[Woodsman]

First, are you and I about to share thoughts or are you about to become the “call in the Calvary” for the person I originally responded to? If the later, I won’t be entering into an out numbered / impossible to respond to the numbers situation.

Secondly, What exactly do you and I agree on?

As for the swearing on the Bible …. True it is used often for such reason, but who made it the needed golden seal of approval? It can be done with out the actual book. One must ask if by presenting the “book” one is forcing compliance? If compliance is being the “thing” or the condition implied for the end result one wants from and out of … whatever …. How is it not a set up from the get go? How is it not blasphemy? That is to say; to insist on a man ( for example ) placing his hand on the bible and swear on it as almost a condition to serve as president or to serve as a soldier is to assume he knows not his faith in God and has no real faith. Does one need to be made to swear an oath via the ritual of hand on bible. I would think the oath had been there all along and is between that man and God, and not man and man as if a condition to getting the job. What if someone (soon to become president) said I will swear an oath but I will not swear an oath over the Bible because; as a believer, I see it as blasphemy? Will the job be lost? Is it wrong to see that the Bible and a man’s belief is between him and God and not a condition to the job or worse proof to others that he is a believer! Is the Bible and a man’s belief being held over his had as a job condition … if so …. It is wrong!

If you are attempting to lead me down a rabbit-hole with a hidden lesson …. Stop right now and do not continue. Thank you.