home
RSS
Tim Tebow pulls out of speaking at Dallas church
February 21st, 2013
10:40 AM ET

Tim Tebow pulls out of speaking at Dallas church

By Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

(CNN) - NFL quarterback Tim Tebow has canceled an appearance at a controversial Dallas-area church. The outspoken Christian quarterback was scheduled to speak at First Baptist Church on April 28.

The church is led by Robert Jeffress, who has been widely criticized for views against homosexuality, Islam and Mormonism. Tebow, announcing his decision Thursday on Twitter, said that he was canceling his appearance “due to new information that has been brought to my attention.”

Tebow’s statement appeared over a series of four tweets on the social media site.

“I will continue to use the platform God has blessed me with to bring Faith, Hope and Love to all those needing a brighter day. Thank you for all of your love and support. God Bless!” he wrote to his Twitter followers.

Tebow was scheduled to speak at the 11,000-member Dallas church as part of a monthlong celebration of the megachurch’s completion of a new building campaign, a $130 million dollar project that encompasses five blocks of the downtown.

“Tim called me last night and explained to me that because of some things going on in his personal life and his career he needed to steer clear of controversy right now, but that at some other date he would like to come and speak at our church,” Jeffress told CNN by phone from Dallas.  “Tim has to do what Tim thinks is best for him right now.”

The First Baptist Church of Dallas is a member of the Southern Baptist Convention.  Jeffress, who has been in its pulpit since 2007, is no stranger to controversy.

Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter

After introducing Texas Gov. Rick Perry at the Values Voter Summit in Washington in October 2011, Jeffress told reporters he believed Mormonism was a cult, expressing a personal position and one held by his denomination.  The move was seen as a particular slight to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a lifelong Mormon.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, while acknowledging sharp theological differences with the Southern Baptist Convention, bristles at the term cult and says it is inaccurate.

Jeffress has also drawn fire for his comments about homosexuality, Judiasm and Catholicism.

“This in no way is going to diminish what our church is teaching about salvation being available to all through faith in Jesus Christ,” Jeffress said.

Jeffress pointed out that Tebow is a member of the First Baptist Church in Jacksonville, Florida, a fellow SBC church.

“They certainly believe what we do, that salvation is through Christ alone, and about homosexuality.  Tim confirmed that to me last night, that they believe exactly what we do about homosexuality.”

Tebow and Jeffress differ dramatically in how they present their faith.  Tebow in talking about his faith has used much softer language, while Jeffress has no trouble going after less popular and culturally sensitive issues in Christianity.

CNN Belief Blog: Quarterback moves to trademark 'Tebowing'

“I believe that homosexuality is a sin just like adultery is a sin, just like I believe premarital sex is a sin, because it’s a deviation from God’s standard,” Jeffress said.

“God’s plan for sex is that is should be between a man and a woman in a marriage relationship and any deviation from that is wrong.”

While he believes any sex outside a heterosexual marriage is wrong, he adds, “I never single out homosexuality as the only sin or the unpardonable sin. I think homosexuality, just like adultery, can be forgiven if we ask God for forgiveness.”

Jeffress said he thinks there is a genetic disposition toward homosexuality, a stance on sexual orientation taken by many theologically conservative Christians and one scorned as scientifically flawed by the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community.

Jeffress said he is sure there are gay members in his church.  “We don’t ask all the gay members to stand up, but I’m sure that there are people who are gay in our church simply because of the letters I have received,” he said.  “We have people who’ve committed adultery and who lie and who steal, but that doesn’t mean they’re not welcome to come to our church.”

CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories

As for comments about Mormons, Jews and Catholics, he is quick to point out that he believes “no one goes to hell in a group.”

“I’m not the one who decides who goes to heaven and hell. God does that. God has already given us the criteria for what it takes to go to heaven when you die. Jesus said in John 14:6, ‘I am the way, the truth and the life, and no man comes to the father except through me.’  When I quote that verse I like to remind people that Jesus who said that was not a Southern Baptist evangelist but a Jewish rabbi. Yet as a Jewish rabbi he said there is one way to heaven, and that is through faith in me.”

The controversy surrounding Tebow’s appearance won’t dampen the church’s plans, Jeffress said. He said Tebow, while escaping the spotlight now over his beliefs, will continue to face controversy.

“I think Tim is going to discover that no matter how hard you try to hide from controversy, if you stand for the simple truths of the Bible, like faith in Christ, necessary for salvation, and sex (being acceptable only) between a man and a woman in marriage, you can't avoid controversy.  That’s something Tim needs to discover on his own.  We in no way want to impugn him.  He’s a great man of God who sincerely loves the Lord.”

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Baptist • Christianity • Church

soundoff (2,828 Responses)
  1. Nietodarwin

    What personal sacrifice for "the kingdom of heaven" was Jesus talking about when he told his disciples, "He that is able to receive it, let him receive it"? CASTRATE YOURSELF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Matthew 19:11-12) "But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs from the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it." (Matthew 19:11-12) The Scholar's Version has: "There are castrated men who castrated themselves because of Heaven's imperial rule. If you are able to accept this (advice), do so

    February 21, 2013 at 2:42 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      Perhaps you have Origen in mind, the early Church father who did castrate himself?

      February 21, 2013 at 9:21 pm |
  2. Organic1

    So Tim thinks what he has to say will cause him harm or the church harm. I thought he believes he is covered as long as spirit guides him, is he then saying 'not always covered' or has his pocket broken down and he is looking to get sacked.

    February 21, 2013 at 2:39 pm |
  3. Duke

    I struggle to understand what is wrong with this Church teaching what is fundamentally held to be true by most evangelical Christians. If Muslims teach that Jews, Christians, Mormons and others who don't worship Allah will be condemned, Jews can teach that they are the chosen people of God, Mormons can teach that only they will inherit a heavenly reward, and atheists can teach their is no god and all religions are wrong, then why can't Christians teach what they believe? Why is that only the Christian is controversial and polarizing? You believe what you choose to believe. If the SBC or other Christians faiths are contrary to your beliefs then so be it. None of these are controversial except the Christian? I don't get it.

    February 21, 2013 at 2:35 pm |
    • tas20036

      You can teach whatever you want. But when you start involving secular laws – marriage equity for instance, then you are crossing the church/state line.

      And that is where the trouble begins.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:38 pm |
    • Reasonably

      In my opinion, they are all wrong for teaching that anyone who doesn't believe their dogma is unwashed, unworthy, inhuman, whatever. They all teach intolerance, hate and subjugation.

      I'm not into that. Thanks.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:38 pm |
    • EvidenceBased4

      You have not been paying attention. They are all equally controversial, polarizing, deluded and divisive. They are each cults.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:39 pm |
    • pockets

      BREAKING NEWS: Pope resigns for new job at Wal-Mart as a Greeter. The pointy hat and red slippers have to go though.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:39 pm |
    • Saraswati

      @Duke

      " Why is that only the Christian is controversial and polarizing? ... None of these are controversial except the Christian? I don't get it."

      You don't get it because no one ever said that. Is there something in this story that says "only the Christians are controversial?" You do realize we live in a predominantly Christian country. It would hardly be a wise use of time for people here to spend much time criticizing religions like Islam and Mormonism which each make up less than 1% of the population. Perhaps you'd like us all to go into long critiques of the Australian aboriginal Dreamtime beliefs? It sounds to me like you’ve got a bit of a persecution complex going there.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:40 pm |
    • Reason and Logic

      Christians must teach what the world wants to hear

      February 21, 2013 at 2:42 pm |
    • clarity

      It's the basic nature of Christianity since the beginning. It continues to splinter and be divisive.

      Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth.

      (Thomas Jefferson, from Notes on the State of Virginia)

      February 21, 2013 at 2:44 pm |
    • Duke

      I beg to differ. The news media and indeed most of you seem to find nothing wrong with Islam's rights. You may not agree with them or Jewish teaching, but now Christianity is controversial. Some have said Christians cross the line of church and state. Let me remind you that this line has never been a solid wall. Our founding fathers embraced many teachings of Christ. Even Jefferson, the so-called creator of the "wall of separation" used government money and facilities for church services and missionary assignments into the native tribes. We have "In God We Trust" on our money, and imprinted on the one dollar bill is "annuit coeptis" from the first great American seal meaning He has blessed our endeavors. Christianity and faith as always played a role in this nation. But it has never been the only faith permitted.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:47 pm |
    • clarity

      It didn't take long for the founders to start to realize they needed to better conform to the wall, Duke:

      James Madison, 4th POTUS, chief architect of the U.S. Constitution, 1st Amendment, Bill of Rights:

      Every new & successful example therefore of a perfect separation between ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance. And I have no doubt that every new example, will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt. will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.

      The Civil Govt, tho' bereft of everything like an associated hierarchy, possesses the requisite stability and performs its functions with complete success, Whilst the number, the industry, and the morality of the Priesthood, & the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the Church from the State.

      (from letters to Edward Livingston and Robert Walsh)

      Madison as president vetoed two bills that he believed would violate the separation of church and state. He also came to oppose the long-established practice of employing chaplains at public expense in the House of Representatives and Senate on the grounds that it violated the separation of church and state and the principles of religious freedom. (Library of Congress – James Madison Papers – Detached memorandum, ca. 1823.)

      February 21, 2013 at 2:54 pm |
    • cedar rapids

      'The news media and indeed most of you seem to find nothing wrong with Islam's rights.'

      What islam's rights are you on about? if Muslims tried to introduce religious based bills in the country then they would indeed meet the same response.
      Dont confuse being unwilling to label all Muslims as terrorists with being pro-Islam.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:00 pm |
    • Dee

      Maybe Rick Santorum? That could have done it.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:06 pm |
    • Duke

      Clarity,

      Really? You think they really tried to walk some that back. This wall as we know it didn't even start to form until 1934 in Hamilton v. Regents of University of California. Look I'm not saying that this is a Christian nation, I'm saying its always been based on some affinity with Christian principles and its ridiculous to think that a Church teaching that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life is controversial. You can disagree with this evangelical teaching if you want, we all have that freedom. But it isn't controversial.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:07 pm |
    • Live4Him

      @tas20036 : But when you start involving secular laws – marriage equity for instance, then you are crossing the church/state line.

      So lets take an example of "a father marrying his daughter" or "a mother marrying her son" – If they have no offspring, then is this wrong?

      February 21, 2013 at 3:17 pm |
    • clarity

      Duke – I certainly wouldn't argue that the primary purpose of the 1st Amendment is to provide for religious freedom. But it is quite clear also on preventing the state-establishment of religion – that is the wall of separation. It was designed in a way that allows it to reinforce itself the more someone tries to circumvent it. That's what has played out, and we do see hints of that from Madison after his ideas had been ratified. What I quoted above shows that he already knew how they cheated some when carrying out the regular ceremonial duties of running the government. And the first Amendment has constantly been under attack since, but it holds strong.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:19 pm |
    • clarity

      Gullible4Him – what an ass. There are already different laws that address those scenarios that you so lovingly like to always group with consensual relations between same-sex adults who are not related.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:24 pm |
    • Duke

      Clarity, How who cheated? Jefferson? He was the one who came up with the phrase of the so called "wall." All of the founders believed that the morals and principles of the Bible were a valuable tool for government and the people. That doesn't mean they all believed the religious teachings, but to a certain extent, one cannot be separated from the other. Although Jefferson did his best with his own version of the New Testament. Even today this wall is clearly not a solid barrier for either force. The SCOTUS came out with two seemingly opposing views on this wall of separation on the same day (Van Orden v. Perry & McCreary County v. ACLU, 2005).

