Mormon scholar: 'Book of Mormon' like a fun-house mirror
June 28th, 2011
12:00 PM ET

Mormon scholar: 'Book of Mormon' like a fun-house mirror

(CNN)–Prof. Richard Bushman shares his insight in CNN's "In the Arena" off-set interview on how the award-winning Broadway musical, The Book of Mormon, is not the best insight to Mormon beliefs.

He teaches courses on Mormonism in its broad social and cultural context and on the history of religion in America. Bushman has taken an active part in explaining Mormonism to a broad public and in negotiating the tensions between Mormonism and modern culture. An emeritus professor at Columbia University, he received his Ph.D. in the History of American Civilization from Harvard.

Among his books is the biography, “Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling.” He also serves as one of three general editors of the Joseph Smith Papers.

Prof. Bushman, the character of Elder Price, an American Mormon missionary in modern-day Uganda, questions his faith, but regains it while performing the song, “I Believe.” He sings, “I believe that God has a plan for all of us. / I believe that plan involves me getting my own planet.” Is that lyric based in Mormon belief?

I have been living in California and Utah for the past year while the musical "The Book of Mormon” has been packing the house on Broadway. I have not seen the show, but I have read endless reviews, listened to parts of the score, and talked with Mormon friends who have seen it. Based on what I have heard, and the lyrics of Elder Price’s song, the musical gets a lot of laughs, but it is not meant to explain Mormon beliefs.

Read more about Bushman's views on the 'The Book of Mormon'
- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints • Mormonism • Movies • Theater

soundoff (89 Responses)
  1. mascmen7

    The inventor of the Mormon cult was Joseph Smith, a Vermont well digger who had 85 wives outstripping Muhammad who had 13 wives including his favorite "Aisha" 9 years old. Joseph Smith relied on the Bible for his Book of Mormon which he changed here and there. Temple ceremonies of the LDS Temples were stolen from the Masonic rituals. Hard to believe that Jon Huntsman, Mitt Romney and Glenn Beck believe in such a false man made religion.

    July 16, 2011 at 1:50 pm |
  2. dxp2718

    And "Wicked" is not intended to teach you witchcraft. "Fiddler on the Roof" is not intended to teach you about Judaism. And you won't learn urology from "Urinetown." Any other "news"?

    July 15, 2011 at 12:54 am |
    • Keith

      Exactly!!!! Its a comedy play on broadway. These people really think we are all dumb?? Did the musical say that it was based on a true story or something?? Come on folks

      July 16, 2011 at 5:24 am |
  3. stevie68a

    Reading a biography on Joseph Smith clearly shows he was a fraud. Religion is just a delusion.

    July 14, 2011 at 10:17 am |
  4. Marie Kidman


    July 1, 2011 at 10:53 am |
  5. Marie Kidman


    June 30, 2011 at 3:29 am |
  6. True Friend

    God is transcendent; the reason Jesus is fully Man and fully God. Jews, Muslims and Mormons missed it all by relying on the human reasoning alone.

    June 29, 2011 at 7:40 pm |
    • gozer

      Whereas you are incapable of any reasoning, and instead swallowed the whole Christian fiction without being able to see what a ludicrous farce it is.

      How's your talking snake young earth personal god rapture doing these days?

      June 29, 2011 at 7:52 pm |
    • True Friend

      Atheists are out of question. They are hopeless, not having even the basic logic. They worship self saying creation creates itself.

      June 29, 2011 at 8:15 pm |
    • True Friend

      I missed my meds this morning! Wheeeeeeee!

      July 15, 2011 at 10:26 am |
  7. godless_heathen_blasphemer

    Can somebody as me this: If Jesus was a god, how the hell did he die? I thought gods were immortal?

    June 29, 2011 at 4:24 pm |
    • godless_heathen_blasphemer

      Doh! Obviously I meant answer me this...

      June 29, 2011 at 4:25 pm |
    • Juggling Squirrel-Jesus

      Because he was both fully human and fully god all at the same time. See, when you make stuff up, anything is possible!

      June 29, 2011 at 4:26 pm |
    • godless_heathen_blasphemer

      so similar to the way roman emperors were elevated to god status after their death?

