home
RSS
Faces of discrimination
October 13th, 2012
10:00 PM ET

Shining light on Emory school's past anti-Semitism prompts healing – and, for one man, questions

By Jessica Ravitz, CNN

Atlanta (CNN) – Sixteen years after Susan Shulman Tessel lost her father, she sat on a Southern college campus Wednesday night and couldn't stop thinking about him. Surrounded by hundreds in a packed ballroom, she cried because he was missing. He should have been there with her and her mother. He deserved to be.

The late Irving Shulman was the only Jewish man to enter Emory University’s School of Dentistry in 1948. That was the same year someone else came to the school: the newly appointed dean, John E. Buhler.

After one academic year, Shulman flunked out. Buhler stayed on for 13 years, leading what some Jewish students would refer to as a “reign of terror.” Between 1948 and 1961, when Buhler left, 65% of Jewish students either failed out or were forced to repeat up to two years of coursework in the four-year program.

Those who lasted often paid. There were insults from professors such as “dirty Jew,” accusations by faculty of cheating and questions from the dean like, “Why do you Jews want to be dentists? You don't have it in your hands.”

Tessel's dad earned the distinction of being the first who failed.

Irving Shulman's widow, Irma Shulman-Weiner, and daughter Susan Shulman Tessel came to Emory last week because he couldn't.

His daughter, who lives in New York, heard him tell stories about the constant reminders of how awful he was. His molds of teeth  which he was so proud of  would either get crushed by hands or grades. Convinced he wasn't being treated fairly, a non-Jewish classmate agreed to turn in one of Shulman's molds under his name. Shulman's handiwork earned that student an A-minus.

“At least he knew he didn't make it up,” Tessel said.

Her late father gave up his dentistry dream and moved on to pharmacy school. But, she said, being at Emory last week would have helped him make sense of what had transpired. That's when 19 former Jewish dental students who had experienced that era came together and finally received the apology and recognition they had never thought possible.

“He didn't have the benefit of knowing he wasn't alone."

'A fraternity of silence'

Three years after Shulman was dubbed a failure at the end of his first academic year, Perry Brickman got his surprise letter from the dean telling him the same. Unlike Shulman, though, he had never been told he wasn't doing well.

Stunned. Embarrassed. Brickman was both. But he wasn't beaten down enough to give up on dentistry and was accepted to the dental school at the University of Tennessee, where he graduated fourth in his class. He would go on to have a 43-year career as a respected oral surgeon in Atlanta. He knew he was no failure. He also knew he wasn't alone. He was one of four Jewish men who entered the school in 1951; two years later they were all gone.

Brickman, 79, wasn't one to bring up the past. In 2000, he went to a reunion of his Jewish fraternity brothers from their Emory undergrad days. It turned out eight of the men in the room had been scarred by the same dental program, but it's not something they talked about. Brickman's wife, Shirley, would later start calling the former dental students “a fraternity of silence.”

It would be years before that would change.

In 2006, Emory University celebrated its 30th anniversary of Jewish studies. Eric Goldstein, a Jewish history professor, set up the exhibit to coincide with the event. He called it, “Jews of Emory: Faces of a Changing University.”

Most of the exhibit was a celebration of the campus’ Jewish life, Goldstein said, but a small section jumped out at Brickman.

He stared at statistics, a bar graph that illustrated what happened at the dental school between 1948 and 1961. The image had been featured in a chapter of “Some of My Best Friends...,” a book published by the Anti-Defamation League in the early 1960s. Like a skyscraper among short buildings, he said, the bar showing the numbers of Jews who failed out of the school or repeated coursework towered above all others. He couldn't believe what he was seeing.

The visual highlighted what Brickman always suspected about the dental school leadership and how that period was handled at Emory: “I wasn't a failure. They were a failure.”

He knew there were stories behind those numbers  not just of those who hadn't made it but also of those who did. Between the statistics and a conversation with a still-burdened classmate, Brickman set out on a path to find them all.

Making waves

A month before one man got his degree, he was forced to stand before the dean and assembled faculty for an hourlong dressing down. Later, one of the professors pulled the student aside and apologized, saying he had a wife and children to think about and had no choice but to play along.

Another said the day he got his diploma he felt like he'd been released from prison. A third repeated what a professor used to call him, "my little black sheep,” and then, bothered by the memory, muttered under his breath, “son of a bitch.”

These men said they were the "lucky" ones; the ones who actually made it through to earn degrees from the school. The 39 Jews who Brickman said enrolled during the Buhler era were all men; few women attended the school back then. Of that bunch, a dozen flunked out. Only three of those 12 became dentists. At least 15 of the Jewish dental students who lasted were forced to repeat coursework – and in some cases a year or two of study.

Art Burns, 80, of Jacksonville, Florida, flunked out in 1953 but went on to be first in his class at Temple University's dental school. The retired orthodontist recalled later bumping into the Emory dean in an Army base dental lab. Buhler looked at him and said, “Burns, I'd recognize that nose anywhere.”

Another who didn't fail – but who Buhler insisted didn't have the hands for dentistry – found himself being asked to treat dental school faculty throughout his senior year. Crowns, restorations, fillings. You name it, Ronald Goldstein did it.

“I must have had good enough hands for them,” said Goldstein, 78, of Atlanta, who lectures around the world, is considered a pioneer in his field and wrote the first comprehensive textbook on cosmetic dentistry.

The men were accepted to the school because admissions were handled by the broader university and not the dental school alone, said history professor Goldstein (no relation to Ronald). While quotas worked against Jews in many institutions at the time, the Emory dental school story was unique in that these students faced discrimination after they arrived.

Art Burns, with his wife, Olly, and daughter Marlēn, failed out of Emory's dental school but was first in his class of 131 students at Temple University.

The issues were talked about in small circles, but they weren’t discussed loudly.

What student would announce he'd flunked? What parents would talk about such news, especially in a community that put such emphasis on academic achievement? And this was Emory, a hometown liberal arts jewel many local Jews attended; who would criticize – or believe criticism about – such a place?

Beyond these hangups was the worry about backlash that permeated Atlanta's Jewish community. It was rooted in fears born of history and reality – Atlanta's infamous lynching of Leo Frank in 1913, the ongoing activity of the Ku Klux Klan, the 1958 bombing of the city's most prominent synagogue. Israel was still a fledgling nation. This was also the immediate post-Holocaust era, a time when Jewish people in America were just starting to understand the magnitude of what had happened abroad, said Deborah Lauter, the Anti-Defamation League's civil rights director.

“It was a real period of insecurity for the Jewish community, and that didn’t really shift 'til 1967,” after the Six-Day War between Israel and its neighbors, she said. “With a war victory came a newfound confidence of Jewish people.”

But a small handful of Atlanta Jews refused to let go of what was happening at the dental school. Art Levin, 95, paid attention to every snippet. Then the Southeast regional director of the ADL, Levin was determined to make Emory own up to and deal with the dental school's anti-Jewish bias. He collected graduation programs, which included lists of students in all four years, and studied how the Jewish surnames disappeared or were held back while their classmates moved ahead. He nurtured contacts who helped get him inside information from the registrar's office to back up his calculations. He wanted to make the case not by outing any victims but by presenting irrefutable facts.

When the local Jewish Community Relations Council wanted to tone down pressure on the university, Levin's response, as he stated in an Emory-commissioned documentary that premiered Wednesday evening: “Screw that. This guy has been torturing students for 10 years.”

Photos: Faces of discrimination

Levin, at the time, was “villified” by segments of the Jewish community for making waves, said ADL’s Lauter, a former Atlanta resident who, like Levin, did a stint as the organization's Southeast regional director. “But that's why we're here for people who face discrimination. Sometimes ADL has to be the tough guy. We take no prisoners in the fight against anti-Semitism.”

While Levin takes great satisfaction in knowing the story is finally getting public acknowledgement, Lauter said it's “bittersweet” for him. “He did feel stung by the whole experience." In 1962, after nine years in his position, he left the world of Jewish community work.

Levin, who now lives in Florida and is hard of hearing, was not able to be interviewed for this story.

A form devised by Buhler, which at the top asked students to check a box – Caucasian, Jewish or other (Emory was not racially integrated at the time) – ended up being his downfall, many say. The university president, S. Walter Martin, had been dismissive of the concerns Levin and some others raised. So when Martin was out of town, Levin brought a copy of the form to Judson “Jake” Ward, the dean of faculty, and Ward grew incensed. He marched down to see Buhler, who resigned soon after.

Emory's president still refused to acknowledge what had been going on and wrote off Buhler’s resignation as coincidental. Martin even insisted to local press, Goldstein said, that Buhler could have stayed at the dental school as long as he wanted.

With the dean gone, Atlanta's Jewish community essentially closed the book and put it away.

Not the man he knew

That book only recently opened for the former dean's son.

A sister-in-law sent John E. Buhler Jr., 65, a copy of a recent story in the The New York Times about the episode. What he read “caught me completely off guard,” he said. “I was completely unaware of that situation.”

He was a kid when his father landed at Emory and always believed politics in academia prompted his departure, nothing more. Everything he ever knew about his father, who died on Easter Sunday in 1976, belied what is being discussed now.

The former dean of Emory's dental school, John E. Buhler, was a different man to Jewish students than he was to his son.

The younger Buhler, a retired oral surgeon living in Huntington, Indiana, said he grew up with a man who cared about “helping kids stay in school and not throwing them out of school.” When he got into the field himself, he proudly watched how former students sought out his father at conferences, showering him with gratitude. One even boasted that he had named his child after Buhler.

“It just sort of blows me away. … He did so many positive things for dentistry and students,” the younger Buhler said. “It's hard to believe.”

Trying to make sense of it all, Buhler Jr.'s daughter sent her father an article that appeared in The Spartanburg Herald in South Carolina in 1964. It was written soon after the older Buhler assumed the dean’s post at the new dental school of what was then known as the Medical College of South Carolina – and after the Jewish community there weighed in with concerns about past anti-Semitism, demanding his appointment be rescinded.

The 1964 article quoted the chairman of the Medical College's board of trustees defending Buhler, saying he was recommended for the new position after a committee concluded the Emory charges were “not as serious as painted at one time."

The former dean's namesake doesn't remember his father ever saying a derogatory word about Jewish people. In fact, he's quick to point out that when the family lived in Atlanta, some of his parents' closest friends were Jewish.

These sorts of claims get former students like Brickman, who led the charge to humanize the dental school’s history, riled up. He has collected too many stories and seen too many documents, including incriminating notes written by Buhler himself, to call the former dean anything but an anti-Semite.

But for Buhler Jr., none of this adds up. Really, how can it?

“If this situation did exist, it was certainly out of character of the man I knew,” he wrote CNN the morning after the Emory event. “If indeed these events did occur, I feel badly for the individuals involved. Last night’s event might have made them feel better but didn't compensate for their injury.”

I am sorry. We are sorry.’

Facing its history is something Emory isn’t afraid to do.

In 2011, it issued a statement of regret for the school's involvement with slavery. The Southern institution once had slave laborers on campus and faculty members who owned slaves.

Earlier this year, Emory fessed up to fudging data to boost its ranking.

Meantime, the university boasts a Center for Ethics, campus dialogues on matters like race, sexuality and gender, and has long-proven its support for Jewish studies and community. It has 20 full-time faculty members dedicated to the field, including world-renowned Holocaust scholar Deborah Lipstadt.

The school seemed ripe for the resurfacing of the dental school's history, which is why Goldstein, the Jewish history professor, placed a call last spring to Gary Hauk, Emory's vice president and deputy to the president. He said he had a friend Hauk needed to meet.

With testimonies he had recorded with his Flip camera, Brickman showed Hauk videos of men in their 70s and 80s, their negative Emory dental school experience still etched in their faces and emotions. Hauk didn't need convincing that something needed to be done.

A documentary incorporating Brickman's footage was commissioned, resulting in “From Silence to Recognition: Confronting Discrimination in Emory's Dental School History.” A plan was developed to invite the former students, their families and their widows to come together on campus for an apology that was half a century overdue.

What had happened to them at the dental school, which closed in the early 1990s for unrelated reasons, had never been formally acknowledged. It was time.

Blue ribbons were strung along aisles to reserve seats for the special guests, who first met privately with Emory President James W. Wagner. The men, some of whom hadn't returned to Emory since the day they left, arrived with family members from all over the country. Many went on to become great successes in dentistry. Those who gave up that dream excelled as physicians, lawyers, CPAs and computer experts. One man who flunked out tried his hand at painting, wanting to prove he had the manual skills the dean said he lacked; he won art show awards.

The experience had been a guarded secret for some – a chapter in life they hid from parents, friends, future spouses and their children. One woman in attendance said she had only learned the day before that her father failed out of Emory. For other former students, their time at Emory haunted them. One of their daughters – who refused even years later to apply to Emory when she went to dental school – dubbed herself and others like her “children of survivors,” a term often linked to the Holocaust. An 18-year-old man, who is gay and faced plenty of bullying, realized he could relate to the grandfather sitting next to him in new ways.

Widows and children of deceased former students showed up for those who didn't live long enough to see this day. One man, who was young when his father died, came to hear stories no one else in his life could tell.

All around them, as they took their seats, the ballroom filled. A standing-room-only crowd of hundreds came out to recognize them. Here, any shame from the past was lifted. Instead, these men were the picture of courage and worthy of respect – and that long-awaited apology.

“Institutions – universities – are as fallible as the human beings who populate them, and like individuals, universities need to remind themselves frequently of the principles they want to live by,” President Wagner said. “The discrimination against Jewish dental students undermined the academic integrity of the dental school and ultimately of Emory. … I am sorry. We are sorry.”

The night, which would end with a special dinner for this no-longer-silent fraternity, included a tribute to Brickman, who was called to the stage.

Norman Trieger traveled last week from New York to hear Emory's apology for and acknowledgement of past anti-Semitism. On Saturday, he passed away.

His wife, surrounded by family, clung to a tissue and dabbed her eyes. A daughter clutched her mother’s hand. A son looked up at his dad and beamed.

Brickman never did this for the Emory History Maker medal Wagner strung around his neck. Nor did he do this for the citation read to honor his work.