      February 21, 2013 at 3:28 pm |
    • fred

      clarity
      “It's the basic nature of Christianity since the beginning. It continues to splinter and be divisive.”
      =>it has been the basic nature of the serpent to deceive. Since the beginning of man Gods purpose was to separate evil from the basic nature that is divisive. Atheists have brought about great damage in their relentless pursuit of normalizing evil in all its godless forms.
      The basic nature of Christianity is to love God and love your neighbor. Christianity is not your problem as your problem is with absolute truth. God does call out the absolute truth while you echo the serpent from thousands of years ago. It was the serpent that joined the knowledge of good and evil through deception. Look at your post as you have combined Christ with divisiveness.
      And you claim serpents don’t talk.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:33 pm |
    • Wow

      "The basic nature of Christianity is to love God and love your neighbor. Christianity is not your problem as your problem is with absolute truth. God does call out the absolute truth while you echo the serpent from thousands of years ago. It was the serpent that joined the knowledge of good and evil through deception. Look at your post as you have combined Christ with divisiveness.
      And you claim serpents don’t talk."

      This takes the cake on the most stupid post on this blog yet! Wow talk about a classic statement of delusion.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:36 pm |
    • clarity

      Duke – I mostly agree with the latter part of your last post, but you keep mis-reading my replies. Jefferson might have been the first to use the phrase, but it was Madison who took the lead on the Establishment Clause. If you'll re-read what I wrote, you'll see that I'm talking about Madison's views about it after his handiwork had been adopted. Madison, in effect, admitted that in carrying out day to day duties of government that they should not have been paying chaplains for Congress – he admitted to it. That's all I meant by he realized they had cheated their new law a bit.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:40 pm |
    • clarity

      And fred you are as useless as ever. Like some of the strong Deists, I don't have to believe in the characteristics of your particular God and certainly not Christ. That the early Christian apologists claimed "diabolical mimicry" as the reason the gospels were not plagiarizations of earlier pagan writings is enough for me to not put any weight on that belief.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:46 pm |
    • fred

      Clarity
      Why would you judge Christ based on some wayward thoughts of man? Apologists like scientists are just men that get it wrong for right or wrong reasons. Some very well intended Christians also came up with a 6,000 year creation timeline when the Bible says nothing of the sort. Darwin was wrong and much of what we think today will be found in error also. The truth of the Words of God has not changed.

      Even the founders understood that when writing the Declaration of Independence and attributed our rights to the Creator then asked for the blessing of the Supreme Judge of the World in the closing paragraph before they signed the docu-ment unanimously.

      February 21, 2013 at 4:13 pm |
    • In Santa we trust

      fred, Evolution is a fact. You only think otherwise because you want to cling to your delusions and superstitions.

      February 21, 2013 at 4:18 pm |
    • In Santa we trust

      fred
      "...much of what we think today will be found in error also"

      And yet you prefer to believe a book written hundreds of years ago based on primitive ignorance of the universe, translated, transcribed, and edited to suit the then-current faith leaders over verifiable science. Wow!

      February 21, 2013 at 4:22 pm |
    • fred

      In Santa we trust
      Evolution has some holes in it that may or may not amount to something and certainly does not answer the question of evil, purpose of life and origin of life. Some even attempt to incorporate evolution into the Bible but that is pure speculation. The Bible and Science deal with different things.

      February 21, 2013 at 5:20 pm |
    • fred

      In Santa we trust
      Your argument about the Bible being edited for some ulterior purpose is speculative. You may want to take issue with the books included or not included in the Bible or even create your own bible as Jefferson did.
      Up until 1947 when the Dead Sea scrolls were discovered atheist and skeptics argued the Old Testament was made up and re written to fit the then current conspiracies. Well turns out the Old Testament were 99.99% accurate when compared with scrolls written long before Christ.

      February 21, 2013 at 5:30 pm |
    • clarity

      fred: [ Why would you judge Christ based on some wayward thoughts of man? Apologists like scientists are just men that get it wrong for right or wrong reasons. Some very well intended Christians also came up with a 6,000 year creation timeline when the Bible says nothing of the sort. Darwin was wrong and much of what we think today will be found in error also. The truth of the Words of God has not changed. ]

      => My goodness, fred you are way off base again. I'm not the one who came up with the lame excuse for the stories looking like copies of older stories. It was several early Christian apologists. It is key however, because we know so little else that's verifiable before Paul but after the time period of the stories (by uknown authors I might add). There is less evidence for verifying the gospel stories than what we have for the Mormon claim (JS's special experience), and that claim is not sufficient for me.

      fred: "Even the founders understood that when writing the Declaration of Independence and attributed our rights to the Creator then asked for the blessing of the Supreme Judge of the World in the closing paragraph before they signed the docu-ment unanimously."

      => Yes, fred, you can be like Bob if you want and go all the way back to the Mayflower Compact if you want. But, as I indicated in my post, the key founders of our current law were very Deist. Some of them may very well have believed that God does not *ever* interfere in the lives of his creation. Very different from the kind of ideas about God that I've seen you post.

      February 21, 2013 at 5:48 pm |
  4. jackson

    he was canceling his appearance “due to new information that has been brought to my attention.”

    --

    Translation: "My PR people told me it was not a wise move, seeing as I need a job"

    February 21, 2013 at 2:30 pm |
  5. Thoth

    How many people actually have only had s e x with their spouse? What a bunch of hypocrites.

    February 21, 2013 at 2:30 pm |
    • Sid Airfoil

      Not many. But the "good" ones feel guilty about it.

      Sid

      February 21, 2013 at 2:32 pm |
    • Reason and Logic

      Oh wait, Christians are also sinners

      February 21, 2013 at 2:37 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      And what about families like mine where we've been together, monogamous and raising a family for a long time, but aren't married?

      February 21, 2013 at 2:39 pm |
    • Reasonably

      Since getting married: me.

      So I beat out your high profile church leaders and conservative politicians.

      Snap.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:40 pm |
    • Akira

      Me, for one. But that goes to my own moral compass rather than anything I've ever read.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:43 pm |
    • Thoth

      Wll Doc.....according to the late Jonathan Edwards, you are but a sinner in the hands of an angry god. Dangling by a thread above a fiery cauldron..... but to me, you are a rational person that made a wise decision.....

      February 21, 2013 at 2:45 pm |
    • stan

      Actually Thoth, both my wife and I have, and both were virgins too before we married. We were raised in ministers homes our parents were faithful only to each other, my mom since passed in 2000 from cancer and my dad hasn't dated or remarried and my wifes folks still married. It's what God intendended, and if I had the space I could list thousands of people just like us. May the Lord open your heart and spirit to HIs Word and Truth.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:49 pm |
    • Thoth

      @Reason – well there is not caveat in the bible for "since getting married"....so I guess you are still a horrible sinner.

      @Akira – if you are serious then I feel sorry for you. Having s e x with different people is not a lack of morality – it's called experiencing life. It is natural, and not "wrong".

      February 21, 2013 at 2:53 pm |
    • sam

      Stan, that's good, and I'm glad for you. However, that doesn't make it law, and I don't care if it was any god's idea or intention. The rest of us are not bound to your rules.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:10 pm |
  6. Alicia

    Tim Tebow pulls out..... LOL

    February 21, 2013 at 2:29 pm |
  7. Amy

    Tim Tebow pulls out...... LOL

    February 21, 2013 at 2:28 pm |
  8. Holly

    Please look at the middle ages up until WW2 and see how devout Christians have killed humans in the name of Jesus. It is exactly that kind of history which makes me proud to say "I don't follow your cult anymore!"

    February 21, 2013 at 2:27 pm |
    • Reason and Logic

      My cult is better than yours

      February 21, 2013 at 2:34 pm |
    • Duke

      And yet atheist communism has murdered more people then all these religions combined.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:38 pm |
    • tas20036

      Sources please. And btw, Hitler was a Catholic. He never rescinded his religion.

      So, feel free to enlighten us.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:39 pm |
    • tas20036

      My comment was for Duke.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:40 pm |
    • VanHagar

      I assume this was in response to below. O.k. Lets get one thing straight...I don't follow a cult (or religion). I follow Christ. I wouldn't follow a cult (or religion) either. You want to judge Christianity today based upon a events (which you won't define) that occurred hundreds of years ago. Is that an accurate statement?

      February 21, 2013 at 2:43 pm |
    • DCBuck

      Nice sweeping generalization, Holly. You might try looking up the fact that there are many different denominations of Christianity, as well as do a little comparison to see how many hospitals, schools, homeless shelters, soup kitchens and clothing centers are started and operated by people of faith, as opposed to those started and operated by atheists. This is in addition to researching just how many people were slaughtered at the hands of "enlightened" atheists like Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and Castro.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:43 pm |
    • sam

      @DCBuck – nice try. The difference is, people of 'faith' like to make sure everyone knows what they're doing. The nonbelievers don't advertise; they just go about doing good without hoping for a reward. You have zero idea how many atheists are out there doing good, because they're not crowing about it.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:48 pm |
    • sam

      ps: "You might try looking up the fact that there are many different denominations of Christianity"

      That should tell you something. None of them seem to get it right.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:49 pm |
    • DCBuck

      @tas:

      Persons killed under the regime of:

      Mao: 78 million
      Stalin: 23 million
      Pol Pot: 1.7 million
      Castro: 141,000

      Oh, and I'll throw in another "enlightened atheist, to boot:

      Kim Il Sung: 1.6 million

      and while Hitler used some religious iconography, there is plenty of solid evidence that he 1) did not like religion, and 2) used plenty of anti-religious rhetoric, thus making it unclear whether or not he was or was not an atheist at heart.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:51 pm |
    • DCBuck

      @sam: Ifirst, I call BS. Second, to use atheist language, if I don't see it, it doesn't exist. Nice try, though.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:52 pm |
    • DCBuck

      @sam: First, I call BS. Second, to use atheist language, if I don't see it, it doesn't exist. Nice try, though.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:52 pm |
    • DCBuck

      "That should tell you something. None of them seem to get it right."

      That's the most nonsensical, drivel-like post I've seen yet. Congratulations!

      February 21, 2013 at 2:53 pm |
    • Duke

      For those wanting sources try looking up the 20 million that died at the hands of Stalin, or estimated 40 million from Mao Zedong, and that doesn't count those millions that have died since these men, nor does it count Korea's brutal history. Hitler was not communist he was a fascist so I didn't even count him, but his killing was NOT based on any religious ideas or doctrine. Now compare that with the religious wars that took place in isolated areas when the world's population was much lower. Communism has killed more people than all religious wars.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:01 pm |
    • sam

      DC, that was the best you could do? Really? I'm a little embarrassed for you.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:03 pm |
    • cedar rapids

      'and while Hitler used some religious iconography, there is plenty of solid evidence that he 1) did not like religion, and 2) used plenty of anti-religious rhetoric, thus making it unclear whether or not he was or was not an atheist at heart.'

      oh please, Hitler claimed that by killing the jews he was doing god's will. He claimed how he was not ashamed to admit he drops to his knees to give thanks to god that he was born at this time.

      And as for your list of names......none of those committed their acts in the name of atheism. They committed them in the name of grabbing and holding onto power.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:04 pm |
    • Robert Jeffress

      I could have kept the old church, maybe expanded it a little...and spent that $130 mil on a soup kitchen! But that would not have gotten me enough press. We sell tshirts in the lobby!

      February 21, 2013 at 3:07 pm |
    • sam

      Sorry, cedar, DC doesn't like facts or logic that don't agree with his worldview...

      February 21, 2013 at 3:09 pm |
    • Doobs

      Persons killed under the regime of:

      Mao: 78 million
      Stalin: 23 million
      Pol Pot: 1.7 million
      Castro: 141,000

      Oh, and I'll throw in another "enlightened atheist, to boot:

      Kim Il Sung: 1.6 million

      Let's add one more to the list:

      God: Every man, woman, child, animal and plant on the face of the earth except Noah and his family.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:09 pm |
    • fred

      Dobbs
      God cast judgment on the wicked in the days of Noah because the purpose of life was to provide the best possible goodness for the largest number of souls with eternal destiny. Atheists do not see or believe in the hope of the best possible goodness for the largest number of souls.
      God does not kill his own creation the creation is in God. This is very different from an atheist like Stalin that takes life without knowledge of destiny for self or the life he has taken.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:19 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      Hitler’s Third Reich was no friend to atheists and encouraged religion in Germany. Having been exposed to religious methods of persuasion in school at a Benedictine cloister, Hitler recognized religion’s power to keep the people compliant.
      Instead of purging faith like the Communist regimes, he purged atheism:
      "We were convinced that the people need and require this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out".
      The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, Oxford University Press, 1942
      Hitler publically professed his Christianity until his dying day and used Christian arguments to whip his people into a frenzy. This is why Nazi uniform belt buckles were emblazoned with the slogan “Gott mit uns” (God is with us).

