home
RSS
Conservatives brace for `marriage revolution'
Conservative Christians say their churches have been unprepared for cultural shifts on same-sex marriage.
June 28th, 2013
06:19 PM ET

Conservatives brace for `marriage revolution'

By Daniel Burke, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

(CNN) - With its ivy-covered entrance and Teddy Bear bouquets, Arlene’s Flowers seems an unlikely spot to trigger a culture-war skirmish.

Until recently, the Richland, Washington, shop was better known for its artistic arrangements than its stance on same-sex marriage.

But in March, Barronelle Stutzman, the shop’s 68-year-old proprietress, refused to provide wedding flowers for a longtime customer who was marrying his partner. Washington state legalized same-sex marriage in December.

An ardent evangelical, Stutzman said she agonized over the decision but couldn’t support a wedding that her faith forbids.

“I was not discriminating at all,” she said. “I never told him he couldn’t get married. I gave him recommendations for other flower shops.”

Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson disagreed, and filed a consumer protection lawsuit against Arlene’s Flowers. The ACLU also sued on behalf of the customer, Robert Ingersoll, who has said Stutzman’s refusal “really hurt, because it was someone I knew.”

Among conservative Christians, Stutzman has become a byword - part cautionary tale and part cause celebre.

Websites call her a freedom fighter. Tributes fill Arlene’s Facebook page. Donations to her legal defense fund pour in from as far away as Texas and Arkansas.

“For some reason, her case has made a lot of people of faith worry,” said Stutzman’s lawyer, Dale Schowengerdt of the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal group.

Those anxieties have only increased, conservative Christians say, since the Supreme Court struck down part of the Defense of Marriage Act and opened the door to gay marriage in California.

Taking a line from Justice Antonin Scalia's sharp dissent, Southern Baptist scholar Albert Mohler said it’s only a matter of time "before the other shoe drops" – and the high court legalizes same-sex marriage from coast to coast.

“Christians will have to think hard — and fast — about these issues and our proper response,” Mohler wrote on Wednesday.

“We will have to learn an entire new set of missional skills as we seek to remain faithful to Christ in this fast-changing culture.”

His fellow Southern Baptist Russell Moore put the matter more succinctly.

“Same-sex marriage is coming to your community.”

`The debate is over'

Well before the Supreme Court’s rulings, many conservative Christians said they saw the writing - or the poll numbers - on the wall.

Survey after survey shows increasing support for same-sex marriage, especially among young Americans. That includes many religious believers.

Most Catholics and mainline Protestants, not to mention many Jews, support same-sex relationships, according to surveys. The bells of Washington National Cathedral pealed in celebration on Thursday.

Even among those who oppose gay marriage, many think it’s a losing battle.

Seventy percent of white evangelicals believe that legal recognition for gay nuptials is inevitable, according to a June poll by the Pew Research Center, though just 22 percent favor it.

“The gay marriage debate is over,” said Jonathan Merritt, an evangelical writer on faith and culture. “Statistically, all the numbers move in one direction.”

Young Christians have grown up in a far more diverse culture than their forebears, Merritt noted, and many have befriended gays and lesbians.

Pew found that more than 90 percent of Americans overall personally know someone who is gay or lesbian, a 30 percent increase since 1993.

“It’s far easier to wage war against an agenda than it is to battle a friend,” Merritt said.

At the same time, many conservative young Christians say they’re weary of the culture wars, and of seeing their communities labeled “judgmental.”

When Christian researchers at the Barna Group asked Americans aged 16-29 what words best describe Christianity, the top response was “anti-homosexual.” That was true of more than 90 percent of non-Christians and 80 percent of churchgoers, according to Barna.

Tired of being told the country is slouching toward Gomorrah, many young Christians have simply tuned out the angry prophets of earlier generations, evangelical leaders say.

“The shrill angry voices of retrenchment are no longer getting a broad hearing either in the culture at large or in the evangelical community,” Merritt said.

But the battle over same-sex marriage is far from over, said Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage.

“I don’t believe most Christians are going to give up the fight,” said Brown, who is Catholic. He said his movement includes many young evangelical and Orthodox Christians.

“And they are more energized than ever.”

Love thy gay neighbors

Energized or not, conservative Christians must prepare for the moral dilemmas posed by the country’s growing acceptance of same-sex marriage, said Moore, the new president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission.

“Is Your Church Ready for the Marriage Revolution?” Moore asked, while promoting a special session on homosexuality at the Southern Baptist Convention’s annual meeting in Houston in June.

Many evangelical pastors have seen homosexuality as a distant culture-war battle that’s fought far from the doors of the churches, Moore said.

Now, it’s as close as their front pews.

“I think it’s not so much that churches haven’t wanted to talk about it,” he said, “but they haven’t recognized how much the culture has changed around them.”

The first step, said Moore, is learning to defend traditional marriage without demonizing gays and lesbians.

Walking through Washington’s Union Station last Thursday, Moore said he saw several lesbian couples kissing in celebration of the Supreme Court rulings.

“If we can’t empathize with what’s going on in their hearts and minds, we’re not going to be able to love and respect them.”

Then come a host of secondary questions: How should conservative pastors minister to same-sex couples? Should Christians attend same-sex weddings? Should florists like Barronelle Stutzman's agree to work with gay couples?

`Don't give in' 

Florist Barronelle Stutzman.

In the 17 years she’s owned Arlene’s Flowers, Stutzman said, she’s worked with a number of gay colleagues.

“It really didn’t matter if they were gay, or blue or green, if they were creative and could do the job,” she said.

Stutzman suspects that some of her eight children privately don’t agree with her on homosexuality, even as they publicly support her decision.

Online, Stutzman has been called a bigot, and worse.

She said she’s lost at least two weddings because of her refusal to provide services for the same-sex marriage.

Conservative activists say her case is the first of what will surely be many more, as gay marriage spreads across the country.

As she gets ready to face a judge, the silver-haired florist offered some advice for fellow evangelicals.

“Don’t give in. If you have to go down for Christ, what better person to go down for?”

- CNN Religion Editor

Filed under: Baptist • Belief • Christianity • Church • Culture wars • Discrimination • Faith • Gay marriage • Gay rights • Homosexuality • Politics • Religious liberty • Same-sex marriage

soundoff (5,210 Responses)
  1. Robespierre

    Pro-gay bias at CNN.

    July 2, 2013 at 7:05 pm |
    • Peter

      Only balances off the anti-gay bias over at Fox News.

      July 3, 2013 at 12:14 am |
  2. jazzguitarman

    Does she refuse to sell her products to anyone that she feels is immoral? How about to the mother of a dead murdered that wishes to place, say, flowers at his grave site? So while I find the women to be a fool, I support her right as a business owner to refuse service as long as doing so doesn't create an over bearing burden on the consumer. e.g. if this was the only flower shop in town. But yea, I do tend to lean liberitarian (but I'm 100% for gay rights and SSM).

    July 2, 2013 at 7:03 pm |
    • Akira

      It is illegal in Washington to discriminate; if she sells to hetero weddings, she must sell to gay weddings.

      July 2, 2013 at 8:02 pm |
    • Athy

      It's discrimination plain and simple. Doesn't matter what her beliefs are. That's no excuse.

      July 2, 2013 at 8:09 pm |
    • jazzguitarman

      Yes, I understand it is discrimination and that in most states this type of discimination is illegal. My point is that I don't believe discrimination should be illegal UNLESS it places an undo burden on others. e.g. there is only one flower shop in town.

      Now, I wouldn't support anyone that discriminates based on race, gender, s-e xual perference, etc.. But I still believe people should have the right to do so, as long as they openly declare they are doing so AND it places no undo burden on others.

      I just believe one has a right to be a b i got even if I would never assocaited with people like that or support their business

      July 2, 2013 at 8:43 pm |
    • Athy

      So what constitutes "undue (not undo) burden?" Who makes that decision? How do we measure it? Do we invent some kind of "scale of discrimination?" So a "little" discrimination is OK?

      July 2, 2013 at 8:52 pm |
    • Ken Margo

      @Jazz........What if the discrimination is against you? Would you be OK with it then?

      July 2, 2013 at 9:18 pm |
    • Akira

      One can be as big of a bigot as they want. Using that bigotry to deprive/harm others is illegal. As it should be.

      July 2, 2013 at 9:25 pm |
    • Jim

      Sounds like a repackage of "separate but equal". They went thru that in the south with segregation. You simply cannot refuse service to a class of people because you think they're not to your liking.

      July 2, 2013 at 10:04 pm |
    • tallulah13

      The woman broke a law, and now she's being prosecuted for it. Why is that so difficult to comprehend?

      July 2, 2013 at 10:29 pm |
    • jazzguitarman

      To all the fair minded people; I clearly understand where you are coming from. AGAIN, I would and do NOT associate with those that would discriminate. As for 'undo burden'; If someone can get the same services at a similar price at another location than the fact a place refuses service does NOT create an undo burden. As for the question; what if I was discrimnated against; well I wouldn't wish to do business with a shop that have that POV. So I would willingly take my business elsewhere. Note that I feel the same about smoking bans in bar. I do NOT smoke and would NEVER go to a bar where people smoke, but I feel people that do some should have a right to a smoking bar in their town as long as there are many no smoke bars for others.

