Saturday, April 07, 2007
Collins: Why this scientist believes in God
A friend of mine sent the link to this article in an email to me today. While I disagree with some of what the author writes, it is good to read that a life long study of science has led someone to faith in God rather than away from it.
POSTED: 9:37 a.m. EDT, April 6, 2007 (link above)
By Dr. Francis Collins
Special to CNN
Editor's note: Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D., is the director of the Human Genome Project. His most recent book is "The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief."
ROCKVILLE, Maryland (CNN) -- I am a scientist and a believer, and I find no conflict between those world views.
As the director of the Human Genome Project, I have led a consortium of scientists to read out the 3.1 billion letters of the human genome, our own DNA instruction book. As a believer, I see DNA, the information molecule of all living things, as God's language, and the elegance and complexity of our own bodies and the rest of nature as a reflection of God's plan.
I did not always embrace these perspectives. As a graduate student in physical chemistry in the 1970s, I was an atheist, finding no reason to postulate the existence of any truths outside of mathematics, physics and chemistry. But then I went to medical school, and encountered life and death issues at the bedsides of my patients. Challenged by one of those patients, who asked "What do you believe, doctor?", I began searching for answers.
I had to admit that the science I loved so much was powerless to answer questions such as "What is the meaning of life?" "Why am I here?" "Why does mathematics work, anyway?" "If the universe had a beginning, who created it?" "Why are the physical constants in the universe so finely tuned to allow the possibility of complex life forms?" "Why do humans have a moral sense?" "What happens after we die?" (Watch Francis Collins discuss how he came to believe in God )
I had always assumed that faith was based on purely emotional and irrational arguments, and was astounded to discover, initially in the writings of the Oxford scholar C.S. Lewis and subsequently from many other sources, that one could build a very strong case for the plausibility of the existence of God on purely rational grounds. My earlier atheist's assertion that "I know there is no God" emerged as the least defensible. As the British writer G.K. Chesterton famously remarked, "Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas, for it is the assertion of a universal negative."
But reason alone cannot prove the existence of God. Faith is reason plus revelation, and the revelation part requires one to think with the spirit as well as with the mind. You have to hear the music, not just read the notes on the page. Ultimately, a leap of faith is required.
For me, that leap came in my 27th year, after a search to learn more about God's character led me to the person of Jesus Christ. Here was a person with remarkably strong historical evidence of his life, who made astounding statements about loving your neighbor, and whose claims about being God's son seemed to demand a decision about whether he was deluded or the real thing. After resisting for nearly two years, I found it impossible to go on living in such a state of uncertainty, and I became a follower of Jesus.
So, some have asked, doesn't your brain explode? Can you both pursue an understanding of how life works using the tools of genetics and molecular biology, and worship a creator God? Aren't evolution and faith in God incompatible? Can a scientist believe in miracles like the resurrection?
Actually, I find no conflict here, and neither apparently do the 40 percent of working scientists who claim to be believers. Yes, evolution by descent from a common ancestor is clearly true. If there was any lingering doubt about the evidence from the fossil record, the study of DNA provides the strongest possible proof of our relatedness to all other living things.
But why couldn't this be God's plan for creation? True, this is incompatible with an ultra-literal interpretation of Genesis, but long before Darwin, there were many thoughtful interpreters like St. Augustine, who found it impossible to be exactly sure what the meaning of that amazing creation story was supposed to be. So attaching oneself to such literal interpretations in the face of compelling scientific evidence pointing to the ancient age of Earth and the relatedness of living things by evolution seems neither wise nor necessary for the believer.
I have found there is a wonderful harmony in the complementary truths of science and faith. The God of the Bible is also the God of the genome. God can be found in the cathedral or in the laboratory. By investigating God's majestic and awesome creation, science can actually be a means of worship.
POSTED: 9:37 a.m. EDT, April 6, 2007 (link above)
By Dr. Francis Collins
Special to CNN
Editor's note: Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D., is the director of the Human Genome Project. His most recent book is "The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief."