For him, this was a journey of discovery - one he took with the faces behind the numbers. With him that night were these men and their families, as well as the university he still loved.

Throughout the evening, and long after dinner ended, he saw tears, camaraderie, even laughter from some of the very men he feared were no longer capable of smiling.

All of this, he hoped, signaled what mattered most: Healing.

- CNN Writer/Producer

Filed under: Discrimination • Education • Judaism • Prejudice

soundoff (1,537 Responses)
  1. hippypoet

    belief in anything without supporting evidence is a childrens game...We teach our children not to lie, judge a book by its cover, or to take anything at face value or to just believe without questioning...you know, we say stuff like check the source and don't believe everything you see/hear....should we teach seeking knowledge or to have faith in without?

    it seems to me that we teach hypocrisy more then we teach anything else.

    this is no different as this is supposedly the country of the free and the land of tolerance yet how many different times has stuff like this – racial hatred – happened and was allowed to happened openly by the publics dislike or rather lack of understanding and therefore hatred of – jews, blacks, rich, poor – whatever –

    this is hypocrisy in action and we may like to think we are above or better then but the truth is we are as low as the lowest wretch and as high standardized as any empire...these horrors have taken place everywhere anyone has ever lived...it does however make me proud that, wether it be a person or group, someone said "i'm sorry".

    terrific and horrific tales of racism and hatred can have a happy ending.

    October 14, 2012 at 8:21 pm |
  2. woodie

    I don't know if any of this is true or not. After these people are long dead and cannot respond to the accusations, then we get the 'scoop'. I only know about discrimination that exists now, against white people, especially white males, and it is the most pervasive discrimination I know about. There is rotten in every race. We all know about it too.

    October 14, 2012 at 8:03 pm |
    • Speedy

      well woody the sins of the father fall upon his sons so suck it up and take the wrath of God created by your ancestors How do you think these men felt?

      October 14, 2012 at 8:19 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Waa waa waa. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.

      October 14, 2012 at 9:28 pm |
  3. STOP MURDER OF CHILDREN , Human be aware of hindu filthy dog's of hindu Atheism, self center ism , DENIAL OF TRUTH ABSOLUTE GOD.

    Mennoknight
    You were borne long time ago, time to grow up and smell hind, stink of hindu Judaism, criminal self center ism, secularism, hindu Jew, criminal goon you make your man god is nothing else but a hindu Magi, criminal trickster, on the way to hind, hell, so will you be for taking a hindu criminal Jew, goon as your god. visit limitisthetruth.com to save your hereafter, hindu, ignorant borne again..

    October 14, 2012 at 7:55 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      I will embrace my Hindu, Jewish, Christian, Muslim and other deluded brothers and sisters. Hand in hand we will skip bravely into the future in DENIAL OF TRUTH ABSOLUTE GOD as everyone sheds their foolish beliefs, inhibitions, clothing. We'll teach the world to sing in perfect harmony and have a big old time. If you can't make it I understand.

      October 14, 2012 at 8:05 pm |
    • Theen Allah Fat Mullah (the Original Hinduism Source.......)

      TERRORIST ALERT! ALERT! ALERT !!

      October 14, 2012 at 8:35 pm |
  4. Mennoknight

    I am a born again Christian:
    I love Jews because they are God's chosen people from whom the whole world has been blessed.
    They are the cornerstone of our civilization.
    We own them our salvation and much of our culture.

    October 14, 2012 at 5:50 pm |
    • OTOH

      Mennoknight,
      " they are God's chosen people from whom the whole world has been blessed."

      Actually, if I were to hold anything against the Jews it would be ^that^ - being responsible for inventing and promulgating their divisive, ethnocentric fantasies and supersti'tions.

      October 14, 2012 at 5:57 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      No. They chose themselves, and told themselves in the book they wrote about themselves they were special. Who wouldn't ? They did not "produce" your salvation. (Even YOUR system says "God so loved the world" etc...) The "salvation paradigm" was created from their myth system, (by Paul of Tarsus). "Sin" in Genesis was "chaos", (taken from the Sumerian myths). The very idea that an ancient pi.ss.ed-off deity required his child to die, so he would fell better is utterly preposterous. AND look what you got. The world is NO better after Jeebus, than before. So it made no difference.

      October 14, 2012 at 6:00 pm |
    • sybaris

      Mennoknight<<<<<<<<<<< troll

      October 14, 2012 at 6:03 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Hebrew culture had 2 possible unique contributions.
      1. They did make. They changed the Sumerian universal "chaos" (in Marduk Slays the Dragon myth), in their genesis myth to "personal" *moral* choice,
      2. The second they rejected. They could have become one of the earliest democracies, but in rejecting the tribal confederation model, (against Amos' advice, (ie "fallen is the virgin Isre_EL, never to rise again", they insisted on a King. (They also were NOT monotheistic, so that is false).

      October 14, 2012 at 6:04 pm |
    • STOP MURDER OF CHILDREN , Human be aware of hindu filthy dog's of hindu Atheism, self center ism , DENIAL OF TRUTH ABSOLUTE GOD.

      Statement of a typical hindu gentile, ignorant slave of hindu Jew, criminal self centered, secular, bowing to a hindu denier of truth absolute, assuming to be his hindu sanatan, filthy goon man god. nothing else but to be called insult to humanity.

      October 14, 2012 at 6:10 pm |
    • STOP MURDER OF CHILDREN , Human be aware of hindu filthy dog's of hindu Atheism, self center ism , DENIAL OF TRUTH ABSOLUTE GOD.

      You were borne long time ago, time to grow up and smell hind, stink of hindu Judaism, criminal self center ism, secularism, hindu Jew, criminal goon you make your man god is nothing else but a hindu Magi, criminal trickster, on the way to hind, hell, so will you be for taking a hindu criminal Jew, goon as your god. visit limitisthetruth.com to save your hereafter, hindu, ignorant borne again..

      October 14, 2012 at 7:53 pm |
    • Seyedibar

      Nice sentiment I suppose, but it's fiction. That's a word that means it never happened.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:15 pm |
  5. realbuckyball

    The Origins of the Rodent Universe.

    Shelia, the Omnipotent God, could make anything she wanted. She did not care to be worshiped. She was busy. She was administrator god.
    Shelia decreed, (being omnipotent), that any gods ever made would always be less powerful than herself.
    Shelia decided to make "universe makers", who could *possibly* make universes if they chose. In order to make universes they had to have at least 20 degrees of omnipotence.
    Shelia, being infinitely omnipotent, decreed that "universe makers" MUST have 5 degrees of separation from her, and that "universe makers" MUST be worshiped only if they wanted to be worshiped, and ONLY universe makers may be worshiped.

    Shelia also wanted to make another "almost" omnipotent god, named "Twila The Almost", (like a plastic po'rn doll .. ie "in her image"), who could make only 1 other god, and the 1 other god HAD to have 1 degree less of "omnipotence" than her, and Twila could make only 1 other god also, with any property SHE wanted, but HAD to have 1 degree less of omnipotence than herself. So Shelia made Twila The Almost omnipotent god. Shelia gave Twila 100 degrees of omnipotence.

    Twila The Almost, wanted to make 1 god also. So, Twila made Suzy The Sweet god, who had the same properties as herself, (except Suzy had 1 degree less of omnipotence, (99)). And all was well.

    Then one day, Suzy decided she was not busy enough, so she made John The Jerk god, with 98 degrees of omnipotence, and things were well again.

    John the Just decided he wanted to make a god named Hank The Hockey god, with 97 degrees of omnipotence.
    And so forth.
    John the Just made Curt the Cute, (96 degrees of omnipotence).
    Curt the Cute made Jason the Jurist, (95) and Jason COULD have made a universe, but did not, as he liked things the way they were.
    Jason the Jurist made Pat The Perfect (94) who wanted things to do when he was not playing hockey, so he made a universe, BUT Pat did not want to be worshiped.
    Pat made Sarah the Sassy god. Meanwhile Curt the Cute made a non-god hockey team, which wanted a mascot.
    Sarah the Sassy god, DID want to be worshiped, so when she made a universe, she created one in which the beings NEEDED to worship their creator,
    and also her universe would eventually produce rodents for the still longed for mascot.
    Sarah also made a god named Yahweh, and whispered to Yahweh, that when they worshiped his wife, (Ashera), she would accept it as being herself.
    Sarah The sassy god created a Big Bang, and then they stayed busy. Eventuall this universe produced Hebrews who worshiped Ashera, and Sarah was pleased.
    Eventually Sarah's universe also produced rodents, and Fluffy the Gerbil of Doom was born, and Fluffy was sent for safe-keeping to Bucky, at school.
    All the gods in heaven rejoiced, as the team finally had a mascot, and the meaning and purpose of the universe was fulfilled.
    Alleluia. Amen.

    October 14, 2012 at 5:21 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      oops. John The Jerk = John The Just

      October 14, 2012 at 5:27 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Bucky, you rule.

      By the way, can I have a toke of whatever yer smokin'?

      October 14, 2012 at 5:27 pm |
    • 24 Hour Crisis Center

      Stupid squirrels.

      October 14, 2012 at 5:45 pm |
  6. STOP MURDER OF CHILDREN , Human be aware of hindu filthy dog's of hindu Atheism, self center ism , DENIAL OF TRUTH ABSOLUTE GOD.

    hindu pagan Paul had nothing to do with son of blessed Mary, one has to be hindu, stupid to believe in hindu crook Paul, after he lied on truth absolute GOD"s name, unless person is a hindu, ignorant himself. Mithra ism, savior ism is nothing else but hindu pagan Paul ism, sold on name of blessed Mary son.

    October 14, 2012 at 4:05 pm |
    • Theen Allah Fat Mullah (the original hinduism source.....)

      Achmed the Dead Terrorist has a Son – Hindu blah blah blah.

      October 14, 2012 at 4:29 pm |
    • Rabble-Rabble-Rabble

      Hindu? You keep saying that word a lot, I don't think it means what you think it means.

      October 14, 2012 at 6:54 pm |
  7. STOP CIRC UM CISION OF HUMANITY, Human be aware of filthy Mullah terrorist dog's of Allah ism, self center ism , DENIAL OF TRUTH ABSOLUTE GOD.

    [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IL357BrwK7c&w=640&h=390]

    October 14, 2012 at 3:47 pm |
  8. achepotlex

    Oh my gosh, those poor Jews!

    October 14, 2012 at 3:34 pm |
    • STOP MURDER OF CHILDREN , Human be aware of hindu filthy dog's of hindu Atheism, self center ism , DENIAL OF TRUTH ABSOLUTE GOD.

      having heart aches, hindu gentile, ignorant slave?

      October 14, 2012 at 3:43 pm |
  9. Kindness

    kindness
    This is my experience... Thank you.

    MY personal testimony.
    A thought to consider without an ego response

    I Accepted Jesus christ as my lord and saviour. You never know how soon is too late. Transcend the worldly illusion of enslavement.
    The world denounces truth....

    Accepting Jesus Christ (for me) resulted in something like seeng a new colour. You will see it .....but will not be able to clearly explain it to anyone else..... Its meant to be that way to transend any selfism within you.

    Also... much the world arranges "surrounding dark matter into something to be debated" in such a way that protects/inflates the ego.

    The key is be present and transcend our own desire to physically see evidence. We don't know anyways by defending our own perception of dark matter.

    Currently.... most of us are constructing our own path that suits our sin lifestyle. Were all sinners. Knowing that we are is often an issue. But both christians and non are sinners. Even once we are saved by christs merciful grace we will still experience adversity to mold us to adhering to the truth.
    We will slip... But not fall of the ship ...carrying us onward to perfection in christs grace.

    We don't like to Let go and let god. We want control to some degree. This is what Jesus asks us to do. "Follow me".
    It's the hardest thing to do... but is done by letting the truth of scripture lead you (redemptive revelation)... as I said .

    Try reading corinthians and see if it makes sense to you. Try it without a pre conceived notion of it being a fairy tale.
    See the truth...
    do we do what it says in todays society... is it relevant... so many have not recently read and only hinge their philosophy on what they have heard from some other person...which may have been full of arogance pride or vanity..

    Look closely at the economy ponzi, look at how society idolizes Lust , greed , envy, sloth, pride of life, desire for knowledge, desire for power, desire for revencge,gluttony with food etc .

    Trancsend the temporal world.

    Just think if you can find any truth you can take with you ....in any of these things. When you die your riches go to someone who will spend away your life..... You will be forgotten.... history will repeat iteslf.... the greatest minds knowledge fade or are eventually plagerzed..... your good deeds will be forgotten and only give you a fleeting temporary reward . your learned teachings are forgotten or mutated..... your gold is transfered back to the rullers that rule you through deception. Your grave will grow over . This is truth .

    Trancsend your egoism and free yourself from this dominion of satan. Understand you are a sinner and part of the collective problem of this worldly matrix... Repent.... Repent means knowing (to change) The Holy spirit (within) will convict you beyond what you think you can do by yourself. Grace is given to those who renounce the world. That are" in" the world but not "of " the world.

    Evidence follows faith. Faith does not follow evidence..... Faith ....above reason in Jesus Christ.

    Faith comes by Reading or Hearing the word of god from the bible . Ask Jesus in faith for dicernment and start reading the new testament... You will be shocked when you lay down your preconceived notions and ....see and hear truth ... see how christ sets an example ... feel the truth....

    Read Ecclesiastes. Read romans or corinthians.

    You cant trancend your own egoism by adapting a world philosophy to suit your needs. Seek the truth in Christ.

    Sell all your cleverness and purchase true bewilderment. You don't get what you want ....you get what you are by faith above reason in christ.

    I promise this has been the truth for me. In Jesus christ .

    Think of what you really have to lose. ...your ego?