      June 29, 2011 at 5:26 pm |
    • GodPot

      Every Christian knows that Jesus was the "ransom" paid for our sin's by dying on the cross. And obviously they also know that the price for mankind's sin is 72 hours of death and not a second more. Once he had been "dead" for three days he resurected himself since the "price" was paid. It's like paying $1,000,000 ransom to get your daughter back then 3 days later after she is safe you magicly teleport the cash back you so you were really only out the money for the three days...

      June 29, 2011 at 7:51 pm |
    • GodPot

      Oh, and I forgot to mention, in that last example you are also the kidnapper to who you paid the money then retrieved it. The Christians seem to know that a ransom had to be paid for their sin's but are never really sure who that ransom gets paid to, which just so happens to be the person paying the ransom.

      June 29, 2011 at 7:54 pm |
    • geraldh

      He took on the human form which is capable of physical death. His spirit did not die and pre-existed his body.

      July 13, 2011 at 1:28 pm |
    • Betsy

      He chose to die, no one could kill him, when he was whipped, he didn't die, when he was being tortured he didn't die. Up on the cross he basically said, Father I release my soul to you. Meaning he did what he was supposed to do, and he was ready to die.

      July 14, 2011 at 11:27 am |
  8. True Friend

    No matter how presented, falsehood is false. Mormonism is incompatiable with the whole Bible.

    June 29, 2011 at 3:10 am |
    • Friend

      Carburators are incompatible with the whole Bible too, so they are false.

      June 29, 2011 at 3:17 am |
    • True Friend

      The above Friend is a fake.

      June 29, 2011 at 3:19 am |
    • True Friend

      Only I am true – all others are false, especially dirty Americans. They are falsest of all. Their falsity will falsify their false salvation.

      June 29, 2011 at 7:49 am |
    • True Friend

      The 3rd "True Friend" is a fake. I love USA. Maybe I should plan to come to America for the sake of all these atheists who ridicule me. Will you like the idea? ^^

      June 29, 2011 at 9:01 am |
    • True True Friend

      Yeah, come on over! We'll grill up some steaks and have margaritas by the pool. You will provide the comedy.

      June 29, 2011 at 12:23 pm |
    • True Friend

      @True-, I don't understand American jokes. I won't join your party, atheists, even if I go to America because you do filthy things.

      June 29, 2011 at 7:36 pm |
    • Betsy

      Ok, but the bible isn't even completely the true bible it was when writtten. And the Christian church is not what it was meant to be either. Back after Christ died, in the dark ages, the members of the Christian church, the heads, met together and decided how they wanted the church to be run, they changed around key elements to suit what they wanted! So saying the Book of Mormon doesn't go along with the Bible, well why would it?

      July 14, 2011 at 11:32 am |
    • True Friend

      No matter how you slice a turd, the nuts always show through. Jesus has revealed this to me, He has shown me his True face in my morning bowel movement.

      July 15, 2011 at 10:29 am |
  9. mark

    wake up will you, it is just another way of controlling us-religion has been made up ever since man could speak

    June 29, 2011 at 1:21 am |
  10. Dusty

    I love it when people try to argue religion with ration. Religion is not ration. It may at times appear rational, and many try to dress it up in the guide of ration, but it isn't ration.

    That said, ration is religion. More to the point, it is a matter of pure faith just like every profession of religious "knowledge." People trust in ration, pretend that it leads to truth, but in fact they are making decision out of faith in a god they cannot prove exists. The rational mind sees evidence of one truth in a set of facts while the religious sees a whole different truth in the same set of facts. Neither of them is willing to step back and see that they are looking at less than one billionth of a percent of the information available.

    To degrade anyone or any belief set is as much to say, "I have all knowledge so it's probably better if you let me do your thinking for you before you get hurt." We are all limited in our knowledge and scope. Do the math (rationalists). If there is an infinite or even nearly infinite amount that is learnable, and even in a given, finite experiment there are uncountable factors that we assume but do not know, and we know a billion facts or just one fact the percentage of what we can know vs. what we cannot know is a number so close to zero as to make literally no difference.

    To those of faith, take the same idea and apply it to your personal knowledge divided by the knowledge of your god. No matter how much you know, if you believe in an infinite god you are as close to zero as to make it safer for you to agree with the rationalists and say, "Gee, I know nothing."

