home
RSS
Pastor's reality food show pitch: Christians and Jews bonding over hot dogs
February 23rd, 2011
06:00 AM ET

Pastor's reality food show pitch: Christians and Jews bonding over hot dogs

By Gabe LaMonica, CNN

It was the hot dogs that broke down religious barriers.

Megachurch pastor Phil Hotsenpiller and his wife, Tammy, invited their Muslim, Jewish and Buddhist neighbors over to their Southern California home for an interfaith, multicultural meal.

But not just any meal: This one was being filmed as a pilot for a reality TV show based on Tammy Hotsenpiller’s book, “Taste of Humanity" – which she described as an attempt to “bring cultures together through cuisine.”

“I had everyone bring something from their country,” Tammy Hotsenpiller recalled, “and I thought, ‘Well what is America known for? I mean, apple pie and hot dogs.’ So I brought apple pie and hot dogs. We did a hot dog bar with all the condiments and everything else."

Their neighbors hadn’t gotten together in 20 years.

“And the first thing [our guests] asked was, ‘Was it kosher? Are they beef? Are they pork?’

"So it gave us an opportunity to talk about their conviction and why they don’t eat pork and what that means, and it really opened up some great opportunities of dialogue and conversation – just really over cuisine – all of us sitting down and talking about what our beliefs are."

The Hotsenpillers won’t say which networks they’re pitching the reality show to. Ashley Williams, who has worked as a segment producer for ABC's "The Bachelor," filmed the pilot. In 30 minute episodes, the Hotsenpilles say, the program would showcase dinners held in the homes of people from neighborhoods across America.

They’ve also shot two international pilots in Ethiopia and India.

Because of changing U.S. demographics, American food is defined less by hot dogs and apple pie and more by the cuisines of a multitude of cultures.

As Phil Hotsenpiller notes, “There’s no atheist food."

“I have friends that are atheists,” he said. “I can dialogue with them – we don’t agree – but it’s a whole lot easier to sit down and talk to someone of a different belief or non-belief system if we’ve got a piece of food in our hand and a fork in our hand and we’re trying to break down some barriers and build some understanding.

“I’m not going to become a Muslim, but that doesn’t mean I can’t eat with a Muslim, respect a Muslim, dialogue with a Muslim, and try to understand their perspective,” he said.

The Hotsenpillers are well traveled. In December they were in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, where they attended a dinner with representatives of more than two dozen embassies.

"As we sat next to each other filling our plates with one another’s cuisine – our plates were so beautiful – you could taste the culture through the basic food groups," Tammy Hotsenpiller said. "[Despite] the wars and prejudice and all kinds of issues [that] were going on in each of these people’s countries, cuisine was a way we could sit down and really bridge that.

"Most of us use the same basic ingredients in every culture – it’s just how we use the ingredients," she said.

"Just trying each other’s cuisine, not being afraid to try something new, will hopefully then open doors to conversation."

Hotsenpiller, who calls herself a “culture coach,” said, “Most people are intimidated by each other until you can sit down and really taste each other’s culture, through cuisine, conversation, costume, customs, so that’s really what the reality show is based on: merging into one another’s culture by sitting down and tasting humanity.”

In terms of their beliefs, Phil Hotsenpiller said, “We’re both of the Christian faith and we believe Christ is our savior and the Bible is our guide. At the same time we hold a really strong belief that we live in a world that we have to live together, and we want to find ways to respect people and honor people and the way they live their life and live with the freedom to choose and to thrive.”

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Africa • Belief • Christianity • Church • TV

soundoff (165 Responses)
  1. Wesley Wyatt

    In terms of their beliefs, Phil Hotsenpiller said, “We’re both of the Christian faith and we believe Christ is our savior and the Bible is our guide. At the same time we hold a really strong belief that we live in a world that we have to live together, and we want to find ways to respect people and honor people and the way they live their life and live with the freedom to choose and to thrive.”

    I am not trying to offend or insult anyone, but they are saying that Christ is THEIR Savior, and the Bible is THEIR guide. But that is not what the Bible teaches. It teaches that Christ is THE Savior and the Bible is THE guide. There aren't many roads and many gods that will get you to heaven. It's only Christ – whether you believe it or not. This is not my opinion or commentary. It's simply what the Bible teaches.

    February 23, 2011 at 3:37 pm |
  2. displeased

    Why would they use hotdogs to represent American cuisine? Hotdogs have got to be one of the most non-nutritional foods out there. Couldn't they make a pizza, or a hamburger, or tuna fish sandwich, or anything but hotdogs!

    February 23, 2011 at 3:36 pm |
    • Frogist

      @displeased:
      I thought hamburgers were more American than hot dogs myself.

      February 23, 2011 at 3:41 pm |
  3. Maty

    I'm not sure he meant "there's no atheist food" as an insult. I think he was trying to point out the fact that people have strong opinions, traditions or restrictions regarding food, regardless of their religion (or lack thereof) or cultural background.

    February 23, 2011 at 3:31 pm |
  4. Michael Kairis

    The idea of using cuisine to bridge the cultural gap is brillant! As people(s) learn to enbrace a respectful and appropriate "world view", the willingness to explore the sharing of foods will definately have a tremendous impact on how we view the world as a whole, each other, and ourselves. A refreshing concept! MK

    February 23, 2011 at 3:30 pm |
    • displeased

      It is a refreshing concept as long as they respect other cultures (for instance, don't serve pork hotdogs if they know Muslims don't eat pork).

      February 23, 2011 at 3:38 pm |
  5. Colin

    People love taking shots at Atheists. It's fear, it's looking over shoulders, it's the image in the side view mirror that's closer than it appears.

    There's no such thing as a "Religious" food item. I don't think it takes much brain power to realize that "Food" came before "Religion" in this particular "Chicken or the Egg" debate.

    February 23, 2011 at 3:28 pm |
  6. Marlene Tafoya

    PASTOR'S REALITY FOOD SHOW;
    I believe the concept of Cuisine to bridge cultural differences is a wonderful idea. This can be a perfect solution to create peace between the different cultures. In the process of sharing food, thoughts, and love for each other while all interacting together in an atmosphere of learning about each other, eating and laughing together and developing the comfort of being friends to share our lives, would make a friendlier, and more perfect world where culture and food can come alive.

    February 23, 2011 at 2:54 pm |
  7. Frogist

    I love this story! Or maybe I'm just totally hungry...

    I do share their ideas about culture. When people mi-gra-te to another country the longest lasting part of their culture is always the food. So it is very possible to share your culture and learn about your own culture through food. I'm not so sure it is really telling about religion though. I don't really know that many religious dietary restrictions. After you learn about hindus and cows, muslims, jews and pork, what's kosher and what's halaal, what else is really left in terms of religion and food? For Christmas, Americans eat turkey, West Indians drink punch a creme, the ja-panese eat strawberry shortcake, but that's not a matter of what religion they are. They are all Christians. It's only a matter of where they are from.
    Also I lol'd at "There's no atheist food." True! But I would think that could make it easier to converse with an atheist, because there are no cultural boundaries for atheism. Most likely you eat what they are eating too. Technically there's no Christian food either... unless you count the wafers and wine or maybe Easter eggs? And odds are you will meet your jewish friend from the gym, your muslim neighbour and you atheist boss in the Star-bucks getting coffee anyways.

    BTW This article reminds me of a place I heard of recently in Philadelphia called Conflict Kitchen. It's really just a little food stall that sells only one kind of food. And the food is always from a place that the US is at conflict with. It serves up food from that region and some facts about the country and it's people. It's trying to give a different viewpoint of what the people from these countries are like other than what we just see on the news.

    Forgive the dashes and multi-posts... I can't find what the filter is censoring...