ROCKVILLE, Maryland (CNN) -- I am a scientist and a believer, and I find no conflict between those world views.As the director of the Human Genome Project, I have led a consortium of scientists to read out the 3.1 billion letters of the human genome, our own DNA instruction book. As a believer, I see DNA, the information molecule of all living things, as God's language, and the elegance and complexity of our own bodies and the rest of nature as a reflection of God's plan.
I did not always embrace these perspectives. As a graduate student in physical chemistry in the 1970s, I was an atheist, finding no reason to postulate the existence of any truths outside of mathematics, physics and chemistry. But then I went to medical school, and encountered life and death issues at the bedsides of my patients. Challenged by one of those patients, who asked "What do you believe, doctor?", I began searching for answers.
I had to admit that the science I loved so much was powerless to answer questions such as "What is the meaning of life?" "Why am I here?" "Why does mathematics work, anyway?" "If the universe had a beginning, who created it?" "Why are the physical constants in the universe so finely tuned to allow the possibility of complex life forms?" "Why do humans have a moral sense?" "What happens after we die?" (Watch Francis Collins discuss how he came to believe in God )
I had always assumed that faith was based on purely emotional and irrational arguments, and was astounded to discover, initially in the writings of the Oxford scholar C.S. Lewis and subsequently from many other sources, that one could build a very strong case for the plausibility of the existence of God on purely rational grounds. My earlier atheist's assertion that "I know there is no God" emerged as the least defensible. As the British writer G.K. Chesterton famously remarked, "Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas, for it is the assertion of a universal negative."
But reason alone cannot prove the existence of God. Faith is reason plus revelation, and the revelation part requires one to think with the spirit as well as with the mind. You have to hear the music, not just read the notes on the page. Ultimately, a leap of faith is required.
For me, that leap came in my 27th year, after a search to learn more about God's character led me to the person of Jesus Christ. Here was a person with remarkably strong historical evidence of his life, who made astounding statements about loving your neighbor, and whose claims about being God's son seemed to demand a decision about whether he was deluded or the real thing. After resisting for nearly two years, I found it impossible to go on living in such a state of uncertainty, and I became a follower of Jesus.
So, some have asked, doesn't your brain explode? Can you both pursue an understanding of how life works using the tools of genetics and molecular biology, and worship a creator God? Aren't evolution and faith in God incompatible? Can a scientist believe in miracles like the resurrection?
Actually, I find no conflict here, and neither apparently do the 40 percent of working scientists who claim to be believers. Yes, evolution by descent from a common ancestor is clearly true. If there was any lingering doubt about the evidence from the fossil record, the study of DNA provides the strongest possible proof of our relatedness to all other living things.
But why couldn't this be God's plan for creation? True, this is incompatible with an ultra-literal interpretation of Genesis, but long before Darwin, there were many thoughtful interpreters like St. Augustine, who found it impossible to be exactly sure what the meaning of that amazing creation story was supposed to be. So attaching oneself to such literal interpretations in the face of compelling scientific evidence pointing to the ancient age of Earth and the relatedness of living things by evolution seems neither wise nor necessary for the believer.
I have found there is a wonderful harmony in the complementary truths of science and faith. The God of the Bible is also the God of the genome. God can be found in the cathedral or in the laboratory. By investigating God's majestic and awesome creation, science can actually be a means of worship.
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Good Wednesday makes more sense
I ran this article over on my main blog last year on Good Wednesday. I think it is appropriate to re-print it again here, for your benefit.
Was Jesus Really Three Days and Three Nights in the Heart of the Earth?
by R.A. Torrey (1856-1928)
In the twelfth chapter of Matthew’s gospel, Jesus is reported as saying, “As Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” (Matt. 12:40). According to the commonly accepted tradition of the church, Jesus was crucified on Friday, dying at 3 PM, or somewhere between 3 PM and sundown, and was raised from the dead very early in the morning of the following Sunday. Many readers of the Bible are puzzled to know how the interval between late Friday afternoon and early Sunday morning can be figured out to be three days and three nights. It seems rather to be two nights, one day, and a very small portion of another day.