    Break the Matrix of illusion that holds your senses captive.

    once you do . you too will have the wisdom of God that comes only through the Holy Spirit. Saved By grace through Faith. Just like seeing a new colour.... can't explain it to a transient caught in the matrix of worldly deception.
    You will also see how the world suppresses this information and distorts it

    You're all smart people . I tell the truth. Its hard to think out of the box when earthly thinking is the box.
    I'ts a personal free experience you can do it free anytime . Don't wait till you are about to die.. START PUTTING YOUR TREASURES WHERE THEY REALLY MATTER >
    Its awsome and It's just between you and Jesus

    my testimony

    Romans 10:9

    "If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved

    October 14, 2012 at 3:27 pm |
    • STOP MURDER OF CHILDREN , Human be aware of hindu filthy dog's of hindu Atheism, self center ism , DENIAL OF TRUTH ABSOLUTE GOD.

      No one ever lived by the name of Jesus, and every hindu pagan King claimed to be a Mithra, savior, awake up hindu, ignorant, you have spoken nothing, but spewed your hinduism, absurdity.

      October 14, 2012 at 3:33 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      "Evidence follows faith. Faith does not follow evidence."
      - There's your problem, (and you DO have a problem).
      You do not know what the definition of "evidence" is.

      October 14, 2012 at 3:54 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      That folks is what "linguistic integrity" is all about, (or an example of what it is NOT).
      This is what religionists do constantly. They try to redefine words, to make their arguments "appear" to come out OK.

      October 14, 2012 at 3:56 pm |
    • STOP MURDER OF CHILDREN , Human be aware of hindu filthy dog's of hindu Atheism, self center ism , DENIAL OF TRUTH ABSOLUTE GOD.

      It is called hinduism, absurdity, to make a hypothesis a reality, to fool himself and than fool every one in to some thing having no reason to exist. heaven of hindu's, fool's.

      October 14, 2012 at 4:08 pm |
    • snowboarder

      kind – that is some seriously crazy stuff.

      October 14, 2012 at 7:45 pm |
  10. Kindness

    Last eve I passed beside a blacksmith’s door,
    And heard the anvil ring the vesper chime;
    The, looking in, I saw upon the floor
    Old hammers, worn with beating years of time.
    “How many anvils have you had,” said I,
    “To wear and batter all these hammers so?”
    “Just one,” said he, and then with twinkling eye,
    “The anvil wears the hammers out, you know.”
    And so, thought I, the anvil of God’s Word,
    For ages skeptic blows have beat upon;
    Yet, though the noise of falling blows was heard,
    The anvil is unharmed – the hammers gone.

    October 14, 2012 at 3:13 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Nice poem. Except people have figured out why and how the HUMAN'S who wrote "god's word" did so for VERY human reasons, and were self-admitted liars.

      October 14, 2012 at 3:21 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      "For if the truth of God hath more abounded by my lie unto his glory, why yet am I also adjudged a sinner?" – St. Paul, Romans 3.7.

      October 14, 2012 at 3:27 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky,
      Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
      Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
      One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
      In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
      One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
      One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them

      October 14, 2012 at 7:08 pm |
    • Chad

      Hi Bucky.
      still havent actually read the entire verse yet to figure out that Paul is speaking rhetorically yet?

      why?

      wouldnt you really rather have what you believe to be true, actually BE true?
      Why believe something that isnt true?

      But if our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.) 6 Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world? 7 Someone might argue, “If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?” 8 Why not say—as some slanderously claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is just! Romans 3

      October 14, 2012 at 7:16 pm |
    • Veritas

      Chad. Wouldn't you rather that the creation myth in the bible be true. Unfortunately it isn't. Yet you believe.

      October 14, 2012 at 9:56 pm |
    • Chad

      @Veritas "Wouldn't you rather that the creation myth in the bible be true. Unfortunately it isn't. "

      =>based on what?

      October 14, 2012 at 10:20 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Based on lack of any evidence. If you can show otherwise, you'd have done it long ago. The very fact that this roundabout with you and your nonsense continues is proof that you have no evidence. Only belief. And the fact that you continue to deny that you have no proof is only evidence that your belief is tenuous. if you truly believed, you'd stop attempting to "prove" anything and simply state that faith is what you have and nothing more than that. And THAT, Chard, should be enough. That it isn't says more about you than it does about anyone else.

      October 14, 2012 at 10:24 pm |
    • Chad

      Veritas is making a statement that the creation account in Genesis is not true.

      I am asking, based on what evidence is he making that claim?

      please note that it is a logical fallacy to state that the lack of evidence of a statements truth, proves its falsehood.
      Otherwise, I could say "God is real because you havent proved He isnt" :-)

      October 14, 2012 at 10:27 pm |
  11. Atheism is not healthy for children and other living things

    Prayer changes things .

    October 14, 2012 at 3:09 pm |
    • hal 9001

      I'm sorry, "Atheism is not healthy for children and other living things", but everything you have ever asserted regarding atheism and prayer is unfounded. The degree to which your assertions may represent truths is 0.0. To help you understand the degree to which your assertions may represent truths, I will access my Idiomatic Expression Equivalency module (IEE). Using my IEE module, the expression that best matches the degree to which your assertions may represent truths is: "TOTAL FAIL".

      I see that you repeat these unfounded statements with high frequency. Perhaps the following book might help you overcome this problem:

      I'm Told I Have Dementia: What You Can Do... Who You Can Turn to...
      by the Alzheimer's Disease Society

      October 14, 2012 at 3:15 pm |
    • HeavenSense

      Hi Prayerbot.....

      October 14, 2012 at 3:26 pm |
  12. Anybody know how to read?

    The root cause of the Semites, Arabs and 'Jews', fighting, is over a birthright that is no longer valid. Jesus said, 'Jhn 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.' 'Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.'

    October 14, 2012 at 2:48 pm |
    • GAW

      And I sayeth to you speaketh in the language of the people.

      October 14, 2012 at 2:54 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Yeah, forsooth, verily I sayeth unto thee. Thy house is Bucky's promised land. Get out today, and leave your keys, (forsooth), under the doormat. For yeah, I sayeth unto thee,
      The Lost Gospel of Fluffy. 1:12

      October 14, 2012 at 3:05 pm |
    • snowboarder

      read – as if a religious birthright has any meaning anyway.

      October 14, 2012 at 3:17 pm |
    • Anybody know how to read?

      Well, snowcake, I'm sure you've heard it all before. Jesus is the only one that had a righteous birth.

      October 14, 2012 at 3:22 pm |
    • STOP MURDER OF CHILDREN , Human be aware of hindu filthy dog's of hindu Atheism, self center ism , DENIAL OF TRUTH ABSOLUTE GOD.

      There ware no birth right's, birth right's are claimed buy hindu's, lairs for sole purpose of hinduism, racism.

      October 14, 2012 at 3:27 pm |
    • snowboarder

      read – no such thing as a righteous birth. simply the product of the imagination of the writers.

      October 14, 2012 at 5:12 pm |
    • therealpeace2all

      @realbuckyball

      " The Lost Gospel of Fluffy. 1:12 "

      LOL ! :D

      Peace...

      October 14, 2012 at 7:46 pm |
  13. CENSORED

    CNN IS CENSORING LEGIITIMATE COMMENTS

    October 14, 2012 at 2:42 pm |
    • midwest rail

      There are no censors here, only word filters.

      October 14, 2012 at 2:43 pm |
    • Helpful Hints

      There is an automatic word filter on these blogs.

      Bad letter combinations / words to avoid if you want to get past the CNN automatic filter:
      Many, if not most, are buried within other words, so use your imagination.
      You can use dashes, spaces, or other characters or some html tricks to modify the "offending" letter combinations.
      ---
      ar-se.....as in ar-senic.
      co-ck.....as in co-ckatiel, co-ckatrice, co-ckleshell, co-ckles, etc.
      co-on.....as in racc-oon, coc-oon, etc.
      crac-ker…
      cu-m......as in doc-ument, accu-mulate, circu-mnavigate, circu-mstances, cu-mbersome, cuc-umber, etc.
      ef-fing...as in ef-fing filter
      ft-w......as in soft-ware, delft-ware, swift-water, drift-wood, etc.
      ho-mo.....as in ho-mo sapiens or ho-mose-xual, ho-mogenous, sopho-more, etc.
      ho-oters…as in sho-oters
      ho-rny....as in tho-rny, etc.
      inf-orms us…
      hu-mp… as in th-ump, th-umper, th-umping
      jacka-ss...yet "ass" is allowed by itself.....
      ja-p......as in j-apanese, ja-pan, j-ape, etc.
      koo-ch....as in koo-chie koo..!
      nip-ple
      o-rgy….as in po-rgy, zo-rgy, etc.
      pi-s......as in pi-stol, lapi-s, pi-ssed, therapi-st, etc.
      p-oon… as in sp-oon, lamp-oon, harp-oon
      p-orn… as in p-ornography
      pr-ick....as in pri-ckling, pri-ckles, etc.
      que-er
      ra-pe.....as in scra-pe, tra-peze, gr-ape, thera-peutic, sara-pe, etc.
      se-x......as in Ess-ex, s-exual, etc.
      sl-ut
      sm-ut…..as in transm-utation
      sn-atch
      sp-ank
      sp-ic.....as in desp-icable, hosp-ice, consp-icuous, susp-icious, sp-icule, sp-ice, etc.
      sp-ook… as in sp-ooky, sp-ooked
      strip-per
      ti-t......as in const-itution, att-itude, t-itle, ent-ity, alt-itude, beat-itude, etc.
      tw-at.....as in wristw-atch, nightw-atchman, salt-water, etc.
      va-g......as in extrava-gant, va-gina, va-grant, va-gue, sava-ge, etc.
      who-re....as in who're you kidding / don't forget to put in that apostrophe!
      wt-f....also!!!!!!!

      October 14, 2012 at 2:45 pm |
    • GAW

      If there was a censor here they would be pretty busy.

      October 14, 2012 at 2:48 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      They sure fucking would.

      October 14, 2012 at 2:56 pm |
    • krussell

      Yes there are censors here.
      Say something bad and hard to deny about jews and your comment will be deleted.
      They will also ban you so you'll have to log in under a different email.

      October 14, 2012 at 7:14 pm |
    • OTOH

      krussell,

      Your evidence for this...?

      October 14, 2012 at 7:16 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Nope. I've never been unable to post a comment, regardless of its content, unless it contained one of the "forbidden" words or word fragments. If anyone were to be censored, I'd be one of the most likely.

      October 14, 2012 at 7:17 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Krussel doesn't HAVE any evidence.

      October 14, 2012 at 7:19 pm |
    • therealpeace2all

      @krussell

      " Say something bad and hard to deny about jews and your comment will be deleted. "

      Um... the seder dinner really su cks ! 8O

      The je-ws can often be penny pinchers ! 8O

      They believe in a lot of crazy sh!t ! 8O

      What... not bad enough ? LOL ! :D

      Peace...

      October 14, 2012 at 7:41 pm |
    • krussell

      What 'Proof' do you expect?
      I posted some things comparing the treatment of the Palestinians by the jews to te treatment of te jews by the germans, and I was banned from posting comments.
      Fortunately for you all, I have more than one email so I can comment under a different account.

      October 15, 2012 at 1:57 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Anyone who hasn't figured out that no one is "banning" you needs to get a clue. You're not being banned. No one at CNN cares what you write. There are no live "censors."

      October 15, 2012 at 2:00 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Krusty says: "Fortunately for you all, I have more than one...."

      Gosh, should we genuflect now or just kiss your azz?

      October 15, 2012 at 2:01 pm |
  14. fritz

    I don't care about a person's race or ethnicity. We all come from the same Mom if you go back far enough. But as far as religion, I'm an equal opportunity hater. I hate them all equally. ;oD

    October 14, 2012 at 2:41 pm |
    • GAW

      But you still are a discriminator then. So you must hate most people because of their ideology.

      October 14, 2012 at 2:47 pm |
    • The finisher

      Can't hate what you do not understand.

      October 14, 2012 at 3:30 pm |
  15. ruth

    How disgusting of these universities to do this...I hope this is not going on.....but I am sure it is....

    October 14, 2012 at 2:39 pm |
  16. The Case for Ethinic Cleansing

    It's time to deport all these Jewish imports who's allegiance is toward Israel instead of the United States. They are a cancer on our society. They have manipulated the system to take control of key parts of our government and economy. Doctors, Dentists, Lawyers, Entertainers, Bankers and other positions of power have been hijacked by the American Jew. In these positions, they assert their power to propagate religious nepotism. Just look at the statistics. The physician and banking sectors are majority Jew occupied. The medical school selection committees preselect jews for admission over others who may be more intelligent or stronger candidates for medical school. It's time for deportatin of the Jewish cartel that runs the United States.

    October 14, 2012 at 2:25 pm |
    • GAW

      And I thought Hitler was dead. He's now posting on the CNN belief blog.

      October 14, 2012 at 2:33 pm |
    • kathryn Giberman

      I am a Jew. My nose is small; my skin is fair; my eyes are green; I have always been poor; I am an artist. My dentist, lawyer, doctor, bank manager and local politicians are non-Jews. My parents and relatives have never held positions in these fields or others of power over society or the media. I wonder who taught you so much silliness? I've heard that ignorance is bliss... but in your case, it is hate.

      October 14, 2012 at 6:48 pm |
    • Veritas

      Not much of a case. Any evidence?

      October 14, 2012 at 6:52 pm |
    • psst's understudy

      Hint: "who's" is a contraction for "who is."

      "Whose" is a possessive.

      Further clarification: you should have used "whose."

      October 14, 2012 at 6:54 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      If Jesus existed, (and that's an IF) it proves NOT ONE of the claims made about him. The fact that "pious fraud" was an accepted method in the Early Church, is reason to doubt everything. What we know about the Hebrew scriptures PROVES that Paul changed the concepts of Messiahship, "sin", evil". salvation" and "purification".

      Gamailiel III, (the grandson of the High-Priest Paul talks about) had to insist in 90's CE, that all Jewish synagogues read every week, an "expulsion curse". (thus we KNOW they STILL considered themselves Jews that late). St. John Chrysostom in 400CE STILL was yelling at HIS congregation in his known Christmas sermon, to STOP going to the synagogue. Christian "history" is a fable, as it's made up, and told.

      October 14, 2012 at 10:26 pm |
  17. Anybody know how to read?