    February 23, 2011 at 2:45 pm |
  8. David Johnson

    @Debbie B.

    You said: "God did create the first man in the Garden...His plan was that we be without sin....He also gave us free choice-Adam and Eve chose sin"

    Before they ate the fruit, Adam and Eve did not know what sin was. Why did god have the tree in the garden in the first place?

    Cheers!

    February 23, 2011 at 2:43 pm |
  9. Debbie B.

    God did create the first man in the Garden...His plan was that we be without sin....He also gave us free choice-Adam and Eve chose sin.....We are born with sinful natures but and so we need a Savior-read Gen. 1-3. I applaud Tammy's effort to bring cultures together with food (Something we can all argee on and enjoy....we need to grow older with open minds and teachable spirits-this helps!!!!

    February 23, 2011 at 2:11 pm |
    • The Bobinator

      > God did create the first man in the Garden...His plan was that we be without sin....He also gave us free choice

      So what you're saying is that God was not all knowing and all powerful when he created Adam. Because if he was, he would have known Adam would have failed.

      If God is all powerful and all knowing, God created Adam with faults (for we are not as God is) knowing that these faults would lead to the failure of God's test.

      Either way, the story doesn't make any sense and is contradictory.

      PS: An omnipotent and omniscient God cannot by defition allow us to have free will. That's the claims of the bible.

      February 23, 2011 at 2:38 pm |
    • The Bobinator

      > we need to grow older with open minds and teachable spirits-this helps!!!!

      And yet you don't have an open mind. I'm open to the concept of the bible being true. You're not open to the concept of the bible being false.

      Perhaps you should take your own advice and think about what you believe.

      February 23, 2011 at 2:39 pm |
  10. Steve the real one

    The Bobinator
    By the way, if you accept the bible as absolute truth, God is responsible for sin. God creates us with flaws. For we are not perfect like him. God could create a perfect being. God knows this flaw will cause some humans to do bad things.
    Humans do bad things. Let's take a look at something else. Ford creates cars with flaws. They can create a better car, but it will cost too much. Ford knows this flaw will cause some cars to fail. Some cars fail. The difference here is that you'd be saying God isn't responsible while at the same time taking your Ford into repair and demanding that they are responsible and it should be fixed.
    -----
    Look. Your Ford example is ridiculous. Why? You are comparing HUMAN effort (Ford) to Divine effort! God made Adam perfect. He and Eve fell due to choice! Sin entered the world! God yet had a plan to address sin....Jesus Christ! Down play free will and choice if you want to. You rejecting it does not eliminate it! There will be not one excuse! Not one!

    February 23, 2011 at 1:41 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Steve the real one

      You said: "Down play free will and choice if you want to. You rejecting it does not eliminate it! "

      If God knows the future, that means that the future is predictable and unchangeable. This, in turn, means that our actions are predetermined. If god is all knowing, free will is an illusion.

      This also binds god, in that He knows what he will do in the future, and He must do it.

      Let's look at Jesus and his predictions that Judas would betray him and Peter would deny him.
      Those were future events. Do you think Judas could have used his free will to opt out? Not, if Jesus/God was omniscient. Same goes for Peter.

      The actions of Peter and Judas were predetermined. They had no choice.

      Also, note that if future events are not predetermined, Biblical prophecies would not be possible.

      What about the child who is murdered by a monster, or a people slaughtered by a stronger opponent (or a god)?
      Did they choose to be harmed? Where was their free will? These acts show that the strong or the people in power have greater free will than their victims. Hmmm...

      If god has a "plan for each of us", then that pretty much rules out free will.

      Jeremiah 29:11
      For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the LORD, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.

      "You saw me before I was born and scheduled each day of my life before I began to breathe. Every day was recorded in your book!" [Psalm 139:16]

      Ephesians 1:11 "We have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will."

      "this man [Christ Jesus] delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God" (Acts 2:23a NASB).

      The 6 point Calvinists believe our fates are sealed, even before we are born. This would mean that god allows humans to be born, knowing they will someday burn forever. Seems wrong to me, somehow, even for a mysterious god.

      There is no evidence that a god gives or safeguards human will.

      Cheers!

      February 23, 2011 at 2:06 pm |
    • SeanNJ

      @Steve the real one: If Adam and Eve were perfect, why would they have made an imperfect choice? It's nonsensical.

      February 23, 2011 at 2:24 pm |
    • Steve the real one

      David, We have a choice to do evil or do good. We have a choice to seek after God or reject Him. We have a choice between Heaven or Hell. Free will! Free choice!

      God does have a plan for us all. Guess what? That plan is NOT forced upon anyone. You have to (...wait for it, wait for it...here comes that pesky little word again) CHOOSE to particpate in His plan! I choose to, you do not. That sums us the primary difference between you and me. You may want to stick with "science". You are not doing too well with scriptures! Just some friendly advice that you can CHOOSE to accept or reject!

      February 23, 2011 at 2:29 pm |
    • Logicrevealsall

      @ David Johnson

      In any situation, it is easy to say there was no real choice. But let's look at your examples.

      You said,
      "Let's look at Jesus and his predictions that Judas would betray him and Peter would deny him.
      Those were future events. Do you think Judas could have used his free will to opt out? Not, if Jesus/God was omniscient. Same goes for Peter.

      The actions of Peter and Judas were predetermined. They had no choice."

      If I were to say to someone "David Johnson will post on this board at some point in the near future." Does that mean you no longer have a choice whether to post or not? Of course not. I'm just using past actions as a way to determine your next step. In Jesus' case, he already knew what choice Judas would make, and was correct.

      Example #2
      You Said
      "If God knows the future, that means that the future is predictable and unchangeable. This, in turn, means that our actions are predetermined. If god is all knowing, free will is an illusion."

      This takes some understanding to grasp. If, for examples sake, we concede that God is all knowing and omnipitent, then we can begin to understand what he means when he says he knows the future. We tend to look at things from a perspective that puts human limitations on things. For instance, we cannot know the future until it has happened. So you're stating something that would be a fact if God where bound by human limitations. For example, If there were such a thing as a time machine, I could easily go into the future and see what the result of this discussion would be. I could then come back and tell you the result with absolute certainty, because I had seen it for myself. You would still have the free will to change the argument, but if you chose to stay the course, my prediction would be correct without robbing you of your free will. To truely argue that God is incorrect is an excercise in futility as humans cannot understand the level that God operates on.
      Finally, this one.
      "What about the child who is murdered by a monster, or a people slaughtered by a stronger opponent (or a god)?
      Did they choose to be harmed? Where was their free will? These acts show that the strong or the people in power have greater free will than their victims. Hmmm..."

      If I choose to walk down the middle of the street, and get hit by a bus, was I somehow robbed of my free will? If a group of people choose to go against a stronger opponent, that was their choice. They may not have chosen to be defeated, but that is called a consequence. In my analogy, I didn't choose to get hit by a bus, it was simply a consequence of my choice to walk down the middle of the street.

      February 23, 2011 at 2:35 pm |
    • Reality

      And then there was "god-inspired", 1st century Paul who said:

      In 1 Corinthians 15, "If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith."

      "Heaven is a Spirit state" as per JPII and Aquinas i.e. there can be no bodies. i.e. there was and never will be any physical resurrection/ascension of human bodies" aka there was no Easter.

      And is it not ironical that JPII along with Aquinas are the ones who put meaning to the words "If Christ has not been raised, your faith is useless."