    June 28, 2011 at 6:59 pm |
    • News Flash

         [rash-uhn, rey-shuhn]

      a fixed allowance of provisions or food, especially for soldiers or sailors or for civilians during a shortage: a daily ration of meat and bread.

      an allotted amount: They finally saved up enough gas rations for the trip.

      June 28, 2011 at 7:34 pm |
  11. Reality

    In the general scheme of con games, we have the Great Angelic Con ( for Professor Bushman perusal in case he forgot):

    Joe Smith had his Moroni.

    Jehovah Witnesses have their Jesus /Michael the archangel, the first angelic being created by God;

    Mohammed had his Gabriel (this "tin-kerbell" got around).

    Jesus and his family had Michael, Gabriel, and Satan, the latter being a modern day dem-on of the de-mented.

    The Abraham-Moses myths had their Angel of Death and other "no-namers" to do their dirty work or other assorted duties.

    Contemporary biblical and religious scholars have relegated these "pretty wingie thingies" to the myth pile. We should do the same to include deleting all references to them in our religious operating manuals. Doing this will eliminate the prophet/profit/prophecy status of these founders and put them where they belong as simple humans just like the rest of us.
    Some added references to "tink-erbells".

    "Latter-day Saints also believe that Michael the Archangel was Adam (the first man) when he was mortal, and Gabriel lived on the earth as Noah."

    Apparently hallu-cinations did not stop with Joe Smith.


    "The belief in guardian angels can be traced throughout all antiquity; pagans, like Menander and Plutarch (cf. Euseb., "Praep. Evang.", xii), and Neo-Platonists, like Plotinus, held it. It was also the belief of the Babylonians and As-syrians, as their monuments testify, for a figure of a guardian angel now in the British Museum once decorated an As-syrian palace, and might well serve for a modern representation; while Nabopolassar, father of Nebuchadnezzar the Great, says: "He (Marduk) sent a tutelary deity (cherub) of grace to go at my side; in everything that I did, he made my work to succeed."

    Catholic monks and Dark Age theologians also did their share of hallu-cinating:
    "TUBUAS-A member of the group of angels who were removed from the ranks of officially recognized celestial hierarchy in 745 by a council in Rome under Pope Zachary. He was joined by Uriel, Adimus, Sabaoth, Simiel, and Raguel."

    And tin-ker- bells go way, way back:

    "In Zoroastrianism there are different angel like creatures. For example each person has a guardian angel called Fravashi. They patronize human being and other creatures and also manifest god’s energy. Also, the Amesha Spentas have often been regarded as angels, but they don't convey messages, but are rather emanations of Ahura Mazda ("Wise Lord", God); they appear in an abstract fashion in the religious thought of Zarathustra and then later (during the Achaemenid period of Zoroastrianism) became personalized, associated with an aspect of the divine creation (fire, plants, water...)."
    "The beginnings of the biblical belief in angels must be sought in very early folklore. The gods of the Hitti-tes and Canaanites had their supernatural messengers, and parallels to the Old Testament stories of angels are found in Near Eastern literature. "

    "The 'Magic Papyri' contain many spells to secure just such help and protection of angels. From magic traditions arose the concept of the guardian angel. "

    June 28, 2011 at 4:01 pm |
    • herbert juarez

      what a surprise the same rant on a whole new story.you ain't got much do you?you never back up your rant with proof of any kind just run off at the mouth.Bottom line you are a fraud

      July 16, 2011 at 7:50 pm |
  12. Student of World Religions

    RE: “I believe that God has a plan for all of us. / I believe that plan involves me GETTING MY OWN PLANET.”

    That’s right! Worthy members of Mormonism (Latter-day Saints) may one day become “exalted” to godhood themselves. you see the Mormons believe that God the Father was once a man, but “progressed” to godhood. They believe He has a physical body, as does his wife (Heavenly Mother). They don't believe in the Trinity like the Christians do. To them the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are three separate gods.

    June 28, 2011 at 3:15 pm |
    • Wyoming

      And do you believe the Christ was once part-man? When Christ was baptized, the voice came from elsewhere, the Holy Spirit appeared like a dove. Was Christ a ventriliquist(sp?). Other orthodox Christians believe in some form of diefication. What do you believe becoming 'joint-heirs' with Christ might mean?