The solution proposed by many commentators to this apparent difficulty, is that “a day and a night” is simply another way of saying, “a day,” and the ancient Jews reckoned a fraction of a day as a whole day. So they say there was a part (a very small part) of Friday (or a day and a night), all of Saturday, another day (or a day and a night); and part of Sunday (a very small part), another day (or a day and a night). There are many persons whom this solution does not altogether satisfy, and I confess it does not satisfy me at all. It seems to me to be a makeshift, and a very weak makeshift. Is there any solution that is altogether satisfactory? There is.
The first fact to be noticed in the proper solution is that the Bible nowhere says or implies that Jesus was crucified and died on Friday. It is said that Jesus was crucified on “the day before the Sabbath” (Mark 15:42). As the Jewish weekly Sabbath came on Saturday (beginning at sunset the day before), the conclusion is naturally drawn that, since Jesus was crucified the day before the Sabbath, He must have been crucified on Friday.
However, it is a well-known fact, to which the Bible bears abundant testimony, that the Jews had other Sabbaths besides the weekly Sabbath that fell on Saturday. The first day of the Passover week, no matter upon what day of the week it came, was always a Sabbath (Exodus 12:16; Leviticus 23:7; Numbers 28:16-18). The question therefore arises whether the Sabbath that followed Christ’s crucifixion was the weekly Sabbath (Saturday) or the Passover Sabbath, falling on the fifteenth day of Nisan, which came that year on Thursday.
Now, the Bible does not leave us to speculate which Sabbath is meant in this instance; for John tells us in so many words, in John 19:14, the day on which Jesus was tried and crucified was “the preparation of the Passover” (italics added). In other words, it was not the day before the weekly Sabbath (that is, Saturday), but it was the day before the Passover Sabbath, which came that year on Thursday- that is to say, the day on which Jesus Christ was crucified was a Wednesday. John makes this as clear as day.
The gospel of John was written later than the other Gospels, and scholars have for a long time noticed that in various places there was an evident intention to correct false impressions that one might get from reading the other Gospels. One of these false impressions was that Jesus ate the Passover with His disciples at the regular time of the Passover. To correct this false impression, John clearly states that He ate it the evening before, and that He Himself died on the cross at the very moment the Passover lambs were being slain “between the two evenings” on the fourteenth day of Nisan. (See Exodus 12:6 in the Hebrew, and the Revised Version margin.)
God’s real Paschal Lamb, Jesus, of whom all other paschal lambs offered through the centuries were only types, was therefore slain at the very time appointed by God. Everything about the Passover Lamb was fulfilled in Jesus. First, He was a Lamb without blemish and without spot (Exodus 12:5). Second, He was chosen on the tenth day of Nisan (Exodus 12:3); for it was on the tenth day of the month, the preceding Saturday, that the triumphal entry into Jerusalem was made.
We know this because He came from Jericho to Bethany six days before the Passover (John 12:1). That would be six days before Thursday, which would be Friday. Furthermore, it was on the next day that the entry into Jerusalem was made (John 12:12 and following), that is, on Saturday, the tenth day of Nisan. It was also on this same day that Judas went to the chief priests and offered to betray Jesus for thirty pieces of silver (Matthew 26:6-16 and Mark 14:3-11). As it was after the supper in the house of Simon the leper, and as the supper occurred late on Friday or early on Saturday, after sunset, after the supper would necessarily be on the tenth of Nisan. This being the price set on Him by the chief priests, it was, of course, the buying or taking to them of a lamb, which according to law must occur on the tenth day of Nisan. Furthermore, they put the exact value on the Lamb that Old Testament prophecy predicted (Zechariah 11:12 and Matthew 26:15).
Third, not a bone of Him was broken when he was killed (John 19:36; Exodus 12:46; Numbers 9:12; Psalm 34:20). And fourth, He was killed on the fourteenth of Nisan, between the evenings, just before the beginning of the fifteenth day, at sundown (Exodus 12:6). If we take just exactly what the Bible says, that Jesus was slain before the Passover Sabbath, the type is marvelously fulfilled in every detail; but if we accept the traditional theory that Jesus was crucified on Friday, the type fails at many points.