      February 23, 2011 at 2:40 pm |
    • Steve the real one

      @SeanNJ
      @Steve the real one: If Adam and Eve were perfect, why would they have made an imperfect choice? It's nonsensical.
      ---–
      Reasonable question that you will not like the answer to. Adam and Eve had all the power and dominion they needed to say no and place the devil in his place. They failed because they choose poorly. They made a choice! Humanity has been paying for that choose since that day. When we fail to consider the consequences of our choices it is easy to choose wrongly!

      February 23, 2011 at 2:52 pm |
    • SeanNJ

      @Steve the real one

      Reasonable question that you will not like the answer to. Adam and Eve had all the power and dominion they needed to say no and place the devil in his place. They failed because they choose poorly. They made a choice! Humanity has been paying for that choose since that day. When we fail to consider the consequences of our choices it is easy to choose wrongly!
      --

      Perfect creatures are incapable of imperfection, by definition. Your answer is unsatisfactory. You must redefine "perfection," or cease to use that adjective for that explanation to work.

      February 23, 2011 at 2:59 pm |
    • The Bobinator

      > If I were to say to someone "David Johnson will post on this board at some point in the near future." Does that mean you no longer have a choice whether to post or not? Of course not. I'm just using past actions as a way to determine your next step. In Jesus' case, he already knew what choice Judas would make, and was correct.

      First flaw. Your "educated guess" is not the same thing as "God knowing absolutely". Second flaw, you did not create David Johnson. God presumably did.

      > This takes some understanding to grasp. If, for examples sake, we concede that God is all knowing and omnipitent, then we can begin to understand what he means when he says he knows the future. We tend to look at things from a perspective that puts human limitations on things. For instance, we cannot know the future until it has happened. So you're stating something that would be a fact if God where bound by human limitations. For example, If there were such a thing as a time machine, I could easily go into the future and see what the result of this discussion would be. I could then come back and tell you the result with absolute certainty, because I had seen it for myself. You would still have the free will to change the argument, but if you chose to stay the course, my prediction would be correct without robbing you of your free will. To truely argue that God is incorrect is an excercise in futility as humans cannot understand the level that God operates on.

      Again, you're missing the fact that God created David Johnson and deliberately made him this way. God made him knowing how he'd act and what he'd do.

      Here's a correct example for you to think about.

      You are a mechanic. Not just any mechanic. You are the best mechanic in the world. You know how a car will react to any change of the engine, any tweak to the timing and any modification to the shocks. Your knowledge is I daresay perfect.

      You decide to create a new engine a car building it from a limitless array of parts. When you're done, you know that the engine you have built will run hot and if it's run too hard, it will crack and fail.

      You take the car out, and run it long and hot. The engine cracks.

      Did the engine have the free will not to crack? Do you blame the engine which you made for the fault that you imbued to it?

      > If I choose to walk down the middle of the street, and get hit by a bus, was I somehow robbed of my free will? If a group of people choose to go against a stronger opponent, that was their choice. They may not have chosen to be defeated, but that is called a consequence. In my analogy, I didn't choose to get hit by a bus, it was simply a consequence of my choice to walk down the middle of the street.

      You're now switching topics. The core concept of the discussion was that God knows the future and therefore knows what we will do. Given that perspective, God does not allow us to choose when we will die. Our free will in fact is taken from us.

      February 23, 2011 at 3:05 pm |
    • Frogist

      @SeanNJ & Steve, the real one: Why did god make "choice" itself? Why not spare Adam and Eve and all the rest of us the option of hell so that we could live forever in a beautiful garden worshipping god directly? Instead he made Man and made choice, knowing in his infinite wisdom that we would be condemned forever. It points to a god more interested in cruel games than pure love, doesn't it? I guess while we're at it, why make Man at all? I'm not trying to be facetious, these are just the questions for which I can't find satisfying answers.

      February 23, 2011 at 3:27 pm |
    • Reality

      Even Catholic high school students are taught that Adam and Eve did not exist. Myths abound in the OT and NT.

      February 23, 2011 at 3:31 pm |
    • Steve the real one

      @SeanNJ

      @Steve the real one
      Perfect creatures are incapable of imperfection, by definition. Your answer is unsatisfactory. You must define "perfection," or cease to use that adjective for that explanation to work.
      ------
      1. Not trying to satisfy you
      2. Look up perfection on your own
      3. Will not cease to use the word perfections or perfect. Why? Because God originally created them that way
      4. The biblical explaination works fine by me!

      February 23, 2011 at 3:34 pm |
    • SeanNJ

      @Frogist:

      You said:

      Why did god make "choice" itself? Why not spare Adam and Eve and all the rest of us the option of hell so that we could live forever in a beautiful garden worshipping god directly? Instead he made Man and made choice, knowing in his infinite wisdom that we would be condemned forever. It points to a god more interested in cruel games than pure love, doesn't it? I guess while we're at it, why make Man at all? I'm not trying to be facetious, these are just the questions for which I can't find satisfying answers.

      -

      I agree wholeheartedly. I'm merely taking the circuitous, meandering, ultimately pointless route of establishing a thread of logic before it's summarily dismissed with some tripe about god being incomprehensible. Of course, we could then make the argument that if god is truly incomprehensible, why would he punish those that, by their very nature, can't grasp the concept.

      February 23, 2011 at 3:37 pm |
    • Logicrevealsall

      @The Bobinator

      First flaw. Your "educated guess" is not the same thing as "God knowing absolutely". Second flaw, you did not create David Johnson. God presumably did.

      I eluded to this difference by stating "n Jesus' case, he already knew what choice Judas would make, and was correct."
      I can't argue your mechanic analogy for one simple reason; An inanimate object has no free will. However, I can see your argument with my initial analogy. This one may be a little closer to appeasing you. Let's presume I have a pet bird and a pet cat. Now I know that my pet cat wants to eat that bird in the worst kind of way. But the cat can't reach the bird because it's cage is elevated. I know that the cat will eat the bird if it gets a chance. I also know that if the cage is open, my bird will fly into reach of the cat. Yet, in the interest of free will for the bird, I open the cage door. The bird promptly flies out, the cat catches it, and eats it. Does God know when and how we are going to die? Yes. But like me, even though he knows that if we leave our "cage" we will be "eaten", in the interest of free will, he opens the cage door. We then have the option to leave the safety of the cage or stay.

      I did not switch topics with the second analogy. David Johnson posed this question;
      "What about the child who is murdered by a monster, or a people slaughtered by a stronger opponent (or a god)?
      Did they choose to be harmed? Where was their free will? These acts show that the strong or the people in power have greater free will than their victims. Hmmm..."

      I simply responded to that.

      February 23, 2011 at 3:42 pm |
    • SeanNJ

      @Steve the real one

      @Steve the real one
      Perfect creatures are incapable of imperfection, by definition. Your answer is unsatisfactory. You must define "perfection," or cease to use that adjective for that explanation to work.
      --
      1. Not trying to satisfy you
      2. Look up perfection on your own
      3. Will not cease to use the word perfections or perfect. Why? Because God originally created them that way
      4. The biblical explaination works fine by me!

      --

      1) Since your response is an answer to my question, I'm the only one you need to satisfy at the moment.
      2) My apologies. My original post should've said REdefine "perfection." I wasn't asking for a link to Merriam-Webster.
      3) I repeat: a perfect creature could not, by definition, make an imperfect choice. However, that's exactly what you're claiming they did. Presumably, the bible says the same.
      4) I'm asking for you to elaborate on the biblical explanation. There must be some other way you can explain it to me. We have to agree on the meanings of the words we use, or we can't communicate effectively. Agreed?

      February 23, 2011 at 3:45 pm |
    • Brittany

      Steve, if God made everything to be perfect – why did he invent sin, which is by definition, unperfect?

      February 23, 2011 at 3:46 pm |
    • SeanNJ

      @Steve the real one: And, reading back, I noticed that I did, in fact say "redefine."

