Jesus’ Temper Tantrum

Nan Bible, Christianity, , ,

jesus-temple

On another blog, a reference was made to the Jeffersonian Bible. Having never really looked into this version of the “Holy Word,” I googled a PDF version and perused a few lines. While I admit I haven’t finished it, something jumped off the page at me at the very beginning.

The following passage supposedly takes place shortly after Jesus has been baptized by John:

And the Jews’ passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.
30 And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and
doves, and the changers of money sitting:
31 And when he had made a scourge of cords, he drove them all
out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured
out the changers’ coins, and overthrew their tables;
32 And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence;
make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise.

I’m sure many bible readers are familiar with this event and probably haven’t given it much thought. However, as I read it something puzzling occurred to me. Up to this point, Jesus was just another Jew, right? He didn’t have any special designation as a Jewish priest or any other position of repute.

So what gave him the authority to create this havoc in the temple?  Although he did refer to Jewish scripture related to the temple being a house of prayer, this hardly provided justification for his actions. Bottom line is that he was nothing more than an irate Jew who let his temper get the best of him.

Of course, Christians will say that it was John’s “baptism” that suddenly turned Jesus into a mini-god and he now possessed “godly” authority. But in fact, the use of the Jewish mikvah was primarily “a ritual purification and cleansing bath that Orthodox Jews [took] on certain occasions (as before Sabbath or after menstruation).” It didn’t magically turn any of the participants into some kind of god.

So when I considered the actual circumstances in place, it seemed to me that Jesus didn’t have ANY authority to do what he did.

But of course, no one nowadays reads the scriptures as written. Instead, they read the “interpretations” offered by individuals who seem to think they have an inside track on understanding what was happening over 2,000 years ago. So surely, I’m just misinformed, right?

80 thoughts on “Jesus’ Temper Tantrum”

  1. i always thought Jesus was being a violent pratt here. the sellers of good were largely meetin a need for ritual sacrifices at the temple. So His anger seemed very misplaced?

    I always thought Hitchens’ sarcastic phrase “Gentle Jesus Meek and Mild” hilariously applied here!

    And modern preachers sure seem to make a good living off religion? No poverty in our modern Learjetted, bemansioned men of gawd?

    Arnold will be along shortly to explain that the voice in his head told him this was all good. It’s different!!!!

    Arnold just needs to color his hair pink and rebuke hurricanes! A good living can be had I am told!

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  2. I think the argument might be put forward that Jesus’s super powers were with him from birth (I wonder if he had temper tantrums in school and settled playground injustices by smoting a few of the other kiddies …. the records are famously vague on this period). But I find it odd that he should choose this moment to resort to violence (super-power indeed – he seems to have overpowered something of a mob single-handedly!) when surely there were far greater injustices and ungodly acts confronting his sensibilities all around at the time.
    Perhaps he was just having a bad day – he was only human,after calling

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  4. If I recall correctly Jefferson sought to present the moral and ethical teachings of Jesus as truer Christian doctrine, and he rejected the church’s assertion of Jesus as a deity and all scriptures of miracles and supernatural structure.
    Personally, I see the human Jesus when I read his story and this section always lent proof of his humanity to me, and as you said, in this moment being an angry Jewish man losing his temper in the temple.
    Jesus (ironically) believed in a separation of church and state and money changers in the temple were violating that principle. Not to mention that Jesus seemed to also be questioning if he was the Jewish messiah, which would have been seen by the people as a warrior and not a meek man. If I’m not mistaken driving out the moneychangers occurred within a week prior to Passover, and during those days his authority was questioned, and he made the entry into Jerusalem on a donkey to fulfill scripture and show himself as the chosen one or messiah. Theatre perhaps, that eventually ended his life.
    I see Jesus as a revolutionary rabbi in his time, who believed in a benevolent and loving God and tried to teach that to establish a brotherhood between all men. I tend to think of him as the first humanitarian documented in ancient works. And I consider him the first spiritual leader who was concerned with the well-being of the believers, not the interests of the hierarchy of priests. So, I’ve got some respect for the man, his human story, and what he tried to do.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  5. Nan, I hope you’ll accept my comment; I’ve never once preached or taught a Sunday school class. And I’ll do my best from here on to avoid doing such. This is me:

    I take it that the Father authorized Jesus’ baptism because ‘the Son of man’ identified with both us and God: “You are my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased.” They were tight.