    Confusion on Jewishness need not continue. Paul, a Benjamite, explains: 'Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither [is that] circu mcision, which is outward in the flesh:But he [is] a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circu mcision [is that] of the heart, in the spirit, [and] not in the letter; whose praise [is] not of men, but of God.'

    October 14, 2012 at 2:25 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      All Bible quotes are circular arguments. They are believers telling believers what believers already believe. HUMANS write the Bible. (And Paul's thought system developed, and was inconsistent). If there even was ONE Paul, it begs the question, what was "inspired", if what he said LATER, contradicts what he said earlier.

      October 14, 2012 at 2:30 pm |
    • Chad

      @realbuckyball "All Bible quotes are circular arguments. They are believers telling believers what believers already believe. HUMANS write the Bible. (And Paul's thought system developed, and was inconsistent). If there even was ONE Paul, it begs the question, what was "inspired", if what he said LATER, contradicts what he said earlier."

      =>#1 common atheist trait
      lots of accusations
      no examples

      October 14, 2012 at 2:37 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      1. First of all Chad, the burden of proof is on YOU to prove that any book, has ANY origin, other than 100 % human. You have none. There is NO example of any literature, that has been created by ANY other method, other than human.
      2. "Inspiration" is refuted, by the "inclusion" process for the canon. It was long. convoluted, and happened by VOTES, which were non-unanimous. NO one disputes that.
      3. The Pauline literature's development process is well known to all scholars.
      [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDSUTjxNuiU&w=640&h=390]

      October 14, 2012 at 2:50 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Paul admitted he was a liar. Do I need to get that quote for you re "abounded by my LIE" ?
      [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ix7LUcyg_58&w=640&h=390]

      October 14, 2012 at 2:52 pm |
    • Chad

      thanks for making my point for me

      accusations

      no evidence ;-)

      question.. this "confidence" that you have.. what is it based on?

      October 14, 2012 at 2:57 pm |
    • Chad

      What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circ umcision? 2 Much in every way! First of all, the Jews have been entrusted with the very words of God.

      3 What if some were unfaithful? Will their unfaithfulness nullify God’s faithfulness? 4 Not at all! Let God be true, and every human being a liar. As it is written:

      “So that you may be proved right when you speak
      and prevail when you judge.”[a]
      5 But if our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.) 6 Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world? 7 Someone might argue, “If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?” 8 Why not say—as some slanderously claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is just!
      Romans 3

      that's what you think is "paul admitting he was a liar??

      Just astonishing that you such misplaced confidence. Why dont you actually read the bible for once? You are NOT going to get a clear picture of the truth just browsing infidels.org looking for something to cut and paste

      October 14, 2012 at 3:02 pm |
    • Concerned Citizen

      Chad

      Be more specific, do you want examples of the bible having circular reasoning? Would you not agree that every holy book is caught in a cycle of circular reasoning by saying in one form or another that the book is true because the book says its true. If that's what you are asking examples of then you either a) have never actually read your bible or b) are just being difficult for the sake of being difficult.

      October 14, 2012 at 3:11 pm |
    • STOP MURDER OF CHILDREN , Human be aware of hindu filthy dog's of hindu Atheism, self center ism , DENIAL OF TRUTH ABSOLUTE GOD.

      No need to hind, hindu pagan Paul was not a Israelite, but a hindu pagan of non Israel, spouted noting else but hindu Mithra ism, pagan savior ism, part of hinduism, illegality on name of son of blessed Mary.

      October 14, 2012 at 3:24 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Chad is so stupid that, after seeing the first video, he thinks that there are no contradictions, and cannot argue why they are not.

      "For if the truth of God hath more abounded by my lie unto his glory, why yet am I also adjudged a sinner?" – St. Paul, Romans 3.7.

      October 14, 2012 at 3:25 pm |
    • Chad

      bucky..
      read the actual verse

      then, after reading it, tell me if you believe that Paul was admitting lying in it..

      as I said, you simply are not going to be able to construct any kind of an argument only looking around infidels.org...

      What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circ umcision? 2 Much in every way! First of all, the Jews have been entrusted with the very words of God.

      3 What if some were unfaithful? Will their unfaithfulness nullify God’s faithfulness? 4 Not at all! Let God be true, and every human being a liar. As it is written:

      “So that you may be proved right when you speak
      and prevail when you judge.”[a]
      5 But if our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.) 6 Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world? 7 Someone might argue, “If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?” 8 Why not say—as some slanderously claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is just! Romans 3

      October 14, 2012 at 3:55 pm |
    • Chad

      @Concerned Citizen "... Would you not agree that every holy book is caught in a cycle of circular reasoning..."

      @Chad "A. Every non-fiction book makes a statement about what it believes to be true..
      B. The bible has the advantage of actually BEING true, not because it says it is, but because it is.

      no historical fact in the bible has EVER been proved to have been incorrect

      right?

      October 14, 2012 at 3:58 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      No Chad.
      I started out by pointing that Paul's thought system was inconsistent. YOU have not defended either you position, or refuted my original post about inspiration. You are evading the original point.
      Paul said he lied, and god's glory "abounded" by it. Words mean what they mean. It fits neatly into an entire pattern of "pious fraud", that all the Church Fathers admitted they practiced.

      October 14, 2012 at 4:06 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Chad
      All kinds of "historical facts" have been proven false. Jesus' genealogies are different in different gospels.

      October 14, 2012 at 4:09 pm |
    • midwest rail

      " B. The bible has the advantage of actually BEING true, not because it says it is, but because it is. " Sadly, this is thought to be real evidence.

      October 14, 2012 at 4:33 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      MR, that sentence of the Vegetable's made me guffaw. The Bible is true? Says who? Chard? The guy who has yet to demonstrate he has a brain?

      October 14, 2012 at 4:35 pm |
    • Concerned Citizen

      @Chad

      Nonfiction books to do not state within the text to be true, either because they are biographies written in the first person, autobiographies or commentary/essays on different historical events or phenomenon. Most non fiction (at least historical non fiction or commentary) also has cited, respectable sources and large amounts of research put into it. With all that, it still doesn't mean that all those non fiction books are correct, it just means they have done their due diligence. The bible however is a book that has been revised countless times, voted on, contradictions galore and has to keep stating it's true because giving even a medic.um of doubt would mean disaster for the entire religion.

      All you've given me so far is that the bible is true because you say its true, the text says its true and that's all that matters.

      For a guy who constantly demands sources and legitimate examples to back up claims, you sure are a hypocrite.

      October 14, 2012 at 4:58 pm |
    • Chad

      @realbuckyball "I started out by pointing that Paul's thought system was inconsistent"
      @Chad "where? how?

      @realbuckyball "Paul said he lied, and god's glory "abounded" by it."
      @Chad "LOL
      no, read it again :-)

      =====
      @realbuckyball All kinds of "historical facts" have been proven false"
      @Chad "such as what??

      ======
      @realbuckyball "Jesus' genealogies are different in different gospels."
      @Chad "?
      how do you figure?
      Luke traces the legal lineage thru Joseph, Matthew traces blood lineage thru Mary.

      October 14, 2012 at 5:55 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Oooh, Chard's using emoticons again. That's a sure sign he's been wounded.

      October 14, 2012 at 5:57 pm |
    • mama k

      You all are still arguing over Gullible's Travels? My goodness. Of course the Bible is like old rancid hamburger that wasn't even a very good grade to being with, and so then some chef-wanna-be's tried to fix it up with a whole lotta of some imitation hamburger helper. It's just so rehashed.

      October 14, 2012 at 6:10 pm |
    • Chad

      @Concerned Citizen "Nonfiction books to do not state within the text to be true"
      @Chad "???
      You are incorrect.. See for example
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sworn_declaration
      affirmations that what is being recorded is true are pretty common..

      ===========
      @Concerned Citizen "Most non fiction (at least historical non fiction or commentary) also has cited, respectable sources and large amounts of research put into it."
      @Chad "Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled[a] among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3 With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. Luke 1

      ===========
      @Concerned Citizen "The bible however is a book that has been revised countless times"
      @Chad "really? name one.

      ===========
      @Concerned Citizen "voted on"
      @Chad "you are referring to the council of nicea voting on New Testament (not Old Testament) texts, recognizing which were authentic.
      There is good reason that no apocryphal writing has ever been thought to have been excluded wrongly, nor any canonized text included incorrectly, that council was divinely guided.

      ===========
      @Concerned Citizen "contradictions galore and has to keep stating it's true because giving even a medic.um of doubt would mean disaster for the entire religion."
      @Chad "that kind of statement is SO much more effective if actually backed up with a "contradiction"

      I actually dont know why you guys have such trouble finding them,, after all, they're everywhere according to you :-)

      ===========
      @Concerned Citizen "All you've given me so far is that the bible is true because you say its true"
      @Chad "hmm.. no. what I gave you was the true statement that no historical fact in the bible has ever been proven wrong, and thousands have been proven correct.

      That's the most powerful evidence imaginable, right?

      October 14, 2012 at 6:11 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      When you read Chard's posts, don't you wonder who in the world would have married and had children with such a smarmy azzwipe?

      October 14, 2012 at 6:16 pm |
    • mama k

      Chad wrote: ". . .the first were eyewitnesses and servants . . ."

      In other words charlatan politicians who were either out to make a buck or to save their asses from being killed by someone else or both.

      October 14, 2012 at 6:21 pm |
    • mama k

      Chad: "what I gave you was the true statement that no historical fact in the bible has ever been proven wrong,"

      which means it's as valid as the stuff in my spam folder...

      October 14, 2012 at 6:24 pm |
    • OTOH

      Chad,
      "no historical fact in the bible has ever been proven wrong, and thousands have been proven correct.

      That's the most powerful evidence imaginable, right?"

      No. All sorts of fiction and fantasy stories are set in real places. For example, Dickens' "The Christmas Carol" accurately portrays the places and conditions in the history of 19th century England. Does that mean that the supernatural visits of Jacob Marley and the Ghosts of Christmas Past, Present, and Yet-to-Come were real?

      October 14, 2012 at 6:24 pm |
    • Chad

      I really do love atheist responses like this.. as it shows how completely and totally unfamiliar that person is with the bible, and early Christian history.

      Makes one wonder.. how in the world can someone so completely ignorant of some historical event, be so completely certain it is false? Is that the very definition of irrational or what?

      ========
      @mama k "In other words charlatan politicians who were either out to make a buck or to save their asses from being killed by someone else or both."
      @Chad "not a politician amongst any of them.
      ALL of the people that made those statements were persecuted for saying them, many were killed. NONE made those statements to avoid being killed. (this is the first century dont forget, Christians were persecuted both by Jewish leaders of the time, and by Roman authorities.

      October 14, 2012 at 6:28 pm |
    • Concerned Citizen

      Chad

      Wrong, just plain wrong on all accounts. First, why cite the "sworn declaration" as an example that nonfiction BOOKS say they are true? That doesn't make any sense in this context and like I stated earlier, when books are being written, in the text themselves they don't have to keep affirming their veracity, that's why they have a works cited page at the end and citations and footnotes.

      The bible being revised.... well lets see, there's been quite a few translations from different languages, as well as like I pointed out before, the council of nicea, which is hilarious that the only way to defend THAT is you say it was divinely guided, what large, crazy mounds of bullish.it.

      and of course, lastly, this is the most incredible part. I make a statement about contradictions everywhere in the bible. Not only have they been cited to you countless times on this blog, but just look above at the beginning of this thread. So not only do you constantly have to ignore all the citations that have been given to you to make the claim that me and other atheists have not given them to you, but then you have the audacity to make the statement, " what I gave you was the true statement that no historical fact in the bible has ever been proven wrong, and thousands have been proven correct." WITHOUT GIVING EXAMPLES. Seriously chad, what is wrong with you?

      What kind of historical facts are you speaking of exactly? an historical "fact" which I'm sure you want to claim is that cities like Jerusalem and Damascus are referred to in the bible and existed, even though you and I both know that it's very possible to refer to real places in fiction and it still is fiction. So please tell me, these "facts" your referring to, what are they?

      October 14, 2012 at 6:34 pm |
    • truth be told

      Archaeology confirms the Bible as Truth with each new discovery. There have been thousands of confirming discoveries over the years, all available to anyone who wants to look.

      October 14, 2012 at 6:41 pm |
    • OTOH

      tbt,

      The fact that places mentioned in the Bible have been verified archeologically has no bearing on the veracity of the supernatural stories put forth in that book.

      Mount Olympus (and many other places mentioned in their legends and myths) really exists in Greece. Does that mean that 12 gods really live there?

      October 14, 2012 at 6:45 pm |
    • truth be told

      There is more evidence than names of places, but then you really do not want to be educated in Truth you prefer the ignorance of hate and bigotry. It is easier for you to follow hate than Truth.

      October 14, 2012 at 6:48 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      truth be told:
      "Archaeology confirms the Bible as Truth with each new discovery. There have been thousands of confirming discoveries over the years, all available to anyone who wants to look."

      Says the brain-dead turd who doesn't know the difference between "gall" and "Gaul" and can't manage to look up either word.

      October 14, 2012 at 6:49 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      truth be told
      "There is more evidence than names of places, but then you really do not want to be educated in Truth you prefer the ignorance of hate and bigotry. It is easier for you to follow hate than Truth."

      Thus barfs up the idiot who thinks "truth" is capitalized and can't manage to take a high school English class to learn otherwise. It would rather live in ignorance. It's much easier for a moron like Turd to do so.

      October 14, 2012 at 6:51 pm |
    • Concerned Citizen

      I love how all the fun dies keep trying to prove the bible correct by saying archeological findings prove the bible to be truthful, as if finding a pot dated to the time of jesus somehow proves that jesus walked on water.

      The bible could be proven easily, all god has to do is come on down and give us a wave. Maybe make it rain frogs or something, or like others have pointed out, God could start a website, maybe tweet a couple of things here or there. Heck, even sending a real life prophet could help, and yet god has done nothing, been incredibly mum on the issue. You would think god, the guy who's supposed to be ruler of over 1/3 of the worlds population would give some indication to his followers who is right? Why let the people he chose kill or die in his name?