      February 21, 2013 at 3:22 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      For 1500 years, Christians outlawed atheists from the universities, or any teaching careers, besmirched their reputations, banned or burned their books or their writings of any kind, drove them into exile, humiliated them, seized their properties, arrested them for blasphemy, dehumanized them with beatings and torture, gouged out their eyes, slit their tongues, stretched, crushed or broke their limbs, tore off their breasts if they were women, crushed their scrotums if they were men, imprisoned them, disemboweled them, hung them, burnt them alive etc. ad nauseum.

      Ever hear of the Judas Cradle? A Christian name for a horrific torture device used by Christians on atheists, heretics, apostates and others who dared go against the Church.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:29 pm |
    • Doobs

      @fraud

      Atheists do not see or believe in the hope of the best possible goodness for the largest number of souls.

      Could you provide a citation for this statement?

      The excuse that god had some sort of higher purpose for his murder is ridiculous. Your bible states "The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. 7 So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.”

      Even if you believe that god's temper tantrum towards mankind was somehow justified, why were the animals included? They had done nothing wrong.

      Face it. Your god is a petulant, murdering aswhole.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:32 pm |
    • OTOH

      VanHagar
      " O.k. Lets get one thing straight...I don't follow a cult (or religion). I follow Christ."

      The only, and that's ONLY, description of what this "Christ" said or did is from first century cult writings. You follow a cult's teachings and writings whether you acknowledge it or not.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:37 pm |
    • fred

      Doobs
      1) The Hebrew for “wipe out” is blotted out. This could mean the wicked were erased (thus not “killed”) or simply the Hebrew basis for cleansing with water (flood) sin and unclean animals. As for the animals you must remember they were created for man to subdue and a gift for man. All that God created for man with the purpose of good was erased.

      2) If you think it was just a story about the final judgment of the earth where God takes the chosen ones away in the safety of His arms to the highest mountain (heavenly) it is simply that. God has the right to invite anyone He wants to His wedding feast. Everyone is invited but you need to get on the boat with requires trusting God exists and wants to take you to paradise.

      3) It may be a simple story of the God of Israel that protects his chosen family from the suffering of life. The world is not a safe place full of storms (due to nature of the environment and the evil nature of man) and Gods love provides an ark that rides out the storms of life.

      4) Literal global flood that is possible only possible under the supernatural powers of an all knowing God is a physical calamity that destroys all life with the exception of what’s in the ark. All physical life is lost to the environmental calamity. In this case you must keep in mind that God is concerned and has purposed life for the blessing of eternal souls. Physical moments without soul are simply organic matter responding to chemical stimuli. How is washing off the earth any different than fertility specialists that sterilize a Petri dish of unwanted embryos after selecting the little desired blond Einstein for implantation?

      February 21, 2013 at 4:02 pm |
    • Smithsonian

      "Literal global flood that is possible only possible under the supernatural powers of an all knowing God is a physical calamity that destroys all life with the exception of what’s in the ark"

      The stories such as the flood story, the record is quite different: the time period under consideration is much more ancient. The factual bases of the stories are hidden from our view archaeologically. The stories remain a part of folk traditions.

      February 21, 2013 at 4:05 pm |
    • fred

      Smithsonian
      Please admitt you know that your last sentence was just opinion and is without fact correct?

      February 21, 2013 at 4:10 pm |
    • LOL!

      "Please admitt you know that your last sentence was just opinion and is without fact correct?"

      The bible is not fact because it is based on folk tradition. Folk tradition is defined as the common beliefs, practices, customs and other cultural elements of an ethnic or social group that are rooted in the past, but are persisting into the present due to means such as arts and crafts, songs and music, dance, foods, drama, storytelling and certain forms of oral communication.

      February 21, 2013 at 4:46 pm |
    • Doobs

      @ fraud

      It's interesting to see you spin and tap dance around with words, trying to justify your god's murders, violence and hatred.

      1) The Hebrew for “wipe out” is blotted out. This could mean the wicked were erased (thus not “killed”) or simply the Hebrew basis for cleansing with water (flood) sin and unclean animals.

      Ah, the old "it means something different in Hebrew than what is printed on the page".

      "13 So God said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth."

      "21 Every living thing that moved on land perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 23 Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark."

      Perhaps god has a different definition of "destroy" and "died" as well? Or did all these men, women, children, babies, and animals tread water for the forty days and nights of rain, the 150 days of flooding, the three months of sitting on Ararat, and another month of sending birds in and out of the ark?

      " When the dove returned to him in the evening, there in its beak was a freshly plucked olive leaf!" And somehow, after being underwater for nearly a year, an olive tree had already sprouted up with leaves!

      As for the animals you must remember they were created for man to subdue and a gift for man. All that God created for man with the purpose of good was erased.

      The Lord then said to Noah, “Go into the ark, you and your whole family, because I have found you righteous in this generation. "2 Take with you seven pairs of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and one pair of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, 3 and also seven pairs of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth. 4 Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made.”

      When were "clean" and "unclean" animals established? There is no mention of such a thing prior to this, god's first references to it are in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Did god get his chronology wrong in his book?

      Also, seven days to collect millions of pairs of animals, birds, fish, and insects? What about plants? Bacteria?

      2) If you think it was just a story about the final judgment of the earth where God takes the chosen ones away in the safety of His arms to the highest mountain (heavenly) it is simply that. God has the right to invite anyone He wants to His wedding feast. Everyone is invited but you need to get on the boat with requires trusting God exists and wants to take you to paradise.

      You are right. I think this is just a story. A fictional story, made up be men to explain the natural world at a time when they didn't have the ability to understand natural phenomena like rain, thunder, the sun, moon, stars, disasters and illness. At some point, a group of them realized that they could control large numbers of people with these stories, promises of better things in an afterlife and threats of impending doom. Not only control them, but get them to give you lavish amounts of money. Thus, religion was born.

      3) It may be a simple story of the God of Israel that protects his chosen family from the suffering of life. The world is not a safe place full of storms (due to nature of the environment and the evil nature of man) and Gods love provides an ark that rides out the storms of life.

      I'm sure that the 230,000 men, women, and children killed in the 2004 earthquake and tsunami were comforted by that thought as they drowned.

      4) Literal global flood that is possible only possible under the supernatural powers of an all knowing God is a physical calamity that destroys all life with the exception of what’s in the ark. All physical life is lost to the environmental calamity. In this case you must keep in mind that God is concerned and has purposed life for the blessing of eternal souls. Physical moments without soul are simply organic matter responding to chemical stimuli. How is washing off the earth any different than fertility specialists that sterilize a Petri dish of unwanted embryos after selecting the little desired blond Einstein for implantation?

      Fertilized human eggs are not human beings. They aren't even dogs, or birds or honeybees. That's how it's different.

      "God is concerned"?? How generous of him.

      February 21, 2013 at 5:21 pm |
    • SeilnoigileR

      @VanHagar – Yes, it is a cult. You believe in a book that claims we all decended from 2 people (genetically impossible), that snakes can talk, that god and satan make side bets on mortals (how kind and loving is that!), that the entire planet was flooded (no evidence of that) and that your saviour was crucified, died and then came back to life. If anyone came to you with a similar set of statements and told you they were true because they 'believed' or 'felt' they were true, you would call them crazy, yet you and the other followers feel persecuted when people point out the absolutely jaw-dropping nonsense that you believe in is truth – and, more revoltingly – try to convince everyone else is true. Sorry if we don't really have much sympathy.

      February 21, 2013 at 7:55 pm |
    • fred

      doobs
      “”Ah, the old "it means something different in Hebrew than what is printed on the page". “
      =>no, I listed 4 possibilities regarding the flood one of which focused on the word “wiped out”. Another version is “blotted out”. The exact Hebrew is not always known but what is clear the wicked were judged for their wickedness and washed away by a sudden calamity. The flood is a great understandable calamity as is Gods escape or security that is always right in front of your eyes (and typically for a long time) so there can be no question concerning the longsuffering of God.

      “And somehow, after being underwater for nearly a year, an olive tree had already sprouted up with leaves!”
      =>ok, you believe the flood story is allegory or some story on what happens to good people and bad people. That works fine and is in keeping with the Bible.

      February 21, 2013 at 8:54 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      Yup it follows the exact message of the bible. "Obey or else. NO QUESTIONS!".

      February 21, 2013 at 8:57 pm |
    • fred

      Doobs

      “When were "clean" and "unclean" animals established? There is no mention of such a thing prior to this; god's first references to it are in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Did god get his chronology wrong in his book?”
      =>God provided the first sacrifice in the Garden of Eden when man sinned. Abel gave the f-at portion of the first born to God. The ritual of sacrifice goes back to the beginning. Truths in the Bible contain sufficient information for anyone that is seeking the truth of God with just enough information to reveal the true heart of a skeptic.
      Leviticus shows details of the laws and rituals that were symbolic not to mention the building up of mans ceremony and traditions on top of the truth of God.

      “Also, seven days to collect millions of pairs of animals, birds, fish, and insects? What about plants? Bacteria? “
      =>It appears you want to argue against a literal flood yet use a literal flood to discredit God. Well that will not work as you must choose one way or the other. Note that it took 7 days to collect and in the beginning God created in 6 days and rested on the 7th. The number 7 has a lot of meaning in scripture as does the day of rest.

      “A fictional story, made up be men to explain the natural world at a time when they didn't have the ability to understand natural phenomena like rain, thunder, the sun:
      =>no, the story is about God blessing a chosen people and why the rest of the world was judged. You may see it your way but the author and the audience it was written for see it as intended.

      “At some point, a group of them realized that they could control large numbers of people with these stories, promises of better things in an afterlife and threats of impending doom. Not only control them, but get them to give you lavish amounts of money. Thus, religion was born.”
      =>seriously? There are always those that game any system but that is not the story of the Chosen. The power of God, the name of God is eternal, all powerful and self evident. Jesus took issue with the Priests of his day that play the system while he was himself a giver not a taker. God creates to give and Jesus died to give. The only one doing the taking is man.

      February 21, 2013 at 9:00 pm |
    • fred

      hawaiiguest
      If you do not believe in God it could simply be a bedtime storry for the little children of how their loving God will save them. The older children can see that it is better to find favor in the eyes of the Lord than hang out with people so wicked God relented making man in the first place.

      February 21, 2013 at 9:05 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      If not for the bedside stories and such that you feed them, fred, children would remain atheist. They were born atheist.

      Teach me to live that I may dread
      The grave as little as my bed.
      Teach me to die that so I may
      Rise glorious at the awe-ful Day.

      February 21, 2013 at 9:08 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      I see you're still unable to give anything resembling a relevant answer, let alone address what a point is. Still as pathetic and useless as ever. Continue to make the case for the dangers of Christianity on the mind fred. People like you and Chad are like poster children for it.

      February 21, 2013 at 9:19 pm |
    • fred

      TomTom the other one

      It would seem that belief works to the advantage of man. Go figure even to this day the Christian World View is firmly behind the biggest superpower known. Better yet it was the 56 signers of the declaration of independence that pleaded unanimously with the Supreme Judge of the World to bless our country. Atheism seems to be a trait that natural selection only allows a short period of existence.

      February 21, 2013 at 9:24 pm |
    • Jen

      A few posts later we'll see fred claiming that our steps away from his Christian myths are causing our demise, when in fact at the same time as the steep decline in Christian lemming followers of the past 4 decades, we've seen our greatest advances in our standard of living, plus declines in crime rates (except for gun crime, with guns being promoted mainly by the same awful people that push Christianity at us).

      Fred, you are sick. And deluded.