      Oh, and since one would have to declare what type of 'class' a business wouldn't serve, my 'end game' here is to expose and shame these people as well as hurt their business (under the hope most people wouldn't support a business that openly discriminate. BUT if that business does well we as a society learn something about others in our town.

      July 3, 2013 at 1:38 pm |
    • Dippy

      It's "undue", not "undo".

      July 3, 2013 at 4:29 pm |
  3. Robespierre

    What this country needs is a good old-fashioned reign of terror with guillotines and stuff.

    July 2, 2013 at 6:42 pm |
  4. Observer

    lionlylamb,

    If it turned out that any of the Granite Mountain firefighters was gay, please tell us why you think that such a HERO is UNWORTHY of the same rights you have.

    Try to actually answer the question and try not to run away.

    July 2, 2013 at 5:14 pm |
    • AE

      Or, what if it turns out one of them was a h.mophobic?

      July 2, 2013 at 5:24 pm |
    • Observer

      AE,

      Then he is allowed the SAME RIGHTS that everyone else has.

      July 2, 2013 at 5:29 pm |
    • Observer

      lionlylamb,

      Completely STUMPED?

      July 2, 2013 at 5:36 pm |
    • lol??

      Classical Mythology . hero
      a.
      a being of godlike prowess and beneficence who often came to be honored as a divinity............ The Herodians were tryin' to work their way up in the daemon world.

      July 2, 2013 at 5:37 pm |
    • AE

      I agree.

      July 2, 2013 at 5:37 pm |
    • AE

      To be fair, he may not have seen your question yet.

      July 2, 2013 at 5:39 pm |
    • AE

      Oops, probably has seen it if he posted.

      July 2, 2013 at 5:40 pm |
    • lionlylamb

      Observer,

      People who stand within all rankings of national servitudes do so for many reasons. Their personal life should never be considered when considering the valor of anyone giving their life up for the sakes of protecting our social precedence. Your preference to place sexism within hero worshipping is quite lame!

      July 2, 2013 at 6:00 pm |
    • Observer

      lionlylamb,

      Sorry you missed the question:

      please tell us why you think that such a HERO is UNWORTHY of the same rights you have.

      July 2, 2013 at 6:04 pm |
    • lionlylamb

      Lionlylamb wrote on Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 4:50 pm to Observer where I wrote, "Homophobia is a secular construct made out to impart a sensation of social bigotry among those who declare themselves to be other than heterosexual. Your ineptness to conjure your mindset to rightfully consecrate what I meant shows me your shallowness ways within mental leaflets of ill considerations.”

      Observer wrote on Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 4:53 pm to lionlylamb declaring, “H0mophobia does exist and it IS bigotry. All your pompous bs doesn't change a thing.”

      Observer,

      People who stand within all rankings of national servitudes do so for many reasons. To proclaim the dead to be heroes such as you insinuate, are a no-brainer. Your philosophic stance to place homosexuals above par of heterosexuals is reversed bigotry. They are just people who became firefighters and no parsec of sexual underpinnings should be made when honoring such heroes who died. Their personal life should never be considered when considering the valor of anyone giving their life up for the sakes of protecting our social precedence.

      Lionlylamb wrote on Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 6:00 pm to Observer stating, “People who stand within all rankings of national servitudes do so for many reasons. Their personal life should never be considered when considering the valor of anyone giving their life up for the sakes of protecting our social precedence. Your preference to place sexism within hero worshipping is quite lame!”

      Observer wrote to lionlylamb on Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 6:04 pm, declaring, “Sorry you missed the question: please tell us why you think that such a HERO is UNWORTHY of the same rights you have.”

      So Observer, heroes should not be based upon human sexualities as you so blatantly want to be considered? Can you please tell me as to just exactly what rights of any of our nation’s firefighters are being left out? Or, are you saying that a “married homsexual” who is a firefighter are not receiving matrimonial benefits? Why didn’t you say so?

      July 2, 2013 at 6:56 pm |
    • Observer

      lionlylamb,

      All your dodging and stalling is a riot. You know very well that gay heroes like soldiers, policemen, emergency workers and FIREMEN, unlike you, cannot marry the person they love and have the same legal options available (survivor's benefits, medical decisions, etc). that you do.

      Quit the stalling tactics that fool no one but yourself, even if it is fun laughing at you.

      So why do you feel that these HEROES who risk their lives (and DIE) for you (and us) are UNWORTHY of the same benefits you have?

      July 2, 2013 at 7:35 pm |
  5. aallen333

    "We're very happy with it (concerning the court's rulings)," said Joe Darger, a Utah polygamist, "I think [the court] has taken a step in correcting some inequality, and that's certainly something that's going to trickle down and impact us... I think the government needs to now recognize that we have a right to live free as much as anyone else."

    July 2, 2013 at 4:17 pm |
    • Observer

      Those are separate issues. Know the difference?

      July 2, 2013 at 4:19 pm |
    • lionlylamb

      aallen333,

      Multi-social secularists admonishes the higher values of socialized moralism within the vetted rankings of religious hierarchies giving rises to secularized infidelities.

      July 2, 2013 at 4:25 pm |
    • Ken Margo

      Frankly I don't see why we don't have polygamous marriages. The problem is if one of the wife's want out. How does a judge split the assets. If you force polygamous marriages to have a pre nuptial agreement with each additional spouse and those agreements are binding why not?

      July 2, 2013 at 4:47 pm |
    • lol??

      Oh, ooooooooooohh, Observer is classifyin'.

      July 2, 2013 at 5:13 pm |
    • myweightinwords

      There are some legal and financial things to work out before we are ready to have federally recognized plural marriages. Pre-nuptials would work to some degree, but there is the taxation issue and the social security/benefits aspect of it that would need to be sorted.

      Divorce must certainly be considered as well as untimely death.

      It gets further complicated when the marriages are not strictly one man and several women or one woman and several men. Take a quad for example. If person A & B & C & D are all married together. A & B & C are "together" and B & C & D are together. What then if C dies, how does that affect the others? Who gets any benefits that may be involved?

      I believe we will get to a place where plural marriage is where gay marriage is now. It will just take time.

      July 2, 2013 at 5:18 pm |
    • Ken Margo

      @MY.......................I think we need to get gay marriage in 50 states before we can get plural marriage going. If plural marriages do gain some traction............the republicans will spontaneously explode!!!

      July 2, 2013 at 6:30 pm |
    • myweightinwords

      Ken, yeah, I'm all for one thing at a time.

      Most poly folk I know get around it with contracts and such for now. They keep the "legal marriage" between one couple (or in one case two couples are legally married), then bind the family together with a complex web of legal red tape to grant rights to each other, particularly where there are kids involved.

      Let's get through one war before we launch the first battle of the next one.

      July 2, 2013 at 7:11 pm |
  6. pete

    AE is there anything besides things in the bible that you believe to be true despite the fact that all evidence so far says they are not true? If the answer to this question is no then you might want to consider why you believe some of the things in the bible to be true.

    July 2, 2013 at 4:16 pm |
    • AE

      What do I believe that is in the Bible that is not true?

      July 2, 2013 at 4:46 pm |
    • pete

      Well in my opinion the vast majority of it.

      July 2, 2013 at 5:09 pm |
    • AE

      But how do you know what I believe?

      July 2, 2013 at 5:13 pm |
  7. Bootyfunk

    don't you think jesus would be pro-g.ay marriage?

    great tan, six pack abs, long hair, never interested in women, hung out with 12 dudes...

    yeah, jesus would be VERY pro-g.ay marriage...

    July 2, 2013 at 3:01 pm |
    • Madtown

      Yep, this whole marriage discussion certainly is interesting. Christians in once instance tell us that God designed marriage to be between 1 man and 1 woman. They also tell us that Jesus Christ is the son of God, led a sinless life, and is to serve as an example of how we should all aspire to live. Yet, Jesus didn't marry? If Jesus was to be an example for us, and God desired for us to marry a partner of the opposite gender, wouldn't he have wanted Jesus to be married, to set that shining example? Interesting.

      July 2, 2013 at 3:23 pm |
  8. Bootyfunk

    christians,

    your h.omophobia is based on fear and ignorance. there's nothing to be afraid of. you can't catch 'g.ay - you're born that way. i know your dusty holy book commands that you not only hate g.ays, but actually go out and kill them, but the bible is a terrible guide for good living. there's lots of commands to kill in the bible - but you're better than the bible. you know that book was written by 2k year old sheep herders that thought the earth was flat. there are talking donkeys and talking snakes in the bible, also unicorns, dragons and satyrs. the bible is not to be taken seriously.

    modern ethics > biblical morals

    July 2, 2013 at 2:52 pm |
    • AE

      Bootyfunk,

      Not all Christians are h.mophobic. This might come as a shock to you... but there are h.mos.xual Christians.

      And there are atheists that are h.mophobic.