      It seems to come down to one foundational difference in belief. We believe the bible literally that we are the sons and daughters of God. We are not a different species. This truth was lost by the time the 4th Century creeds were developed.

      June 28, 2011 at 6:03 pm |
    • Dusty

      Clarification: The idea of the Trinity is a defining characteristic of Christianity. It was actually brought about through a vote to make the distinction between the new "Christian" religion and those of the polytheistic religions of the region. Prior to that it is unclear since various texts give various takes on the idea depending upon the audience the apostle was addressing. As a "student of world religions" you should note that the "Mormon" idea of the Trinity does state that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one in purpose, not differing from one another, though they do clearly state that the Father has a body of flesh and bone (not blood), the Son gained one (touch the nail prints in my hands...), and the Holy Ghost is a personage of spirit. Similar notions have been spoken of in several other "christian" faiths, but most others defer to the counsel of Nicea.

      June 28, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
    • News Flash

      @Dusty & SoWR
      How many angels can dance on the head of a pin ?

      June 29, 2011 at 4:53 am |
    • Stevie7

      @News Flash

      It probably depends on the size of the pin. It's roughly 10x the amount of nymphs, 3.14x the amount of mermaids, and several thousands times the amount of unicorns. I'm assuming, for the sake of argument, that unicorns can dance.

      June 29, 2011 at 7:54 am |
  13. Ron

    Walked out of the Broadway play after the 5the F word. Sad day when these type of grotesque portrayal gets praised. The mormon people should be up in arms over this piece of trash!

    June 28, 2011 at 3:10 pm |
    • News Flash

      it got a lot of Tony Awards

      June 28, 2011 at 3:43 pm |
    • Free

      Like how people got up in arms over Jesus Christ Superstar and Godspell when they first came out?

      June 28, 2011 at 4:10 pm |
    • Wyoming

      Good for you Ron. What a person consumes says as much about the character of the person as what they consume. If this is play represents the apex of popular culture – God help us all.

      June 28, 2011 at 5:30 pm |
    • The Real Tom Paine

      Its a parody of religion, from the creators of South Park. You are like the people who went to see "Blazing Saddles" expecting to see a real Western: idiots.

      June 29, 2011 at 4:41 pm |
    • Neva Rae Powers

      I guess your have no sense of humor. Did you ever hear of the word satire?

      July 19, 2011 at 10:06 am |
  14. Wyoming


    Are you saying that religious truths of 'orthodox' christianity were arrived at by community consensus rather than revelation? From Moses, each Judeo-Christian group has evolved using the same method. Then God would send a prophet or Christ himself. In your reading of the scriptures – how did the 'community' typically receive them?

    June 28, 2011 at 2:42 pm |
    • Bucky Ball

      "Are you saying that religious truths of 'orthodox' christianity were arrived at by community consensus rather than revelation."
      -- Exactly. Yes I am. That's why they VOTED on them in the Councils.
      " In your reading of the scriptures – how did the 'community' typically receive them?"
      -- In order to figure that out you have to read other things, (history, archeology, cultural anthropology, etc.,etc.) I explained already how the communities (received) incorporated the texts.

      June 28, 2011 at 3:10 pm |
  15. Bucky Ball

    "Mormon theology differs radically from conventional Christianity"

    It certainly does. But that's not the problem.
    The question of making the judgement about whether or not a group stands inside or outside the Judeo-Christian tradition is not so much about whether they accept this or that, or believe this or that, as it is about the PROCESS involved. Judeo-Christianities DEVELOPED from a long and complex culturally based process, always associated with communities of worshipers, which were the ultimate arbiter, (by inclusion or not into their liturgical celebrations), of the texts which they accepted as the authentic experience of that community, (and those that were found wanting were considered "heretical" or simply not used in the celebrations), (thus were left out, eventually, from their canon)), and NEVER from one guy who found some oh so conveniently, (when asked to produce them "I can't find them") gold tablets in his back yard. The problem with the group in question of this article, is that it was conco'ckted by one uneducated man, and not an organic evolution from a community. The PROCESS is flawed, and in no way even remotely resembles the way any other mainline version of Xtianity was formed, and thus has to be judged to be "unbiblical" and "unchristian" in a simply historical context. For one man, in his cultural (and educational) vacuum, to stand up and make up things and declare them as authentic is not consistent with the known and accepted Judeo-Christian community's validation process, and it's one of the reasons he got so far off the mark. He seemed to be unaware of this actual process, even though some of the centers of biblical form and literary criticism, (especially in Austria-Germany (ie Tubingen University)) HAD begun to be aware of the historical, (archeologically validated) processes, (and eventually at Harvard and Yale and Princeton, and I'm sure other places I don't know about), by the time Smith was doing his thing. For Dr. Bushman to be unaware of those processes is simply astounding.