      February 21, 2013 at 9:28 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      More lies from the Luther following fred. Lie for Jeebus more fred, I'm sure people will get more stupid and eventually accept your lies. Tell me, how long did it take you to completely delude yourself and turn off your intelligence to spew that shit?

      February 21, 2013 at 9:50 pm |
    • fred

      hawaiiguest
      Martin Luther – “Reason is the enemy of faith.”

      February 21, 2013 at 10:34 pm |
    • fred

      jen
      the steep decline in Christian lemming followers of the past 4 decades”

      =>About 35% of the world population was Christian in 1910 and 32% of the world population was Christian in 2010 and 33% of the world population was Christian in 2012.

      =>Check your facts Jen then check into a church near you.

      February 21, 2013 at 11:02 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      Yes, and you're a very good example of a loss of all reason.

      February 22, 2013 at 1:11 pm |
    • fred

      hawaiiguest
      Somehow you manage to blindly go past the all the signs that point you towards reality. Let’s start with “in the beginning God”. That is the first step to your recovery from Philosophical Naturalism. Those are the first 4 words recorded in the Bible and I have it from good authority that these are Divine Words. That would also make these words the first absolute truth in all that is known or knowable.
      Since the sound of “GOD” shuts down your reasoning or limits your reasoning to baryonic matter that is verifiable and falsifiable we will ignore it for the moment and begin with the first 3 words. Just out of curiosity are we in agreement that there was a beginning? Yes or no would be nice but if you actually believe it is unknown then you can say “unknown”.

      February 22, 2013 at 1:33 pm |
    • Doobs

      I have it from good authority that these are Divine Words

      Provide a verified, peer reviewed, unbiased citation, please.

      February 22, 2013 at 1:37 pm |
    • fred

      Doobs
      Divinity is often based on beliefs as are facts you would accept as evidence. Before we address that was there a beginning? Yes, no or unknown

      February 22, 2013 at 1:58 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      Same pathetic bullshit as ever. "The bible is true because I say so, because I say so, because I say so". Not to mention your "philosophical naturalism" buzzword. So, when will you actually address a point fred? When will you stop being a pathetic little moron skipping around from topic to topic to avoid actually addressing anything? Oh wait, you can't address anything, that's why you need to jump around so much, that's right. Sorry fred, I forgot how little you actually think about anything.

      February 22, 2013 at 2:37 pm |
    • fred

      hawaiiguest
      Was there a beginning? Yes or no would be nice but if you actually believe it is unknown then you can say “unknown”.

      February 22, 2013 at 2:39 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      A beginning of what you disingenuous little tool?

      February 22, 2013 at 2:42 pm |
    • Dennise

      "Let’s start with “in the beginning God”. That is the first step to your recovery from Philosophical Naturalism. Those are the first 4 words recorded in the Bible and I have it from good authority that these are Divine Words."

      Seeing as no one from Adam and Eve's time actually could write for centuries, and of course the fact your God supposedly destroyed everything during Noah's time there is absolutely no proof of what was done in the beginning. It's nothing more than made up crap by ancient people.

      February 22, 2013 at 2:49 pm |
    • Jen

      Fred, cite your references or retract your claims. But look here first:

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2246436/Census-2011-religion-data-reveal-4m-fewer-Christians-1-4-atheist.html

      and from one of your own gang:

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-brand/no-more-followers_b_2030205.html

      and more

      http://secularist10.hubpages.com/hub/The-Decline-and-Fall-of-Christianity

      And that is even after aggressive efforts by the slimy, greasy used car salesmen of your religion plus clowns like you to sell the Christian scam in Africa and other places.

      Regardless, fred, it's tiresome to have to deal with your repetitive posts about your religious nonsense. For your case, check yourself into an asylum.

      February 22, 2013 at 3:06 pm |
    • fred

      hawaiiguest
      According to the Bible God always was. God was not created, God simply was, is and will be at the same point as our time does not apply. When I ask was there a beginning I am speaking about that point of causation when God said let it be and so it was. I understand you do not accept God as given so the beginning I am speaking of would be that point when baryonic matter came into existence, our space and our time came into existence.
      My God it is difficult talking to non believers. It was a simple question was there a beginning, yes, no or I don’t know. In the absence of God and the authority of the Bible it takes 18 words simply to establish what is beginning. No wonder the apostle John said in the beginning was the word and word was with God and the word was God. If you want to advance the discussion 2,400 years then the beginning would be the point God spoke.
      All I can say is , My Word Hawaii is it really that difficult

      February 22, 2013 at 3:11 pm |
    • Dennise

      "According to the Bible God always was"

      The bible is not based on real facts, so that statement is not true.

      February 22, 2013 at 3:15 pm |
    • fred

      Dennise
      You are getting very close to the truth because it cannot be contained by written word. Truth is absolute and transcends time which is one way you can identify the truth of God verses the relative truth of today.
      Moses was aware of these truths as were many other cultures over time. Just as the Muslims in 600AD and Joseph Smith in 1820 began adding their “visions” on top of the truth others did so over the past 6000+ years.

      February 22, 2013 at 3:21 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      And I don't give a flying backward fuck what your immoral book of death says. You say it's difficult to talk with non-believers, why? Is it because we don't actually just accept all your assertions without evidence? Because we actually don't want you to go off on irrelevant tangents and jump from topic to topic to avoid addressing anything at all?
      Such a deluded, pathetic little moron you are.
      Keep going fred, show the world the dangers religion poses to the mind. You're the poster child for that.

      February 22, 2013 at 3:26 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      You truly are the epitome of dishonesty. You can't address points, you can't provide evidence, you can't even stay within a single topic most of the time. And yet you claim it is difficult to talk to people who don't accept your dishonesty. How pathetic do you plan on being fred? All I can say is, Luther would be incredibly proud of your dishonesty for Jesus.

      February 22, 2013 at 3:31 pm |
    • fred

      Jen

      Get a grip your source is a UK rag sheet? Even if valid that rag sheet is speaking about the UK!
      My data is a world wide number not in dispute and comes from:
      Figures for 1910 are from a Pew Forum analysis of data from the Center for the Study of Global Christianity.
      January 2011, Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life

      February 22, 2013 at 3:32 pm |
    • Matthew

      In order to understand absolute or universal truth, we must begin by defining truth. Truth, according to the dictionary, is “conformity to fact or actuality; a statement proven to be or accepted as true.” Some people would say that there is no true reality, only perceptions and opinions. Others would argue that there must be some absolute reality or truth.

      - Anything that we take to be true is revisable
      - All truths are a matter of opinion
      - Truth is relative (to culture, historical epoch, language, society etc.)
      - All the truths that we know are subjective truths (i.e. mind-dependent truths)
      - There is nothing more to truth than what we are willing to assert as true

      February 22, 2013 at 3:33 pm |
    • hawaiiTRANSLATOR

      blah blah blah #$*&^$%

      fred what hawaiiguest is saying "atheists are afraid to answer questions that spotlight what they fear". Given he is an atheist just assume he does not know and cannot comprehend "in the beginning"

      February 22, 2013 at 3:36 pm |
    • Saraswati

      @fred,

      That rag was citing official UEngland/Wales Census data (accurately). View it here if you prefer:

      http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census/key-statistics-for-local-authorities-in-england-and-wales/rpt-religion.html

      February 22, 2013 at 3:40 pm |
    • fred

      Matthew
      If we were in the same room would we agree that it is absolutely true that we both exist ?

      February 22, 2013 at 3:40 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      fred, that was Chad's lie: "absolutely"

      February 22, 2013 at 3:43 pm |
    • JustTheFacts

      The number of Christians around the world has more than tripled in the last 100 years, from
      about 600 million in 1910 to more than 2 billion in 2010. But the world’s overall population
      also has risen rapidly, from an estimated 1.8 billion in 1910 to 6.9 billion in 2010. As a result,
      Christians make up about the same portion of the world’s population today (32%) as they did a
      century ago (35%).

      February 22, 2013 at 3:44 pm |
    • Saraswati

      For anyone interested, here is the Pew data:

      http://www.pewforum.org/Christian/Global-Christianity-exec.aspx

      February 22, 2013 at 3:46 pm |
    • fred

      Saraswati
      Yes, that relates to Religion in England and Wales. My Post specified Christianity statistics world-wide during the period 1910-2011 (which has been about 33% the whole time i.e. stable).
      If Jen wants to use England as an example then the decline in the power well being of England has declined as Christ was cast out of the hearts and minds of the people. We could even draw a nice graph yet the atheist would say it means nothing.

      February 22, 2013 at 3:50 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Translator

      Why don't you actually address any of the points I made, or even giving the clarification I asked for? Saying "In the beginning" is so incredibly ill-defined that to make that any kind of cornerstone on it's own is stupid.

      February 22, 2013 at 3:51 pm |
    • fred

      Tom, Tom, the Other One
      So our questions are not different from Pilate who asked Jesus “what is truth”. He saw the innocent man yet gave into political and religious pressure then crucified Christ and freed a criminal Barabbas.
      I would say the absolute truth of God is in our face and what is relative remains the heart of the man not the truth itself.

      February 22, 2013 at 3:59 pm |
    • Jen

      Fred, I quoted three sources and provided links to all three. You actually haven't presented yours correctly yet. Take a closer look.

      Do try to keep up.

      February 22, 2013 at 4:02 pm |
    • Ian

      fred, if you had been born in an Arab country, what do you think that your religion would be?

      February 22, 2013 at 4:04 pm |
    • Doobs

      @ fraud

      Divinity is often based on beliefs as are facts you would accept as evidence. Before we address that was there a beginning? Yes, no or unknown

      Nice try sidestepping the issue, fraud. You made a statement, and I asked for a verified citation. Your response is to ask an irrelevant question.

      Either you can provide evidence of your statement or you can't.

      February 22, 2013 at 4:05 pm |
    • fred

      Jen
      Saraswati gave a good source and it summarized the percentage of Chrristians world wide very well. Christianity as a % of world population is steady since 1910. Christianity in England is on a steep decline as is England.
      End of story.

      February 22, 2013 at 4:09 pm |
    • fred

      Ian
      “fred, if you had been born in an Arab country, what do you think that your religion would be?”

      =>given that I am only alive as the result of a miracle I must conclude that birth in an Arab country was not in the cards.
      => If there is no God then I would buy into your argument that I would most likely be a Muslim. Given God has blessed me personally I say Saul of Tarsus was on the mark when he said it is God that determines where you are born.

      February 22, 2013 at 4:15 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      So god chooses for children to be born in squalor and die after a few years of intense suffering from disease and hunger that makes his little cross ordeal look like a happy ride on a merry go round. God chooses for these kids to die and go to hell in your doctrine to then be tortured forever. Your god is indeed and evil piece of shit.

      February 22, 2013 at 4:20 pm |
    • fred

      Doobs
      I said:“I have it from good authority that these are Divine Words”and you said:”Provide a verified, peer reviewed, unbiased citation, please”
      =>I gave you a correct response in that arguments regarding divinity require an understanding of beliefs. If I provide 5,000 sources from unbiased (Muslims, Christians and Jews) sources you would argue each is biased even though they are of different faith. Their source is one in the same as Jesus referred to Scripture that both Jews and Muslims refer.
      Is there a point in constantly going over the same ground?

      February 22, 2013 at 4:24 pm |
    • Doobs

      @ fraud

      Quit dodging the issue. Provide verified, unbiased, peer reviewed evidence or be called out as a liar.

      February 22, 2013 at 4:27 pm |
    • fred

      hawaiiguest
      Jesus said it was not so in the beginning. I think He said it better than I could. Let me summarize for you. The pain and suffering you describe is not of God but the result of mans desire to exist outside of total dependence on God. The effect of that decision continues and has consequences not only on those who made the decision but on those that came after.
      Your naturalism applauds this natural selection and finds it very accepting. Naturalism is not Gods plan but existence outside of the will of God.
      If you are really interested in the details we need to start at the beginning which you seem to incapable of comprehending.

      Sorry need to run my boss is on my case so I will be off line for sometime.