      July 2, 2013 at 3:01 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      sowwy, most of the hate comes from christians. sure, there are g.ay christians. no sh.it. and they're hated by their fellow christians. i don't see any atheist groups going to funerals of dead g.ay soldiers with signs that read, "God hates f.ags." yes, more and more people are becoming less and less h.omophobic, but take your blinders off - the hate is promoted and reinforced in church and the in the bible. you are aware that the bible says you must kill all g.ays? so is the bible wrong or are you a bad christian for not following its commands?

      July 2, 2013 at 3:04 pm |
    • AE

      No, the Bible doesn't tell me to kill gays.

      "Thou shalt not kill"

      My church fights for equal rights for gay people. Our action speaks louder than your words.

      July 2, 2013 at 3:38 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      i agree that your actions speak louder than your words. i'm very happy to see you moving farther away from the bible. it's a terrible guide for good living.

      but you're wrong that there's no command for you to kill g.ays:

      Leviticus 20:13
      If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

      also, you are to stone to death non-virgin brides:
      If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her, And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid: Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate…. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city. And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him; and they shall amerse him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he has brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel; and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days. But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die

      also disobedient children, anyone working the weekend, all non-believers... and the list goes on.

      thous shalt not kill means not murder. according to the bible, sinners like those above, should be put to death. basically, don't go around killing anyone except those the bible says are worthy of death.

      so why are you killing people, as god and the bible have commanded?

      July 2, 2013 at 3:48 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      btw, AE, i love that your church fights for g.ay rights and that you are pro-g.ay rights. i'm assuming you support our g.ay brothers and sisters in their fight for g.ay marriage rights as well? you sound like a nice person and you're definitely miles ahead of the fundies that openly promote h.omophobia. lots of points there. you're practicing what i call christianity light. you're cherry picking the bible, following the 'good' parts and ignoring the 'evil' parts. anyone who actually followed the bible to the letter would be among the world's worst serial killer/mass murderers ever to have lived.

      July 2, 2013 at 3:52 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @AE
      Yeah – "Thou shalt not kill" – except for when God tells you to.
      Here's a short list of the things that God says are evil enough to merit being stoned to death.
      – Touching Mount Sinai
      – Cursing
      – Adultery
      – Being ra/ped
      – Worshipping other gods
      – getting lippy with your parents
      – working on sunday
      – bad mouthing the King (one as.sumes this applies to any head of state)

      Oh, and anyone else who isn't a follower of Jahweh.
      "Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses."
      – Hebrews 10:28
      Samuel 15:3
      "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass."
      Numbers 31:17
      "Now kill all the boys [innocent kids]. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."
      Isaiah 13:16
      "Whoever is captured will be thrust through; all who are caught will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses will be looted and their wives ravished."

      July 2, 2013 at 3:53 pm |
    • AE

      I'm not expected to follow Leviticus. Ok? Am I an ancient Hebrew priest trying to keep myself pure? No. I'm not.

      Here is a tip: The only time you should use a Leviticus quote, is when the person is using that to persecute someone else.

      So if I say, according to Leviticus – don't be gay. You can say, but according to Leviticus, you can't wear jeans and a t-shirt.

      Luckily, I don't follow your poor understanding of the Bible.

      I have God's spirit to lead me.

      July 2, 2013 at 3:54 pm |
    • AE

      "He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."

      – Jesus Christ

      July 2, 2013 at 3:58 pm |
    • G to the T

      AE – but apparently the spirit didn't alert you that the quote you used is generally accepted as a later addition to the text and not likely the original words of Jesus...

      July 2, 2013 at 4:14 pm |
    • lionlylamb

      Bootyfunk,

      Homophobia is a secular construct made out to impart a sensation of social bigotry among those who declare themselves to be other than heterosexual.

      July 2, 2013 at 4:17 pm |
    • AE

      No. I know about it. It is debatable.

      The story in John appears to have been added later.

      But not in Luke.

      July 2, 2013 at 4:23 pm |
    • Observer

      lionlylamb,

      Yes. H0mophobia is bigotry.

      July 2, 2013 at 4:25 pm |
    • lionlylamb

      Observer,

      I wrote, "Homophobia is a secular construct made out to impart a sensation of social bigotry among those who declare themselves to be other than heterosexual.

      Your ineptness to conjure your mindset to rightfully consecrate what I meant shows me your shallowness ways within mental leaflets of ill considerations.

      July 2, 2013 at 4:50 pm |
    • Observer

      lionlylamb,

      H0mophobia does exist and it IS bigotry.

      All your pompous bs doesn't change a thing.

      July 2, 2013 at 4:53 pm |
  9. Doobs

    Mr. Doobs showed me this last night. It's probably old news but I still like it.

    July 2, 2013 at 2:42 pm |
  10. Observer

    Vic,

    Jesus had much to say about the s3xual habits of heteros and much of it was bad. Those who divorced and remarried are ADULTERERS (remember that from the Ten Commandments?)

    Jesus had NOTHING to say about the s3xual habits of gays.

    Here's what Jesus did say: “Treat others as you want them to treat you. THIS IS WHAT THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS ARE ALL ABOUT.”

    Please tell that to all the HYPOCRITES you know, especially all the Christian ADULTERERS in church since there are FAR FAR MORE of them than there are gays.

    July 2, 2013 at 1:17 pm |
    • Vic

      @Observer "....."

      I do this on the run/fly. I posted so many times about this. In the meantime, it is imperative for anyone who has something to say to use appropriate tone; otherwise no one would listen. They teach in Psychology that to get your message across hings on How You Say It!

      July 2, 2013 at 1:31 pm |
    • Vic

      "hinges"

      July 2, 2013 at 1:33 pm |
    • Observer

      Vic,

      Please tell your fellow Christians all about the Golden Rule since none of the Christian hypocrites picking on gays ever mention it.

      July 2, 2013 at 1:37 pm |
  11. ME II

    Just out of curiosity, I wonder why animals don't pray, or do whatever they might consider prayer?

    July 2, 2013 at 12:35 pm |
    • HotAirAce

      Prove that they don't! :^)

      July 2, 2013 at 12:37 pm |
    • Cpt. Obvious

      I'm not sure we can state that definitively. Perhaps some of them do. A few months back cnn/time had an article on apes? that had a sense of spirituality/wonder/worship at a very specific waterfall site. We certainly have no idea what wales are thinking about all the time with that extra portion of brain in front (we don't have it). If they do pray, I'm pretty sure that their god's interests would match their own.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:38 pm |
    • ME II

      @HotAirAce,
      You are correct that I cannot.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:39 pm |
    • Richard Cranium

      Animals do pray...since all humans are animals, and we know that humans pray....other animals prey ...but than so does the human animal.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:42 pm |
    • HotAirAce

      Ok, now that we have established that animals might pray, prove that their prayers are not being answered. Maybe their every prayer is being answered and they are actually controlling everything. :^)

      July 2, 2013 at 12:44 pm |
    • ME II

      @Richard Cranium,
      You are correct. Perhaps I should have said "other animals".

      July 2, 2013 at 12:46 pm |
    • Richard Cranium

      Me II
      Minor distinction, but important , especially to those who think we are somehow special and not animals.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:50 pm |
    • AE

      Probably because animals were not made in the image of God.

      July 2, 2013 at 1:04 pm |
    • ME II

      @AE,
      "Probably because animals were not made in the image of God."

      You say that as if it were fact, but are you sure?
      http://www.ancientegypt.co.uk/gods/explore/main.html

      July 2, 2013 at 1:51 pm |
    • AE

      I believe I was created in the image of God.

      http://shellsstory.wordpress.com/2012/06/03/1821/

      July 2, 2013 at 2:17 pm |
    • WASP

      @AE: "I believe I was created in the image of God."

      and what image does your god look like?
      we have all seen pictures of the virgin mary and of jesus, but oddly enough not one person has screamed "i saw god!"
      hmmmmm i wonder why?

      July 2, 2013 at 2:31 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @AE
      Isn't it odd how many gods are anthropomorphic and/or anthropocentric?
      When early man, his little brain bent upon survival at all costs, discovered that the world worked independly from how he thought it worked, (or at least how he had hoped it worked), early man was frightened and scared. That can't be! said early man to other early men. There must be some explanation, nature can't just be arbitrary!
      But early man, unaware of such mystical things as provability and objectivity, figured that somebody just like him, but bigger and smarter, must be responsible for how and why the world worked like it did.

      Today, most people people DO understand some basic facts about objectivity and credibility – and yet attempt to prove religion, an ultimately unprovable hypothesis by its very belief-based nature. This gets funny, because "facts" become tools that must be selectively presented. This is a rigourous process of double-think, where some things are ignored or made smaller while others are made huge and important. The common thread, however, is the inability to reconcile some things with others: reality with aggrandizement, hope with reality, anecdote with fact, ideas with proof.

      "Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream up a god superior to themselves. Most gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child."
      – Robert Heinlein

      July 2, 2013 at 2:37 pm |
    • ME II

      @AE
      "I believe I was created in the image of God."

      And your belief has what to do with this?

      "http://shellsstory.wordpress.com/2012/06/03/1821/"

      Same goes for your link.