    So I think his temple ‘temper tantrum’ showed zeal for his Father’s house and name. When the Jews questioned his authority to do such things he declared, “Destroy this temple and in 3 days I will raise it up.”

    To me that statement compares the Jewish temple to the Christ himself. And, with the person that receives him: “I will put my spirit within you.. and I will be your God” (Ezekiel 36).

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Your interpretation, Arnold, is standard Christian-fare. I saw it the same way when I was held by the chains of Christianity. Once a person frees themselves from the “accepted” interpretations, the true story emerges. Hopefully, one day you’ll be able see things from an unbiased and impartial point of view.

      Liked by 4 people

      Reply

  6. A different analysis that I’ve heard is that the gospel writers completely misunderstood what was going on. If Jesus was entering Jerusalem attempting to become the actual foretold Messiah according to Jewish prophesy, he would be expecting to receive divine aid to throw out the Roman occupation. The priests at the temple were collaborators appointed by the Romans, and not the “correct” rabbis that should have been holding those posts. Perhaps what he was doing was trying to throw out the Roman-appointed priests, a move that would have had the approval of the citizens of Jerusalem, and the later Greek writers didn’t understand this and wrote a garbled version about moneychangers instead.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  7. The beauty of fiction, of course, is that the reader is beckoned to take any interpretation that they choose. The challenge for the writer is to supply some plausible framework for that interpretation.
    So, as far as religious mythology goes, this little fairytale seems to resonate for many of us.

    Liked by 5 people

    Reply

    • This little fairy tale has had a devastating effect on society for ages. Me too. It was not introduced to me as a work of fiction but as the very infallible ‘Word of God.’ It takes longer for some of us to ‘kick the traces,’ as it were, than others. The people who canonized the scripture had many manuscripts to choose from, but they only chose those that supported their narrative.

      I have read some comments here that once could have been my own, so I’ll just try to let them slide. Only education can overcome the ignorance that enables religion.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      • Oh, yeah, I agree. Maybe I had good science teachers at school, or good philosophy teachers at university.
        The whole thing struck me as laughably implausible from a very young age.
        But I do know that the lies have fucked up a lot of good intentioned people from a similar young age.
        But it’s never too late to recognise a con.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

  8. I read somewhere that as Jews were coming from far and wide for Passover their ‘coin’ would have been of different origins and thus the need for money changers; somewhat akin to changing foreign currency at a bank.
    The tale of Jesus having a fit in the Temple is probably an interpolation.

    Liked by 5 people

    Reply

  9. Nan, I have seen a couple of excellent documentaries with religious scholars and historians. One of the conclusions made by these people involves this temple outburst. Two things I learned here.

    1) Conducting trade in the temple was not uncommon at this and other city temples. Temples were a center of traffic. So, when Jesus upset the apple cart he offended the Jewish leadership in the city. They were already fearful of Jesus, who as a Rabbi had gained a huge following. The religious scholars and historians’ conclusion is this outburst is what led these Jewish leaders to ask Pilate to do their dirty work for them.

    2) The other part of these documentaries is the timing. In their minds, Jesus was jailed and held for several months until Pilate could figure out what to do with him. There was a new Emperor that had given Pilate license to do this. It was not until the retired emperor returned that Pilate felt compelled to do what the Jewish leaders wanted. The other notable observation on the timing is Jesus was praised with palm fronds the week before he died, which could not have occurred in the spring, as palms were harvested in the fall. This also supports why the crowd turned on Jesus, as he was in jail not doing what they wanted as their Messiah. This is a key reason Jews do not view him as such.

    As a Christian, I recognize what I write above does not fully support what is in the bible. People need to remember the gospels were written between 30 and 75 years after Jesus was killed, so there are some inconsistencies. Plus, gospel means “good news,” so it is like a news account of what happened. What these documentaries reveal, though, is there is historical evidence outside of biblical texts that Jesus was a real person who walked the earth and was viewed as a Rabbi, who likely spoke four languages that were heard in those parts, so he was a learned person.