      February 22, 2013 at 4:33 pm |
    • fred

      dobbs
      be specific, are you asking for evidence that the word of God is divine or that christ is divine? I will need to get back to you latter on this.

      February 22, 2013 at 4:35 pm |
    • LOL!

      "Sorry need to run my boss is on my case so I will be off line for sometime."

      Fred's posting on-line while at work, that's stealing. LOL!

      February 22, 2013 at 4:41 pm |
    • Doobs

      @ fraud

      Another dodge. Go back and read it for yourself. Then provide a verified, peer reviewed, unbiased citation, or be called out a liar.

      February 22, 2013 at 5:02 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      Wow, you really love to move those goalposts don't you? First, god chooses where people are born, then when that choice causes suffering, boom it's no longer god's choice but ours. Pathetic bullshit. You can never defend anything honestly, and you continue to show that everyday that you post on these forums.

      February 22, 2013 at 7:08 pm |
    • fred

      hawaiiguest
      “First, god chooses where people are born”
      =>This happens regardless if God does or does not exist. I can say this because you think God must fit your image of god not the God who is.
      That massive population of non believers (7%) will say I was born here for no reason because that fits in with existence for no reason. The rest of the world believes in something greater than what they look at in the mirror for where they were born. God is present in all things with includes your absence of belief (you see an unknown) and my belief that I was placed here with purpose and expectation.

      “then when that choice causes suffering, boom it's no longer god's choice but ours”
      =>suffering and pain is part of our world regardless if you are blinded by Philosophical Naturalism or alive in Christ. It is how we go through suffering that reveals our character and choices in life. You hold onto nothing and I am in the presence of God.

      February 22, 2013 at 8:09 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      And, once again, you can't give anything resembling a coherent answer that addresses the post. Then again, you do it on purpose don't you? Anything to avoid actually answering anyone that doesn't agree with your unjustified assertions. Truly pathetic fred.

      February 22, 2013 at 8:13 pm |
    • fred

      Actually, I believe you really cannot comprehend anything even slightly abstract. This should calm your soul if it is a neurological reason that prevents you from grasping anything that is spiritual in nature. I say calm your soul because the Bible is based on the assumption of soul and that soul is only held accountable to the extent it had the ability to make an informed decision.
      Your inability to comprehend what the beginning of God’s creation means should set off a round of alarms in your head or heart. If there are no alarms count your blessings.

      February 22, 2013 at 8:39 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      More irrelevant babbling. You truly have no integrity. If you're an example of a "true christian", then any afterlife without people like you would truly be heavenly.

      February 22, 2013 at 8:48 pm |
    • clarity

      hawaii, I think: “First, god chooses where people are born”
      fred: "This happens regardless if God does or does not exist. . . ."

      What fred???? You really are not making any sense and I've only check a bit of the last thing you've posted here.

      February 22, 2013 at 8:57 pm |
    • fred

      hawaiiguest
      I am not trying to hurt your feelings just want you to recognize that there is something you are not getting for some reason. What was your belief or denomination before your conversion?

      February 22, 2013 at 8:58 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Freddy blabbers: " just want you to recognize that there is something you are not getting for some reason."

      Who the fvck do you think you are? You aren't in charge of others' lives or beliefs, you sanctimonious azzhole. Fvck off.

      February 22, 2013 at 9:01 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      Pathetic. You're not even trying to stick to a single topic anymore. Nothing but empty platitudes and unjustified assertions.

      February 22, 2013 at 9:03 pm |
    • fred

      clarity
      From what I can see of the Bible God is revealed through the creation. Whether or not you believe in God is all a part of that creation and revelaton. If our universe is a closed system responding to various laws this reflects God as much as a personal universe that was created for the soul of the Chosen Ones. I was touched in such a way that I believe in the God revealed as personal with purpose for my soul. Hawaiiguest believes God is an empty unknown and the only reality is tied to baryonic matter. Both are in and of God.
      The creation (hawaiiguest) man exists and this existence does not change even if there is no God.

      February 22, 2013 at 9:15 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      Standard apologetic bullshit.
      "The bible says the evidence of god is things exist.
      Things exist, therefore the bible is right and there is a god."

      You know fred, the more often you post the same fallacious bullshit, the more stupid you show yourself to be.

      February 22, 2013 at 9:18 pm |
    • fred

      Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son
      Sorry Tom Tom you cannot escape it and you are completely wrapped up and part of this creation. What was God thinking? I could say no one knows the mind of God but that is just too easy. God is period and you is period.

      February 22, 2013 at 9:22 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Sure, freddy, and you is just stupid.

      February 22, 2013 at 9:25 pm |
    • clarity

      Here's the thing, fred. I fine with you having your belief. I have my own. But fred you need to be more careful when making blanket statements that are simply stating what you believe as fact, while trying to encompass what others hold that might be different. When you start off with "If . . ", that's ok since you are considering more than one thing at once. Of if you just said 'I believe this', that's OK too. But these statements that say whether this or that, xyz is true, while that may be true to your belief, it is condescending. I see you just did it again in your last reply to me.

      February 22, 2013 at 9:38 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @clarity

      Fred doesn't care about the beliefs or thoughts of others. Not to mention his religion teaches that everyone who thinks differently is evil and should be shunned. Telling fred not to be condescending is like telling him to actually address a post. It's not going to happen.

      February 22, 2013 at 9:41 pm |
    • fred

      Clarity
      “From what I can see of the Bible God is revealed through the creation.” Clarity, what am I missing here, the Hebrew God as they saw Him and the writers recorded was revealed through the creation, right?

      “Whether or not you believe in God is all a part of that creation and revelation.” -Agnostics, atheists, Hindus, etc. are all part of the creation even though they do not believe. They are revealed through creation as is God and Gods response to non belief.

      “ If our universe is a closed system responding to various laws this reflects God as much as a personal universe that was created for the soul of the Chosen Ones. I was touched in such a way that I believe in the God revealed as personal with purpose for my soul. Hawaiiguest believes God is an empty unknown and the only reality is tied to baryonic matter. Both are in and of God.” – simple true statement with the only difference being how we see God, right?

      “The creation (hawaiiguest) man exists and this existence does not change even if there is no God” –this is a true statement also, correct? Hawaiiguest can be removed and fred inserted it does not change.
      Let him who has eyes see.
      Now, how can any of this be condescending?

      February 22, 2013 at 11:18 pm |
  9. This is for sure...

    This is for sure... you can sit around and degrade Christians and Churches and religion in general, but one day, you will cross over into that unknown, are you so sure that your religious views will support you at that time? Are you sure that when you meet your maker, all of the bad things you've said about there being no God and such will please him, or her for that matter? Perhaps you should get off the internet spewing all your ignorance and do some "soul" searching, or better yet, get a bible out and start reading it. REad it to see if it's true or not. How can you say it's not true if you've never even read it.

    February 21, 2013 at 2:25 pm |
    • Robert Jeffress

      Come to my new $130 mil church in Dallas, friend, and kneel, and get Jesus' salvation spewed on your face.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:28 pm |
    • ellid

      I have no doubt that I am in right relation with God. A pastor who would spend $130 million on buildings when people are sick, hungry, and homeless, on the other hand, may not be so lucky.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:28 pm |
    • Wrathbrow

      Your making assumptions that some people posting here that don't agree with you have not read the bible. I have, so have some others. Your doing almost exactly what you tell others they should not do, saying things about what others think without doing some research and discussion.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:28 pm |
    • Chad

      ". REad it to see if it's true or not. How can you say it's not true if you've never even read it"

      => a question that is asked all the time, the typical responses:

      "Christians havent proved God exists"
      "why do you Mr. Christian reject unicorns"
      "the concept of God is stupid"

      Of course, none of which indicate due diligence having been done on the part of the atheist.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:29 pm |
    • Barry McKockner

      Why the Bible? Have you read every other other holy book? How can you be sure? Oh right , you just feel it. Of course.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:29 pm |
    • Sid Airfoil

      If god wants me to believe in him, it would be very easy for him to convince me with an onslaught of evidence. Why does god deny us conclusive proof of his existence and insist that our belief in him must instead be based on faith (i.e. belief without evidence)? If he exists, he sure seems to like playing games with us.

      Sid

      February 21, 2013 at 2:31 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      Have you read the Tanakh, Talmud, Midrash, Quran, Sunnah, Nahjul Balagha, Avesta, Vedas, Upanisahds, Bhagavad Gita, Puranas, Tantras, Sutras, Vachanas, Adi Granth, Purvas, Samayasara, Niyamasara, Pravacanasara, and Pancastikaya; Anupreksa; Samadhishataka of Pujyapada; Tattvarthasutra of Umasvati, Tattvarthasutra, Pali Tripitaka, Jataka,, Visuddimagga, Tripitaka, Lotus Sutra, Garland Sutra, Analects; the Great Learning; the Doctrine of the Mean; the Mencius, Tao Te Ching, Chuang-tzu, Kojiki, Nihon Shoki, K-oki, Ofudesaki, Mikagura-uta, Michi-no-Shiori, Johrei, Goseigen, Netarean Shower of Holy Doctrines, Chun Boo Kyung, Kitab-i-Iqan, Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, Book of Mormon, Dianetics, or Revelation X to see if any of those Holy Books is true?
      They all claim to be, so how can you dismiss them without proper study?

      February 21, 2013 at 2:31 pm |
    • Sure....

      Reading the Bible is all one needs to become an Atheist.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:31 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      More pathetic Pascal's Wager idiocy, coupled with the addition of the king of idiocy Chad.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:32 pm |
    • clarity

      There is plenty of reason to suspect that the gospels are merely a plagiarism of older pagan stories. And we have the early Christian apologists (Justin Martyr for example) to thank for that suspicion. They were the ones, when faced with the charges of plagiarism that could do no better than come up with the excuse that the devil had committed plagiarism in anticipation – that he had disseminated the fake stories first, before the gospels. LOL. wink wink. yeah, right.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:32 pm |
    • Saraswati

      I have no idea what will happen when I die, but if there are gods, it seems a heck of a lot more likely that those who were simple minded and gullible will be sent for re-education than that any negative effects would come from holding a healthy skepticism.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:33 pm |
    • David in NC

      Well, if any of that was remotely true, I would be very worried. However, there is no evidence to back up any of the crazy claims you have made. Which means reality based folks will not be moved by your fantasies.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:33 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      Re-post of what I said on page 1:
      What if the Vikings were right and by worshipping Jesus and refusing to die gloriously in battle you miss out on Valhalla?
      What if teh Mormons are right and you need to learn the secret passwords, new names and masonic handshakes in order to pass Joesph Smith and get into the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom?
      What if the Hindus are right and you get reincarnated as a dung beetle becuase you failed to pay cows the proper respect?
      What if the egyptians were right and your heart gets measured against Ma'at's shu feather when you die?
      There are countless myths about the afterlife – it isn't simply a matter of Jesus or Nothing....
      Heck, even the various denominations of the Abrahamic religions can't agree on what happens.
      The Jewish faith has no Hell, and they are your God's Chosen People!
      A Jehovah's Witness would tell you that YOU'RE bound for eternal torment becuase you don't subsribe to their particular subset of Christianity.
      If you're using Pascal's Wager as an argument for religion, then it must logically encompass ALL religions, gods and possible afterlives.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:34 pm |
    • Thoth

      Are you sure this is for sure?

      February 21, 2013 at 2:34 pm |
    • NGB4M

      Again with the threats. Religion is paranoia on a grand scale. No good reason to believe it, but what if it's true. Non-believers have moved past being afraid of things dreamed up by ignorant people 2000 years ago.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:35 pm |
    • EvidenceBased4

      Excellent point by Doc Vestibule. Chad, can we assume you have committed the due diligence of reading all of those works to see if they are true?

      February 21, 2013 at 2:36 pm |
    • Bravo

      It was reading / studying the Bible that made me realize that it was a crock of crap and moved me away from Religion,...Atheist just don't dismiss religion from nowhere,...more often than not atheist know more about scripture than religious nuts. So what proof do you have that your per-conception of God is in fact what you will meet when you die?