      If you're going to quote my posts, please do me the courtesy of not editing them to confuse the conversation.

      February 23, 2011 at 3:49 pm |
    • Steve the real one

      Frogist

      @SeanNJ & Steve, the real one: Why did god make "choice" itself? Why not spare Adam and Eve and all the rest of us the option of hell so that we could live forever in a beautiful garden worshipping god directly? Instead he made Man and made choice, knowing in his infinite wisdom that we would be condemned forever. It points to a god more interested in cruel games than pure love, doesn't it? I guess while we're at it, why make Man at all? I'm not trying to be facetious, these are just the questions for which I can't find satisfying answers.
      --------
      Hi Frogist,

      God did not create robots. He created humans. His desire is for us to choose to love Him and obey Him. Love is not love if it is forced and not chosen. Frogist are you married or have children? If so, did your spouse choose to love you and marry you? Or was she forced to do so? Which of those 2 examples is real love? Which of those 2 examples you prefer? Why can we desire true love but not God? True love is a choice! That is why he gave free will! I remember when my girls were toddlers. When I came home from work they would run to the door to greet me with hugs, kisses, smiles and a I love you Daddy! That was not forced! They chose to greet me and they chose to love me! just as I chose to love them! It is no different with God He wants us to freely love Him! He deserves that and much more!
      Why make a man? We don't have all the answers, Frogist. God does not need us. We however, need Him!

      February 23, 2011 at 3:54 pm |
    • Frogist

      LOL@SeanNJ
      Oh I see!
      I too find it aggravating that the insistent religious explain everything away with god, but in the end say god is unknowable, all the while proclaiming judgements about what s/he wants us to do. Either s/he is unknowable and therefore any proclamations about god must be made with caution and humility and leeway for other ideas, OR you can know god and use your god-given human intellect to judge his actions. You can't have it both ways as I see it.

      February 23, 2011 at 3:58 pm |
    • Steve the real one

      @SeanNJ
      @Steve the real one: And, reading back, I noticed that I did, in fact say "redefine."
      If you're going to quote my posts, please do me the courtesy of not editing them to confuse the conversation.
      -----
      You are correct. That was not intentional! Sorry!

      February 23, 2011 at 4:02 pm |
    • Colin

      You can read Genesis over and over as many times as you like, I will never try and take your security blanket away from you.

      However, I'm going to read to my children about Y-Chromosomal Adam and Mitochondrial Eve, I'm going to teach my children about Charles Darwin and Evolution, and Phil Collins or Peter Gabriel are going to be the first Genesis my children ever get exposed to. I'll teach them about people like John Brown, who actually existed, instead of people like Adam, Eve, Jesus Christ, and Moses. That's my choice just as you have made yours.

      February 23, 2011 at 4:03 pm |
    • Steve the real one

      Brittany
      Steve, if God made everything to be perfect – why did he invent sin, which is by definition, unperfect?
      ---–
      Brittany, God id not create sin! It originated in the heart of one of His created beings, Lucifer better known now as the devil or satan!

      February 23, 2011 at 4:10 pm |
    • SeanNJ

      Steve the real one said: "Brittany, God id not create sin! It originated in the heart of one of His created beings, Lucifer better known now as the devil or satan!"

      @Brittany: So as you can see, there exists something that god did not create. Leads me to wonder what other imperfect things might exist that god also did not create. 😉

      February 23, 2011 at 4:14 pm |
    • Steve the real one

      @Colin
      You can read Genesis over and over as many times as you like, I will never try and take your security blanket away from you. However, I'm going to read to my children about Y-Chromosomal Adam and Mitochondrial Eve, I'm going to teach my children about Charles Darwin and Evolution, and Phil Collins or Peter Gabriel are going to be the first Genesis my children ever get exposed to. I'll teach them about people like John Brown, who actually existed, instead of people like Adam, Eve, Jesus Christ, and Moses. That's my choice just as you have made yours.
      -----
      Your choice. I am not arging with you on your choice! Nor am I looking to take that choice from you. Neither wilI I insult you for your choice! Jesus NEVER forced himself on anyone an di will not force Him on you either! Yet I will defined what I believe! You guys KNOW what I believe yet I am still being asked and when I answer (which by now, should not take anyone by surprise) you can read what comes next! Not pointing you out specifically just a general statement!

      February 23, 2011 at 4:23 pm |
    • Colin

      I should have also included in my original post that I would definitely come over to your place for dinner and you would be welcome to come to mine.

      John Brown said at his trial "I see a book kissed here which I suppose to be the Bible, or at least the New Testament, which teaches me that all things whatsoever I would that men should do to me, I should do even so to them. It teaches me, further, to remember them that are in bonds as bound with them. I endeavored to act upon that instruction. I say I am yet too young to understand that God is any respecter of persons. I believe that to have interfered as I have done—as I have always freely admitted I have done—in behalf of His despised poor is no wrong but right."

      Your good book does have some very good things to say can and has inspired greatness in man.

      February 23, 2011 at 4:29 pm |
    • Steve the real one

      SeanNJ
      Steve the real one said: "Brittany, God id not create sin! It originated in the heart of one of His created beings, Lucifer better known now as the devil or satan!"
      @Brittany: So as you can see, there exists something that god did not create. Leads me to wonder what other imperfect things might exist that god also did not create
      ------
      Well SeanNJ, if you had 1 million lifetimes, you could not disprove God!

      February 23, 2011 at 4:38 pm |
    • SeanNJ

      Well SeanNJ, if you had 1 million lifetimes, you could not disprove God!

      --
      @Steve the real one: No need. You're doing a fantastic job all on your own. I'm going home to grill some hot dogs for dinner.

      February 23, 2011 at 4:42 pm |
    • Frogist

      @Steve, the real one:
      Hi! Seems to me any god who would create a being just for the sake of having someone to love him/her is a selfish and needy individual indeed. And paired with the fact that if you choose what he does not like he can filet you in hell for an eternity, s/he is also sadistic. A truly unhealthy relationship. And according to every self-help book ever written, not love.

      If I have a child with the sole purpose of making someone love me, well that's screwed up right there. But then my child makes choices I don't like, I decided to set him on fire, I would be considered cruel, and abusive. I don't really see the difference here.

      You say we do not have all the answers but you have given me answers that are impossible to know whether they are true. And horrifying, if in fact they are. None of what you are saying is making me want to be closer to your god.

      February 23, 2011 at 4:57 pm |
    • Frogist

      @Steve: Put another way. You mentioned your children who greet you with hugs when you get home from work. Would you expect the same from them if you told them, the only reason we had you is so you love me no matter what, and if you tell daddy a fib or take any candy from the jar without asking, he will put you in the oven and cook you forever? They will run screaming from you until someone calls the authorities.

      February 23, 2011 at 5:07 pm |
    • The Bobinator

      > Look. Your Ford example is ridiculous. Why? You are comparing HUMAN effort (Ford) to Divine effort! God made Adam perfect.

      If Adam is less then God, how can Adam be perfect as well. Doesn't make sense dude. You just rambling?

      > He and Eve fell due to choice!

      No, they fell due to God's design of their minds. God imbued Adam and Eve's minds with faults (not perfect like God's), and then made it in such a way that he knew they'd fail. I have to ask, is your God retarded? God doesn't want sin, but knows that if he creates Adam and Eve with these flaws of their minds (they're not as smart as God), they will create it.

      The only reasonable conclusion is that God intended sin to occur. There's no other position you can take.

      > Sin entered the world! God yet had a plan to address sin....Jesus Christ!