      July 2, 2013 at 2:38 pm |
    • AE

      Ok, you posted a link about "Egyptian Gods" for some reason.

      I posted a link showing that God mocked those "Egyptian gods".

      We are created in a spiritual image of God. I think some are mistaking me and thinking that I think God literally looks like human beings. That is not what I mean.

      “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness.”

      Lately I have been pondering that to be created in God's image, we are created to be in relationship. Just like God exists.

      Why does he say "our image" "our likeness"? Father, Son, Holy Spirit?

      July 2, 2013 at 2:47 pm |
    • Madtown

      God mocked those "Egyptian gods
      -----
      God mocks? Isn't mocking immature and boorish behavior, that a perfect being wouldn't engage in?

      July 2, 2013 at 3:14 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Madtown
      The frist thing said about Abraham's God is that He is jealous of all the other gods.
      God acts like a petulant child, stamping His feet over and over again (especially in the OT).

      July 2, 2013 at 3:29 pm |
    • AE

      Yes, because there is no other definition to the word "mock" than what you propose it means. The dictionary is wrong. You are right.

      July 2, 2013 at 3:46 pm |
    • ME II

      @AE,
      Sorry, perhaps I wasn't clear. I was simply showing that there are different images of god, so how can you say that animals weren't created in the image of god. Although, you have since clarified that as well.

      First, it seems odd to me to try an figure out such a va.gue and easily misunderstood statement such as "our image" or likeness.
      Second, if the "image" indicated was a relationship, it seems at odds with the proposed God's initial state and supposed lack of need for us.
      Third, I would guess that the wording is more a reflection to the culture of the time, whether that particular time is the oral tradition, the initial recording in Hebrew, the medieval translation into Latin then English, or the many translations/interpretations in between, I'll leave up to you.

      July 2, 2013 at 3:48 pm |
    • Madtown

      The dictionary is wrong. You are right.
      -----
      Holy cow, are you an arrogant @ss. Since you used the word, and know the mind and intent of God, why don't you just elaborate on what you mean? Unless you'd just like to continue to be a d!ckhead, then just carry on.

      July 2, 2013 at 4:14 pm |
    • AE

      "Isn't mocking immature and boorish behavior, that a perfect being wouldn't engage in?"

      No. Consider this definition: Mock – to frustrate the hopes of; disappoint.

      It seems that God wanted to disappoint, or frustrate the hopes of the people who worshiped the false Egyptian Gods.

      July 2, 2013 at 4:34 pm |
    • AE

      "God mocks proud mockers but gives grace to the humble." Proverbs 3:34

      God always knows when you're full of it.

      July 2, 2013 at 4:41 pm |
    • Ken

      AE
      Funny, Egyptian ancient writings are full of reports of prayers answered by their gods and goddesses. Hindus, Muslims, and people who seriously believed in and prayed to any other god will report that their prayers were answered at about the exact same rate as Christians claim. So, either all gods are real and equally capable of answering prayers, or most, if not all prayers actually go unanswered, and what everyone is experiencing is just the laws of chance playing out. Which do you think it is?

      July 2, 2013 at 11:38 pm |
    • AE

      "So, either all gods are real and equally capable of answering prayers, or most, if not all prayers actually go unanswered, and what everyone is experiencing is just the laws of chance playing out. Which do you think it is?"

      Are those my only options to choose from? What if I am praying for something that is totally against God's will for me?

      "No." "Not now." "Never." are answers to a prayer.

      July 3, 2013 at 11:04 am |
    • Ken

      AE
      If "No, not now, and never" are acceptable answers to a prayer, then the results are indistinguishable from random chance, so why bother?

      And, where does Jesus say that God will deny, or ever delay answering prayers in these verses?

      "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." (Matthew 7:7)

      "Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven." (Matthew 18:19)

      "And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive." (Matthew 21:22)

      "Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them." (Mark 11:24)

      "And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it." (John 14:13-14)

      "And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you." (John 16:23)

      "And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us: And if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the peti tions that we desired of him." (1 John 5:14-15)

      July 3, 2013 at 12:09 pm |
    • AE

      You think Jesus Christ came to reveal that all our selfish desires and wants can be met if we just pray? Like God is a magic genie? I guess if you just read those verses and nothing else that would seem true.

      But consider these:

      1 John 3:21-22

      Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God and receive from him anything we ask, because we keep his commands and do what pleases him.

      James 4:2-3

      When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures.

      July 3, 2013 at 12:25 pm |
    • Ken

      AE
      So, you're making a case that "no, never, and not right now" are answers that God gives to people asking for selfish things, or to immoral people who don't have the right to ask God for anything?

      So, every parent who prays in vain for the life of their sick child is somehow to blame for their child dying anyway? Is that what you're arguing?

      July 3, 2013 at 1:10 pm |
    • AE

      No. That is not what I'm saying.

      A lot of time, when Jesus is talking about "ask and you shall receive", he is talking about receiving knowledge of God's will.

      The Bible explains good and bad things can happen to selfless and immoral people. And good and bad things can happen to selfish and moral people.

      Sometimes God's will is very painful and sad. The loss of a child is a tragedy.

      July 3, 2013 at 1:23 pm |
    • WASP

      @AE: "ask and you shall receive"

      MATTHEW 7:7-Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and you shall find; knock, and it shall be opened to you: 8For every one that asks receives; and he that seeks finds; and to him that knocks it shall be opened. 9Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone?

      so where do you get the whole " he is talking about receiving knowledge of God's will." from that statement; it seems pretty cut and dry to me.

      July 3, 2013 at 1:29 pm |
    • Ken

      AE
      WASP is right; it seems pretty clear that Jesus is promising only positive results. He doesn't qualify any of those promises with an "or my Father may choose not to, depending on his mood, or whether your prayer interests conflict with some test he has in mind for you." If "God's Will" is often very painful and sad, why do believers only count what they see as positive results in characterizing him as a Loving god?

      You're pretty much saying that it's a toss-up whether God answers prayers the way we like, or not? Have you ever seen George Carlin's bit about choosing to pray to Joe Pesci instead? It seems that the person who does not pray at all will likely get the same results as the person who prays to a god, so why bother?

      July 3, 2013 at 2:05 pm |
    • AE

      Jesus said a lot more than that. You are taking one line out of many from his Sermon on the Mount.

      He said this at the beginning:

      Matthew 5:11

      "Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you."

      If you take that line out of context and understanding, yes it says what WASP implies. But put in context and meaning... the truth.

      I think followers of Jesus should expect suffering.

      1 Peter 4:12-19
      "Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice insofar as you share Christ's sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed. If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. But let none of you suffer as a murderer or a thief or an evildoer or as a meddler. Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name. ... "

      July 3, 2013 at 4:30 pm |
    • Ken

      AE
      Still, where does Jesus condemn gays specifically that we should read this lady's position as "persecution because of Jesus"? If she were to refuse servicing divorcees wishing to remarry someone else, then she would have a clear-cut case, because Jesus actually did speak out against most cases of divorce. (And those cases, where adultery was evident, someone likely would have ended up being stoned to death. So, remarriage probably wasn't so typical, right?)

      July 4, 2013 at 12:00 am |
  12. Cpt. Obvious

    Who's tired of seeing Vic's post at the top of this thread?

    July 2, 2013 at 12:27 pm |
    • Akira

      Oh, I know I can never get enough of Vic's propensity to emphasize random words for no apparent reason. Not.
      I wonder if he talks that way? Like Bobcat Goldwaith. On steroids. Or John Wayne. Pilgrim.

      Vic? Care to answer?

      July 2, 2013 at 12:35 pm |
    • Observer

      Is there anyone who actually reads his long cut-and-paste projects?

      Is there anyone who wouldn't prefer that Vic try to use his own words rather than spam cut-and-paste?

      July 2, 2013 at 12:59 pm |
    • Doobs

      For me, it's more like Regis Philbin.

      I have a fundie relative who writes and emails sermons regularly. He does the exact same thing – random emphasis, capitalization and italics. I've tried to tell him that it makes his posts difficult to read and looks unprofessional. He didn't listen either, so now all his email goes right into my junk mail.

      Just like Vic's crapola, I don't even bother to read them anymore.

      July 2, 2013 at 1:13 pm |
    • Akira

      Regis Philbin! Forgot about him, Doobs!
      Or, so Vic can read this better:

      Regis Philbin!
      Forgot about him, Doobs!

      July 2, 2013 at 1:29 pm |
    • My Dog is a Jealous Dog

      Maybe its more like Christopher Walken.

      July 2, 2013 at 1:39 pm |
    • Akira

      Ooh! Chritopher Walkin! Deadpan.

      July 2, 2013 at 2:19 pm |
    • My Dog is a Jealous Dog

      Gotta have more cowbell!

      July 2, 2013 at 2:26 pm |
    • Mark from Middle River

      Interesting Cpt and Oberserver, because when Reality makes his anti Faith post which are normally longer cut and paste, you both are silent. Why slam Vic when he is doing the same as Reality, unless the problem is not with how Vic post but that the post are counter to your view?