      February 21, 2013 at 2:38 pm |
    • Chad

      @clarity "There is plenty of reason to suspect that the gospels are merely a plagiarism of older pagan stories"

      =>like.. what?
      that line of thinking was popular among atheists in the early 20th century, known as the "History of Religions School", it has been thoroughly debunked and is no longer used by atheist scholars when debating the topic.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:38 pm |
    • sbp

      And if there is a God, and it is Zeus, how do you think he's going to feel about your carrying on about Jesus all the time? What on Earth makes you confident that "your" god is the right one?

      February 21, 2013 at 2:40 pm |
    • Fallacy Spotting 101

      Post by 'hawaiiguest' is an instance of an Ad Hominem fallacy

      http://www.fallacyfiles.org/glossary.html

      February 21, 2013 at 2:40 pm |
    • TV

      Having read the bible and listened to many people who have studied it deeply, I have found that you can justify just about anything with the bible. Just read Deutronomy 20 and tell me that is God's vision for how non-jews should be treated and it is perfectly acceptable to you. If you say that since Jesus came along all that Old Testament stuff is wrong. If so, why do you still cling to the ten commandments?

      Get your head out the sand, book, or wherever else it might be and see the light... Its a book, written by people a long time ago, with a certain agenda. If you agree with the agenda, then fine. Many of us don't.

      I personally agree with everything Jesus had to say. But it does not mean that I am right, I could very well be wrong. It is simply my interpretation of what he may have said.

      As Gandhi once said "I like your Christ, but I don't like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ". He was a bit of a smart ass, but he is dead on about this.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:40 pm |
    • Chad

      @EvidenceBased4 "Chad, can we assume you have committed the due diligence of reading all of those works to see if they are true?"

      =>If the God of Israel is real, all the other "gods" are not real.
      The God of Israel IS real
      Therefore, all the other "gods" are not real.

      Belief in the reality of the God of Israel is mutually exclusive with belief in any other "god".

      February 21, 2013 at 2:43 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      Chad is still pathetic as ever. Everyone needs to accept his interpretation before he considers them as having read the bible, constantly says that all atheists don't study as he thinks they should, but he doesn't need to do anything because he accepts a single position. Pathetic double standard dishonesty from the useless pile of shit known as Chad.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:47 pm |
    • sadlyperturbed

      You want to talk about due diligence? How about you explain to me how you can be a follower of a book which teaches, among other things, that I should kill my neighbor if he works on Sunday, that a woman should be killed if she is not a virgin when you marry her, that I should beat my child. The bible is nothing more than a fictional story full of murder. Murders, I might add, that for the most part are committed by your God. Anyone who can follow such teachings is no better than the people of any other religion and quite frankly, a lesser human being than an atheist such as myself who only follows his heart, not some violent book. I have read every page, more than once, and although there may be some moral teachings of value, to wade through the evil and violence to learn the few nuggets of good does not make this "good book" a value to any modern society. Live in your dream world if you must, but do not think that your stating "This is for sure" makes it reality. It does not. Nothing is for sure. Especially any religion.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:50 pm |
    • clarity

      Chad: "like.. what? that line of thinking was popular among atheists in the early 20th century, known as the "History of Religions School", it has been thoroughly debunked and is no longer used by atheist scholars when debating the topic."

      BS, Chad. This ridiculous notion about diabolic mimicry was stated by several early Christian apologists – it's in their writings. Just because you buy what they claimed – the ridiculous notion that the devil disseminated fake stories before the real ones – is your choice to believe, but it's there to be seen in all its ridiculous glory (and in my mind an embarrassment for the early church).

      February 21, 2013 at 2:50 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Chad
      OK – have you studied the other books purported to be inspired by The God of Abraham?
      How do you know for sure that the Quran isn't true?
      What about the Tanakh? The Torah?
      The Book of Mormon is rather explicitly sub-ti/tled "Another Testament of Jesus Christ".

      February 21, 2013 at 2:51 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Fallacy Spotting

      Would you rather I take the time to refute the Wager for the 50th time here? Sorry but I'm not that bored.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:59 pm |
    • Mike

      If you choose to ignore the historicity of Jesus, His claims He made and the veracity of His resurrection, then all of the responses to this particular post make a lot of sense. However, in the face of Christ's resurrection, which establishes the veracity of His claims, these responses really have nothing to do with the Bible or historical Christianity. And regarding the notion that due diligence would be to read every other religious work possible, I disagree. If Christ was raised from the dead(rhetorical question) then His statement/claim: "I am the way, the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father but through me" is authoritative. In that passage, He, not me, excluded all other options. He also made the claim that He would return some day to judge the living and the dead and to inaugurate the true New Age. That day will certainly settle the question.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:05 pm |
    • cedar rapids

      'all of the bad things you've said about there being no God and such will please him, or her for that matter?'

      and all powerful supreme being has such a frail ego that my meer words and thoughts anger him? really? wow.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:07 pm |
    • HotAirAce

      Bullsh!t Mike!! The resurrection of jesus is not a fact. You are choosing to believe one story over other stories, none of which have evidence to support their supernatural claims.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:10 pm |
    • Dee

      Is it okay to read the Talmud or the Koran? Or just the Bible?

      February 21, 2013 at 3:10 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Chad
      And lest we forget the Kitáb-i-Aqdas from the poor deluded B'Hai who try and reconcile the major Abrahamic religions

      February 21, 2013 at 3:19 pm |
    • This is for sure...

      @ Dee – "Is it okay to read the Talmud or the Koran? Or just the Bible?"

      Read the book of your founding fathers of the country of which you are a citizen; that should be a good starting point.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:22 pm |
    • meifumado

      You presume a lot.
      You say thing like "When you meet your maker" and "when you go into the unknown"
      I will not meet any "maker" when I die, I will not go into the "unknown" I will die and there will be nothing ,it's the same as before I was born.

      This is for sure... You suffer from wishful thinking and this is delusional, please seek help.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:29 pm |
    • Arrogant Chad

      Chad you get thourghly fvcking debunked every day, it doesn't stop you from posting the same drivel every day.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:33 pm |
    • Saraswati

      @Arrogant Chad,

      The problem is that while 3 or 4 people make very good points each day against Chad, at least as many make crappy arguments. Just like fanatics on the atheist side, Chad will focus on the crappy arguments as proof of his opponents' weaknesses rather than learning from the good ones.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:36 pm |
    • Arrogant Chad

      Sara..
      You don't really believe you are getting anywhere with Chad? He is the prince of christian apologists and uses every deceit imaginable, Redzoa has crucified chad over and over again, his comment "that Chad is hopelessly ignorant or hopelessly disingenious" is the polite way of saying he is an aszhole.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:57 pm |
    • Saraswati

      @Arrogant Chad,

      I have no plans to convert Chad away from Christianity nor any belief that I will. I have seen him develop new arguments since I came to this forum in November in some areas, something I think most intelligent people who debate sincerely do.

      Sure, it's nice to influence people in some significant way, but I don't really think this is the best forum for that. We do better face to face for that kind of real personal change experience. Also, face to face you know when it has happened. Here when there's a radical change no one comes back 6 months or a year later to tell you about it. Just on the topic of “free will” I’ve debated with several people in the “real world” who I learned only years later had developed new ideas from our discussions. So I also don’t need to see immediate change to hold out long term hope. :)

      February 21, 2013 at 4:12 pm |
    • Saraswati

      But I settle for much smaller things than probably most others here do. I'm happy to see small changes in my own or other's arguments. I don't think Christianity is evil or that all Christians are irrational fools.

      February 21, 2013 at 4:13 pm |
    • Saraswati

      I think there is a possible “good” world where people believe in gods. It wouldn't be my choice, but it's not impossible. So my end goals aren't really very lofty. I wouldn't come here with a goal of making any real change; I only do it because I enjoy debate and am happy with very small effects.

      February 21, 2013 at 4:17 pm |
    • Chad

      so, like I said. These are the typical responses (I added #4 and #5)

      Typical responses to "what evidence do you have that the God of Israel is not real"
      "Christians havent proved the God of Israel exists"
      "why do you Mr. Christian reject unicorns/other religious/santa clause/whatever"
      "the concept of God of Israel is stupid"
      "The God of Israel isnt real"
      "You're a moron"

      February 21, 2013 at 4:23 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Chad
      I don't think my questions to you fall into any of those categories.
      Have you given the same diligence to the other Holy Books inspired by the God of Abraham?
      The Tanakh, the Torah, The Book of Mormon, The Quaran, the Kitáb-i-Aqdas... ?

      February 21, 2013 at 4:32 pm |
    • Chad

      That was captured in #3, but I'll include your examples

      Typical responses to "what evidence do you have that the God of Israel is not real"
      "Christians havent proved the God of Israel exists"
      "why do you Mr. Christian reject unicorns/other religious/santa clause/Islam/Q'uran/Mormonism/whatever"
      "the concept of God of Israel is stupid"
      "The God of Israel isnt real"
      "You're a moron"

      =====
      and, to answer your question:
      1. Belief in the God of Israel is mutually exclusive with belief in any other "god" or "gods"
      2. What does my lack of investigation into other religions have to do with your lack of investigation into the God of Israel? Are you expecting that the God of Israel will "let you off the hook" because I failed to thoroughly vet other "gods"?

      February 21, 2013 at 4:41 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      As I said above:

      Chad is still pathetic as ever. Everyone needs to accept his interpretation before he considers them as having read the bible, constantly says that all atheists don't study as he thinks they should, but he doesn't need to do anything because he accepts a single position.

      Truly Chad is the perfect example of the damage to the mind religion causes.

      February 21, 2013 at 4:52 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Chad
      "What does my lack of investigation into other religions have to do with your lack of investigation into the God of Israel?"
      No, Chad. The point is that by neglecting to pay attention to the other books inspired by Jahweh, you are limiting your understanding of Him.

      February 22, 2013 at 8:03 am |
  10. Valentina

    @Cedar Rapids
    Actually, it was a Democrat President (Bill Clinton) who signed DOMA into law, not a conservative, not a Republican, not a church.

    February 21, 2013 at 2:24 pm |
    • frank

      True. and he now views it as an improper decision.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:25 pm |
    • Valentina

      Very brave of him to say that now that he's no longer in office. LOL

      February 21, 2013 at 2:38 pm |
    • Saraswati

      Were you folks around at the time? There was a move on my Republican conservatives to add a marriage amendment to the const itution – something that would have been almost impossible to reverse. DOMA is the only thing that stopped that move from going forward. It was a compromise, plain and simple. Sure, I want my marriage to be nationally recognized, but I know why Clinton did what he did and am very glad of it. And no, I don’t expect any politician to come out and admit to making laws he didn’t believe in to manipulate the politics.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:48 pm |
    • cedar rapids

      because the alternative was a flat outright ban. It literally was the lesser of two evils.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:08 pm |
    • Mike

      He did the right thing...Back peddling simply further impugns his integrity....Although whenever I think of his presidency the only thing that stands out is the name Lewinsky...sad.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:08 pm |
    • Mass Debater

      I'm glad to see Mike wants to hold others to the same high standard all Christians live by, you know, where they have never been unfaithful to their wives, they have never gotten blowj's on the sly, they have never flirted with a co-worker which led to some office tryst. Thank goodness all those Christians are so holy and set such a good example. The proof is in the statistics of how 99% of all abortions in America are received by non-Christians and atheists... oh, wait a sec, my bad, Christians account for nearly 82% of all abortions in America...

      February 21, 2013 at 4:01 pm |
  11. EvidenceBased4

    Perhaps we shouldn't be hanging on the words of athletes or fundamentalist preachers in the first place. There are far better role models out there.

    February 21, 2013 at 2:21 pm |
    • frank

      agreed.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:26 pm |
    • Reason and Logic

      Like Lady Gaga

      February 21, 2013 at 2:26 pm |
    • Mike

      I would agree. The one voice we should be listening to is God's voice...that's why He gave us His word...The Blible. I hope you read it.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:35 pm |
    • pockets

      What a crock of BS all of this is......he's a nutbar. Scrambled eggs in his empty head......