Furthermore, if we accept the traditional view that Jesus was crucified on Friday and ate the Passover on the regular day of Passover, then the journey from Jericho to Bethany, which occurred six days before the Passover (John 12:1), would fall on a Saturday- that is the Jewish Sabbath. Such a journey on the Jewish Sabbath would be contrary to Jewish law.
Of course, it was impossible for Jesus to take such a journey on the Jewish Sabbath, because His triumphal entry into Jerusalem was on the Jewish Sabbath, Saturday. This was altogether possible, for the Bible elsewhere tells us that Bethany was a Sabbath’s day journey from Jerusalem (Acts 1:12 and Luke 24:50).
It has also been figured out by the astronomers that in the year A.D. 30, which is the commonly accepted year for the crucifixion of our Lord, the Passover was observed on Thursday, April 6, the moon being full that day. The chronologists who have supposed that the crucifixion took place on Friday have been greatly perplexed by this fact that in the year A.D. 30 the Passover occurred on Thursday.
One writer, in seeking a solution to the difficulty, has suggested that the crucifixion may have been in the year A.D. 33. Although the full moon was on a Thursday that year also, the time was only two and a half hours from being Friday. Consequently, he thinks that perhaps the Jews may have observed the Passover on Friday, instead, and that the crucifixion therefore took place on Thursday. However, when we accept exactly what the Bible says- namely, that Jesus was not crucified on the Passover day but on “the preparation for the Passover” (John 19:14) and that He was to be three days and three nights in the grave- then the fact that the “preparation of the Passover” that year was on a Wednesday and His resurrection early on the first day of the week, allows exactly three days and three nights in the grave.
To sum it all up, Jesus died just about sunset on Wednesday (April 5). Seventy-two hours later, exactly three days and three nights, at the beginning of the first day of the week, Saturday at sunset, He arose again from the grave. When the women visited the tomb in the morning just before dawn, they found the grave already empty.
From this, we are not driven to makeshift that any small portion of a day is reckoned as a whole day and night, but we find the statement of Jesus was literally true. Three days and three nights His body was dead and lay in the sepulchre. While His body lay dead, He Himself, being quickened in the Spirit (1 Peter 3:18), went into the heart of the earth and preached unto the spirits that were in prison (1 Peter 3:19).
The two men on the way to Emmaus early on the first day of the week, that is Sunday, said to Jesus, in speaking of the crucifixion and events accompanying it, “Besides all this, to day is the third day since these things were done” (Luke 24:21). Some people have objected to this, and it is said that, if the crucifixion took place on Wednesday, Sunday would be the fourth day since these things were done; but the answer is very simple.
These things were done at sunset, just as Thursday was beginning. They were therefore completed on Thursday, and the first day since Thursday would be Friday, the second day since Thursday would be Saturday, and “the third day since” Thursday would be Sunday, the first day of the week. So the supposed objection in reality supports the theory. On the other hand, if the crucifixion took place on Friday, by no manner of reckoning could Sunday be made “the third day since” these things were done.
There are many passages in the Scriptures that support the theory advanced above and that make it necessary to believe that Jesus died late on Wednesday. Some of them are as follows:
There is absolutely nothing in favor of a Friday crucifixion, but everything in the Scripture is perfectly harmonized by a Wednesday crucifixion. It is remarkable how many prophetical and typical passages of the Old Testament are fulfilled and how many seeming discrepancies in the gospel narratives are straightened out when we once come to understand that Jesus died on Wednesday, and not on Friday.
Was Jesus Really Three Days and Three Nights in the Heart of the Earth?
by R.A. Torrey (1856-1928)
In the twelfth chapter of Matthew’s gospel, Jesus is reported as saying, “As Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” (Matt. 12:40). According to the commonly accepted tradition of the church, Jesus was crucified on Friday, dying at 3 PM, or somewhere between 3 PM and sundown, and was raised from the dead very early in the morning of the following Sunday. Many readers of the Bible are puzzled to know how the interval between late Friday afternoon and early Sunday morning can be figured out to be three days and three nights. It seems rather to be two nights, one day, and a very small portion of another day.