      Try to be fair to all guys.

      July 2, 2013 at 2:44 pm |
    • Doobs

      @ Mark from....

      You weren't addressing me, but I'm jumping in anyway.

      I typically don't read any posters who repeatedly cut/paste the same things over and over, no matter which side they are on. It's a lazy way of presenting information.

      July 2, 2013 at 2:50 pm |
    • Observer

      Mark from Middle River

      "Interesting Cpt and Oberserver, because when Reality makes his anti Faith post which are normally longer cut and paste, you both are silent."

      I have made ONE comment on Vic and none on Reality. Vic makes FAR more cut-and-paste comments.

      July 2, 2013 at 2:53 pm |
    • Athy

      Reality's posts make sense, Vic's don't. Cut and paste has nothing to do with it.

      July 2, 2013 at 8:37 pm |
  13. Vic

    The Work Of The Holy Spirit In The Believer

    The Holy Spirit baptizes & indwells believers in Jesus Christ

    When a person is born again, he/she is born of the spirit and not the flesh and baptized and indwelled by the Holy Spirit.

    Matthew 3:11
    "11 “As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire."

    Luke 3:16
    "16 John answered and said to them all, “As for me, I baptize you with water; but One is coming who is mightier than I, and I am not fit to untie the thong of His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire."

    John 1:33
    "33 I did not recognize Him, but He who sent me to baptize in water said to me, ‘He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, this is the One who baptizes in the Holy Spirit.’"

    John 14:17
    "17 that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you."

    John 15:26
    "26 “When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify about Me,"

    Romans 8:9-11
    "9 However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. 10 If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness. 11 But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you."

    The redemption of the born again is in the precious blood of the Lord Jesus Christ.

    How it works:

    1. The Holy Spirit convicts the world of sin and self-righteousness:

    John 16:8
    "8 And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment;"

    2. The Holy Spirit then searches the heart. When He finds Faith in Jesus Christ, He intercedes on his/her behalf and righteousness is imputed and sin is washed away.

    Romans 8:26,27
    "26 In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words; 27 and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God."

    Acts 26:18
    "18 to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me.’"

    Ephesians 1:7
    "In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace"

    Ephesians 1:13-14
    "13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory."

    Ephesians 2:8,9
    "8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast."

    T i t u s 3:4-6
    "4 But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, 5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, 6 whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior,"

    All Scripture Is From:

    New American Standard Bible (NASB)
    Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation

    http://www.biblegateway.com/

    July 2, 2013 at 12:00 pm |
    • Akira

      How nice. How does this relate to this story?

      July 2, 2013 at 12:12 pm |
    • Vic

      @Akira "....."

      Good question! I forgot to mention there have been heavy mention of the Holy Spirit and the believer on this blog since last night. I am just addressing that.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:20 pm |
    • Madtown

      New American Standard Bible (NASB)
      Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation
      -------
      Wait......I thought the bible was the word of God? How come an organization of human beings has a copyright on it? How come that copyright has been renewed, and updated releases issued? Why do you disclose that this is the NASB? If God wrote it, wouldn't there unquestionably be only 1 version? If I was God, I'd likely be displeased that humans have so thoroughly messed around with my words, to the point where they are not my words at all.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:22 pm |
    • myweightinwords

      You do understand that you could post the entire bible and it would do nothing to convince anyone to believe what you believe, right?

      We've all read it. Okay, maybe not all of us. But certainly most of us. And we're still not Christian. Or in some cases, are no longer Christian after reading it.

      If you have something of your own to contribute, it goes a lot further than just spitting out quotations of what someone else once said about a subject that might possibly be tangentially related.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:23 pm |
    • ME II

      However, more to the point...

      "'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
      Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
      All mimsy were the borogoves,
      And the mome raths outgrabe."
      – Lewis Carroll

      July 2, 2013 at 12:24 pm |
    • Akira

      Will you please address your overuse of html tags? You emphasize random words, and it looks really, really odd. Thank you.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:28 pm |
    • AE

      @ Madtown

      Are you unfamiliar with the copyright laws of this nation? Or how printing, distributing and selling a book works?

      The Bible is a collection of books. It was written in different languages, and thus needs to be translated for new languages to understand. I have been taught it is very important to read the book in a community to get new understandings of what God is trying to tell us.

      The Bible points to God, but it is not God. I don't worship the Bible.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:32 pm |
    • Brother Maynard

      Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995
      how come so many versions for the infallible word of god ?

      July 2, 2013 at 12:33 pm |
    • AE

      “The Bible alone is the most dangerous thing I can think of. You need an ongoing context and a community of interpretation to keep the Bible current and to keep yourself honest. Forget the thought that the Bible is an absolute pronouncement.”

      Peter Gomes

      July 2, 2013 at 12:35 pm |
    • Akira

      AE: I think your perspective on worshipping the Bible, while I'm sure is not popular with the literalists, is spot on.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:39 pm |
    • Madtown

      to get new understandings of what God is trying to tell us
      -----
      LOL!! You're an entertaining contradiction. The bible needs to be translated and revised, all by the hand of man, in order to "understand what God is trying to tell us". That's some good stuff! Seems the revisions are what MAN wants to tell us, about what he believes about God.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:40 pm |
    • Vic

      @Akira "....."

      Good question! I forgot to mention there have been heavy mentions of the Holy Spirit and the believer on this blog since last night. I am just addressing that.

      Regarding text formatting, I am emphasizing important wordings, and not at random!

      @Madtown "....."

      Nobody owns the Bible itself but the Copy Rights of publishing it.

      @m w m "....."

      I am just sharing about what has been discussed recently on this blog. I post for Christians and non-Christians at the same time. Everyone is at 100% Free Will.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:43 pm |
    • Vic

      "@m w w ".....""

      July 2, 2013 at 12:44 pm |
    • AE

      @ Madtown

      God is present. Not just something in the past. To this Christian and my community, the future is way more important than the past.

      So of course new understandings of the Bible will develop. Not a contradiction.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:44 pm |
    • Richard Cranium

      Vic
      How is emphasizing the word blog meaningful in the slightest?

      July 2, 2013 at 12:47 pm |
    • Madtown

      new understandings of the Bible will develop
      ----
      When the hand of man manipulates the words in the bible, those words can no longer be attributed to God. So, cease calling it's "God's word", with the suggestion that God himself wrote the words. This has actually always been the case, as humans have written every word in the bible, yet we still hear this all the time. And, I'm not even suggesting that there isn't anything of value to be studied in the bible, just that it's the creation of the human mind.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:50 pm |
    • OTOH

      Akira,

      Ah, let Vic go to town with the html. It slows him down and keeps him busy...

      July 2, 2013 at 12:51 pm |
    • AE

      God meets us where we are at. Much of the Bible was written to an agricultural society. I have to study a lot about the culture to understand the importance of the analogies that Jesus used.

      The beautiful thing is, thanks to the Holy Spirit, other people can provide modern day analogies that make sense. Or we can make new analogies for cultures completely unfamiliar with Hebrew customs and culture.

      Asian countries have traditionally had a difficult time understanding the Gospel. But something recently has happened, as now the largest revival of Christianity is occurring today.

      July 2, 2013 at 1:01 pm |
    • Vic

      @Richard Cranium "....."

      Classification Emphasis. BTW, there are no specific rules for emphasizing text, it is totally a personal style/preference. That's why I keep practicing it to keep improving.

      @Madtown "....."

      As I mentioned before, whatever Bible you read might have scribal, translational and/or interpretational errors regarding certain details BUT the general narrative about God is clear enough and matches our senses!

      July 2, 2013 at 1:03 pm |
    • Vic

      Just for clarity on previous reply without formatting typos:

      @Richard Cranium "....."

      Classification Emphasis. BTW, there are no specific rules for emphasizing text, it is totally a personal style/preference. That's why I keep practicing it to keep improving.

      @Madtown "....."

      As I mentioned before, whatever Bible you read might have scribal, translational and/or interpretational errors regarding certain details BUT the general narrative about God is clear enough and matches our senses!

      July 2, 2013 at 1:13 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      The great problem is that no translation ever has the long forgotten 1st page of the Bible.
      Fragments of it were recovered with the Dead Sea Scrolls.
      In Hebrew, it goes like this:
      כל הדמויות ואירועים בספר זה הם פיקטיביים וכל דמיון לאנשים אמיתיים, חיים או מתים, הוא מקרי בלבד.

      July 2, 2013 at 1:13 pm |
    • AE

      No. I haven't studied those. But I have studied lots of literature.

      In my time of need, Jesus Christ helped me. That is way more important than anything I have read in a book or on the internet. And Christ continues to work in my life.

      I can deny Eru.

      I can not deny Jesus Christ. That would make me a liar.

      July 2, 2013 at 1:14 pm |
    • Akira

      OTOH:
      I suppose. It would be helpful if there were an ignore feature, so I never had to read the posts in the first place. They are excruciating to try and get through.