    Keith

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    • Hi Keith,
      I agree with you on bible inconsistencies. I stand on Christ only, not inerrancy etc. What prompted you to advance beyond traditional bible views? To me today’s Christians hold to creeds and principles over a relationship with God via Christ.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      • Thanks Arnold. I am fascinated by history. Also, about 45% of Christians do not view the bible as word for word true. It was written, interpreted, edited and translated largely by “imperfect men,” both of those words are important. So, it is important to look to other sources., at least in my view. Keith

        Liked by 4 people

        Reply

        • “It was written, interpreted, edited and translated largely by “imperfect men,” both of those words are important.”

          I only disagree with that statement because you use “largely” whereas I would use “exclusively.”

          I spent years trying to make the bible make sense. I have a problem with the fact that an omniscient, infallible God can only communicate through puny men. It has occurred to me that, contrary to apologetics, an all-powerful God should be able to make man able to countenance His presence without turning to ash.

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

    • What these documentaries reveal, though, is there is historical evidence outside of biblical texts that Jesus was a real person who walked the earth and was viewed as a Rabbi, who likely spoke four languages that were heard in those parts, so he was a learned person.

      Man o Man! Keith, I wish a LOT more Christians did equitable, thorough research as you’ve done. My emphasis above shows what much scholarship reveals from NON-Canonical and Hellenistic Christian sources. No matter how hard the experts repeatedly show factual historicity of Late Second Temple Judaism/Messianism to modern Evangelicals & Fundamentalists, as well as sound, very plausible conclusions of Jesus’ and John’s (the Baptist) 1st-century CE Judean world, like burying ostrich heads… they just don’t care to fairly or open-mindedly examine closely the hardcore Jewishness of Yeshua bar Yosef (Jesus) and his actual background. They are perfectly numb/comfortable with their mythical Greco-Roman version of him. There is SO MUCH to glean from Jesus’/Yeshua’s Tannaitic background that fits very well with what experts and scholars of that Jewish Period do indeed know as factual and/or highly plausible… and their conclusions are based upon ALL reliable sources, and definitely including non-Christian or non-Greco-Roman sources such as the gospel “news” written at least 70-yrs AFTER Yeshua’s/Jesus’ execution.

      A great comment Keith packed with excellent content from scholars who spend their lifetimes ‘getting it right’… or at least getting pretty darn close given the complexities of historical-archaeological sources and how much time (years!) it requires to examine all of it fairly with very little personal bias. Well done Sir. 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    • Keith, I question this — They were already fearful of Jesus, who as a Rabbi had gained a huge following. From sources I’ve consulted, it appears he didn’t actually start his “ministry” until after the so-called “baptism” by John (which is what this post is about).

      Also, there is disagreement on whether he was actually a Rabbi. It seems more likely that those who looked up to/followed him assigned him that title more so than it was an official title.

      Further, you included history that wasn’t actually part of my post … 🙄

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      • Thanks Nan. I found these commenters very credible based on various documents. They noted the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls added a huge amount of context. I am sorry if I took the discussion down a different path. I appreciate your point of view here. Keith

        Liked by 3 people

        Reply

        • Exactly Keith! Again, NON-Canonical NON-Greco-Roman sources in misalignment with the implied Hellenistic “News” gospels… written at least 70-yrs AFTER Yeshua’s (Jesus’) execution. A whole lotta embellishments going on in the 1st- thru 4th-century CE Roman Empire’s Near Eastern Provinces, i.e. typical, traditional Roman incorporation and hijacking coupled with commonly used Greek Apotheosis. 🙂

          None of which has anything significant resembling Late Second Temple Judaism/Messianism of the time, NOR Jesus’ Tainnaitic ties and deep influences.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

    • Quite telling, is it not that, if we discount the fraudulent passage in Josephus, there is not a single independent mention of the character Jesus of Nazareth, whom you assert had a huge following.
      For someone who appears to have garnered almost rock star status I wonder why he seems to have gone completely unnoticed by all and sundry?