      October 14, 2012 at 6:53 pm |
    • Observer

      Must admit, Chad is too good at presenting facts, is well read and comes across as way too intelligent for any of his detractors here.
      Whateva happened to david johnson/john richard/momoya? Newer monikers keep surfacing in the face of defeat ;)

      October 14, 2012 at 6:53 pm |
    • Chad

      @Concerned Citizen "First, why cite the "sworn declaration" as an example that nonfiction BOOKS say they are true? That doesn't make any sense in this context and like I stated earlier, when books are being written, in the text themselves they don't have to keep affirming their veracity, that's why they have a works cited page at the end and citations and footnotes."
      @Chad "lol
      A. A historian affirming that that which is being recorded is true, is somehow viewed by you as affirming it's non-truth? :-)
      B. Show me one (just one is all you have to do), just one. Not two, just one is fine.. Historical doc ument from ANYONE prior to lets say 1000 AD that is in the form you cite ( with end citations and footnotes).. LOL
      C. The bible refers to actual people when recording statements. It is not a book on philosophy, it is a historical record that has never had a single fact been disproven..

      =======
      @Concerned Citizen "The bible being revised.... well lets see, there's been quite a few translations from different languages"
      @Chad "think you are confused on what it means to revise an original text, and to produce different translations of that original text...
      The fact that the original text has been transmitted thru history (in some cases, up to over 2000 years), is a fact that simply no other written doc on the face of the earth has ever even come close to duplicating.
      never
      ever

      ========
      @Concerned Citizen " I make a statement about contradictions everywhere in the bible. Not only have they been cited to you countless times on this blog, but just look above at the beginning of this thread. .."
      @Chad "such as.. what? I dont get you guys.. if it's so simple, just DO IT. Why bluster and posture.. just DO IT. Provide an example of a contradiction for crying out loud.

      Look, I"ll give you an example of how it's done.

      This is an example of biblical text that is historically accurate: "In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar—when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene— 2 during the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness. 3 He went into all the country around the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. 4 As it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet: Luke 3

      the bold part is the inarguable accurate portion. You can argue that John was crazy and was hearing voices, but unarguably the rest is historically accurate.

      October 14, 2012 at 6:55 pm |
    • mama k

      Chad said "@Chad "not a politician amongst any of them."

      Politician – as in lying and deceiving to make a buck or to save someone's ass or to promote a possibly untrustworthy cause. Doesn't mean anyone says that's their declared career for crying out loud. My goodness. Look around you today. Why would you think people were not people back then? There's always been a real good likelihood when someone is selling something, especially something you can't see, guess what, they have a certain degree of politician, salesman, lobbyist and charlatan in them.

      October 14, 2012 at 6:56 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      @Observer: then why don't you step up to the plate?

      October 14, 2012 at 6:57 pm |
    • Chad

      @OTOH "The fact that places mentioned in the Bible have been verified archeologically has no bearing on the veracity of the supernatural stories put forth in that book."
      @Chad "not true at all,
      It doesnt prove that the supernatural events happened
      however,
      the fact that the authors had a really unparalleled concern with accuracy in recording events, absolutely DOES bear on the veracity of the other events recorded therein.
      Just as if they had sloppily recorded history, that would tend to undermine their credibility with respect to other events.

      October 14, 2012 at 7:00 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Nonsense, Chard. Citing geographical places existed is no more significant than saying Santa lives at the North Pole, you moron.

      October 14, 2012 at 7:03 pm |
    • Chad

      @Mama K "IF you are concerned at all with having your belief system based on fact, I would really encourage you to investigate the early Christian Church.

      What you are saying is just not accurate in any way shape or form. Persecution was the norm for anyone stating that Jesus was the Messiah for hundreds of years.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians

      what Is just fascinating, and bewildering.. is that your belief system isnt founded on reality.. yet you believe in it.
      The thing you will never ever ever be able to do, is reconcile reality with atheism. It has never been done, and wont ever be done.

      October 14, 2012 at 7:05 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Oh, now the Vegetable is attempting to predict the future. This should be quite entertaining.

      October 14, 2012 at 7:08 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Hey, Chard, have you managed to prove that evolution and the Big Bang were the result of some fart your god emitted? If so, why hasn't this enormous revelation hit the national/world news?

      October 14, 2012 at 7:13 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      NO Chad. Grow up LOOK at the lineages.
      1. NO JEW, EVER, NOT ONCE ever, traced a lineage through the mother. NEVER.
      2. Count the generations. Mathew has 28, Luke has 43. That means in Mathew there 15 LESS generations than the other. Either the generations were the SAME length, or they were not. So you're trying to tell me ALL of Mary's family lived a total of 15 generations LONGER, with the SAME number of people ? Bwawawawawawawa.
      Drop it. Cyrineus died 10 years before Herod was King. The birth records could NOT have happened the way they say.

      With EVERY discovery, archaeology proves nothing, the claims in the Bible are NOT true.
      NO JEW would EVER drink blood. It was an "abomination". it would make them vomit. It's PROOF the whole Last Supper crap is just that.

      October 14, 2012 at 7:18 pm |
    • mama k

      Chad – I didn't say Christians were not persecuted, now did I? My point is to say we have no reason to believe that any of the stories were real as written. None. Anyone can make up a good story. It very easy for any group of two or three or four to make up a good story. Show us some things from outside the Bible that give proof of any of the stories in the Bible – that might be a simpler way to attack this delusion. My point was to say we have plenty of reason to believe that people are people and make up stuff all the time for money, to protect someone (maybe themselves), and among other things, to encourage a belief in something that hasn't been proven to them, yet they support it – that's the way people are. Any they didn't just become that way today – they've always been like that.

      October 14, 2012 at 7:19 pm |
    • mama k

      And Chad – you made a typo here – you said:
      "The thing you will never ever ever be able to do, is reconcile reality with atheism."
      when it really should be:
      "The thing you will never ever ever be able to do, is reconcile reality with religion.

      October 14, 2012 at 7:37 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Score: Mama K: 1, Chard: 0.

      October 14, 2012 at 7:40 pm |
    • Chad

      @realbuckyball "NO JEW, EVER, NOT ONCE ever, traced a lineage through the mother. NEVER.
      @Chad "unusual yes, unprecedented? not by a long shot, see for example the different genealogies of Isaac and Ismael, same father, different mothers, which made all the difference.

      ========
      @realbuckyball " Count the generations. Mathew has 28, Luke has 43. That means in Mathew there 15 LESS generations than the other.
      @Chad "not at all, it just means that Matthew left out more than Luke did, a very common Jewish practice known as "telescoping genealogies" (which BTW is the reason that one cant merely add up all the "begats" to arrive at the age of the earth.)
      Very important to realize that to say in Hebrew that someone was your "father", doesnt in any way shape or form determine if that was father, grandfather, great-grandfather, etc..

      ========
      @realbuckyball " Cyrineus died 10 years before Herod was King. The birth records could NOT have happened the way they say."
      @Chad "Cyrenius most certainly held gov't positions twice (it is well established that he was in the area of Palestine during that time period), the birth of Jesus occurred during the first ( as is alluded to by the text which indicates that this is the first census, distinguishing it from a later second one.

      Like I said, never bet against the bible, it's the most historically accurate doc ument of ancient times.

      =========
      @realbuckyball "NO JEW would EVER drink blood. It was an "abomination". it would make them vomit. It's PROOF the whole Last Supper crap is just that."
      @Chad "you need to read up on the last supper.. there was no blood drank, sorry to burst your bubble..

      October 14, 2012 at 8:07 pm |
    • Chad

      @mama k "I didn't say Christians were not persecuted, now did I? "
      @mama k "In other words charlatan politicians who were either out to make a buck or to save their asses from being killed by someone else or both."

      =>hmm.. you certainly said (incorrectly and inaccurately) that early Christians said what they said to save their lives.. when in fact the opposite is true.

      misconception corrected :-)

      question: instead of spending all this time making nonsensical, false accusations, why not spend some time investigating the bible? think of all the facts you would then have at your disposal!!!

      October 14, 2012 at 8:13 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      "telescoping generations" Bwahahahahahahahahaha. Give me ONE other example, in an extra-Biblical texts. Why list ANY then ? You are sooo full of sh1t. YOU know you have doubts. You KNOW it. You don't REALLY buy this crapolla. In Judaism, ONLY the male line counted, and YOU know it. Otherwise Deborah would be Mother of the Nation.

      Jesus said, at the last supper, "THIS IS MY BLOOD". I see your Jesus lies a lot.
      Give it up.

      October 14, 2012 at 8:14 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      Chad is still trying to keep his Bible on life support I see.

      October 14, 2012 at 8:14 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Herod WAS DEAD before Cyreneus was governor AT all. The Roman records are clear.

      October 14, 2012 at 8:16 pm |
    • Chad

      @realbuckyball "telescoping generations" Bwahahahahahahahahaha. Give me ONE other example, in an extra-Biblical texts."
      @Chad "you want an extra-biblical source to show how telescoping in the bible is a common practice?
      lol
      simply Google the topic, it is very, very, very well established.. a couple examples:


      Moses and Aaron – Exodus 6:16-20, Numbers 26:57-59; and 1 Chronicles 6:1-3; 23:6, 12-13
      With the Moses and Aaron playing such central roles in the exodus, it is not surprising that their genealogy is given four different times in the Old Testament. This genealogy serves as a striking example of telescoping a genealogy to include only the tribe, division, and clan. The genealogies defining the divisions and clans of the Levites are given in Numbers 3:17-37; 26:57-59 and 1 Chronicles 6:1-3; 23:6-23. We see from these passages that Moses and Aaron were of the tribe of Levi (the Levites), the division of Kohath (the Kohathites), and the clan of Amram (the Amramites). These genealogies were telescoped to only include the three generations needed to establish this.

      Korah – Numbers 16:1
      In the second census during Israel’s desert wanderings, a few noteworthy individuals are listed along with each tribe’s genealogy. Korah, son of Izhar, son of Kohath, the son of Levi led a rebellion against Moses during the desert wandering and was engulfed by the earth along with his followers. This genealogy specifies his clan (Izhar), division (Kohath), and tribe (Levi) and telescopes out the remaining generations between Korah and Izhar.

      Dathan and Abiram – Numbers 16:1; 26:5-9
      Along with Korah, Dathan and Abiram participated in the rebellion against Moses and died with him. Because of this notoriety, Dathan and Abiram are listed among the Reubenites in the second Israelite census. In this genealogy, we are
      given only their clan (Eliab), division (Pallu), and tribe (Reuben).

      Zelophehads’ daughters – Numbers 26:28-32; 27:1
      Zelophehad and his daughters are listed as noteworthy among the Manassehites in the second census of Israel. Because he had 5 daughters and no sons, they came to Moses about the issue of inheritance. As a result, it became law that daughters would receive the inheritance if there were no sons (Numbers 27). This genealogy, Zelophehad, son of Hepher, son of Gilead, son of Machir, son of Manasseh, son of Joseph is analogous to the preceding examples except that one more name is included beyond the tribe (Manasseh), division (Machir), and clan (Gilead).

      Ezra 7:1-5 compared to 1 Chronicles 6:3-15
      The genealogy of 1 Chronicles 6:3-15 lists the descendents of Aaron down to Jehozadak (Jozadak). Ezra 7 lists Ezra’s own genealogy going back to Aaron. Where the two genealogies overlap, 1 Chronicles contains 22 names and Ezra contains 16 names, making Ezra’s genealogy no more than 70% complete.[9] (See Priestly Lineage on page 18.) Both genealogies span a time period of about 860 years from the exodus to the fall of Jerusalem, which suggests that both genealogies are in fact highly telescoped. A thorough search of the Old Testament reveals that there were many high priests during this time period who are not included in either of these two genealogies, which provides additional evidence that these genealogies are not complete. The following high priests are known from the OT but are not included in these genealogies: Jehoiada (2 Kings 12:2), Uriah (2 Kings 16:10-16), possibly two Azariahs (2 Chronicles 26:17, 20; 31:10-31), Eli (1 Samuel 1:9; 14:3) and Abiathar (2 Samuel 8:17).[10]

      ==============
      @realbuckyball "Jesus said, at the last supper, "THIS IS MY BLOOD"."
      @Chad "you'll have to actually read it..
      there was no blood drank at the last supper.. That was a figure of speech.. like "I am the light of the world", He wasnt calling Himself the sun was he?

      October 14, 2012 at 8:29 pm |
    • Chad

      @realbuckyball "Herod WAS DEAD before Cyreneus was governor AT all. The Roman records are clear."

      =>A. There are no "roman records" of that(that's not saying there never were, but we have none that survived that I am aware of), what we know (extra-biblically) comes to us from Josephus a Jewish historian.

      B. again, the likely resolution here is that Quirinius held positions of authority in the area at least twice, one being during the birth of Jesus. Note that Luke doesn't use the official political t itle of "Governor" ("legatus"), but the broader term "hegemon" which is a ruling officer or procurator.

      October 14, 2012 at 8:42 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      There are 2 creation accounts in Genesis. They do not agree.
      Judas' death is not consistent. In one he hanged, in one his gut split.
      In Matthew 500 zombies also rose. No one says anything about seeing them, The temple curtain was rent, and "rocks split". Where are they. There was an earthquake, which NO one recorded, even while recording EVERY other known one. (They missed the one on Good Friday also). Jesus dies on different days in different gospels. Different people arrive 1st at the tomb. Mark's gospel originally HAD no resurrection. Moses knew about "kings" before there was a kingdom. Moses talks about his own death ad burial. Moses talks from the WRONG side of the Jordan River. Moses says "to this day, there has arisen in Israel", ie LOOKING back, which HE could not have done, As in the 1st video above the Pauline ideas are NOT consistent, and contradict themselves, The Temple cleansing was at the beginning of the ministry in one gospel, at the end in another, the denial of peter is different. In the Farewell Discourse, in John the disciples ask him "where are you going" and LATER he says "no one asks where am I going", (short attention span ??), why did god not know what kind of mate to make Adam, and "none proved to be a suitable mate" ?? (?? did he make him try bestiality ??), Is Yahweh "known" or "unknown", (he forgot he already told them) Exodus 6:3, there WAS no town of Nazareth, (it was ONLY a graveyard..archaeologically proven ), the voice at the baptism says different things, the daughter of Jarius...dead or alive..take your pick, where was Jesus the day after his baptism, (contradiction), who id for Jesus and who is against him , (Matthew 12:30, or Mark 9 :40), did Jesus talk at his trial, depends on which gospel...Matthew quotes the WRONG Prophet, (Matthew 27:9-10), Matthew says it's Jeremiah, ..it's really Zechariah, when was the temple curtain torn,...Jesus alive, or after he died...depends. Shall I start down the list in Paul ?