      So God creates sin, then develops a complicated blood ritual to sacrifice his own son to himself so that he can do away with sin? I thought your God was all powerful. Why couldn't he just say "bam, there's no more sin". Seems mildly retarded to me.

      > Down play free will and choice if you want to. You rejecting it does not eliminate it! There will be not one excuse! Not one!

      It's not downplayed dude. It's impossible with the description of God in the bible. What aren't you getting? There's not one excuse? How about "This book is internally inconsistent and has lead to thousands of different interpretations." All of which God would know about.

      When will you learn Steve? All these statements of "There will be no excuse" "The bible is the word of God", etc are self serving statements to command you to believe.

      Honestly, I don't know how you manage to keep tricking yourself. Some people don't want to wake up from the Matrix I suppose.

      February 23, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Logicrevealsall

      The Christian god's attribute of omniscience makes human free will impossible. If the future can be known, then it is not random. It is not dependent on choices or events. Everything is predestined. It doesn't matter if god resides in another dimension or is made of spirit or yellow marshmallow like an Easter Peep.

      Re: Example 1
      You said, "If I were to say to someone "David Johnson will post on this board at some point in the near future." Does that mean you no longer have a choice whether to post or not? Of course not. I'm just using past actions as a way to determine your next step. In Jesus' case, he already knew what choice Judas would make, and was correct."

      Your premise here, seems to be that God has to "learn". God, according to your view, is limited and he has to make educated guesses on what people will do in the future, based upon what people have done in the past.

      Christians believe their god is omniscient – He knows the past, the present, and the future. Omniscience is the capacity to know everything infinitely. Are you denying god has this ability? The evidence from the bible suggest He is all knowing.

      Jesus makes a very specific prediction concerning Peter. He said Peter would deny Him 3 times before the rooster crowed.
      This prediction came true. Several predictions about future events were made in the bible. Apparently, they came true.

      Re: Example 2
      You said: "This takes some understanding to grasp. If, for examples sake, we concede that God is all knowing and omnipitent, then we can begin to understand what he means when he says he knows the future. We tend to look at things from a perspective that puts human limitations on things. For instance, we cannot know the future until it has happened. So you're stating something that would be a fact if God where bound by human limitations. For example, If there were such a thing as a time machine, I could easily go into the future and see what the result of this discussion would be. I could then come back and tell you the result with absolute certainty, because I had seen it for myself. You would still have the free will to change the argument, but if you chose to stay the course, my prediction would be correct without robbing you of your free will. To truely argue that God is incorrect is an excercise in futility as humans cannot understand the level that God operates on."

      You said, "We tend to look at things from a perspective that puts human limitations on things. For instance, we cannot know the future until it has happened."

      Once the future has happened, it is no longer the future. It is the present and rapidly becoming the past. *Yawn*

      Your argument is not logical. If the future can be known then it cannot be changed. That is why it is the future. What god sees Himself doing in the future, He must do. If He does something else, then He is not omniscient. The future He saw, was not truly the future. Get it?

      By your logic: You saw the future in your time machine and X was the outcome. You come back and tell me. I now have the option to change and thereby have a different future, Y. Or I could not change and the X outcome would result.

      No. Because, the outcome you would have seen, would include all the actions and events. If this wasn't so, then you didn't see the future. If you truly saw the future, then it could not be changed. Just like god would not be omniscient, if He did something to change the future He saw. Being all powerful, He would be able to do this.

      Re: Example 3

      You said: "If I choose to walk down the middle of the street, and get hit by a bus, was I somehow robbed of my free will? "

      No, not if it was your choice. Right?

      But:
      I think I have a choice, to wear my black running shoes or my brown running shoes. But actually, god being omniscient, already knows which ones I will choose. If god knows I will choose black, could I choose brown? No. Because, that would mean god would not be omniscient.

      If god knows the future, and he manages our days, then free will is an illusion.

      As evidence I offer the word of god:
      "You saw me before I was born and scheduled each day of my life before I began to breathe. Every day was recorded in your book!" [Psalm 139:16]

      If a group of people choose to go against a stronger opponent, that was their choice. They may not have chosen to be defeated, but that is called a consequence.

      That's right. They had a choice.

      A child attacked by a monster had no free will. Was this the plan god had for the child? Children, including babies, murdered in the bible had no free will. And the murders were the plan of god.

      People say free will is a gift from god. But it is not given in equal quant_ity.

      February 23, 2011 at 6:14 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Logicrevealsall

      I had some problems here at work, so I couldn't get back to you as quickly as I wanted. I have posted a response now, and look forward to your reply.

      Cheers!

      February 23, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Steve the real one

      You said: "Brittany, God id not create sin! It originated in the heart of one of His created beings, Lucifer better known now as the devil or satan!"

      And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. – Genesis 3:22

      I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (Isaiah 45:7, KJV)

      Also God is not good or moral.

      God directly or at His insistence, murdered men, women and children including babies. Is this good? Is this moral?
      God had a man believe he was going to sacrifice his son to Him. Do you know how traumatic that would be for a father and his son?
      If you had the power would you do this? Would you be so insecure? Is this good? Is this moral?

      There was a man who loved God. God made a bet with Satan that even if the man were tortured, his Possessions taken, and his children killed, he would still love God and never curse Him. God won the bet.
      Would you do that? Would you kill a man's children for a bet? Is this good? Is this moral?

      God sent a bear to kill a group of children, because they had teased one of His prophets.
      Did the children deserve to die, because they teased a bald man? Is this good? Is this moral?

      God allowed a man to sacrifice his daughter to Him, for giving the man a victory in battle.
      Is this good? Is this moral?

      God created a place He can send people to be burned for all eternity. Could an all good god do this?
      If a puppy wet on the floor, would you hold it over a burner? Even for a second?

      Jesus had this to say:
      Matthew 7:17 Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.
      Luke 6:43 "No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit.

      A good god can't do evil things!

      So, god could be evil or he could not exist and all the events we see, are just coincidence and random chance.

      Cheers!

      February 23, 2011 at 6:41 pm |
  11. Steve the real one

    SeanNJ
    @The Bobinator: Save your breath. The only thing the rational ones can do is to prevent the irrational beliefs of a shrinking majority to have any impact on the lives of the rest of us. They'll be marginalized soon enough. Evolution will see to it.
    ----
    If that is what you believe, just sit back and wait for that great day! Your attempts to challenge my beliefs cannot/willnot work. You never have to understand that either. That's just the way it is!

    February 23, 2011 at 1:35 pm |
    • SeanNJ

      @Steve the real one: Not trying to change your beliefs. As I mentioned, I consider you lost. My only hope is to isolate your silliness so that it doesn't affect *too* many people. The increasing number of people identifying as nonreligious/atheist seems to indicate that your beliefs and mindset are, in fact, being marginalized over time. I likely won't live to see that "great day" as you call it, but it surely is coming...slowly evolving in such a way that the tipping point will pass barely having been noticed, if it's ever noticed at all.

      February 23, 2011 at 2:33 pm |
    • Steve the real one

      SeanNJ
      @Steve the real one: Not trying to change your beliefs. As I mentioned, I consider you lost. My only hope is to isolate your silliness so that it doesn't affect *too* many people
      ------
      You consider me lost? Too funny! God considers me saved and His son! Who do I believe? Who do I believe here? D I believe a God who forgave my sins and called me his own and provide peace and comfort or do I believe a faceless name on the blog? Sorry SeanNJ, you lose! Trying to save the world from my "silliness? I said this before and I will say it again, you cannot save yourself much less anyone else from anything!

      February 23, 2011 at 3:24 pm |
    • SeanNJ

      @Steve the real one: Fortunately, I don't require saving from anything at the moment. I must admit I enjoy when you get your dander up. The defensive, panicky, almost angry writing style really shows through when you're flustered.