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

        • @Arnold
          Does it warm the cockles of your heart, Arnold to respond with such an asinine reply that merely illustrates the level of your blind ignorance and indoctrination?
          Please, refresh my memory; what was the emotional / traumatic issue that caused you to confess to being a sinner and seek salvation via the blood of a first century human sacrifice?

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

          • Great, but as you spend a certain amount of time engaging former believers, which seems odd unless you are trying to proselytise in some manner, what caused you to consider yourself a sinner and seek salvation in the first place?
            Example: Francis Collins, who I’m sure you are aware of, developed a form of death anxiety while treating terminally patients. This was what prompted him to seek Jesus.
            So was your “prompt” something along similar lines, or were there other factors involved?
            I am interested as I find the reasons people convert interesting, inasmuch as most I have read seem to have one or two common threads.
            So, in the abscence of evidence what was it that triggered your desire to convert?

            Liked by 2 people

          • I needed a drastic change- after a divorce in 1998 I partied for 15 years piling up a series of car accidents and blackouts etc.
            I’d tried Christianity 2 or 3 times since childhood so instead decided to believe Christ only- to face to face obey him in life’s details.

            Liked by 2 people

          • So it was initially because of the cultural association ( I too was once what one might refer to as a ‘Cultural Christian’) and later, the emotional trauma pushed you over the edge for want of a better term.

            Did you not consider therapy rather than unsubstantiated supernaturalism?

            In the face of the complete lack of evidence for your inculcated beliefs how do you, as an educated individual, deal with cognitive dissonance?

            Liked by 2 people

          • You hear his voice?
            Do you realise this is considered an unhealthy mental condition akin to delusion?

            Do you at least refrain from trying to inculcate others with your unsubstantiated supernatural beliefs, especially children?

            Liked by 1 person

          • Figure of speech- whether or not flawed, to me the bible’s alive, has Christ behind it, has voice.

            I love and respect children as I do you, and anyone I meet along the way.

            Liked by 1 person

          • You know, I really don’t voice my views publicly until the topic clicks into place. I’d rather give someone in need a cup of cold water than drench them.
            My comments here and there on WordPress are mostly point/counterpoint rebuttals. Thanks for your questions and thoughts Ark.

            Liked by 1 person

          • I didn’t say you need to defend Christ – which is a title NOT a name.
            I asked why you feel the need to defend your faith, notably by commenting in a site such as this where most are either deconverts or like me, atheist and anti theist.
            Why not chat with fellow indoctrinated believers?
            What are you hoping to achieve by punting Christian drivel to those, most of whom have Been there, got the T shirt rejected the nonsense and embraced reality?

            Like

      • I have noticed that, according to church history, men, not God, canonized the scripture. That scripture was selected from the writings of men, not God, and we will never know what manuscripts were rejected nor why.

        Someone will always argue that those men wrote under divine inspiration. Says those men who wrote. Who knows what they were smoking?

        Liked by 3 people

        Reply

  10. I read something recently on a blog I follow & damned if I can’t find it! But it totally refuted this whole story … pointed out that it was entirely fiction, written as metaphor, only to point to Jesus’ coming trial & execution.

    As for Jesus being a real person … well maybe. But I really doubt it. There’s absolutely no contemporary documentation to prove his existence & what there is, is hearsay evidence at best. Given that there is plenty of evidence for other historical figures who lived at that same time & even hundreds of years before him, I find his physical existence to be utterly & totally fictional.

    I have never understand why Jesus’ historical reality is important. In fact, Jesus shouldn’t be real, he should be entirely fictional. Worshiping real people is idolatry. Gods should be beyond the realm of this world. If they do decide to walk among us, we’re not supposed to know that fact, except in flashes of insight. Often the people who do know these facts are deemed to be mad. Given the reality of Christianity today, especially American Christian Nationalism, perhaps this is true … collective madness.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

  11. I am often amused by religious interpretations by the religious. Everybody is a damn expert.

    To further Richmond Road’s comment… “The beauty of fiction, of course, is that the reader is beckoned to take any interpretation that they choose.”

    When you are an expert in bullshit, what exactly are you an expert in?

    …and as I often say, there are as many gods as there are believers.