      July 2, 2013 at 1:36 pm |
    • WASP

      @VIC: " 1 KINGS 18:37 Hear me, O LORD, hear me, that this people may know that you are the LORD God, and that you have turned their heart back again. 38Then the fire of the LORD fell, and consumed the burnt sacrifice, and the wood, and the stones, and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench.

      SO LET'S SEE YOUR GOD.

      July 2, 2013 at 1:36 pm |
    • Ken

      AE
      Don't you mean that your belief in Jesus Christ has helped you in your times of need, just as billions of other people's belief in Allah, Vishnu, Thor, Athena, or some other god throughout the ages helped them? You can deny their gods just as easily as they can deny yours, but does that help prove that any of them are actually real?

      July 2, 2013 at 1:38 pm |
    • WASP

      @AfterEarth: "In my time of need, Jesus Christ helped me."

      1) how do you know jesus was the one that helped you?
      2) how convient it wasn't the devil working behind the guise of jesus; or one of the other 10 million gods from all throughout history.

      July 2, 2013 at 1:39 pm |
    • Ken

      Vic
      People write pop songs that match our senses too, not to mention propaganda. Isn't it fair to call the Bible religious propaganda?

      July 2, 2013 at 1:42 pm |
    • Ken

      AE
      Asian countries are also the fastest growing market for tobacco and fast food today. Seems like they are taking up all of our bad habits, doesn't it?

      July 2, 2013 at 1:45 pm |
    • Ken

      AE
      “The Bible alone is the most dangerous thing I can think of. You need an ongoing context and a community of interpretation to keep the Bible current and to keep yourself honest. Forget the thought that the Bible is an absolute pronouncement.”

      Peter Gomes

      So much for the protestant ideal of personal interpretation of the Bible. How is "an ongoing context and a community of interpretation" any different than the Catholic Church's Papacy assuming the role of interpretation?

      July 2, 2013 at 1:49 pm |
    • Lisa

      Vic
      The way I see it, the Spirit is in the words of encouragement given to this long-awaited ruling. Most of the Justices appear to have been listening to their hearts with a sense towards fair play, clear signs that the Spirit was with those five, correct?

      July 2, 2013 at 1:56 pm |
    • AE

      @Ken
      "Don't you mean that your belief in Jesus Christ has helped you in your times of need, "

      No I do not mean that. It was by God's grace.

      July 2, 2013 at 2:07 pm |
    • WASP

      @AE: "No I do not mean that. It was by God's grace."

      ok next question;
      1) which god?
      2) are you absolutely certain it wasn't lucifer guiding you away from god by answering "your prayer"? it would make it really simple for him to grant you something that wasn't in god's plan for you to secretly pull you away, remember lucifer is the untilmate deciever. 😄

      July 2, 2013 at 2:28 pm |
    • AE

      1) which god?

      Jesus Christ.

      2) are you absolutely certain it wasn't lucifer guiding you away from god by answering "your prayer"? it would make it really simple for him to grant you something that wasn't in god's plan for you to secretly pull you away, remember lucifer is the untilmate deciever. 😄

      I'm pretty certain, that is why I can't honestly deny Jesus Christ anymore. He didn't answer "my prayer". I didn't believe in Jesus Christ at the time.

      July 2, 2013 at 2:35 pm |
    • Ken

      AE
      Don't you mean that you believe it was by God's grace?

      You can't prove that it was, right?

      July 2, 2013 at 11:24 pm |
    • Arthur Bryant

      You've been added to the list of posters I don't bother to read which also includes Lonlylamb or however that's spelled, Austin, Lol?? HeavenSent and others too numerous to mention. Same crazy (in my opinion) stuff over and over again.

      July 3, 2013 at 12:15 am |
  14. Vic

    The Work Of The Holy Spirit

    The Holy Spirit Indwells Believers in Jesus Christ

    When a person is born again, he/she is born of the spirit and not the flesh and baptized and indwelled by the Holy Spirit.

    Matthew 3:11
    "11 “As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire."

    Luke 3:16
    "16 John answered and said to them all, “As for me, I baptize you with water; but One is coming who is mightier than I, and I am not fit to untie the thong of His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire."

    John 1:33
    "33 I did not recognize Him, but He who sent me to baptize in water said to me, ‘He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, this is the One who baptizes in the Holy Spirit.’"

    John 14:17
    "17 that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you."

    John 15:26
    "26 “When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify about Me,"

    The redemption of the born again is in the precious blood of the Lord Jesus Christ.

    How it works:

    1. The Holy Spirit convicts the world of sin and self-righteousness:

    John 16:8
    "8 And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment;"

    2. The Holy Spirit then searches the heart. When He finds Faith in Jesus Christ, He intercedes on his/her behalf and righteousness is imputed and sin is washed away.

    Romans 8:26,27
    "26 In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words; 27 and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God."

    Acts 26:18
    "18 to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me.’"

    Ephesians 1:7
    "In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace"

    Ephesians 1:13-14
    "13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory."

    Ephesians 2:8,9
    "8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast."

    T i t u s 3:4-6
    "4 But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, 5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, 6 whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior,"

    All Scripture Is From:

    New American Standard Bible (NASB)
    Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation

    http://www.biblegateway.com/

    July 2, 2013 at 11:34 am |
    • ME II

      Not sure I'd have helped you if I knew it was going to be Bible-quote spam.

      July 2, 2013 at 11:38 am |
    • EnjaySea

      Yep, that's the doctrine, and I don't believe a single word of it.

      July 2, 2013 at 11:39 am |
    • Vic

      Oops..posted the rough draft!

      Will post later!

      @ME II "....."

      I help people based on principle and without judgement unless, of course, they threaten me; I would call 911 then! LOL

      July 2, 2013 at 11:43 am |
    • Just the Facts Ma'am...

      I could post a few pages of Lord of the Rings Vic, will that help? Or is this not a competltion to see who can post the most fiction on one blog?

      July 2, 2013 at 11:45 am |
    • ME II

      @Vic,
      "I help people based on principle and without judgement..."

      So, you will help, without judgement, the LGBT community secure the right to marry? Great?

      July 2, 2013 at 11:47 am |
    • Richard Cranium

      Vic
      Stop with the bible spam.
      I could post passages from The Silmarillion....it does not lend any credibility to it.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:06 pm |
    • AE

      Thanks, Vic.

      "Fools mock at the guilt offering, but the upright enjoy acceptance."

      Proverbs 14:9

      July 2, 2013 at 12:11 pm |
    • Madtown

      The Holy Spirit Indwells Believers in Jesus Christ
      -------
      This is all very nice, however it leaves out a lot of your human brethren that have no access to christianity. Christianity is not a universal truth, is isn't available to everyone. It may be your preferred method, but it's not the "only", or the "correct" method where others are not.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:14 pm |
    • AE

      It is easier the way to God. Or it is not.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:19 pm |
    • Alias

      So why is it that when I select some quotes from the old testament that you say I'm taking it out of context, or that since jesus died that doesn't apply any more – But when you do it we suddenly need to go be what it says?

      July 2, 2013 at 12:23 pm |
    • Richard Cranium

      Even Jesus said that the OT is still in play, every word of it. He never took anything away from it, just added to it.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:32 pm |
    • Madtown

      AE
      It is easier the way to God.
      ----
      You don't seem to understand. It can't be the "easier" way to God, IF YOU'VE NEVER HEARD OF IT. You can't choose to follow it, if you don't know it exists.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:33 pm |
    • AE

      That was supposed to be "either".

      Either the way to God, or not.

      Yea, there are a lot of people that don't know The Gospel of Jesus Christ. Most of them are poor and in need.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:40 pm |
    • Austin

      Vic, Thank you for faithful intro!!!

      Enabling!

      July 2, 2013 at 7:25 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      Hey Vic, I'm having a little get together and some people will be there from one of our theater companies, some musicians, far too many mathematicians, and some people from the Broad Institute. Since you're in with the Holy Spirit, do you think you could persuade it to stop buy and maybe let us hear in its own words what it's all about. There'll be food and drink, of course.

      July 2, 2013 at 7:37 pm |
    • Austin

      Be nice. thats not funny about the food.

      July 2, 2013 at 7:44 pm |
  15. Reality

    Revolution? The gay population in the USA is estimated to be 4%. As-suming 50% of these are in the unionization age, that is 2 % of the population. So "riddle me this" where is the revolution?

    And considering that many of these unions are already established, where is the revolution in weddings, markets etc.?

    ("The Williams Inst-itute at UCLA School of Law, a gay and lesbian think tank, released a study in April 2011[24] estimating based on its research that just 1.7 percent of Americans between 18 and 44 identify as gay or lesbian, while another 1.8 percent – predominantly women – identify as bise-xual. Far from underestimating the ranks of gay people because of h-om-ophobia, these figures included a substantial number of people who remained deeply closeted, such as a quarter of the bise-xuals. A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention survey of women between 22 and 44 that questioned more than 13,500 respondents between 2006 and 2008 found very similar numbers: Only 1 percent of the women identified themselves as gay, while 4 percent identified as bis[exual.)

    July 2, 2013 at 11:31 am |
    • Observer

      Reality,

      The revolution is in the thinking of heteros. A huge change has come and now the majority support gay marriage.