The solution proposed by many commentators to this apparent difficulty, is that “a day and a night” is simply another way of saying, “a day,” and the ancient Jews reckoned a fraction of a day as a whole day. So they say there was a part (a very small part) of Friday (or a day and a night), all of Saturday, another day (or a day and a night); and part of Sunday (a very small part), another day (or a day and a night). There are many persons whom this solution does not altogether satisfy, and I confess it does not satisfy me at all. It seems to me to be a makeshift, and a very weak makeshift. Is there any solution that is altogether satisfactory? There is.
The first fact to be noticed in the proper solution is that the Bible nowhere says or implies that Jesus was crucified and died on Friday. It is said that Jesus was crucified on “the day before the Sabbath” (Mark 15:42). As the Jewish weekly Sabbath came on Saturday (beginning at sunset the day before), the conclusion is naturally drawn that, since Jesus was crucified the day before the Sabbath, He must have been crucified on Friday.
However, it is a well-known fact, to which the Bible bears abundant testimony, that the Jews had other Sabbaths besides the weekly Sabbath that fell on Saturday. The first day of the Passover week, no matter upon what day of the week it came, was always a Sabbath (Exodus 12:16; Leviticus 23:7; Numbers 28:16-18). The question therefore arises whether the Sabbath that followed Christ’s crucifixion was the weekly Sabbath (Saturday) or the Passover Sabbath, falling on the fifteenth day of Nisan, which came that year on Thursday.
Now, the Bible does not leave us to speculate which Sabbath is meant in this instance; for John tells us in so many words, in John 19:14, the day on which Jesus was tried and crucified was “the preparation of the Passover” (italics added). In other words, it was not the day before the weekly Sabbath (that is, Saturday), but it was the day before the Passover Sabbath, which came that year on Thursday- that is to say, the day on which Jesus Christ was crucified was a Wednesday. John makes this as clear as day.
The gospel of John was written later than the other Gospels, and scholars have for a long time noticed that in various places there was an evident intention to correct false impressions that one might get from reading the other Gospels. One of these false impressions was that Jesus ate the Passover with His disciples at the regular time of the Passover. To correct this false impression, John clearly states that He ate it the evening before, and that He Himself died on the cross at the very moment the Passover lambs were being slain “between the two evenings” on the fourteenth day of Nisan. (See Exodus 12:6 in the Hebrew, and the Revised Version margin.)
God’s real Paschal Lamb, Jesus, of whom all other paschal lambs offered through the centuries were only types, was therefore slain at the very time appointed by God. Everything about the Passover Lamb was fulfilled in Jesus. First, He was a Lamb without blemish and without spot (Exodus 12:5). Second, He was chosen on the tenth day of Nisan (Exodus 12:3); for it was on the tenth day of the month, the preceding Saturday, that the triumphal entry into Jerusalem was made.
We know this because He came from Jericho to Bethany six days before the Passover (John 12:1). That would be six days before Thursday, which would be Friday. Furthermore, it was on the next day that the entry into Jerusalem was made (John 12:12 and following), that is, on Saturday, the tenth day of Nisan. It was also on this same day that Judas went to the chief priests and offered to betray Jesus for thirty pieces of silver (Matthew 26:6-16 and Mark 14:3-11). As it was after the supper in the house of Simon the leper, and as the supper occurred late on Friday or early on Saturday, after sunset, after the supper would necessarily be on the tenth of Nisan. This being the price set on Him by the chief priests, it was, of course, the buying or taking to them of a lamb, which according to law must occur on the tenth day of Nisan. Furthermore, they put the exact value on the Lamb that Old Testament prophecy predicted (Zechariah 11:12 and Matthew 26:15).
Third, not a bone of Him was broken when he was killed (John 19:36; Exodus 12:46; Numbers 9:12; Psalm 34:20). And fourth, He was killed on the fourteenth of Nisan, between the evenings, just before the beginning of the fifteenth day, at sundown (Exodus 12:6). If we take just exactly what the Bible says, that Jesus was slain before the Passover Sabbath, the type is marvelously fulfilled in every detail; but if we accept the traditional theory that Jesus was crucified on Friday, the type fails at many points.