    Liked by 6 people

    Reply

  12. Yahweh/God has severe temper tantrums as well all throughout the Israelites history… so it stands perfectly to (Judeo-Christian Greco-Roman) reason and theology that His “One and only Son” would also carry the disorder. In fact, Yahweh/God and His “One and only Son” even PROMISE a lot more childish temper tantrums in the future! They will all culminate with one MASSIVE big one that slaughters well over half the human and animal population on this ‘perfectly created Earth He constructed in His omniscience and omnipotence! Woot woot! 👏🏻 Hallelujah, praise Him! 😉 😄

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    • because He Loves Us.

      🤪

      Given the awesome omni-ness of blessed Yahweh…every sun, every war crime., every blasphemy is all part of His wondrous Plan! God is the source of sin. He is to blame. To quote the ancient Emerson Lake, and Palmer song: How could He lose…six million Jews? ALL part of the Plan.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

    • jeez. I did a little weight lifting and a YouTube channel posted a video of this loony kid loudly ranting away in a gym. Annoying as hell . Sure ‘nuff, the godbots appeared in the comments burbling about his bravery on n sharing the Gud News. Disgusting.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  13. Jesus often became angry because he was poor and purchased cheap, Roman made sandals that allowed too many rock fragments to get inside them and prick his feet causing him great pain and discomfort whilst he wandered around on foot preaching. Here’s a lesser known quote from Mark: 22-24, “And Jesus said of his footwear, ‘God friggin’ damn these cheap-ass Roman sandals! My friggin’ feet are bleeding like I’m a stuck pig! This truly, sucks! ‘”

    Liked by 6 people

    Reply

  14. Arnold seems to be a really nice guy? but liking Jesus because he is “just like me” is the creepy position of too many cult leaders throughout history?

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  15. The question that comes to my mind is when, by whom, and under what circumstances was this passage written? Was it completely fictional, or was it a minor episode of disorder magnified by the author, perhaps with a substitution of characters?

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  16. I’m here to voice my views outside the box. Many believers tend to stick to denominational bias and pet theologies.
    So I’m fascinated by anti-theist, atheist and deconversionist views. For one, Dr Robert M Price.
    Chatting with you folk balances and stretches my vocabulary and thinking skills outside the Christian circle.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • So there is always the possibility you may one day ditch the supernatural clap-trap and embrace reality like the normal people here?
      We will do our utmost to help with your problem.
      I highly recommend you visit the Clergy project.com and read some of the testimonies from former professional clergy covering a wide and varied background of god – botherers.
      Their stories of why they left ‘the faith’ are enlightening and in some cases quite painful; especially those clergy who, although having ditched their faith for reality are, for various reasons, obliged to maintain the charade and continue to preach.

      If you would like to watch something a little more light hearted yet still close to the bone when it comes to truth about your faith, then you might enjoy Seth Andrews’ ( a former fundamrntalist) video: Christianity Made Me Talk Like an Idiot.
      It’s on YouTube. Just Google it.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      • Google Jean Meslier. He was a parish priest in 1600s France who, when he died, left a manuscript for his parishioners, apologizing to them for having lied to them about Christianity. He didn’t believe his own bullshit, but it was his only means of making a living.

        There is a story behind the publication of his writings:
        baron d’ Paul Henri Thiry Holbach. Superstition In All Ages (1732) / Common Sense

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

      • Thank you for that link. It was well worth the time. It’s the story of a lot of us, and the time frame is about the average. It takes a while to come to terms with the fact that our parents would be the first to handicap us with such a load of bullshit.
        Thanx.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

  17. Jeremiah 31:33 “But this is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD. I will put My law in their minds and inscribe it on their hearts…”

    The people would no longer need the priesthood to guide their worship of God. The lucrative business of collecting the offerings and the tithings would end. With God’s laws and will inscribed in every heart and mind, the priesthood would be null and void.

    Elizabeth, the mother of John, and Mary, the mother of Jesus, were cousins of the house of Levi and Aaron: the priesthood.
    Joseph was of the house of David: the line of the kings. So the story goes.