      February 23, 2011 at 3:30 pm |
    • The Bobinator

      > You consider me lost? Too funny! God considers me saved and His son!

      You consider me lost? Too funny! The fictional construct of a primitive book written by primitive men where they outline a fictional and inconsistent character would perhaps consider me saved, depending on the interpretation of the inconsistent message contained within.

      Fixed it for you.

      > Who do I believe? Who do I believe here? D I believe a God who forgave my sins and called me his own and provide peace and comfort or do I believe a faceless name on the blog?

      That's not the only two options. You believe in a God who exists, someone who writes a blog, or you believe in your own mental construct of a God because you're unable to face reality and face the concept of "some day I'll die".

      > Sorry SeanNJ, you lose! Trying to save the world from my "silliness? I said this before and I will say it again, you cannot save yourself much less anyone else from anything!

      We're saving people from your specific brand of selective vision. Your constant posts and my constant pointing out of your silly and glaring errors ensures that. To put it in your terms "Will the person believe the person who's making sense, or will they believe someone who suggests laws of logic are created by "people who hate God".

      You're a pair of clown shoes, and I'm showing people who you are. I get a kick out of it and doing a good turn for the human race by banishing this antequated nonsense.

      The concept of God is dying because ignorance and reason is too. Get used to it. 🙂

      February 23, 2011 at 5:35 pm |
    • The Bobinator

      Typo. It should say ignorance and lack of reason.

      February 23, 2011 at 5:36 pm |
  12. The Bobinator

    @The Bobinator: Save your breath. The only thing the rational ones can do is to prevent the irrational beliefs of a shrinking majority to have any impact on the lives of the rest of us.

    I'm trying to affect the ones that are not so far gone as Steve. He's unchangable. His mind is locked and not open to thought.

    February 23, 2011 at 1:29 pm |
    • Steve the real one

      @The Bobinator: I'm trying to affect the ones that are not so far gone as Steve. He's unchangable. His mind is locked and not open to thought
      ------–
      Unchangeable? Absolutely! Not open to thought? Locked mind? When it comes to belief or non belief, you're darn skippy! In your efforts to affect those are not "as far gone" as I am , exaclty what are you offering them instead? What are you replacing their peace with? What are you replacing their Jesus with? What are you replacing their eternal destiny with? Please let me know because if it is better than what Christ offered, I might be interested! All I am see from you is human effort this, human learning that. Sorry not good enough! I will NOT trade down so you can feel good about yourself. You are trying to save me and those like me. NEWSFLASH, you cannot save yourself! Reminds me of the first Christopher Reeves Superman movie. Lois Lane falls off a building and Superman catches her mid-air. he says: Don't worry ma'am, I've got you. She says: yeah but who got you? Bobinator I KNOW who has me! The real question is who has you? I am not sure who called you to save me but I KNOW who can and who already did!!

      February 23, 2011 at 2:01 pm |
    • The Bobinator

      > Unchangeable? Absolutely! Not open to thought? Locked mind? When it comes to belief or non belief, you're darn skippy!

      Right, you have a closed mind. Thanks for clarifying.

      > In your efforts to affect those are not "as far gone" as I am , exaclty what are you offering them instead?

      Umm, this isn't a contest. I'm not offering them anything.

      > What are you replacing their peace with? What are you replacing their Jesus with? What are you replacing their eternal destiny with? Please let me know because if it is better than what Christ offered, I might be interested!

      So you admit your faith is founded on what you want to believe because it makes you feel good. Glad you finally admitted that. Personally I prefer to base my opinions on fact, not whether they make me feel warm and fuzzy. Why don't you believe in genies that grant you three wishes? You could get far more then what Jesus can offer!

      > All I am see from you is human effort this, human learning that. Sorry not good enough!

      Yet you're willing to accept the words of men. Oh wait. I forgot. You can accept their words as proof because they say so. You must be a car salesman's best customer "This car runs like an angel" "are you serious" "yes, I just told you". "OK!"

      > I will NOT trade down so you can feel good about yourself.

      You just said you will believe what you will because it makes you feel good.

      > You are trying to save me and those like me. NEWSFLASH, you cannot save yourself!

      According to your magic book

      > Reminds me of the first Christopher Reeves Superman movie. Lois Lane falls off a building and Superman catches her mid-air. he says: Don't worry ma'am, I've got you. She says: yeah but who got you? Bobinator I KNOW who has me! The real question is who has you? I am not sure who called you to save me but I KNOW who can and who already did!!

      Reminds me of a strawman.

      February 23, 2011 at 4:12 pm |
  13. Steve the real one

    David Johnson
    Genesis 2 18:20:
    18 Then the Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper who is just right for him.”
    19 So the Lord God formed from the ground all the wild animals and all the birds of the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would call them, and the man chose a name for each one.
    20 He gave names to all the livestock, all the birds of the sky, and all the wild animals. But still there was no helper just right for him. OMG! If Adam had found a "helper who was just right for him", in a sheep or a chicken, the fundies would be running around claiming god created Adam and Cluck,Cluck!
    Shades of bestiality! How can you fundies believe this stuff? There isn't enough faith in all the world!
    ------
    Objection you're Honor...Speculation! Sustained! That did not happen so why speculate? God gave Adam , a wife,..Eve, P.S I KNOW you're next argument! You will argue that none of this happened. Saved your energy David. You know I don't believe you, right?

    February 23, 2011 at 1:04 pm |
    • The Bobinator

      You believe in the story of Adam and Eve because you're willfully ignorant of how science has shown it to be wrong.

      That's the facts. You believe in a certain idea of God and nothing is going to change your mind. You can never see the bible as anything except in the most favourable light.

      My question to you is this. Assuming that there are other people like you on the other side, say Muslims. What good does their strict adherance and unaccepting nature do for them finding out the truth, ie, Christ.

      When will you begin to think rationally and consider what you have been presented instead of swallowing whatever you're told from a certain source and rejecting what you're told from another source, regardless of merit of the concept?

      February 23, 2011 at 1:16 pm |
    • SeanNJ

      @The Bobinator: Save your breath. The only thing the rational ones can do is to prevent the irrational beliefs of a shrinking majority to have any impact on the lives of the rest of us. They'll be marginalized soon enough. Evolution will see to it.

      February 23, 2011 at 1:19 pm |
    • The Bobinator

      By the way, if you accept the bible as absolute truth, God is responsible for sin.

      God creates us with flaws. For we are not perfect like him. God could create a perfect being.
      God knows this flaw will cause some humans to do bad things.
      Humans do bad things.

      Let's take a look at something else.

      Ford creates cars with flaws. They can create a better car, but it will cost too much.
      Ford knows this flaw will cause some cars to fail.
      Some cars fail.

      The difference here is that you'd be saying God isn't responsible while at the same time taking your Ford into repair and demanding that they are responsible and it should be fixed.

      February 23, 2011 at 1:20 pm |
    • Steve the real one

      The Bobinator
      You believe in the story of Adam and Eve because you're willfully ignorant of how science has shown it to be wrong.
      ----
      I am well aware that science, as you know it "proves" the Bible wrong. Yet I know science is based upon HUMAN efforts! Bobinator, I choose God everytime! You attempt to box God in based upon your experiences, your education, and your reality! Go for it. Stop worrying about me and what I believe in!

      February 23, 2011 at 1:31 pm |
    • David Johnson

      You said: "That did not happen so why speculate? God gave Adam , a wife,..Eve, P.S I KNOW you're next argument! You will argue that none of this happened. Saved your energy David. You know I don't believe you, right?"

      Hmm... Of course it didn't happen. I point out the stupid stuff in the bible, not to change the minds of the already deluded, but rather to keep the people on the fence, from drinking the Kool Aid.