      What planet have you been on during the last decade or so?

      July 2, 2013 at 11:35 am |
    • Just the Facts Ma'am...

      There will never be an explosion in the numbers of people identifying as gay, there will only be those who already know they are gay being more open about it as it gains acceptance. Being gay is not a choice, discriminating against gay persons is.

      July 2, 2013 at 11:40 am |
    • Reality

      See p. 28 for added comments.

      July 2, 2013 at 3:04 pm |
  16. Colin

    I see that, despite our knowing for over 150 years that Genesis is complete mythology, a few posters are still adhering to the "six days and a talking snake" theory of the formation of the Universe and its 400,000,000,000 galaxies, each with about 200,000,000,000 stars. Here are a few reasons why this theory is untenable. They are just a few, there are many more.

    First and most obviously is the fossil record. The fossil record is much, much more than just dinosaurs. Indeed, dinosaurs only get the press because of their size, but they make up less than 1% of the entire fossil record. Life had been evolving on Earth for over 3 thousand million years before dinosaurs evolved and has gone on evolving for 65 million years after the Chicxulub meteor likely wiped them out.

    The fossil record includes the Stromatolites, colonies of prokaryotic bacteria, that range in age going back to about 3 billion years, the Ediacara fossils from South Australia, widely regarded as among the earliest multi-celled organisms, the Cambrian species of the Burgess shale in Canada (circa – 450 million years ago) the giant scorpions of the Silurian Period, the giant, wingless insects of the Devonian period, the insects, amphibians, reptiles, fishes, clams, crustaceans of the Carboniferous Period, the many precursors to the dinosaurs, the 700 odd known species of dinosaurs themselves, the subsequent dominant mammals, including the saber tooth tiger, the mammoths and hairy rhinoceros of North America and Asia, the fossils of early man in Africa and the Neanderthals of Europe.

    The fossil record shows a consistent and worldwide evolution of life on Earth dating back to about 3,500,000,000 years ago. There are literally millions of fossils that have been recovered, of thousands of different species and they are all located where they would be in the geological record if life evolved slowly over billions of years. None of them can be explained by a 6,000 year old Earth and Noah’s flood. Were they all on the ark? What happened to them when it docked?

    A Tyrannosaurus Rex ate a lot of food – meat- which means its food would itself have to have been fed, like the food of every other carnivore on the ark for the entire 360 odd days Noah supposedly spent on the ark. T-Rex was not even the largest carnivorous dinosaur we know of. Spinosaurus, Argentinosaurus and Carcharodontosaurus were all larger and ate more even meat. Even they were not large enough to bring down the largest sauropods we know of, many species of which weighed in at close to 100 tons and were about 100 feet long. A bit of “back of the envelope” math quickly shows that “Noah’s Ark” would actually have to have been an armada of ships larger than the D-Day invasion force, manned by thousands and thousands of people – and this is without including the World’s 300,000 current species of plants, none of which could walk merrily in twos onto the ark.

    Then, of course, there are the various races of human beings. There were no Sub-Saharan Africans, Chinese, Australian Aboriginals, blonde haired Scandinavians, Pygmies or Eskimos on the Ark. Where did they come from?

    Second, there are those little things we call oil, natural gas and other fossil fuels. Their mere existence is another independent and fatal blow to the creationists. Speak to any geologist who works for Exxon Mobil, Shell or any of the thousands of mining, oil or natural gas related companies that make a living finding fossil fuels. They will tell you these fossil fuels take millions of years to develop from the remains of large, often Carboniferous Period forests, in the case of coal, or tiny marine creatures in the case of oil. For the fossils to develop into oil or coal takes tens or hundreds of millions of years of “slow baking” under optimum geological conditions. That’s why they are called “fossil fuels.” Have a close look at coal, you can often see the fossilized leaves in it. The geologists know exactly what rocks to look for fossil fuels in, because they know how to date the rocks to tens or hundreds of millions of years ago. Creationists have no credible explanation for this.

    Third, most of astronomy and cosmology would be wrong if the creationists were right. In short, as Einstein showed, light travels at a set speed. Space is so large that light from distant stars takes many years to reach the Earth. In some cases, this is millions or billions of years. The fact that we can see light from such far away stars means it began its journey billions of years ago. The Universe must be billions of years old. We can currently see galaxies whose light left home 13, 700,000,000 years ago. Indeed, on a clear night, one can see the collective, misty light of many stars more than 6,000 light years away with the naked eye, shining down like tiny accusatorial witnesses against the nonsense of creationism.

    Fourth, we have not just carbon dating, but also all other methods used by scientists to date wood, rocks, fossils, and other artifacts. These comprehensively disprove the Bible’s claims. They include uranium-lead dating, potassium-argon dating as well as other non-radioactive methods such as pollen dating, dendrochronology and ice core dating. In order for any particular rock, fossil or other artifact to be aged, generally two or more samples are dated independently by two or more laboratories in order to ensure an accurate result. If results were random, as creationists claim, the two independent results would rarely agree. They generally do. They regularly reveal ages much older than Genesis. Indeed, the Earth is about 750,000 times older than the Bible claims, the Universe about three times the age of the Earth.

    Fifth, the relatively new field of DNA mapping not only convicts criminals, it shows in undeniable, full detail how we differ from other life forms on the planet. For example, about 98.4% of human DNA is identical to that of chimpanzees, about 97% of human DNA is identical to that of gorillas, and slightly less again of human DNA is identical to the DNA of monkeys. This gradual divergence in DNA can only be rationally explained by the two species diverging from a common ancestor, and coincides perfectly with the fossil record. Indeed, scientists can use the percentage of DNA that two animal share (such as humans and bears, or domestic dogs and wolves) to get an idea of how long ago the last common ancestor of both species lived. It perfectly corroborates the fossil record and is completely independently developed.

    Sixth, the entire field of historical linguistics would have to be rewritten to accommodate the Bible. This discipline studies how languages develop and diverge over time. For example, Spanish and Italian are very similar and have a recent common “ancestor” language, Latin, as most people know. However, Russian is quite different and therefore either did not share a common root, or branched off much earlier in time. No respected linguist anywhere in the World traces languages back to the Tower of Babel, the creationists’ simplistic and patently absurd explanation for different languages. Indeed, American Indians, Australian Aboriginals, “true” Indians, Chinese, Mongols, Ja.panese, Sub-Saharan Africans and the Celts and other tribes of ancient Europe were speaking thousands of different languages thousands of years before the date creationist say the Tower of Babel occurred – and even well before the date they claim for the Garden of Eden.

    Seventh, lactose intolerance is also a clear vestige of human evolution. Most mammals only consume milk as infants. After infancy, they no longer produce the enzyme “lactase” that digests the lactose in milk and so become lactose intolerant. Humans are an exception and can drink milk as adults – but not all humans – some humans remain lactose intolerant. So which humans are no longer lactose intolerant? The answer is those who evolved over the past few thousand years raising cows. They evolved slightly to keep producing lactase as adults so as to allow the consumption of milk as adults. This includes most Europeans and some Africans, notably the Tutsi of Rwanda. On the other hand, most Chinese, native Americans and Aboriginal Australians, whose ancestors did not raise cattle, remain lactose intolerant.

    I could go on and elaborate on a number of other disciplines or facts that creationists have to pretend into oblivion to retain their faith, including the Ice Ages, cavemen and early hominids, much of microbiology, paleontology and archeology, continental drift and plate tectonics. Even large parts of medical research would be rendered unusable but for the fact that monkeys and mice share a common ancestor with us and therefore our fundamental cell biology and basic body architecture is identical to theirs.

    In short, and not surprisingly, the World’s most gifted evolutionary biologists, astronomers, cosmologists, geologists, archeologists, paleontologists, historians, modern medical researchers and linguists (and about 2,000 years of accu.mulated knowledge) are right and a handful of Iron Age Middle Eastern goat herders copying then extant mythology were wrong. Creationists aren’t just trying to swim upstream against the weight of scientific evidence; they are trying to ascend a waterfall.

    July 2, 2013 at 11:17 am |
    • Observer

      Colin,

      GREAT job! Your comments are some of the best ever posted on blogs. Although people may disagree with individual points, it is certainly an outstanding source of worthwhile information and food for thought.

      Your comments should be required reading. Please repost again in the future.

      July 2, 2013 at 11:32 am |
    • Robert Brown

      Colin,

      That is a very well thought out and researched post. Assuming everything you posted is absolutely accurate you have done a good job of refuting a literal interpretation of the first 12 chapters of the first of 66 books in the bible. After reading all of that and thinking on it the first question that came to mind is what do you think of the remaining 38 chapters of genesis or the other 65 books? There does seem to be a lot of theories of how things came to be based on what we think we know whether you include the first 12 chapters of genesis in the thinking or not. What if those stories you take issue with are more allegorical in nature?

      July 2, 2013 at 12:16 pm |
    • Cpt. Obvious

      If the first 60 pages of a math book had the very fundamentals and basics wrong on every page, would you really wonder what the rest of the book had to say about math?