Furthermore, if we accept the traditional view that Jesus was crucified on Friday and ate the Passover on the regular day of Passover, then the journey from Jericho to Bethany, which occurred six days before the Passover (John 12:1), would fall on a Saturday- that is the Jewish Sabbath. Such a journey on the Jewish Sabbath would be contrary to Jewish law.
Of course, it was impossible for Jesus to take such a journey on the Jewish Sabbath, because His triumphal entry into Jerusalem was on the Jewish Sabbath, Saturday. This was altogether possible, for the Bible elsewhere tells us that Bethany was a Sabbath’s day journey from Jerusalem (Acts 1:12 and Luke 24:50).
It has also been figured out by the astronomers that in the year A.D. 30, which is the commonly accepted year for the crucifixion of our Lord, the Passover was observed on Thursday, April 6, the moon being full that day. The chronologists who have supposed that the crucifixion took place on Friday have been greatly perplexed by this fact that in the year A.D. 30 the Passover occurred on Thursday.
One writer, in seeking a solution to the difficulty, has suggested that the crucifixion may have been in the year A.D. 33. Although the full moon was on a Thursday that year also, the time was only two and a half hours from being Friday. Consequently, he thinks that perhaps the Jews may have observed the Passover on Friday, instead, and that the crucifixion therefore took place on Thursday. However, when we accept exactly what the Bible says- namely, that Jesus was not crucified on the Passover day but on “the preparation for the Passover” (John 19:14) and that He was to be three days and three nights in the grave- then the fact that the “preparation of the Passover” that year was on a Wednesday and His resurrection early on the first day of the week, allows exactly three days and three nights in the grave.
To sum it all up, Jesus died just about sunset on Wednesday (April 5). Seventy-two hours later, exactly three days and three nights, at the beginning of the first day of the week, Saturday at sunset, He arose again from the grave. When the women visited the tomb in the morning just before dawn, they found the grave already empty.
From this, we are not driven to makeshift that any small portion of a day is reckoned as a whole day and night, but we find the statement of Jesus was literally true. Three days and three nights His body was dead and lay in the sepulchre. While His body lay dead, He Himself, being quickened in the Spirit (1 Peter 3:18), went into the heart of the earth and preached unto the spirits that were in prison (1 Peter 3:19).
The two men on the way to Emmaus early on the first day of the week, that is Sunday, said to Jesus, in speaking of the crucifixion and events accompanying it, “Besides all this, to day is the third day since these things were done” (Luke 24:21). Some people have objected to this, and it is said that, if the crucifixion took place on Wednesday, Sunday would be the fourth day since these things were done; but the answer is very simple.
These things were done at sunset, just as Thursday was beginning. They were therefore completed on Thursday, and the first day since Thursday would be Friday, the second day since Thursday would be Saturday, and “the third day since” Thursday would be Sunday, the first day of the week. So the supposed objection in reality supports the theory. On the other hand, if the crucifixion took place on Friday, by no manner of reckoning could Sunday be made “the third day since” these things were done.
There are many passages in the Scriptures that support the theory advanced above and that make it necessary to believe that Jesus died late on Wednesday. Some of them are as follows:
For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (Matthew 12:40)
This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days. (Matthew 26:61)
Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save Thyself. (Matthew 27:40)
Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, after three days I will rise again. (Matthew 27:63)
The Son of man must suffer many things…and be killed, and after three days rise again. (Mark 8:31)
They shall kill him; and when he is killed, after three days he shall rise again. (Mark 9:31 RV)
They…shall scourge him, and shall kill him; and after three days he shall rise again. (Mark 10:34 RV)
Destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another made without hands. (Mark 14:58 RV)
Ah, thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself. (Mark 15:29-30)
Beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done. (Luke 24:21)
Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body. When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said. (John 2:19-22)
There is absolutely nothing in favor of a Friday crucifixion, but everything in the Scripture is perfectly harmonized by a Wednesday crucifixion. It is remarkable how many prophetical and typical passages of the Old Testament are fulfilled and how many seeming discrepancies in the gospel narratives are straightened out when we once come to understand that Jesus died on Wednesday, and not on Friday.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
