home
RSS
My Take: 5 biblical passages for Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry
What parts of the Bible do candidates really follow?
August 16th, 2011
10:57 AM ET

My Take: 5 biblical passages for Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry

Editor's Note: Stephen Prothero, a Boston University religion scholar and author of "God is Not One: The Eight Rival Religions that Run the World," is a regular CNN Belief Blog contributor.

By Stephen Prothero, Special to CNN

The audience booed when columnist Byron York asked U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota at the Republican presidential debate last week, if, as president, she would be “submissive to her husband.”

That question would have been out of order if she had excluded her evangelical Protestant faith from her presidential campaign. But she has made her faith as a Bible believer central to that campaign, so voters have a right to know which parts of the Bible she really believes in, and which parts (if any) she ignores.

Unfortunately, we cannot ask God whether He has in fact called Bachmann to be president, but we can ask her to interpret what she affirms to be the Word of God.

The same goes for Texas Governor Rick Perry, who earlier this month led “The Response,” a prayer and fasting event at a Houston football stadium that had the look and feel of an evangelical revival.

So here are my five Bible quotations for the two Republican presidential candidates now vying most vociferously for the evangelical Protestant vote.

1.  “Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands” (Colossians 3:18).

Should female presidents submit to their first husbands? As it should be obvious to anyone who saw this portion of the debate, Bachmann did not answer this question. She said she respected her husband. She said he respected her. But the question was about submission, not respect.

When John F. Kennedy was running for president, some voters were worried about whether, as president, he would take his marching orders from someone else. That someone else was not Jacqueline Onassis but the pope.

In a famous speech delivered on September 12, 1960, in Houston, he answered the question clearly and definitely. “I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute; where no Catholic prelate would tell the President - should he be Catholic - how to act.”

He also drew a sharp distinction between his private religious views and his public political views, pledging that his private faith would have no bearing on his actions as president. “Whatever issue may come before me as President, if I should be elected, on birth control, divorce, censorship, gambling or any other subject, I will make my decision in accordance with these views - in accordance with what my conscience tells me to be in the national interest, and without regard to outside religious pressure or dictates.”

I would like to know whether Bachmann will say the same about her evangelical Protestantism. If her husband tells her to veto a bill, will she submit to him? Is there any separation for her, as there was for Kennedy, between her private religious doctrines (in this case, that wives should be submissive to their husbands) and her public responsibilities (to act as "the decider")?

2. “But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you” (Matthew 6:6).

When I watched Perry’s performance at “The Response,” this Bible quote came to mind. I would like to know what he thinks of it.

Should Christians make a show of praying in public? This passage at least would seem to say no. In fact, it seems to say that when you pray you should go into your room and shut the door before addressing God. But perhaps I am misreading it. Either way, I would like for Perry to tell me what he makes of this Bible passage. And Bachmann, too, while we are at it.

3.  “Thou shalt not kill” (Exodus 20:13).

Part of the Ten Commandments, this passage has been used by many social conservatives to argue against Roe v. Wade and abortion rights. After all, if God said, “Thou shalt not kill” then why are we taking lives inside the womb?  But if God said, “Thou shalt not kill” then why are we allowing capital punishment?

I would like to hear from both Perry and Bachmann about how they read this passage, and how it can simultaneously justify opposition to abortion rights and support for the death penalty. (During his term as Texas governor, Perry has overseen 234 executions. Bachmann's position on the issue is unclear.)

4.  “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s” (Luke 20:25).

This famous quotation, which appears in parallel form in the Gospels of Mark and Matthew, arises when Jesus is asked a "gotcha" question about paying taxes to the Roman government. It has been read in various ways by various Christians.

Nonetheless, Jesus seems to be drawing a clear distinction here between religious and secular authority - a distinction that neither Perry nor Bachmann appears to see.

Admittedly, neither of these candidates agrees with the famous metaphor of Thomas Jefferson famous metaphor of a “wall of separation between church and state” but does either see a line of demarcation of any sort - a picket fence, perhaps - between “what is Caesar’s” and “what is God’s”?

5.  “Blessed are the poor" (Luke 6:20).

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus famously begins, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:3). In Luke, he says, more simply, “Blessed are the poor, for yours is the kingdom of God” (Luke 6:20).

This Lukan passage is a key source in the social teachings of the Roman Catholic Church for the so-called “preferential option for the poor”—the notion that Christian communities have a particular responsibility to take care of the poor in their midst.

How do Perry and Bachmann read this passage? Did Luke mess up by leaving out "in spirit"? Or did Jesus really say "Blessed are the poor"? And if he did say that, what did he mean by it? Do his words carry any meaning for us today, and to the way we craft our federal budget?

I have more quotations, of course, but these five will do for now.

I presume both candidates will acknowledge that these passages are, in fact, in the Bible. And I take it for granted that, as self-professed Bible-believing Christians, they believe these passages are true. But what truths do they teach? And what import, if any, do those truths have on their public policies?

I understand the impulse to draft Jesus into your political campaign. At least in U.S. politics, Jesus is good for business. But if you are going to call Jesus to your side, you need to let voters know how that affects your politics. Might you change your mind if you saw that a political position of yours was contradicted by the Bible? Or is the Bible a dead letter, useful for invoking divine authority but never for correction or reprove?