    June 28, 2011 at 1:44 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @Bucky Ball

      Well said.


      June 28, 2011 at 2:43 pm |
    • Erik

      The process you describe is precisely the problem. With an imperfect humanity how can mankind expect itself to establish things of God through imperfect intellect? Only direct revelation from God can establish the things of God. The communal agreement and pruning of doctrine over time does not establish anything more pure–it only corrupts it. Is it any less likely that God revealed on gold plates than he revealed on stone tablets? What about parchment or gentle whisperings of the spirit?

      June 28, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
    • Bucky Ball

      I actually completely agree with you.
      I didn't say it was any better. I simply said it is the process that is known from historical evidence to have occurred.

      "With an imperfect humanity how can mankind expect itself establish things of God through imperfect intellect? Only direct revelation from God can establish the things of God."
      -- In your paradigm, after the revelation the intellect remains imperfect. In scientific terms, the brains cells that have been altered by revelation, (??) are changed(??), having gone from state (a) uninspired, to state (b) inspired. They remain the same cells, and "imperfect", according to you. So to assert an imperfect intellect possesses the (perfect) "truth" seems to be a pretty shaky proposition, IMHO.

      "The communal agreement and pruning of doctrine over time does not establish anything more pure–it only corrupts it."
      -- Agree totally. This phenomenon is a well known and has been observed many times.
      "Is it any less likely that God revealed on gold plates than he revealed on stone tablets? What about parchment or gentle whisperings of the spirit?"
      -- Agree. They are all equally unlikely.

      June 28, 2011 at 7:54 pm |
  16. Peace2All

    From The Article quoting Prof. Richard Bushman:

    "I had my Elder Price moment, as many Mormons do, but during my sopho-more year at Harvard. Writing a paper on Nietzsche and Freud had raised lots of questions about religion in general.

    When I went off to Halifax to preach the gospel, I was pretty shaky in my belief. For three months I wrestled with questions about Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon. Was it a hoax, a bold, fraudulent effort to create a myth? Had Joseph Smith hoodwinked his friends—and the rest of his followers including me?

    I studied everything and (prayed) hard for some kind of light. In time I 'arrived' at a (rational explanation) that -allowed- for a (miracle) in the book’s production


    I am very curious as to 'how' specifically he 'arrived' at a (rational explanation)... that (allowed) for a (miracle) in the book's (Book of Mormon's) production. It seems like that might be a contradi-ction in processing to me. Is this the 'god of the gaps' rationale... Since I can't explain it, the only conclusion is that it must have been God/supernatural... a "miracle."...?

    It may be just me on this, but what he wrote doesn't quite make any sense, again... to me. What was his (rational explanation)...? Since he was obviously -shaky- in his beliefs, was he consciously, or unconsciously looking for a -loophole- to arrive at...it must be a 'miracle'...?

    It reads as if he did some interesting mental gymnastics, that created the mental climate for him to 'allow' an explanation that it was a 'miracle' rather than the IMHO 'rational' conclusion that the Book of Mormon and all of the 'golden plates' etc... stuff surrounding the myth, was something other than 'supernatural.'

    I guess ultimately, why would someone jump to the IMHO 'least' likely conclusions (miracle) when there were and are IMHO much more rational believable tenable conclusions surrounding this...?

    I am in no way bashing on religion or mormon beliefs specifically, ... just pondering some thoughts concerning this.


    June 28, 2011 at 1:30 pm |
    • Bucky Ball

      He suspended his rationality because it made him feel good, but why they chose to do that is the question.

      ("but along the way I experienced something more important than the book itself. I caught a glimpse of a higher form of human flourishing, something forceful and ennobling which I can only call sacred. It was this encounter with a kind of elevated goodness in the book that won me over.")

      Sounds like an aesthetic experience. I prefer Mozart.