      February 21, 2013 at 2:40 pm |
    • tas20036

      I've read the Satanic Bible, Mike. Does that count?

      February 21, 2013 at 2:43 pm |
    • Mike

      Hi Tas..Nah! One of these days, however, the difference will be very obvious. many blessings.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:11 pm |
  12. Mark

    Wow...so many people that can't join reality because of archaic beliefs. The bible, and yes for all you Mormons this applies to your Book of Mormon as well, where written to give people something to believe in when living was extremely difficult. I'm sure the authors of these books would be laughing today if then knew how many "lemmings" follow a piece of fiction as truth. The blind leading the blind. Your are born, you live and you die end of story.

    February 21, 2013 at 2:20 pm |
    • I'm a believer

      God is with you even when you reject him. I may be "crazy" for believing in something you call a myth and I really understand where you are coming from. I lived there for a while myself. It took me a long period of time saying things like you posted, before reality set in. I pray that one day you will discover that.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:36 pm |
    • Mike

      Hi Mark, your view flies in the face of substantial historical evidence validating the Bible as the sole, supernaturally revealed word of God. I would encourage you to read Norman Geisler's book "Christian Apologetics,' and Walter Martin's book, "The Maze of Mormonism." The Book of Mormon doesn't even exist in the same universe as the Bible. Just a suggestion. Many blessings.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:39 pm |
    • Mass Debater

      "substantial historical evidence validating the Bible as the sole, supernaturally revealed word of God." lol

      Please provide any evidence of anything "supernatural" before making such a blatantly false claim. I've read the bible many times and studies it for over 30 years trying to find anything that would amount to validated supernatural evidence and I, like many before me, found less than nothing. In fact, I found quite the opposite when cross referencing specifically the account of Genesis with what we now have which is repeatable, verifiable science and study of the origin of the human race.

      The first step is to stop lying to yourself, then you will find it easy to stop lying to others.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:47 pm |
  13. Rob

    Yes, Jesus as a great prophet NOT GOD!!! Anyone who thinks that Jesus is GOD must examine his thinking!! First of all, Jesus, himself, never said he was GOD & he never said I am your creator or worship me. Secondly, if he was GOD he needed to have some of GOD's attributes & be needless of time, space & humanly needs, i.e., food, water, air, etc. Jesus was not self sufficient!! Jesus ate, slept, prayed. If he was GOD he would say to people PRAY to me!! He never did. Jesus Prayed. He said that GOD's knowledge was way above him. He said GOD is greater than me. He can not be GOD & have another GOD greater than him. GOD is too great & cannot be seen by anyone. Thirdly, GOD doesn't die!! Fourthly, one, plus one, plus, one, is three NOT one!!! The whole concept of trinity came about by Paul 325 AD, years after Jesus Christ! Jesus explicitly said many times, i.e. in John 17.3 "One true GOD Jesus Christ whom you have sent" as messenger!! He told Mary Magdalene that "I will be ascending & you will be ascending to GOD". NOT that I will be ascending to myself!! Also to be called the son of GOD is NOT exclusive Jesus. Many have been called sons of GOD!! GOD would not colon himself!! GOD can NOT change in my nature!! GOD can not be subjected to the same things that he himself created. How could GOD tell himself that you have forsaken me, as Jesus did, supposedly, on the cross!! There are tens of reasons why he can not be GOD as he said it himself. Just read the scripture with open eyes!!

    February 21, 2013 at 2:20 pm |
    • pockets

      I can see Jesus standing on the side of the road having a leak. He was human, probably delusional, and suffered ailments like the rest of humanity. "Mary" supposed gave birth to him by Immaculate Conception, but the rest of her children she had thru intercourse with Joseph her old husband. Kinda makes you wonder about the whole fairy tale now doesn't it.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:28 pm |
    • clarity

      There's plenty of reason. In fact there is plenty of reason to suspect that the gospels are merely a plagiarism of older pagan stories. And we have the early Christian apologists (Justin Martyr for example) to thank for that suspicion. They were the ones, when faced with the charges of plagiarism that could do no better than come up with the excuse that the devil had committed plagiarism in anticipation – that he had disseminated the fake stories first, before the gospels. LOL. wink wink. yeah, right.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:29 pm |
    • Russ

      http://carm.org/bible-verses-show-jesus-divine

      February 21, 2013 at 2:30 pm |
    • Frogmore

      Wrong. Jesus IS God. You don't seem to understand what the incarnation was. Furthermore, as recorded in Scripture, He did testify to His divinity. John 8:58, John 10:30-33, John 14:9-11. These are the words of Christ. But there are other Scriptures which also give testimony to the divinity of Christ, most notably John 1. When Thomas saw Jesus after His resurrection he exclaimed, "My Lord and my God!" John 20:28.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:31 pm |
    • Wrathbrow

      Technically speaking, from what I've been able to find/read, Jesus (if he existed) did not write down anything that we have today. Most of it was written by people long after he died, many of whom would never of met him.
      But you are right from the point of view that many people make up what may of been said, or done or how something happened.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:32 pm |
    • LaMorris Birdwell

      @Pockets
      The Immaculate Conception is NOT the birth of Chris by His monther Mary. The Immaculate Conception refers to the belief that Mary was conceived by her mother, Anne, without the stain of original sin.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:33 pm |
    • sam

      Great, look at all the christians who can't agree on what 'the truth' is.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:37 pm |
    • orly?

      If Jesus is God, then God did not sacrifice his only son, or anything really, to pay for our sins.

      Still wondering, if our universe is too complex to have come about by any other means then the hand of God, who created the "more powerful then anything in our universe" God? Certainly that being must be more complex and powerful then God, right?

      February 21, 2013 at 2:43 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Mary
      Being a Jewess, Mary must have realized that the penalty for getting pregnant out of wedlock was both her and her lover being stoned to death by all her friends and neighbours.
      If you were in her shoes – engaged to be married and pregnant by a man other than your betrothed and facing the death penalty for it – wouldn't you try to test just how gullible your husband to be is?

      February 21, 2013 at 2:46 pm |
    • Al

      It's all true. You can find it in Leviticus 3, Deuteronomy 4, Jackson 5.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:50 pm |
    • lexie1961

      HE also said – I and my Father are one – when you look upon me you see my Father

      John 10-30 I and the Father are one.”
      John 1-1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
      John 1-14 14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
      John 14:9 Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

      February 21, 2013 at 2:53 pm |
    • A Frayed Knot

      LaMorris Birdwell
      "The Immaculate Conception is NOT the birth of Chris by His monther Mary. The Immaculate Conception refers to the belief that Mary was conceived by her mother, Anne, without the stain of original sin."

      Correct... and just another set of fantasies for which there is not a whit of verified evidence.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:04 pm |
  14. ILUVJESUS

    Why do people feel it is wrong when the truth is spoken? I am a sinner and always will sin but I know through Christ Jesus I am forgiven and the more I stay in his word the closer I come to God and the less I SIN. Just because I may SIN less will never make me perfect. Jesus came to save us from our ways and that is why he died on the cross because he loved us. None the less, people are sensitive to hearing the truth because they feel convicted of their wrong doings as I feel convicted when I read scripture of things I do wrong. God loves us and that is tought all through the BIBLE. That is why he gives us the truth. Guilt, Shame, Short term happiness do not come from GOD, as GOD prepares us for enternal salvation. Let's take GAY out of the conversation.It will never be a perfect World because of the SIN. I commend preachers who teach the truth and if that offends someone you ask yourself why that offends you. I pray that our preachers don't preach HATE but LOVE. If people take it has HATE I pray they open their minds and hearts to feel the LOVE of Jesus. Amen.. I will always fall short of the GLORY of GOD. Will you? I am saved through our Lord Jesus... Thank you GOD!!! Love, Faith and Hope!!!

    February 21, 2013 at 2:17 pm |
    • sam

      The truth? It's one version of many tales. No one needs to be made to live your 'truth'.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:21 pm |
    • pockets

      Come on people wake up and smell the coffee...we are an evolved species, although looking around you have to wonder how 'evolved' we really are....not long out of the cave. The myth of a sky-god is really just that, a myth, from uneducated peasants who needed "something' to explain the weather, the failure of crops, etc etc. Remember they used to bury kids in corner post holes for buildings to "ensure" it had 'blessings' to keep it standing and to appease the gods...go figure those nutty ba$tard$ out...... slaughtering kids to appease a myth.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:33 pm |
    • Wrathbrow

      sam nailed it in his post above.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:33 pm |
    • ====>

      Do you want to hook up with Tebow?

      February 21, 2013 at 2:42 pm |
    • Going In Circles

      he died on the cross because he loved us.

      He died on the cross because the Romans nailed him there.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:53 pm |
    • Dee

      From the sound of it, you're falling seriously short.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:15 pm |
    • sam stone

      "the truth"? why do you feel that YOU possess the truth?

      February 21, 2013 at 3:44 pm |
    • Yup

      " I commend preachers who teach the truth and if that offends someone you ask yourself why that offends you."

      There are religions that do allow gay marriage cause they know the truth.

      In July 2012, the General Convention of the Episcopal Church approved a liturgy for blessing same-sex relationships.

      Evangelical Lutheran Church in 2009 voted to allow congregations that choose to do so to recognize and bless same-sex unions

      Judaism – The Reform and Reconstructionist Jewish movements have supported gay and lesbian rights, including same-sex marriage, since the mid-1990s. In June 2012, the Conservative Jewish movement approved a ceremony to allow same-sex couples to marry

      Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations in 1996, the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations passed a resolution in support of same-sex marriage.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:48 pm |
  15. winchester74

    It's a pitiful situation when these people twist the teachings of Jesus into a contagious form of mental disease

    February 21, 2013 at 2:17 pm |
    • Reason and Logic

      winchester74 is the only who can preach Christianity to the Christians

      February 21, 2013 at 2:20 pm |
  16. NickD

    In Other words tebow will come speak about his beliefs when no one is looking.

    meanwhile he wants to cash in on his faith.

    February 21, 2013 at 2:16 pm |
  17. Jose Muerte

    Tim Tebow is just as Q"`R as a football bat

    February 21, 2013 at 2:13 pm |
    • the blood

      Funny thing. All you folks who accuse Tebow and Jeffries for being either stupid or hateful because of their faith, are equally, or even MORE judgmental in your comments than the ones you're accusing. Time to take another look at that log in your eye before harping at folks for the speck they might have in theirs.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:21 pm |
    • Robert Jeffress

      The blood, you are right. I would like you to come down to my church, and I will put my own log somewhere special.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:25 pm |
  18. heretic69

    Jeffress is right about one thing: Mormonism, like every other religion on the planet, is a cult.

    February 21, 2013 at 2:11 pm |
    • Robert Jeffress

      69 is only between a man and a woman.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:14 pm |
  19. Holly

    Christians have been some of the most fundamentalist crusaders against humanity in the history of the universe.

    February 21, 2013 at 2:11 pm |
    • Wrathbrow

      I would say many religions in general. Christianity is sorta the newer kid on the block and the one some areas get the most exposure to.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:14 pm |
    • Reason and Logic

      Christians should be crucified

      February 21, 2013 at 2:16 pm |
    • Valentina

      But you can't say that about atheists, right? Stalin, Mao, Kim Jong Il, et al, guess they don't count, right?

      February 21, 2013 at 2:18 pm |
    • VanHagar

      Holly...this is an interesting topic. What specifically are you referring to?

      February 21, 2013 at 2:20 pm |
    • God Fearing

      NO Reason and NO Logic,

      You are a HATER!