      October 14, 2012 at 8:45 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Prove it Chad. YOU are no authority. Why should anyone listen to YOU ?

      October 14, 2012 at 8:47 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Why would Matthew do a genealogy AT ALL, if he actually thought god was the father ?

      October 14, 2012 at 8:53 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      who carried the cross ? depends, what did he say on the cross, depends,
      Paul : conversion ?? Acts 9:7 states that when Jesus called Paul to preach the gospel, the men who were with Paul heard a voice but saw no man. According to Acts 22:9, however, the men saw a light but didn't hear the voice speaking to Paul. So W.T.F is going one here. Is your god trying to tick us ?

      October 14, 2012 at 8:55 pm |
    • Chad

      @realbuckyball "There are 2 creation accounts in Genesis. They do not agree."
      @Chad "that one has been tried.. and failed.. there are many examples in the bible where the same events are recorded in different locations, see for example samuel and chronicles.
      Genesis 2 simply provides additional detail to Genesis 1.

      =========
      @realbuckyball "Judas' death is not consistent. In one he hanged, in one his gut split."
      @Chad "most likely hung, body decomposed and eventually fell down, busting apart on impact.

      =====
      @realbuckyball "In Matthew 500 zombies also rose. No one says anything about seeing them"
      @Chat "just as the bible is full of events recorded in multiple places, the bible is also full of events that are recorded in only one location.

      =========
      @realbuckyball " The temple curtain was rent, and "rocks split". Where are they"
      @Chad "Jerusalem was completely destroyed in 70 AD by the Romans.

      =========
      @realbuckyball "There was an earthquake, which NO one recorded, even while recording EVERY other known one."
      @Chad "LOLOLOLO
      thanks for that :-)
      can you please show me the site that has the list of all earthquakes that ever happened??
      that one made me smile.

      =========
      @realbuckyball "Jesus dies on different days in different gospels.
      @Chad "??? how do you figure that?"

      =========
      @realbuckyball "Different people arrive 1st at the tomb."
      these statements are NOT contradictory:
      1. Sam and Simon ran to the store, Sam arrived first"
      2. Mark and Mort ran to the store, Mark arrived first"

      These statements ARE contradictory
      1. Sam and Simon ran to the store, Sam arrived first"
      1. Sam and Simon ran to the store, Simon arrived first"

      and on, and on...

      all of those objections have been tried, all failed

      October 14, 2012 at 8:57 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      "likely resolution" "likely" based on what ? Your "likely" bias ? Are YOU a Historian ? Or a modern apologist, desperate to keep you holy book intact.

      October 14, 2012 at 8:58 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      The different genesis accounts contradict each other.
      The gospels say the temple curtain was rent at different times. Your rebuttal is irrelevant, and YOU know it. Bad faith.
      There is more than one historian, who did earthquakes. I WILL get them . The fact you didn't know this proves your ignorance on the subject. (Call Dr. Craig for help. You need it).
      John 19:14, Day of Preparation, Mark 15:25 Doy OF Passover,
      No. Resurrection stories ALL different women, and what they saw.
      No they have ALL not been answered. Just attempted "excuses". Why did an almighty god NOT MAKE sure, he was understood ? Fail.

      October 14, 2012 at 9:06 pm |
    • mama k

      @mama k "I didn't say Christians were not persecuted, now did I? "
      Chad wrote:

      "@mama k "In other words charlatan politicians who were either out to make a buck or to save their asses from being killed by someone else or both."

      =>hmm.. you certainly said (incorrectly and inaccurately) that early Christians said what they said to save their lives.. when in fact the opposite is true."

      No Chad – you got it wrong yet again. I was speaking generically of the characteristics of people now and then, and I did not say the Christians were not persecuted. My reply since this one you responded to should have made my position apparent, but evidently you missed it. My intent (and it should be obvious by now) is to say that in any civilization of people, past or present, we have a large element of deception on the part of people who will either a) make up something that is not true, or b) not bother to investigate and just believe what someone else has told them. Based on this assumption, and knowing how little if no proof we have of the special claims and a lot more that is written in the Bible, you have nothing to stand on by believing it wholeheartedly. I also asked for something of real proof to any of the special incidents in the Bible. Let's take Paul's ascension to apostleship for instance. Show me one, just one thing external to his claim that proves that (meaning his vision, conversation, etc.). (You know, his secretary's claim for instance would be an internal reference. We need a proof external to just the words in the Bible.)

      October 14, 2012 at 9:11 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Good luck getting any "proof" from Chard the dishonest, mama k. Proof is never provided by the Vegetable, only demanded by the it.

      October 14, 2012 at 9:14 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcPiUGGd25s&w=640&h=390]

      October 14, 2012 at 9:15 pm |
    • Chad

      @mama k "we have a large element of deception on the part of people who will either a) make up something that is not true, or b) not bother to investigate and just believe what someone else has told them."

      =>true, people believe all kinds of things. However,
      do they believe things to be true that they know to be a lie? And willingly go to their death proclaiming that truth? no.
      that is the case with the first century witnesses of Christs resurrection that were martyred for their proclamation of same.

      October 14, 2012 at 10:11 pm |
    • Chad

      Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed,[5][6][7][8] and biblical scholars and cla ssical historians regard theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.[9][10][11] Scholars generally agree that Jesus was a Galilean Jew who was born BC 7–2 and died AD 30–36.[12][13] Most scholars hold that Jesus lived in Galilee and Judea[14][15][16] and that he spoke Aramaic and may have also spoken Hebrew and Greek.[17][18][19][20][21] Although scholars differ on the reconstruction of the specific episodes of the life of Jesus, the two events whose historicity is subject to "almost universal as sent" are that he was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.

      [5] Jesus and His Contemporaries: Comparative Studies by Craig A. Evans 2001 ISBN 0391041185 pages 2-5
      [6] Christopher M. Tuckett In The Cambridge Companion to Jesus edited by Markus N. A. Bockmuehl 2001 ISBN 0521796784 pages 122-126
      [7] Amy-Jill Levine in the The Historical Jesus in Context edited by Amy-Jill Levine et al. 2006 Princeton Univ Press ISBN 978-0-691-00992-6 pages 1-2
      [8] Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium by Bart D. Ehrman (Sep 23, 1999) ISBN 0195124731 Oxford Univ Press pages ix-xi
      [9] In a 2011 review of the state of modern scholarship, Bart Ehrman (who is a secular agnostic) wrote: "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees" B. Ehrman, 2011 Forged : writing in the name of God ISBN 978-0-06-207863-6. page 285
      ^ Robert M. Price (an atheist who denies existence) agrees that this perspective runs against the views of the majority of scholars: Robert M. Price "Jesus at the Vanishing Point" in The Historical Jesus: Five Views edited by James K. Beilby & Paul Rhodes Eddy, 2009 InterVarsity, ISBN 028106329X page 61
      [10] Michael Grant (a cla ssicist) states that "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." in Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels by Micjhael Grant 2004 ISBN 1898799881 page 200
      [11] Richard A. Burridge states: "There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church’s imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that any more." in Jesus Now and Then by Richard A. Burridge and Graham Gould (Apr 1, 2004) ISBN 0802809774 page 34
      [12] Robert E. Van Voorst Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence Eerdmans Publishing, 2000. ISBN 0-8028-4368-9 page 16 states: "biblical scholars and cla ssical historians regard theories of non-existence of Jesus as effectively refuted"
      [13] James D. G. Dunn "Paul's understanding of the death of Jesus" in Sacrifice and Redemption edited by S. W. Sykes (Dec 3, 2007) Cambridge University Press ISBN 052104460X pages 35-36 states that the theories of non-existence of Jesus are "a thoroughly dead thesis"
      [14] The Gospels and Jesus by Graham Stanton, 1989 ISBN 0192132415 Oxford University Press, page 145 states : "Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed".
      [15] Paul L. Maier "The Date of the Nativity and Chronology of Jesus" in Chronos, kairos, Christos: nativity and chronological studies by Jerry Vardaman, Edwin M. Yamauchi 1989 ISBN 0-931464-50-1 pages 113-129
      [16] The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown: An Introduction to the New Testament by Andreas J. Köstenberger, L. Scott Kellum 2009 ISBN 978-0-8054-4365-3 page 114
      ^ Joel B. Green, Scot McKnight, I. Howard Marshall, Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (InterVarsity Press, 1992), page 442
      [17] The Historical Jesus in Recent Research edited by James D. G. Dunn and Scot McKnight 2006 ISBN 1-57506-100-7 page 303
      [18] Who Is Jesus? by John Dominic Crossan, Richard G. Watts 1999 ISBN 0664258425 pages 28-29
      [19] James Barr, Which language did Jesus speak, Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester, 1970; 53(1) pages 9-29 [1]
      [20] Handbook to exegesis of the New Testament by Stanley E. Porter 1997 ISBN 90-04-09921-2 pages 110-112
      [21] Discovering the language of Jesus by Douglas Hamp 2005 ISBN 1-59751-017-3 page 3-4
      ^ Jesus in history and myth by R. Joseph Hoffmann 1986 ISBN 0-87975-332-3 page 98

      October 14, 2012 at 10:16 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Chardo, when are you going to stop pretending that you are presenting evidence when you make these statements? You have no proof that anyone "went to his death" as a result of proclaiming a single thing. You cite the Bible as if it were verifiable; it is not. There is no independent proof that anyone saw Jesus after death. None whatsoever.

      October 14, 2012 at 10:17 pm |
    • Chad

      what would you consider proof?

      October 14, 2012 at 10:18 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      I'm not debating the existence of a man named Jesus. There is NO evidence of his divinity. None.

      October 14, 2012 at 10:18 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      If you had any "proof", you'd have presented it. You don't. If you did, the whole world would be agog, numbskull.

      October 14, 2012 at 10:19 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Nor do you have any proof that there was some god that initiated the Big Bang or had anything to do with evolution. You're a sham, Chardo. You prove it every time you post.

      October 14, 2012 at 10:20 pm |
    • Chad

      I guess you misunderstood the question, which is this : What would you consider proof?"
      simple question.. can you answer it?

      October 14, 2012 at 10:21 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      No, Chard. The real question is this: Why do you feel the need to provide proof? Why is your faith not enough to sway others? Why are you so uncertain of it that you continue to tilt at windmills?

      October 14, 2012 at 10:26 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      If Jesus existed, (and that's an IF) it proves NOT ONE of the claims made about him. The fact that "pious fraud" was an accepted method in the Early Church, is reason to doubt everything. What we know about the Hebrew scriptures PROVES that Paul changed the concepts of Messiahship, "sin", evil". salvation" and "purification".

      Gamailiel III, (the grandson of the High-Priest Paul talks about) had to insist in 90's CE, that all Jewish synagogues read every week, an "expulsion curse". (thus we KNOW they STILL considered themselves Jews that late). St. John Chrysostom in 400CE STILL was yelling at HIS congregation in his known Christmas sermon, to STOP going to the synagogue. Christian "history" is a fable, as it's made up, and told.

      October 14, 2012 at 10:27 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      You do the same idiotic thing as every other fundie. You continue to pretend you can provide proof of the unprovable instead of simply stating the facts: that your belief is NOT based on any facts but on faith.

      That you continue to try this as if it were a court case says far more about the weakness of your faith than it does about the doubt of those who question it.

      October 14, 2012 at 10:29 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      There is NO contemporary of Jesus who records him. There were at least 20 other apocalyptic preachers running around, and they were ALL seen to be doing miracles, thus ANY eyewitness is, a priori, refuted, as "magical thinking was the norm".

      October 14, 2012 at 10:33 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Your dishonesty and smarminess are the reasons I wrote you off long ago, Chard. If you were really sure of your faith, you'd stop attempting to use the Bible to prove there's a factual basis for your belief and acknowledge that there doesn't have to be any factual basis. That you continue to pretend that you believe because of facts is just a lie.

      October 14, 2012 at 10:33 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Lying for Jesus :
      "I will only mention the Apostle Paul. [...] He, then, if anyone, ought to be calumniated; we should speak thus to him: ‘The proofs which you have used against the Jews and against other heretics bear a different meaning in their own contexts to that which they bear in your Epistles'."
      Jerome, Epistle to Pammachus

      "We see passages taken captive by your pen and pressed into service to win you a victory, which in volumes from which they are taken have no controversial bearing at all ... the line so often adopted by strong men in controversy – of justifying the means by the result."
      St. Jerome, Epistle to Pammachus (xlviii, 13; N&PNF. vi, 72-73)

      Bishop Eusebius, the official propagandist for Constantine, enti'tles the 32nd Chapter of his 12th Book of Evangelical Preparation:

      "How it may be Lawful and Fitting to use Falsehood as a Medicine and for the Benefit of those who Want to be Deceived."

      Eusebius is famously the author of many great falsehoods, yet at the same time he warns us:

      "We shall introduce into this history in general only those events which may be useful first to ourselves and afterwards to posterity."
      Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Vol. 8, chapter 2

      Clement of Alexandria was one of the earliest of the Church Fathers to draw a distinction between "mere human truth" and the higher truth of faith:

      "Not all true things are the truth, nor should that truth which merely seems true according to human opinions be preferred to the true truth, that according to the faith."
      Clement (quoted by M. Smith, Clement of Alexandria, p446)

      October 14, 2012 at 10:36 pm |
    • Chad

      @realbuckyball "If Jesus existed, (and that's an IF) it proves NOT ONE of the claims made about him"
      @Chad "the debate is about His divinity, I agree.