      July 2, 2013 at 12:23 pm |
    • Alias

      Robert Brown,

      Yes there is a lot of wisdom in the bible. jesus said some really good stuff. That does not prove your god exists.
      There is also a lot of wisdom in the Koran. Buddha got a lot of things right too. Confucius was preaching the golden rule too. What makes your holy book any more believable than the others?

      July 2, 2013 at 12:41 pm |
    • Mark from Middle River

      Creationists aren’t just trying to swim upstream against the weight of scientific evidence; they are trying to ascend a waterfall.

      Hi Colin.

      For me, the telling of creation, in the Bible, is not that far off from the reports of Evolution. In fact they are so close that I fail to see the great contested divide between Creationist and Evolutionist. Well, maybe between ones such as yourself and Pat Robertson, because to be truthful the majority of the public is not ready to go to war over such. Just ones such as yourself.

      The great thing about being in the middle, is that you can see because of the lack of hatred. Try this Colin, I could see if the Bible stated that Man and Woman were created first but it didn't. It started with nothing. No planet or stars, at which point God created Earth first.

      1. Heaven and Earth (planet) ,
      2. Light and then divided light from dark (spun the planet)
      3. Separated the firmament (land and atmosphere)
      4. Gathered the water (lakes and oceans)
      5. Caused plants to grow on the land (self explanatory)
      6. Made the seasons and years (set the Earth into orbit)
      7. Made a brighter light in the day and a smaller light at night (Set the Sun on fire. Made the moon, set it into orbit to reflect the light of the Sun)
      8. Now this is where it gets interesting. “And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life”.
      Now does it not have in evolution something about that life began in the seas? Now here is a writer that did not have the knowledge of such but interestingly enough he or she matched something that it would take hundreds of years to confirm.
      9. Then next … “And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. “
      Now we have the progression of creatures from the waters moving to land ….
      10. Then God created …. us last.
      Colin, there is more in common between the Creationist view and the Evolutionist view. Some things that were described in Genesis, only to be accepted hundreds of years later by Evolution.

      La'Chaim

      July 2, 2013 at 12:56 pm |
    • lol??

      The fossil record is actually a silly approach.

      July 2, 2013 at 2:46 pm |
    • pete

      Robert without a literal genesis there was no Adam and Eve, and thus no original sin. Without that there was no need for the sacrifice of Jesus to forgive original sin, and thus no Christianity at all.

      July 2, 2013 at 4:55 pm |
    • Cpt. Obvious

      Mark, you're being silly. There's no symmetry between genesis and the big bang or evolution; if there was, we'd not be hearing about it from you, and there'd be a bout half a billion youtube videos describing the amazing correlation. Genesis matches with reality about as much as any of the other creation myths; there's a story there, but you have to twist it into multiple knots to make it have any appearance to fact.

      July 2, 2013 at 5:02 pm |
    • lol??

      The Cpt wants to write HIS myth, subject to multiple revisions , of course

      July 2, 2013 at 5:47 pm |
  17. Vic

    I am trying to post a comment about The Work of the Holy Spirit but can't get past the censor ship filter. I don't know what words I am using that are barred!

    Now testing some words:

    indwells
    convicts
    groanings
    blood

    July 2, 2013 at 11:12 am |
    • Vic

      Wow..non of the above!

      Testing:

      baptize
      remove
      fire
      imputed
      intercedes
      redemption
      wash

      July 2, 2013 at 11:18 am |
    • Vic

      Wow..non of the above!

      Testing:

      T i t u s

      Touchdown! Thanks ME II, you gave me the clue!

      July 2, 2013 at 11:23 am |
    • ME II

      um... Ti.tus includes ti.t

      July 2, 2013 at 11:27 am |
    • Alias

      Let me try:
      Vic is a fucktard
      Vic has shit for brains

      July 2, 2013 at 12:12 pm |
    • Observer

      Alias,

      Grow up.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:13 pm |
    • Alias

      Sorry Vic
      The censor seems to be working fine for me.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:13 pm |
  18. global001

    Wow, we can't refuse to serve gays getting married? What next? We won't be able to refuse to serve coloured people in stores either? No. wait, oh yeah that changed 50 years ago! People who are shocked that they can't refuse service to any law abiding member of the public really deserve to taken to court & it shouldn't be a surprise to them. No, they are not victims either.

    July 2, 2013 at 10:42 am |
    • Alias

      Don't despair. There are still ways to offer discounts to the people you want to do business with.

      July 2, 2013 at 12:47 pm |
  19. WASP

    "Don’t give in. If you have to go down for Christ, what better person to go down for?”

    yeah that a great bit of advice; lose for an imaginary friend.
    whatever helps you sleep at night correct?

    ahhhhh sweet christians dreams of all us burning for eternity while they kiss god's ass. 😄

    July 2, 2013 at 9:45 am |
    • Robert Brown

      What helps you sleep?

      July 2, 2013 at 10:09 am |
    • WASP

      @ROBERT: hmmm what helps me sleep? typically a couple of beers, seeing the nightmares from war tend to be less vivid when i have alcohol in my blood.
      however i can say i've never been chased by some invisble enemy in my dreams, or felt guilt over wanting TRUE EQUALITY for my fellow americans.

      July 2, 2013 at 10:25 am |
    • I'm sorry Dave, I can't let you do that

      Does true equality entail curbing all citizens' property rights?

      July 2, 2013 at 10:34 am |
    • In Santa we trust

      RB, Not having to worry what a sky-fairy thinks about my life.

      July 2, 2013 at 10:39 am |
    • ME II

      @I'm sorry Dave, I can't let you do that,
      "Does true equality entail curbing all citizens' property rights?"

      Not sure if this is what you are getting at, but equality usually means equal treatment before the law, not equal results in all things.

      July 2, 2013 at 10:51 am |
    • WASP

      @you're sorry: "Does true equality entail curbing all citizens' property rights?

      you know i remember a group of southern folks that used that same ideal about owning their fellow man, those men were their property and hell your bible saids it's ok, correct. 🙂

      July 2, 2013 at 11:06 am |
  20. Richard Cranium

    So this is how the moderator is going to take care of things?

    Long threads disappered overnight, and I know that much of what I had said and what others had said were not offensive in the least. Most of what I had said was just telling the poster AE that the flood never happened, that the story of genesis has been disproven beyond a doubt. The evidence for such an event simply does not exist, and there is a great deal of evidence to the contrary.

    Why has so much disappeared?...if you try to follow certain threads, you now have just random comments posted and no integrety left in any discussions.
    So nice to see the moderator is working so dilligently to maintain the standards.

    July 2, 2013 at 8:46 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Richard
      You say "evidence", they say "heresy".
      A few generation back, you would've been sent to chat with your friendly neighbourhood inquisitor.

      July 2, 2013 at 8:53 am |
    • Richard Cranium

      Doc
      I know, but I went to follow up on some threads from yesterday and found huge amounts of legitimate discussion blown away, and then found some of what I had said in reply was now at the start of threads, making me appear as nutty as a fruitcake.
      Simply disappointing.

      July 2, 2013 at 9:07 am |
    • Alias

      Firstly, proving the bible wrong can offend people.

      As unbiased as the moderator claims to be, there is no way of knowing why they would delete some things and not others. It is also possible that they labled someone a troll and removed all threads they were part of, no content considered independently.

      July 2, 2013 at 10:41 am |
    • AE

      "Most of what I had said was just telling the poster AE that the flood never happened, that the story of genesis has been disproven beyond a doubt. The evidence for such an event simply does not exist, and there is a great deal of evidence to the contrary."

      It was kind of getting redundant.

      I say there remains a possibility a world-wide flood happened. I'm not asking you to believe that it did. Just that it is possible.

      You say there is absolutely no possibility. Even fellow skeptics disagreed with you in the thread.

      Any way, I asked this question and you never answered (I think it got lost in the thread explosion):

      A couple days ago you claimed you have been paid well for your published work in a number of scientific fields.

      Can you post a link to some of your stuff? Or at least tell me a little bit more about this "science that I have published."

      Your quote:

      "I have been paid quite a bit for all of the science that I have published. My work is in many fields of science."

      July 2, 2013 at 11:12 am |
    • ME II

      @AE,
      "You say there is absolutely no possibility. Even fellow skeptics disagreed with you in the thread."

      Technically, it is possible that all the atoms in your body will simultaneously shift 20 feet to the right.

      July 2, 2013 at 11:22 am |
    • Richard Cranium

      Ae
      No...anonymity remains a paramount on the internet.
      And No , there is no possibility. There would be a layer of earth surrounding the planet all indicating a flood of the same exact time period. Since we know that does not exist, and it would if it ever happened, there is no possibility. It is only your faith that still clings to the myth.
      The colleagues that I have that are believers jsut chalk up the story to humans interpretting gods word wrong when it was written, and move on.

      July 2, 2013 at 11:23 am |
    • Arthur Bryant

      Actually I think I just read the post you're referring to....don't know if it was put back up or what....the one about there being tons of evidence that the flood did NOT take place. Strange.

      July 2, 2013 at 5:49 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
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.