      But, I have questions... Why would an all knowing, all powerful, all good god, give Adam animals to choose his helper, who was just right for him, from? Do you think god was just fu_cking with him?

      Curious in Arizona

      February 23, 2011 at 2:00 pm |
    • Steve the real one

      @David Johnson

      Don't quit your day job!

      Ask a question worthy of response and will you get a response. Would yo like to re-phrase your question?

      February 23, 2011 at 2:10 pm |
    • The Bobinator

      > Yet I know science is based upon HUMAN efforts! Bobinator, I choose God everytime!

      Like I said. Closed mind. Not willing to see what disagrees with you. You're willing to throw up idotic explanations for anything.

      Sorry, Steve. Facts are facts. Just because they're observed by humans doesn't make them less of a fact.

      February 23, 2011 at 2:36 pm |
    • Steve the real one

      The Bobinator
      Like I said. Closed mind. Not willing to see what disagrees with you. You're willing to throw up idotic explanations for anything. Sorry, Steve. Facts are facts. Just because they're observed by humans doesn't make them less of a fact.
      -------–
      Whoa there my friend let us take another look at what you just said and see what is a idotic statemment!
      "Facts are facts. Just because they're observed by humans doesn't make them less of a fact". Let's start there. You believe creationism is idotic. Science says the earth is millions of years old, right? Back to your statement.. "Just because they're observed by humans doesn't make them less of a fact". So you observed the birth of the earth? You said human observation makes it a fact, did you not? Then based upon YOUR statement the earth is NOT millions of years old! You might asks "what about the 'evidence". Well who named the evidence? Who wrote books about the evidence? Could it be folks with an "I hate God" agenda? You did not observe your version of the birth of the earth nor did I. Yet I see the evidence of creation!

      How much are you willing to see what disagrees with you? All your rants can just as easily be tossed back to you as you toss mine back to me! You cannot see than can you?

      February 23, 2011 at 3:13 pm |
    • The Bobinator

      > Whoa there my friend let us take another look at what you just said and see what is a idotic statemment! "Facts are facts. Just because they're observed by humans doesn't make them less of a fact". Let's start there. You believe creationism is idotic.

      I don't believe creationism is idiotic. I know it's wrong. It's been demonstrated to be wrong. The reasons for believing creationism despite that proof is idiotic.

      > Science says the earth is millions of years old, right? Back to your statement.. "Just because they're observed by humans doesn't make them less of a fact". So you observed the birth of the earth? You said human observation makes it a fact, did you not?

      You should learn to read. What I said is that facts are facts independant of human observation.

      > Then based upon YOUR statement the earth is NOT millions of years old!

      I don't even know how to respond to this. Wow.

      > You might asks "what about the 'evidence". Well who named the evidence? Who wrote books about the evidence? Could it be folks with an "I hate God" agenda?

      Wow. Just wow.

      > You did not observe your version of the birth of the earth nor did I. Yet I see the evidence of creation!

      What evidence do you see? Furthermore, how do you know it's for creation. To attribute qualities of creation to something, you'd have to know what "non-creation" is. Just like you'd have to know hot to know what cold is.

      > How much are you willing to see what disagrees with you? All your rants can just as easily be tossed back to you as you toss mine back to me! You cannot see than can you?

      Evidence that proves the bible wrong you reject. You say that by your own words. However, if you were to supply me with proof of God, I'd be instantly converted. That's where we differ. I have an open mind, you do not.

      February 23, 2011 at 3:43 pm |
  14. David Johnson

    Genesis 2 18:20:
    18 Then the Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper who is just right for him.”

    19 So the Lord God formed from the ground all the wild animals and all the birds of the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would call them, and the man chose a name for each one.

    20 He gave names to all the livestock, all the birds of the sky, and all the wild animals. But still there was no helper just right for him.

    OMG! If Adam had found a "helper who was just right for him", in a sheep or a chicken, the fundies would be running around claiming god created Adam and Cluck,Cluck!

    Shades of bestiality!

    How can you fundies believe this stuff? There isn't enough faith in all the world!

    Cheers!

    February 23, 2011 at 12:53 pm |
  15. CatholicMom

    Well, why don’t you atheists take the first step and invite your Christian neighbors over so they can learn what atheistic food is? Why not have Italian Speghetti with meatballs and tomato sauce over long noodles [or isn’t that atheistic enough]?…if you are not friends at the end of the meal, who knows what the problem could be….

    February 23, 2011 at 12:48 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Catholic Mom
      Unfortunately, your proposed meal is religious! It is the holiest of foods for Flying Spaghetti Monsterists. 😉

      February 23, 2011 at 1:20 pm |
    • Nonimus

      Sacred meal of the Pastafarians.

      Excellent, CatholicMom 🙂

      February 23, 2011 at 6:42 pm |
  16. CW

    Don't get me wrong don't mind breaking bread with someone who is a non-believer....b/c that is just another chance for me to try to witness to them. I just hope that this isn't another attempt as some of the christian movements have done to accept unrepentant sinful people...in the disguise of "love thy neighbor"....which also means "don't point out they're sin b/c that is judging" even if they want to come to my church and worship buddha or satan or baal. If this is a case of a pastor trying to use a lunch gathering to witness to these people about a God who will forgive them of they're sins then this is a GREAT THING.

    February 23, 2011 at 10:40 am |
    • SeanNJ

      This is why people don't like you. Some are just too polite to say it though.

      February 23, 2011 at 11:03 am |
    • Nonimus

      @CW,
      So as long as it's a marketing gimmick for Christ Inc., then you're ok with it. But if it's an honest attempt at inter-cultural dialog and understanding, then he's what, a back-sliding Christian, not a 'true' Christian?

      February 23, 2011 at 11:06 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @CW
      I've always been curious as to which is your brand of Christianity.
      I'd appreciate if you could enlighten us.
      Baptist perhaps?

      February 23, 2011 at 11:41 am |
    • CW

      @ SeanNJ,

      Don't care if you don't like me......I forgive you and pray for you no matter what...Peace.

      @ Doc,

      you say a "brand of christianity". I didn't know I needed to brand my christianity but I would say its based on the Bible. I do attend a Baptist church and my belief's are based soley on the Bible. As far as my comments above there has been an increasing number of pastors and church's that will allow for someone to come and fla-'unt their sin before God and everything is everything as long as they show up to church. I say that if your unrepentant and don't change your ways to fit to the will of God then that isn't true Love for God.

      February 23, 2011 at 12:49 pm |
    • SeanNJ

      @CW: Thanks. I'll burn a goat for you too, or whatever it is you do.

      February 23, 2011 at 1:18 pm |
    • Smite Me

      CW,

      I guess it is good that you don't care if you are liked. Then you won't be offended when I tell you that you are a very poor representative of the one in whose image and likeness you claim to have been created.

      Who would want to spend eternity with the likes of you?

      February 23, 2011 at 1:35 pm |
  17. tjerehrthje

    45npjyihg[j54oh

    February 23, 2011 at 10:27 am |
  18. Peace2All

    From The Article:

    "As Phil Hotsenpiller notes, “There’s no atheist food."

    Say What...? 😯 I don't think there is such a thing as 'Christian food'...yes, ?

    While I very much do certainly appreciate their intentions and actions of a multi-cultural dialogue based on a different sensory-based system (olfactory/gustatory–Food), for some reason they kind of lost me when they demonstrated their bias...? or was it an unconscious dig at atheists...?, or did the guy(Phil) just not understand the potential folly of his statement...?