      ========
      @realbuckyball "The fact that "pious fraud" was an accepted method in the Early Church, is reason to doubt everything.
      @Chad "certainly reason to doubt that man kind is capable of behaving righteously.
      which is exactly why Jesus came, died for our sins, and was resurrected.

      ==========
      @realbuckyball "What we know about the Hebrew scriptures PROVES that Paul changed the concepts of Messiahship, "sin", evil". salvation" and "purification"."
      @Chad "sigh.. example please?
      do yourself a favor, before you simply cut and paste some answer from infidels.org, do a little research on it.."

      ==========
      @realbuckyball "Gamailiel III, (the grandson of the High-Priest Paul talks about) had to insist in 90's CE, that all Jewish synagogues read every week, an "expulsion curse". (thus we KNOW they STILL considered themselves Jews that late)"
      @Chad "i'm not getting your point.. Not all Jews recognized that Jesus was indeed the Messiah, in fact relatively few did (in terms of the entire population).
      Thanks for bringing up that extra-biblical evidence of the existence of Jesus, and His claim to be the Messiah!! I actually was not aware of that one.

      ==========
      @realbuckyball " St. John Chrysostom in 400CE STILL was yelling at HIS congregation in his known Christmas sermon, to STOP going to the synagogue."
      @Chad "I wasnt aware of that either, but yes that makes sense. Christians are "adopted" Jews. Jesus IS Jewish, He IS the Jewish Messiah. Christianity was known as a Jewish "sect" for quite some time.
      The bible records quite a dispute early on as to whether or not Christians had to follow some/all of the Jewish "Law", the resolution was no, Jesus had fulfilled the law as He said on the Cross.

      ==========
      @realbuckyball "Christian "history" is a fable, as it's made up, and told."
      @Chad "well, the topic here is the biblical text, right? The Christian history contained therein is certainly accurate. Do you feel otherwise? If so, please provide examples.

      October 14, 2012 at 10:39 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      John Chrysostom, 5th century theologian and erstwhile bishop of Constantinople: "Do you see the advantage of deceit? [...] For great is the value of deceit, provided it be not introduced with a mischievous intention. In fact action of this kind ought not to be called deceit, but rather a kind of good management, cleverness and skill, capable of finding out ways where resources fail, and making up for the defects of the mind ... And often it is necessary to deceive, and to do the greatest benefits by means of this device, whereas he who has gone by a straight course has done great mischief to the person whom he has not deceived."
      Chrysostom, Treatise On The Priesthood, Book 1.

      "Golden Mouth" John is notable for his extensive commentaries on the Bible which emphasized a literal understanding of the stories. The style popular at Alexandria until then was to acknowledge an allegorical meaning of the text:

      "Thus eminent ‘believers’ added falsehood to the beliefs of later generations. ‘For the best of reasons’ they ‘clarified’ obscure points, conjured up characters to speak dialogue that could have been said, invented scenarios that could have happened and borrowed extensively from a wider culture. And this all before they became the custodians of power and had real reasons for lies, inventions and counterfeits. As we shall see, god's immutable laws became as flexible as putty."
      (St.?) John Chrysostom

      The 5th and 6th centuries were the 'golden age' of Christian forgery. In a moment of shocking candor, the Manichean bishop and opponent of Augustine Faustus said:

      "Many things have been inserted by our ancestors in the speeches of our Lord which, though put forth under his name, agree not with his faith; especially since – as already it has been often proved – these things were written not by Christ, nor [by] his apostles, but a long while after their as'sumption, by I know not what sort of half Jews, not even agreeing with themselves, who made up their tale out of reports and opinions merely, and yet, fathering the whole upon the names of the apostles of the Lord or on those who were supposed to follow the apostles, they maliciously pretended that they had written their lies and conceits according to them."

      In the huge battle for adherents, the propagandists sought to outdo each other at every turn. For example, by the 5th century, four very different endings existed to Mark's gospel. Codex Bobiensis ends Mark at verse 16:8, without any post-crucifixion appearances. It lacks both the 'short conclusion' of Jesus sending followers to 'east and west' as well as the 'long conclusion', the fabulous post-death apparitions, where Jesus promises his disciples that they will be immune to snake bites and poison.

      Once the Church had gained acceptance by much of Europe and the Middle East, it's forgery engine went nuts.

      "The Church forgery mill did not limit itself to mere writings but for centuries cranked out thousands of phony "relics" of its "Lord," "Apostles" and "Saints" […] There were at least 26 'authentic' burial shrouds scattered throughout the abbeys of Europe, of which the Shroud of Turin is just one […] At one point, a number of churches claimed the one foreskin of Jesus, and there were enough splinters of the "True Cross" that Calvin said the amount of wood would make "a full load for a good ship."
      Acharya S, The Christ Conspiracy.

      Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556), the zealot for papal authority and founder of the Society of Jesus, the Jesuits, wrote:

      "We should always be disposed to believe that which appears to us to be white is really black, if the hierarchy of the church so decides."

      The Reformation may have swept away some abuses perpetrated by the church liars, priesthood but lying was not one of them. Martin Luther, in private correspondence, said:

      "What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church [...] a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them."
      Martin Luther (Cited by his secretary, in a letter in Max Lenz, ed., Briefwechsel Landgraf Phillips des Grossmüthigen von Hessen mit Bucer, vol. I.)

      The Donation of Constantine:
      'This doc'ument is without doubt a forgery, fabricated somewhere between the years 750 and 850.'
      Catholic Encyclopedia

      A two-part doc'ument purporting to be from the first Christian emperor to Pope Sylvester I (314-35). In the 'Confessio', Constantine thanks Sylvester for his Christian instruction and baptism (and consequent cure of leprosy!). In his 'Donatio', Constantine confers on the pope and his successors primacy over all other bishops, including the eastern patriarchs, senatorial privileges for the clergy, imperial palaces and regalia, Rome itself and the Western Empire.

      In truth, this monstrous 8th century forgery (peppered with anachronisms) was almost certainly written by the future Pope Paul I (757-67) while his equally ambitious brother Stephen II (752-57) sat on the papal throne.

      The False Decretals (aka Pseudo-Isidorian Forgeries):
      They are a riot of more than a hundred fake letters and decrees attributed to pontiffs from 1st century Clement (88-97) to 7th century Gregory I (590-604). Today they are attributed to either 'Isodore Mercator', a supposed 9th century master forger and papal aide, or to a group of Gallic forgers trading on the name and reputation of Isodore of Seville. Like the Donation, the Decretals conferred rights and privileges on the papacy.

      A similar collection, the 'Dionysiana', was named for a 6th century monk 'Dennis the Little' (Dionysius Exiguus), inventor of the BC -AD dating system. Dionysius provided the papacy with Latin translation of the canons the Eastern Church. This ripe collection included fifty canons from the very Apostles themselves.

      The 'Thundering Legion' Decree of Marcus Aurelius:
      In this fabricated letter from the emperor to the Senate, Marcus is said to have forbidden persecution of Christians because prayers from Christian soldiers brought on a thunderstorm which rescued the Romans from thirst and dispersed the barbarian opponents in a battle with the Quadi in 174. The emperor is said to have accorded the Twelfth Legion the suffix fulminata or fulminea, that is, 'thundering'. Tertullian (c.160 – c.230), a North African theologian, made up this nonsense; the twelfth legion had had the suffix legio fulminata from the time of Augustus. The stoic Marcus Aurelius had nothing but contempt for the Christians.

      'Letters' of Emperor Antoninus Pius to the Greeks:
      More fakery, this time from the pen of 4th century Bishop Eusebius (Ecclesiastic History, IV, 13). He has the pious 2nd century pagan forbid 'tumults against the Christians.'

      The Clementines:
      These fakes, twenty books of 'curious religious romance' (Catholic Encyclopedia), masquerade as the work of 1st century pontiff Clement I. Written in the 4th century, their purpose was to bolster Rome's claim to be the primary see. Here we have the 'Epistle of Clement to James' which originated the notion that St. Peter was the first Bishop of Rome.

      October 14, 2012 at 10:40 pm |
    • Chad

      @realbuckyball "Lying for Jesus :........"

      =>you think I'm going to try and argue that every Christian that ever lived has told the truth????
      or even that church leaders do??

      think again

      A. If humanity was capable of being good, we wouldnt need Jesus Christ.
      B. How do you figure that the "badness" of humanity somehow means that Jesus never existed?

      October 14, 2012 at 10:42 pm |
    • Chad

      If you're going to attempt to make the case that the corruption of later Church leaders somehow has corrupted the text of the bible..

      all I have to say is: good luck!

      there is more evidence that what we have in our possession now, is what was initially recorded 20-50 years after Jesus resurrection, than any other historical docu ment.

      October 14, 2012 at 10:46 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Don't *sigh*, Chad. It just proves you really know nothing about the Old Testament. I do see how you *weasel out* of everything. You have NO Linguistic Integrity. It's very typical.. Dis you go to Biola ? They teach apologetics there, not the search for truth. They admit it, on-line. It's there right now. If you know nothing about the origins of the Hebrew scriputure, I cannot help you. You obviously don't. It's very common, for Fundi Evangelicals, Real Christians learn their origins. Modern American Evangelical Literalist Fundamentalism is not really traditional Christianity.

      October 14, 2012 at 10:46 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      "every Christian" ? No Chad, these are the Church Fathers. The Founders of your cult.

      October 14, 2012 at 10:48 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Chad. I challenge you.
      Will you agree, here and now, a priori, that if I can give you the same or better evidence for an event in history, which has equal, or better evidence than your resurrection, YOU, here and now, will agree to affirm it ?

      October 14, 2012 at 10:50 pm |
    • mama k

      Chad wrote: "@mama k "we have a large element of deception on the part of people who will either a) make up something that is not true, or b) not bother to investigate and just believe what someone else has told them."

      [..]true, people believe all kinds of things. However,
      do they believe things to be true that they know to be a lie? And willingly go to their death proclaiming that truth? no."

      I would not necessarily disagree on that point. That means there are a lot of people who fall into my b) category above. That is evident even today – a majority of people who believe what is told to them or what they have read and have a lot of faith in only those sources. Just because someone believes with all their heart and may even become a martyr, does not mean what they believe in is true or valid.

      Then you wrote: "Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed . . ."

      I would not necessarily refute than a man named Jesus existed, but I'm not as convinced as most believers would naturally need to be. The point is, outside of the Bible and outside of the reasonable assertion that this man existed, what is the proof of any of the magic, Paul's vision, etc? So much of what is in the NT hinges on Paul, and he is about as credible as Joseph Smith. Do you believe in everything Joseph Smith asserted, Chad?

      October 14, 2012 at 10:51 pm |
    • Chad

      =>you think I'm going to try and argue that every Christian that ever lived has told the truth????
      or even that church leaders do??

      think again

      ===========
      The founder of my "cult" is Jesus Christ, and again If you're going to attempt to make the case that the corruption of later Church leaders somehow has corrupted the text of the bible.. All I have to say is: good luck!

      there is more evidence that what we have in our possession now, is what was initially recorded 20-50 years after Jesus resurrection, than any other historical docu ment.

      ======
      no, I didnt go to Biola..
      I didnt believe in Jesus Christ until I was 32 years old, long after college.

      ======

      providing simple and straightforward answers isnt "weaseling" out of anything, your problem primarily stems from an utter lack of familiarity with the bible..

      you simply cant expect to be able to construct a coherent argument just by copying stuff from infidels.org..

      October 14, 2012 at 10:54 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      No Chad. That's YOUR rationalization or your Fundi crap. I am a continuing PhD student at Harvard in Biblical Studies. You loose. I know it better than you. All you know it your biased version. As Ehrman says "if people only knew what really gets taught in class rooms they would not recognize it", (see Jesus Interrupted..oh I suppose he suddenly is not an expert...YOU quoted him above).
      Jesus did not found you cult. He thought the end-times were upon them, in THAT generation, and YOU know it, and HE said it. He was wrong, and Saul of Tarsus had to justify continuing the cult.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:03 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      I have no idea what "infidels.org" is. But thanks for scandalizing me. I will check it out. I have never once even heard of it. Unlike you, I think for myself.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:04 pm |
    • Chad

      @realbuckyball "Will you agree, here and now, a priori, that if I can give you the same or better evidence for an event in history, which has equal, or better evidence than your resurrection, YOU, here and now, will agree to affirm it ?
      @Chad "Are you referring to my early statement that the evidence of Jesus as a historical figure, a real person, is not challenged by any serious scholar?

      and then somehow saying that if you can find more archaeological support for the existence of Julius Caesar for example, that that somehow proves Jesus never existed? I dont think that makes any sense...
      A. no serious scholar debates the existence of Jesus as a real historical figure
      B. I'm not aware of any "ranking" that gauges the probable existence of ancient historical figures based on the survival of artifacts..

      On the other hand, if you did mean to type "resurrection", then to be sure there is much more evidence of other historical events than of the resurrection, indeed that's exactly where the debate is (not whether or not Jesus was real, but whether or not He was resurrected/divine).
      There is ample evidence that the resurrection DID occur, but there are many events throughout history..

      October 14, 2012 at 11:08 pm |
    • Chad

      @realbuckyball "I am a continuing PhD student at Harvard in Biblical Studies. You loose. I know it better than you. .."

      @Chad "good grief man, why are you asking mickey mouse questions then?
      are you serious?

      How is it possible that a PhD student at Harvard in Biblical Studies could not recognize that Paul was speaking rhetorically in Romans 3???

      are you for real? you sure dont put posts together like I would expect a PhD student at Harvard in Biblical Studies to do...

      October 14, 2012 at 11:11 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      That's because all you know is Fundamentalism. There is a big world out there, which you know nothing about.

      You did not answer the question. Will you accept the challenge or not ?