    John the Baptist could have been a priest after the order of Alba. He would have burned incense in the temple. Period. He could never be in charge of offerings or sacrifices, for instance. A long way from the treasury and the lucrative business of selling those animals that were kosher for offerings. Jesus could never be king due to the low class in the Jewish society into which he was born; besides, the rulers in Rome now decided who would be king in Judea.

    Joseph was of the house of David, the line of kings and rulers. Mary was of the House of Levi and the priesthood. So the kingship and the priesthood were bound together in their offspring, Jesus. Theocracy.

    Only priests could enter the temple, and only the high priest could enter the holy of holies. Once a year, I think. Those traders and money changers then must have been priests. When I think about those priests, I recall the sons of Samuel with their meathooks in the cooking pot of the meat offerings. The purpose of tithing and offerings in the Jewish religion was to maintain the temple and the priesthood. I imagine the offerings would make their way to the marketplace, and the Chief priests’ purses swelled with the benefits of office. Capitalism at its best; The people donated the goods to the temple, then went to the marketplace to buy those goods, for their own sustenance and that of the temple.

    Jeremiah and Malachi made their prophecies long before the book Ezra was written. It is most likely that the captivity was the subject of the prophecy, not the birth of Jesus. Due to the Christian canonization of the scripture, the chronology of prophecy is manipulated, first to show Jews in the worst light possible and then use prophecy and the law to make Jesus God.

    It is easy to see why the papacy wanted to keep the written word off-limits for the masses. Look at the protestant church in America today. The success of the preachers is measured in the number of private jets in their stable. It is profitable that the sheep do not understand what they are taught.

    Laws for blasphemy and ex-communication are there for a reason: to protect the integrity of the religion. Truth, fact, and critical thinking are not allowed.

    You are not misinformed. All religions are the creation of man, and all religious authority is presumptive. Take the money out of religion, and it will shrivel like Jonah’s squash vine.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Hmmm. I sense a “preacher” flair in this rather long and wandering comment …

      Although you “mention” a couple of things I wrote about in my post, you went a bit “above and beyond” in your comment. (And did I say anything about the papacy???)

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      • “So what gave him the authority to create this havoc in the temple?”

        I don’t know how to respond to the ‘preacher flair’, so I will assume I’m guilty of crossing a line, as I often do. If nothing else, I am long-winded, like a two-verse, bible-thumping backwoods preacher.

        I know Jefferson did a copy-and-paste job on the bible, as many people do, but I never bothered to examine it. He never claimed any religious authority.

        I mentioned the papacy because the people who canonized the scripture were the people who would become the Roman Catholic Church. (The seat of power was then in Rome for government and church.) They set the books in order, not by their chronological order but in the order that supported their narrative. There were a host of old Jewish mss. as well as those from CE writers about Jesus, the Anointed.

        Whether or not we believe the bible story, we can’t pluck out one passage and treat it as though it stands alone. This could be an embellishment of some writer’s record. I don’t know, as we will never know what manuscripts were forever lost.

        It may be pure coincidence that at the same time the New Testament was being devised, the library of Alexandria was destroyed. Burning opposing history has long been a practice.

        Where did Jesus get His authority to assault the people in the temple? Apparently, he had no such authority. He just got a little bitchy about what He saw there. And don’t forget about the figs He damned.

        That is as short as I can make it.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        • Comment length is not always a bad thing, but can sometimes become a bit “much” as the writer shares personal thoughts/ideas/knowledge on a topic. In any case, you have clarified the points you made in your original comment– and I appreciate that. 😊

          There’s just so much in the bible that is “questionable” — and yet there are those who claim to have all the answers –and gullible people swallow it whole. Sigh

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

  18. “There are a dozen views about everything until you know the answer. Then there’s never more than one.” – C.S. Lewis

    Lewis is not my favorite person to quote, but we’re always searching for answers, and at some point, we have to settle on what we think is the best one. And then try to prove it.

    One of my favorite person’s to quote: “Science is the only practice which awards you for proving them wrong.”
    Ann Druyan

    As soon as we declare a thing absolutely true and set it in stone, we cut off the opportunity for further knowledge..

    Once, the earth was flat and the sun orbited it on a daily basis. To say otherwise was to rile up the priesthood and endanger ones life.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

Don't Be Shy -- Tell Us What You Think!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.