    I understand that he expressed that he has 'atheist' friends, but somehow that statement just didn't sit well with me. If there are no 'atheist foods,' then how can this Christian sit down and discuss things based on multi-cultural beliefs, or non-beliefs...with the 'atheists' or 'agnostics' for that matter on the basis of...FOOD...?

    I'm curious if anyone else had a similar experience from reading the article, as i did...?

    Again, I applaud their intentions and actions to break-down barriers, and develop mutual respect, however that comment about the 'atheists' seemed to display an underlying and potentially ignorant or intolerant world-view in that area.

    BTW-As most of my fellow bloggers know, I am an 'agnostic.'

    Peace...

    February 23, 2011 at 8:11 am |
    • Nonimus

      Not to mention ‘Well what is America known for? I mean, apple pie and hot dogs.’ As a Christian and American he offers hot dogs and apple pie, but “There’s no atheist food."
      So either hot dogs are Christian or Atheists aren't American? I'm not sure.

      February 23, 2011 at 9:27 am |
    • Steve the real one

      Nonimus
      Not to mention ‘Well what is America known for? I mean, apple pie and hot dogs.’ As a Christian and American he offers hot dogs and apple pie, but “There’s no atheist food." So either hot dogs are Christian or Atheists aren't American? I'm not sure.
      ---–
      Perhaps he is just illustrating that dispite the differences, we still do have a few things that unite us..like food! Beef is beef yet it can be cooked and served based upon cultural differences, yet it is still beef! "Most of us use the same basic ingredients in every culture – it’s just how we use the ingredients," that is the cultural aspect!

      February 23, 2011 at 10:18 am |
    • Nonimus

      Hi Steve,
      I'm sure that was the intent, "it’s a whole lot easier to sit down and talk to someone of a different belief or non-belief system if we’ve got a piece of food in our hand".
      But as Peace2All indicated, it came out a bit odd.
      Not a big deal in my mind, though.

      February 23, 2011 at 10:29 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Peace2All
      Agreed – the subtle dig at atheists is a tad off putting.
      And you'll note that their multiculural friends are all adherents of the Abrahamic religions and therefore have a great deal in common when it comes to the basic tenets of their religions.
      I'd like to see a meal shared by a Christian, Hindu and Scientologist! Now that would make for interesting conversation...

      February 23, 2011 at 10:37 am |
    • Steve the real one

      Hi Nominus,
      I agree with you! It is a bit odd! I also think we have witnessed so much hatred and misunderstanding (from all sides) that when somebody attempts to unite, we do a double take! Anyway I hope you are well! !

      Same to you Peace2all and you also Reality! Hope that you are well!

      February 23, 2011 at 10:37 am |
    • Frogist

      @Peace2All:
      Soo good to be chatting with you again. Yes, I did sort of take a brick to the head with that comment about atheists. And we are in agreement about what is and isn't "Christian food." I think the pastor is mistaking culture with religion. I hope his show will have an atheist on. Won't it be funny when the atheist shows up with hot dogs and apple pie too?! I do wish him the best because I still think this idea has a chance to break down cultural boundaries and give Americans a broader view of the world through what we love most – food!

      February 23, 2011 at 2:54 pm |
    • stp

      Thank you, thank you. I had the exact same reaction when I read this. Unless Christians can claim red wine and bread as their own, which they can't, there are no "Christian Foods" either.

      February 23, 2011 at 3:36 pm |
    • Brice Cutspec

      This isn't about Christian food and atheist food or saying Christians have to be American or someone isn't American if they are not a Christian. How do you misinterpret that? It's about different religions being, for the most part, associated with certain cultures. And using a median that we all enjoy (food) to come to understand each other in a comfortable setting.

      As for Phil's comment: note this... it was a comment, nobody here wrote this article as far as I know, so nobody here knows the original content of this comment.

      Here is a quote from the same article in the very next paragraph:

      “I can dialogue with them – we don’t agree – but it’s a whole lot easier to sit down and talk to someone of a different belief or non-belief system"

      I guess when he said "NON-beliefe system," anyone who noted the first comment as "odd" or "off-putting" must have simply tuned themselves out to what came next.

      Steve the real one: great comment...

      Why must we extract whatever negativity we can, only to shame something that can do good???

      February 25, 2011 at 2:43 am |
  19. Reality

    "It was the hot dogs that broke down religious barriers."

    Historical reviews and rational thinking will eliminate religions all together.

    It has begun:

    1. origin: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20E1EFE35540C7A8CDDAA0894DA404482

    New Torah For Modern Minds

    Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation.

    Such startling propositions – the product of findings by archaeologists digging in Israel and its environs over the last 25 years – have gained wide acceptance among non-Orthodox rabbis. But there has been no attempt to disseminate these ideas or to discuss them with the laity – until now.

    The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5 million Conservative Jews in the United States, has just issued a new Torah and commentary, the first for Conservatives in more than 60 years. Called "Etz Hayim" ("Tree of Life" in Hebrew), it offers an interpretation that incorporates the latest findings from archaeology, philology, anthropology and the study of ancient cultures. To the editors who worked on the book, it represents one of the boldest efforts ever to introduce into the religious mainstream a view of the Bible as a human rather than divine docu-ment.

    2. Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a ma-mzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). An-alyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, ) via the NT and related doc-uments have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan se-cts.

    The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hit-ti-tes, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics.
    earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

    For added "pizz-azz", Catholic theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "fil-icider".

    Current RCC problems:

    Pedo-ph-iliac priests, an all-male, mostly white hierarchy, atonement theology and original sin!!!!

    3. Luther, Calvin, Joe Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley, Roger Williams, the Great “Babs” et al, founders of Christian-based religions or combination religions also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immacu-late co-nceptions).

    Current problems:

    Adu-lterous preachers, "propheteering/ profiteering" evangelicals and atonement theology,

    4. Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

    This agenda continues as shown by the ma-ssacre in Mumbai, the as-sas-sinations of Bhutto and Theo Van Gogh, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, the Ft. Hood follower of the koran, and the Filipino “koranics”.
    And who funds this muck and stench of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

    Current crises:

    The Sunni-Shiite blood feud and the warmongering, womanizing (11 wives), hallucinating founder.

    5. Hinduism (from an online Hindu site) – "Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centered and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’."

    The caste/laborer system, reincarnation and cow worship/reverence are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism."

    Current problems:

    The caste system and cow worship/reverence.

    6. Buddhism- "Buddhism began in India about 500 years before the birth of Christ. The people living at that time had become disillusioned with certain beliefs of Hinduism including the caste system, which had grown extremely complex. The number of outcasts (those who did not belong to any particular caste) was continuing to grow."
    "However, in Buddhism, like so many other religions, fanciful stories arose concerning events in the life of the founder, Siddhartha Gautama (fifth century B.C.):"

    Archaeological discoveries have proved, beyond a doubt, his historical character, but apart from the legends we know very little about the circu-mstances of his life. e.g. Buddha by one legend was supposedly talking when he came out of his mother's womb.

    Bottom line: There are many good ways of living but be aware of the hallucinations, embellishments, lies, and myths surrounding the founders and foundations of said rules of life.

    Then, apply the Five F rule: "First Find the Flaws, then Fix the Foundations". o

    February 23, 2011 at 7:56 am |
    • Thunderlicious

      Great comment that cuts right to the point, but have you thoug-zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

      February 23, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  20. beagles

    Seems like they are threatened by atheists so much that they want all the 'faithful' to bind together as one. I wouldn't have thought that if not for the 'there's no atheist food' comment. Not very accepting of other people as they claim to be. Frauds.

    February 23, 2011 at 7:16 am |
    • TheTruth72

      Yes, this is false teaching and promotes an interfaith movment.

      February 23, 2011 at 3:52 pm |
1 2 3
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.