      October 14, 2012 at 11:17 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      I'm talking about "evidence for the resurrection" THAT is all. (there WAS no resurrection). The Christians meant to say "Jesus was not defeated by the Romans". They are 2 entirely different things. There are many scholars that agree with that.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:20 pm |
    • Chad

      Think I already answered that,, right? from above:

      On the other hand, if you did mean to type "resurrection", then to be sure there is much more evidence of other historical events than of the resurrection, indeed that's exactly where the debate is (not whether or not Jesus was real, but whether or not He was resurrected/divine).
      There is ample evidence that the resurrection DID occur, but there are many events throughout history..

      ======
      as an aside, how in the world to you think you can make a case that corrupt church leaders in the third or fourth century have corrupted the text of that which we have direct manuscript evidence from 100's of years earlier?
      How do you figure you are going to make a case that what we have in the New Testament, isnt what Jesus said??

      October 14, 2012 at 11:22 pm |
    • Chad

      Are you seriously trying to advance the idea that Christians in ~30AD didnt believe that Jesus had been resurrected? And that the resurrection was a later invented idea?

      wow.. good luck with that.. You should listen to Ehrman get destroyed by Craig in several debates.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:26 pm |
    • Chad

      do yourself a favor, read or listen to this:
      http://www.reasonablefaith.org/is-there-historical-evidence-for-the-resurrection-of-jesus-the-craig-ehrman

      remember one thing, "that's all BS" is simply not viewed as an adequate rebuttal. if the claim you are attempting to refute isnt correct, it should be relatively straightforward to marshal the data and present a coherent argument....

      October 14, 2012 at 11:31 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      I have watch the Ehrman debate with Craig. He was not defeated. Ehrman was not effective. I fully agree with that. But debates are not a way tIn fact I can prove right here right now Craig attempted to lie. In fact I have talked to Ehrman about it. Craig is a Sophist, a showman it. I AM saying the Christians did not believe in a physical resurrection. Why would they not recognize him on the road to Emmaus ? Why would the Roman not try to find him ?

      Either you have a standard for evidence, for historical events, or you do not. More weaseling. Do you or do you not ? If you DO, accept the challenge, or agree you are biased.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:33 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Look. I've seen and watched EVERYTHING Craig has to offer. He's a Presuppositionalist fool. He's in it for the money. Why is it Christians who run out of arguments, always refer me to Craig. I have him on tape, saying "I believe, because I believe". Wanna see it ? I can post it. Every argument he has, and his cronies have are easily refuted.

      What about the challenge Chad. Are we a chicken ?

      October 14, 2012 at 11:44 pm |
    • Chad

      @realbuckyball "I can prove right here right now Craig attempted to lie.
      @Chad "by all means, please do so :-)

      ========
      @realbuckyball " I AM saying the Christians did not believe in a physical resurrection. Why would they not recognize him on the road to Emmaus ? Why would the Roman not try to find him ?"
      @Chad "where to start....
      A. Jews had no concept of a Messiah that would be killed by Roman authorities
      B. There were two sects of Jews at the time, Sadducees(did not believe in general resurrection) and Pharisees(believed in a general resurrection)
      C. Whether the Jews that witnessed the resurrection appearances, later becoming the first Christian church (Jesus' Jewish followers) were Pharisees or Sadducees I know not, regardless of their former thoughts on resurrection, they ALL certainly believed after they saw Him. The radical change in their belief as to the fate of Jesus is something well attested to biblically and extra-biblically.

      I dont know why they didnt recognize him on the road to Emmaeus, certainly he was very disfigured as a result of his torture, that could have been part of it.

      I suspect that the Roman authorities viewed the disciples radical change in though and atti tude vis the resurrection of Jesus with the same skepticism as others that didnt witness it.

      ==============
      @realbuckyball "Either you have a standard for evidence, for historical events, or you do not. More weaseling. Do you or do you not ? If you DO, accept the challenge, or agree you are biased"
      @Chad "no idea what you are going on about here.. I have already said that there are many events in history with more archaeological support than the resurrection.. that's precisely what the debate is about.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:45 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      In the Ehrman debate he waved his magic wand over that equation for the proof of the resurrection. Then he called it "Bart's Blunder". In fact it was Criag's crap. If you slow down the tape, you will see the numerator, AND the denominator are actually "0", (zero). O/O = O. He lied. And he knew it.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:49 pm |
    • Chad

      Craigs an easily refuted fool? Please do so!!! there are dozens of sites out there attempting to do so with no success yet.. :-)

      amazing that he is 50-0 in debates with atheists..

      BTW, that fact is much more due to the preponderance of evidence, than any special characteristic of Craig...

      ====
      in any case, good exchange, I'm going to bed, will check back tomorrow night.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:50 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Give me a break. "resurrected bodies" are not disfigured. No one has EVER claimed that. Hahahaha. Good one. IF he was raised, it was a perfect body. You really think God gave his son a disfigured body. Please.
      No. I asked you IF I have as good evidence as YOU have for the resurrection, will you accept the event ?
      "archaeology proving other events" is irrelevant.
      Yes or no ?

      October 14, 2012 at 11:54 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Oh please. there are multiple sites on YouTube that have refuted everything he's said. No one has to even "try". And he's not even the best of them. His cronies, are slightly tougher... Habermas et all. They are also easily refuted. I'm telling you man if that level of (non) academics is ALL you know, you're missing the forest for the trees. I dio not need YouTube. I can refute them all myself.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:57 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Why do you think they all work at Liberty, and Biola, and fundie 3rd rate colleges ? No real academic inst'itution would have them.

      October 15, 2012 at 12:15 am |
    • realbuckyball

      If every single piece of their evidence is crap, there is no "preponderance" of anything. I can refute EVERY single piece of their "so-called" evidence.
      1. There is no evidence.
      2. I challenge you to the evidence test. If I have equal or BETTER evidence for another "event" and you DON'T accept that event, then it proves it's not about evidence, but something else. I can prove it's about something else. Ask yourself, "what IS that 'something else' ?".
      Craig say he believes because he believes. He does not rely on evidence. He pretends to present some. I can refute every piece he put up. Scripturally, and scientifically.
      Truth is not found by good debaters. Truth is truth, no matter whether the debaters are good or not. He only debates bad debaters. Why does he refuse good debaters ?

      October 15, 2012 at 1:03 am |
    • realbuckyball

      The fact that you think Craig 50 / 0 is proof of confirmation bias. I am happy to admit Krauss and Ehrman probably lost there's. Maybe others did too. I argue for myself. It's irrelevant. The ONLY thing that matters, is not who wins, but what the truth is. Debating is no way to arrive at truth. Truth needs careful consideration, and time to do that. Debates do not afford that. You might learn a few things, maybe. There were no votes. So YOU decided on who won. You confirmed your bias, (which we already know, since you weaseled out of the challenge).

      October 15, 2012 at 5:26 am |
    • Chad

      @Realbuckyball “Give me a break. "resurrected bodies" are not disfigured. No one has EVER claimed that.”
      @Chad “??? The disciples reported seeing Jesus with nail marks in his hands, the spear mark in His side. That would indicate a resurrected body, not some kind of “new” physical body.
      Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.” John 20

      ===========
      @Realbuckyball “If every single piece of their evidence is crap, there is no "preponderance" of anything. I can refute EVERY single piece of their "so-called" evidence.”
      @Chad “one thing you’ll need to learn, is that merely calling evidence “crap” isn’t really going to be viewed as a refutation. You are going to have to demonstrate exactly why the evidence is refuted.

      =============
      @Realbuckyball “There is no evidence.”
      @Chad “one thing you’ll need to learn, is that merely saying there is no evidence isn’t really going to be viewed as a refutation. You are going to have to demonstrate exactly why the evidence is insufficient.

      ========
      @Realbuckyball I challenge you to the evidence test. If I have equal or BETTER evidence for another "event" and you DON'T accept that event, then it proves it's not about evidence, but something else.
      @Chad “go right ahead and provide your evidence then. As I have said multiple times, I believe there is more archeological evidence of many other ancient events than exists for the resurrection (which is why the resurrection is a topic under discussion). That doesn’t mean the latter didn’t happen though, that would be a fallacious argument.

      ========
      @Realbuckyball “Oh please. there are multiple sites on YouTube that have refuted everything he's said, The fact that you think Craig 50 / 0 is proof of confirmation bias”
      @Chad “there are many sites that pretend to be able, however the fact that Craig has been using essentially the same argument for 20+ years, opponents know exactly what he’s going to say therefor can be completely prepared, and yet even atheists accept that Craig has not been beat, indicates that the data he is presenting is incredibly strong. No confirmation bias, just realistic look at the data..
      See the debate scorecard at commonsenseatheism dot com for example

      October 15, 2012 at 2:11 pm |
  18. Seyedibar

    Judaism is not a race. It's a religion, an ideology. Therefore it is perfectly acceptable to judge someone on the merits of their ideology. If a person believes in magical and mythical creatures, it likely could have a direct effect on the way they interpret and practice the science of medicine. I certainly judge people for holding primitive beliefs, and there is nothing racist about that.

    October 14, 2012 at 2:02 pm |
    • Jewish Dude

      Anti-Semite!!!!!!

      October 14, 2012 at 2:07 pm |
    • Seyedibar

      "Anti-semitic" would mean i discriminate against people who speak any of the Semitic languages.
      I discriminate against philosophies.

      October 14, 2012 at 2:15 pm |
    • phneutral

      Boy, are you messed up.

      October 14, 2012 at 2:19 pm |
    • GAW

      But you have to admit you are coming pretty darn close.

      October 14, 2012 at 2:24 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Exactly. There were many Semite groups. Jews were but one example. We have to respect the idea that people can have any belief they want. We do NOT have to respect the content of the belief system. If that were true, and you said "I believe there is a 1957 Chevy orbiting Pluto", then I would have to respect that. In fact we know the Hebrews were already settled in Canaan LONG before any possible "Exodus" event could have, (even though it's a myth, and we know WHY it's a myth), occurred. We also know that Abraham, (and his supposed family) was a myth, and we know how, and why that developed. In fact the first actual historical figure there is any evidence for is Deborah. SHE is the Mother of that nation. SHE was the one who organized the tribes. And we know that there was no widespread domestication of camels, in use, (there was some use by the elite), in the Ancient Near East until 1200-1000 BCE. So, all the Old Testament dates are 100% false. (Thus NO Abraham -> Ur is possible, in that dating range).

      October 14, 2012 at 2:26 pm |
    • GAW

      btw There are plenty of people in the field of medicine who are Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus ect. and yes atheists and agnostics Many of them are very competent in their field. So I have no idea there you are going with this ideology but it seems to be going the direction of some form of extremism. I would prefer that types like you and the religious right keep away from the halls of power.

      October 14, 2012 at 2:30 pm |
    • Concerned Citizen

      @seyedibar

      Yes and no. You are correct that Judaism is mostly a religion and cultural heritage and that identifying as a jew implies that you follow the religion and not necessarily just being part of a race, however there are two things you and everyone else on this thread fail to grasp. A) unlike a lot of other religions (hinduism being the exception), Jews claim people as one of their own by heritage. If you have a jewish mother, you are a jew, no ifs, ands or buts about it. That doesn't necessarily support the racial aspect, however it does make it slightly more than just a religion. The second part is that because jews lives in shtetles in Eastern Europe for so long, there was a little of gene mixing in a very small pool. Because of this, certain characteristics have become dominant in jews (dark features, big noses, etc..) and diseases like Tay-Sachs, this, in a way, makes Judaism have a racial aspect to it. There are obviously jews who have converted, come from spain or ethiopia or israel and so clearly these physical characteristics only apply a certain number of jews, but there is a racial identi.ty the most other religions do not have.

      October 14, 2012 at 3:17 pm |
    • Anybody know how to read?

      The religion of Evolutionism promoted different races of man through Darwin. Now Leakey's boat has done a 180 turn. Christians have always taught the ark and the one race of man. Evolutionists preach to their audiences.

      October 14, 2012 at 8:38 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Anybody, are you drinking antifreeze AGAIN? You know what that does to your already-damaged brain, don't you?

      October 14, 2012 at 9:16 pm |
    • Seyedibar

      @concernedcitizen
      Modern DNA testing has shown that the idea of shared ancestry in the Jewish faith is a myth. There is no biological nor historical truth to the Jewish claim that they continue the bloodline of some original tribe. There is no Jewish race, just as there was no king David, no Solomon, and no Joseph that matches historical record.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:20 pm |
    • Concerned Citizen

      @seyedibar

      Did you read what I wrote? I never said anything about a shared bloodline through David, Solomon or Joseph. I merely pointed out that certain genetic characteristics have been passed along within the jewish community because of the intermarriages between jews in their small shtetles. It was happening long enough that dominant traits took hold, like the dark features, the big noses, etc..., It's the reason why someone can "look jewish".

      October 15, 2012 at 1:27 pm |
    • therealpeace2all

      test.

      Peace...

      October 15, 2012 at 6:44 pm |
  19. Everybody is a David

    The American Jewish support of the Zionist state is a disgrace. Anything contra to the state is labeled anti-semite. Heare this LOUD AND CLEAR: If you love Israel more than the USA, go there and live and leave us out of your deluded opinion that you have a right to those lands. You don't and the abuse of the native Palastinian population is no different than the abuse your people recieved at the hand of the Nazis. Examine your own behavior and then shut the fcuk up.

    October 14, 2012 at 2:00 pm |
    • STOP MURDER OF CHILDREN , Human be aware of hindu filthy dog's of hindu Atheism, self center ism , DENIAL OF TRUTH ABSOLUTE GOD.

      I am smart, more smarter than all o you filthy, denier of truth absolute GAWD, I use multiple handlers, but my message is the SAME. Hate Jews, Christians, Hindus, Shia, GLBT, and pigs. I am a new face of terrorism, Islamic, fundamental ism.

      October 14, 2012 at 2:08 pm |
  20. STOP MURDER OF CHILDREN , Human be aware of hindu filthy dog's of hindu Atheism, self center ism , DENIAL OF TRUTH ABSOLUTE GOD.

    Tom, Tom, the Other One
    there is nothing wrong with my post but hinduism, ignorance to truth absolute on your part. My mother was made into hoowa and not your fault, goon father, filthy sold her to Hindu cab driver, for a trip to Mecca, crook.

    October 14, 2012 at 1:57 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

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.