      June 28, 2011 at 2:03 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @Bucky Ball

      Hey Bucky...

      Yeah, all of that (your posting) had not escaped me. And I certainly got the 'bigger issue' for him that he suggested that was bigger than the book itself, but that still doesn't explain how he arrived at the book being a 'miracle' that he arrived at through 'rational' thinking.

      What I am still trying to figure out without speculating here, is 'what' was his 'rational' explanation, that -allowed- him these seemingly 'irrational' beliefs...?

      BTW-I haven't seen your buddy QGF here recently. Did he decide to leave us and explore another universe...?

      Anyway, I hope that you are doing well.



      June 28, 2011 at 2:42 pm |
    • Bucky Ball


      Agree. (I didn't mean my cryptic post to suggest yours was lacking somehow). I suspect asking him to make the connection between the rational and irrational positions, (leap of faith ?), will be a long wait. They just do it, and I cannot see any other explanation than the one I gave. They tell themselves, and others, all kinds of things by way of explanation, I just don't see another good one.

      QGF is usually on the Tech board. He is pretty annoyed by what goes on over here, in terms of the level of discussion. But FP, FJ, and he are setting up FP's apartment in LA, and on vacation. (FP got nailed by a drunk driver his first week out there). He is ok, (and said to say 'hi"), but he is out of commission for a few weeks. QGF got himself hired into a group working on Quantum Computing on the East Coast as a consultant, so he's pretty busy, going back and forth. (He HATES flying ! How strange is THAT ?)

      June 28, 2011 at 3:35 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @Bucky Ball

      Please tell them all 'hello' for me.

      LOL !! In regards to your comment about QGF hating 'flying' back and forth ! 😀



      June 28, 2011 at 4:13 pm |
  17. Artist

    With Zelda, Adelina and HeavenSent in here (they are all the same)...its like trying to comunicate with the insane.

    June 28, 2011 at 12:53 pm |
    • Fredjustadezeldalinafriend

      "Like"? No, it IS.

      June 28, 2011 at 1:12 pm |
    • True Friend

      Zelda and Adelina are not the same with HeavenSent.

      June 29, 2011 at 3:08 am |
    • Zelda

      I love Adelina. In the WORST way.

      June 29, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
  18. Squirrel-Juggling Jesus

    How perfect! The Mormon reviewer says "I have not seen the show, but . . . "

    What a perfect example of religious ignorance! I guess he doesn't want his judgement clouded by actually knowing what he is talking about.

    June 28, 2011 at 12:37 pm |
    • The Insights of Prof. Richard Bushman

      I did not see the show. I just listened to my friends who like to baptize and marry dead people.

      June 28, 2011 at 1:17 pm |
  19. Adelina

    I agree *kisses to Zelda*

    June 28, 2011 at 12:19 pm |
    • Frederica

      I agree with me too!

      June 28, 2011 at 12:39 pm |
    • Justina

      I agree with me more than Adelina-me and Frederica-me agrees with me.

      June 28, 2011 at 12:40 pm |
    • Friend

      But I agree with me the most. Of all the me's, I agree with me more that any other me.

      June 28, 2011 at 12:41 pm |
    • Adelina's Cruise Director

      Co'cktails at 4PM y'all.
      Don't wear the same frock.

      June 28, 2011 at 1:20 pm |
    • Friend

      The first 4 commenters in this group are fakes.

      June 29, 2011 at 3:07 am |
  20. Zelda

    Mormons have lazy minds and cannot think for themselves. They will perish in the lake of fire. Be right and like me and live forever in Heaven.

    June 28, 2011 at 12:08 pm |
    • Zelda

      Of course, the sign on the door of Heaven reads "Belleview Hospital for the Criminally Insane", but don't worry; that;s just his way of keeping out the atheists. The angels in white coats told me that.

      Oh my! It's time for God's mercy, which is labelled "thorazine" to fool the evil ones. Oh goody! There's God's embrace, which is not really the straight jacket that some of the elect here say it is.

      June 28, 2011 at 12:34 pm |
    • Free

      Again with the 'Lake of Fire'? Don't you get bored with that, like the rest of us?

      June 28, 2011 at 4:06 pm |
    • Friend

      These two Zelda are fakes.

      June 29, 2011 at 3:06 am |
1 2
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.