      February 21, 2013 at 2:21 pm |
    • frank

      Stuff it Valentina. Hitler, for instance, was a Christian. Good luck collecting data on the true religious beliefs of populations under totalitarian regimes in your quest to associate that with atheistic motives. Idiot.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:24 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Valentina

      Oh they count, but unfortunately for you none of them did any of that in the name of atheism, unlike something like the Inquisitions which was specifically done in the name of the christian god, or the Salem witch trials, or the killing of doctors who provide abortions.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:25 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Valentina
      The difference is that those despots did not wave a flag of atheism to rally their people.
      They created cults of personality and effectively put themselves in the Godhead position – making them more "autotheists" than atheists.
      And lest we forget, most of those leaders would not have been charismatic enough to gain converts had they not learned the discourse of dogmatic persuasion from religious inst/itutions.
      For example, Pol Pot spent 8 years at a Catholic school in Phnom Penh and Stalin 5 years at a Russian orthodox seminary. Historians have noted their speaking and writing styles ape those of the Church in being 'declamatory and repet.itive, with liturgical overtones”.
      Those leaders wielded their people’s predilection for faith like a weapon.
      Atheism is not the prime cause for these tragic regimes – the misdirection of their people's faith is.
      They demanded blind obedience and obsequious submission from their followers. They tolerated no free-thinkers and enforced dogmatism – very much like the majority of religions.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:28 pm |
    • VanHagar

      Hawaii...Valentina's point, which is missed whenever these examples are brought up, is not in "whose name" the genocide was brought. The point is that you can't simply point to religion and say "see, its evil." There's enough evil by secular humanists (regardless of what they believe or why they do it) to make it certain that there's enough evil on both sides of the religious fence. Too many bad things have been done in the name of God–no doubt. Will you admit that too many bad things have been done by those who reject God?

      February 21, 2013 at 2:33 pm |
    • Wrathbrow

      "But you can't say that about atheists, right? Stalin, Mao, Kim Jong Il, et al, guess they don't count, right?"
      I am an atheist, and I agree with you, being so does not make a person right or good on all things, some times not on anything.
      The problem is most people really are not having a discussion about points of issues and simply want to broadly label one side as all good or all bad.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:36 pm |
    • I'm a believer

      It's interesting that most of the evil dictators that were mentioned had some type of religious background, but when they did all of their atrocities is when they were adamant about denying God and they definitely were not following Jesus teachings.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:47 pm |
    • vbscript2

      How is killing people because they aren't atheists not doing it in the name of atheism? How is the local autocrat killing or imprisoning people for not being atheists any different than them doing so for not being Catholics, Protestants, or Muslims? Oh, right. It isn't.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:48 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Van

      Here's the disconnect between us right now. Making so simple a statement automatically implies a causal relationship. The two statements are not on equal footing. Yes both believers and non-believers is all kinds of god concepts have done bad things, but in this particular thread, there is direct causal links between christianity and atrocities.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:51 pm |
    • sam

      @vbscript2 – are you serious? People who don't believe in a god or gods don't kill in the 'name of' atheism – they're just assholes with agendas. People who kill because they think their god is right and everyone else needs to go are assholes with a special excuse who think they're doing their god's work. No one runs around yelling "For Atheism! In the name of disbelief!" just before they open fire.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:55 pm |
    • VanHagar

      Hawaii...I would look at differently (does that surprise you). My take is that its not "links between christianity and atrocities." But rather links between those purporting to act in conformance with Christianity (but are not) and atrocities. I may be splitting hairs, but its an important distinction for me. Christ would not support genocide and hate. The inquisition, for example, was not "Christ-like." Religion can be abused–not doubt–don't make excuses for it. But true followers of the teachings of Christ are not part of this.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:56 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Van

      Being "Christ-like" is merely a matter of which verses you're going to cherry pick from the bible. Hence the 30,000+ denominations of Christianity. You're merely assuming the interpretation you've decided to accept is necessarily the right one, and fallen into a No True Scotsman fallacy. The fact remains that attrocities like the Inquistion are easily justified in the bible.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:06 pm |
    • cedar rapids

      'How is killing people because they aren't atheists not doing it in the name of atheism? How is the local autocrat killing or imprisoning people for not being atheists any different than them doing so for not being Catholics, Protestants, or Muslims? Oh, right. It isn't'

      people were imprisoned for a lot of things but not being an atheist wasnt one of them.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:13 pm |
    • VanHagar

      Hawaii...I don't cherry pick...I try to follow what I'm supposed to follow and and I try not to follow what I'm not required to follow. How is that cherry picking–be specific.

      February 21, 2013 at 4:16 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Van

      Do you follow all 600+ laws in the old testament? And before you go into "we don't need to follow those anymore", unless you're willing to completely do away with every single one, you're cherry picking again. If you claim the "three different laws" thing, then exactly how do you tell which is which, and what is your biblical support for that?
      Then you can also explain why certain laws would only apply now when the god of the bible is supposed to be unchanging.

      February 21, 2013 at 4:49 pm |
    • VanHagar

      Hawaii...Let me address the biggest fallacy and that is, respectfully, your misrepresentation concerning God as "unchanging". The statement that his is "unchanging" is true–but it refers to his character. There are numerous examples of God changing his mind as to how he plans to deal with us or specific situations (Abraham pleading with him not to destroy Sodom is good example), but his original character does not change. So it isn't inconsistent with his character that he would indicate the the Law is no longer applicable.

      I'm not cherry picking if I choose not to follow the Law because the teachings of Christ and the writings of both Paul and Peter make it clear that the Law is no longer in play. So I don't have to follow those rules....I live by the rules laid out in the New Testament. If NT teaching was that I have to follow OT Law, but then I choose which ones I choose to follow–that would be cherry picking. I am free from the Law. If you want to give a specific Law...pick anything from Leviticus, for instance, I will explain to you why I'm not required to follow it via NT rules (for lack of a better word), or if I am required to follow it, why the NT expressly requires me to do that. Pick two, three–your call. I'll address them all.

      February 21, 2013 at 7:09 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Van

      First off, the penalty for breaking many laws in the OT was death, where in the NT does that penalty get retracted?
      Next, do you follow not working on the sabbath, and before you go to the parable Jesus talked about, that seems to specifically deal with doing good works on the sabbath, not with doing actual work.
      Next, please, how do you even defend Leviticus 12, that shit's just please mysoginistic.

      February 21, 2013 at 7:30 pm |
    • VanHagar

      Hawaii....good questions (comments aside).

      "First off, the penalty for breaking many laws in the OT was death, where in the NT does that penalty get retracted?"

      Easy..."Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." That statement, from Jesus, was in direct and express response to men attempting to, in fact, exact the death penalty for an OT law violation.

      "Next, do you follow not working on the sabbath, and before you go to the parable Jesus talked about, that seems to specifically deal with doing good works on the sabbath, not with doing actual work."

      I like this one. You're right to a point. He was talking about doing good works. But I rely on more than just the 4 gospels...again, I rely on all NT Teaching, including Paul's teachings. And he said at Colossians 2:16: "Therefore do not let anyone condemn you in matters of food and drink or of observing festivals, new moons, or sabbaths." Now, that said, I do try to refrain from work on Sundays, but it is a matter of conscience, not obligation.

      Having not committed Lev. 12 to memory (sorry), I'll get back to you on that one...frankly, I just have to read it...but I'm outta time right now.

      February 21, 2013 at 7:48 pm |
    • End Religion

      VanHager: practices only the finest cherry-picked passages! Religion a la carte.

      February 21, 2013 at 7:52 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Van

      1) And yet, in Matthew 15 Jesus admonishes the Pharisees for not following the commandment to kill children who curse their parents, and says nothing about not doing it. In fact the next thing that happens is he speaks about things people say being bad.

      2) As for not letting anyone condemn you, that drastically changes the scope of what we were talking about. We were talking about your gods laws, and that verse doesn't address that at all, that's just Paul telling people not to care what other people say.

      February 21, 2013 at 8:01 pm |
    • VanHagar

      Hawaii...I'll reply shortly.

      End Religion...you have as about as much credibility here as TBT or Reality. If you have an actual example of me cherry picking–finding a verse that I simply choose not to ignore or a law/rule that I arbitrarily choose not to follow, feel free to point it out. Again, I ask you for specifics, not your usual fly by night, no proof, conclusions and insults.

      February 21, 2013 at 8:05 pm |
  20. Gregory Adamson

    A church spending $130,000,000 on their church building is a bunch of people who have only one thing in mind – glorifying themselves! Think of what great things could be done for people who need help using the money... And churches like this say they are there to glorify God. Give us a break.

    February 21, 2013 at 2:10 pm |
    • Reason and Logic

      A church cannot cost more than 'X' dollars

      February 21, 2013 at 2:15 pm |
    • Really

      Reason and Logic proves his total failure to understand Jesus.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:17 pm |
    • Surprise

      They probably wouldn't send the private jet to pick up Tebow, the nerve.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:20 pm |
    • God Fearing

      Atheists and non-believers haven't the mental capacity to know Jesus; they are too busy worshipping their god King Obama and his evil associates!

      February 21, 2013 at 2:23 pm |
    • the blood

      You have absolutely no idea how much this church gives to charity every year. None whatsoever. So clam up.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:24 pm |
    • Robert Jeffress

      After we pay off that $130 mil, we'll go right back to giving to charity.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:26 pm |
    • ellid

      Unless this church gives more than $130 million to charity per year, which I doubt, I see no reason they should be treated as doing God's work instead of Mammon's.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:31 pm |
    • jackson

      God Fearing

      Atheists and non-believers haven't the mental capacity to know Jesus; they are too busy worshipping their god King Obama and his evil associates!

      __________

      And yet more people throughout history have been killed in the name of religion than anything else.

      By the way, I *do* know Jesus. He is the one that allows church officials to rob children of their innocence without punishment. Anyone who would allow children to be harmed in that manner is not someone I choose to believe in.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:32 pm |
    • JDD

      "The church" in discussion is a community of people who want to build a building to meet in. Just by chance, have you bothered to look at the church's website to see if they ALSO serve their community, and don't just build buildings which you find a scandalous waste of money? People from the local community attend the church – have you bothered to find out if 'people who need help' are actually getting it? Have you bothered to investigate whether some of that money goes towards offices and support space for those services, and what percentage?

      Has it occurred to you that the construction of this building employed many people, which also helped them? In a construction project of this type, more than 50% of the money goes to labor wages, not bricks.

      I bring these points to your attention, and I am not even Baptist.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:37 pm |
    • sam stone

      God Fearing

      "Atheists and non-believers haven't the mental capacity to know Jesus"

      Ah, starting it out with an insult. It is not a very effective technique to convince people.

      "they are too busy worshipping their god King Obama and his evil associates!"

      Atheists come from all over the political spectrum. Some are liberal, some are conservative.

      February 21, 2013 at 2:46 pm |
    • vbscript2

      @jackson: You should review your history. Communism (state-atheist Communism, I should add,) resulted in about 100 million deaths last century. You would have to go back a very, very long time to find that many deaths resulting from religion, if there have ever even been that many. Even with all of the violence done in the name of Islam, the Crusades, and the Inquisitions added together, it still likely doesn't approach that total.

      Bad things have been done in the name of just about any kind of human organization you could think of. Blaming everyone in a type of organization for the actions of a few people who happened to claim membership in it is the guilt-by-association ad hominem variant of the association fallacy. It's not a legitimate argument and it's even less legitimate when the actions for which your blaming the group are condemned by the vast majority of members of the group.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:02 pm |
    • Going In Circles

      Jesus said the way to God is through your heart.
      You dont need a church to find God.
      The Church doesnt like that, who would put money on the plate ?

      If you can have a direct relationship with God,
      what do we need the pope for ?

      Any of you Christians got an answer to that ?
      I doubt you can answer that without spouting some garbage from the church.

      You do NOT need the church, The Pope or any of that crap.
      Blind stupidity.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:04 pm |
    • cedar rapids

      'God Fearing – Atheists and non-believers haven't the mental capacity to know Jesus; they are too busy worshipping their god King Obama and his evil associates!'

      'Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.'
      revilers by the way means haters......such as you. So pack light GF you have a nice warm afterlife awaiting you.
      so much hatred, sigh, its a pity.

      February 21, 2013 at 3:15 pm |
    • lol??

      The A&A's corrupted education and that led to murder from SCOTUS being perfectly fine. Our fadder, who art in washington, hollow is thy name

      send more moolah to the gubmint god.

      February 22, 2013 at 3:44 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
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.