal rights to all citizens. Any unencumbered adult male may marry any unencumbered adult female; hence, all unencumbered adults have an equal right to marry, regardless of their sexual orientation. Those who insist upon codifying marriage as anything other than the civil union of one man and one woman would subject society to the tyranny of a dissolute minority.

In Leviticus 18:22, the Lord commands categorically, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind: it is abomination." In Mark:10, Jesus tells the Pharisees explicitly "but from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; and they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."

The Old and New testaments are in complete accord: Marriages exist only between one man and one woman. Adherents to the tenets of Christianity accept this truth. The California state court has put it asunder.

Richard Wible

Oceanside

Encouragement found from atheist

As an octogenarian, I still appreciate the experience of my younger years that were crucial times, including individuals I learned from. I recall Madalyn Murray O'Hair, the infamous atheist, since deceased. In about 1992, she appeared on the Phil Donahue show as his guest. The then Times-Advocate newspaper printed a newsworthy article headlined "Atheist O'Hair holds fast to her non-beliefs." Her demeanor in general spoke volumes.

This, too, was an encouragement for me, having decided earlier that there had to be more to life than what was offered, than what she displayed and for those who followed in their Faith and Values letters. Over the years, the change in me evidently was made obvious in what my Faith and Values letters contained, so I persevered in spite of criticism from the disgruntled individuals who assumed I might back out via their innuendos.

Little do they know that years ago I was in their arena for a while, found an exit out and learned to have compassion for them that they may have found foreign. It is interesting to notice their Faith and Values letters are null and void of anything their unbelief affords them, that is superior to what I present in my Faith and Values letters. I wonder why.

Mary Beede

Escondido

Writer admits earlier mistake

Someone else has admitted a mistake, so I might as well, about a Faith and Values letter, "Everybody was born saved," Oct. 19, 2007. I was saying everyone is born "from above," "anothen" in the Greek, which is what Jesus told Nicodemus, John 3.3, not "again" which would have been "palin." We come into the world in the light of Christ, John 1:9. "Palin" and "anothen" appear together in Galations 4:9, and the King James scholars left "anothen" out, which would have read: "How you returned again on the weak and poor elements to which again from above to slave you want?", indicating a fall from the birth from above.

In I Peter 1:3 and 23, "anagennesas" means a higher birth, not born again, read the context. The Greek prefix "ana-" means higher. "Palingenesias" in Titus 3.5 means a restoration, not born again, and appears in Matthew 19.28, referring to the Apostles on 12 thrones in heaven. Read Thayer's Lexicon, Strong's 3824. I was overstating myself; we still must be saved. Jesus just started us with a clean record.

Edward Karlson

Oceanside

Your thoughts are your future

Science is finding, through quantum physics, proofs that the brain is a transfer station of information, from the invisible Father-Mind that we live in, to the human awareness (consciousness) and reverse. This Father-Mind is an eternal collection of information up to this now moment, and is available to those who choose to tune into it. What I have found through my mystic ways of communications is that this Father-Mind is also a reactive mind that responds to prayer of pure intent and gratitude.

This eternal reactive Father-Mind is structured the same way our own subconscious mind (soul) is. When we reinforce our subconscious minds repeatedly with an idea, the idea becomes habit, forming within us. This works the same way with the eternal Father-Mind; if it becomes reinforced with ideas of love or hate, this eternal Father-Mind that we live in will respond in like manner through its natural laws to you.

This means that what we think, we get reflected back to us, individually and globally. Since we are the individualized physical manifestation of this eternal mind, we always receive from it what we give it. This means that we must be the best example of what we wish to experience.

Armand Archambeault

San Marcos

He disputes interpretation of Isaiah

Howard Killion (Faith and Values Letters, Aug. 1), joined by Ruth Burkhart (Faith and Values Letters, Aug. 8), continues his desperate attempt to twist Isaiah 53 into saying something it isn't. Yes, when one person suffers consequential to another's sins, it is a heavy "cross to bear." No one without preconceived conclusions could interpret this as sin transference, but even if it were, it would still dodge the key point that this isn't even about Jesus! Are Killion and Burkhart saying there is another, different savior? Or that the "messiah" has not yet appeared? Isaiah 53 describes someone beaten (not crucified) for others' wrongs, yet living a long life and seeing numerous descendants, unlike Jesus, who reportedly died young and childless. Killion tried explaining this previously (Faith and Values Letters, June 27) by adding his own made-up speculations to the passage. Oh, the inconvenience of Scripture literalism and needing to justify claims by other New Testament writers!

And again, Ronald Hutchison (Faith and Values Letters, Aug. 8) defends Paul and Peter by quoting Paul and Peter. But I cited quotes reportedly from Jesus himself saying the opposite (Matt. 25:31-46; Matt 22:36-40; Luke 10:25-37; Matt 7:21), in which Jesus describes salvation through deeds without even mentioning faith, so Hutchison confirms that Paul and Peter contradict Jesus (ergo: Antichrists).

Davis D. Danizier

Oceanside