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Stephen Prothero.

- CNN Belief Blog contributor

Filed under: Bachmann • Bible • Christianity • Politics • Rick Perry • United States

soundoff (1,020 Responses)
  1. Phyrro

    When Bachmann and Perry combine politics and religion then questions about their religion become fair game because it is part of their politics and policy. The can't espouse their politics and religion and then say questions about their religion are unfair. (See "cake and eat it too").

    August 17, 2011 at 8:29 pm |
    • Kix

      Then the same should be said about Obama. After all, he's had numerous interviews where he brought up his muslm... oops.. "christian" faith

      August 17, 2011 at 9:28 pm |
    • J.W

      Kix if you are gonna say that you need to explain why you think he has Muslim. He has never said he was Muslim nor is anyone in his family Muslim.

      August 18, 2011 at 12:03 pm |
    • Chris

      Actually, J.W, I believe Obama's dad is a Muslim. And, according to Islamic law, that made little baby Barack a Muslim too.
      Now, I'm not saying he didn't reject Islam and convert to Christianity...

      August 18, 2011 at 4:47 pm |
    • J.W

      Well if that is true then I admit I am wrong. The fact still remains that he is now a Christian.

      August 18, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
    • Free

      Chris
      "I believe Obama's dad is a Muslim. And, according to Islamic law, that made little baby Barack a Muslim too."
      On a practical level this is true only if he believes he is too, right? Otherwise all those folks that the Mormons have 'baptized' after they've died are really Mormons somewhere now. Who knows, maybe you'll be made a Mormon after you die?

      August 18, 2011 at 6:15 pm |
    • Sean

      Someone who is truly a Christian, does not call the qur'an "holy." To a christian the qur'an is a false religion and false teaching and wouldn't even think of calling it holy. At best Obama SEEMS to be a liberal christian with conflicting beliefs. But definitely not a muslim.

      August 18, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  2. Kix

    It's too bad Mr. Prothero wasn't as concerned about questioning the "christianity" of Obama when he was running for office. I'm sure if he'd taken a truly unbiased approach to such questioning he'd have found then Senator Obama to be much more lacking in his practice of the faith. Or maybe not, since Mr. Prothero doesn't really seem to understand Christianity as much as he understands political game playing. Oh well, perhaps he'll pose these questions to Obama as well before the 2012 election. Or maybe not, since attacking real Christians is what it's all about and the faux christians like Obama will always get a free ride.

    August 17, 2011 at 8:18 pm |
    • Frogist

      LOL@Kix: That question was not about figuring out who is a "better" Christian. It was about figuring out whether Bachmann is capable of running one of the most powerful countries in the world or will she give over because her religion tells her to and let Marcus do it.

      August 18, 2011 at 11:50 am |
    • Sean

      Maybe you should study and understand what that passage actually means instead of assuming it, the same goes for prothero. The wife submits to her husband (read some commentaries on this) but the husband is to love his wife sacrificially as Jesus loves the church, which is a huge statement considering what he did for those who love him...you know the whole crucifixion thing. Too many people only focus on the wife in this case.

      August 18, 2011 at 6:41 pm |
  3. Incredulous

    He can't suck up to the local religion, he is aspiring to be president of the country. PERIOD. So, if he doesn't find a way to both cater to traditional religions and try to bring us together no chance.

    And before any rabid"s" attack me because I don't share their religious beliefs, deal with it if you want your boy to win.

    You have to remember that this fundamentalism that is prevalent across the southern states, then you either get Obumer or that moron from Louisiana (speculation there), then you will see our country totally ruined.

    So wake up or surrender your life to being searched just like the TSA, when entering any public place. It's coming and while you may have thought "Oh it wouldn't happen to me", that's BS. You need to help find an acceptable way to deal with this. Or don't, byte.

    August 17, 2011 at 7:59 pm |
  4. Jeff

    The US is not a theocracy. Questions like these for candidates are ultimately irrelevant yet pursued because some in the US have become Christian Talibans. God help the US should these a-Christian Christians get more political power.

    August 17, 2011 at 7:48 pm |
  5. Dennis Pence

    As most people tend to do, you have taken the scriptures out of context and manipulating them to fit your needs. As an example, it you understood the commandement "Thou shall not kill" the actual original text, is "Thou shall not murder". The Bible also advocates punishment for crimes and obeying the laws of the land – which, in some cases, requires the death sentence. Jesus prayed and healed publicly, but also prayed privately – although I don't agree with making a spectacle of your prayers.

    August 17, 2011 at 7:44 pm |
    • Free

      But Jesus was supposedly God, and therefore would have been the only individual with the authority to pray in public, right? Was Perry’s show at “The Response” not a 'spectacle' whose aim was to impress the public of his piety? Jesus commented about people like that; they were called the Pharisees.

      August 18, 2011 at 6:09 pm |
  6. Kcc

    I find it amazing that CNN is releasing article after article against Christians and their beliefs. The articles against Christianity must be 5 to 1, verses Muslim, Hindu, etc... It seems they have some vendetta or something - like it is a "sin" to be Christian these days (pardon the pun). Someone please explain this to me.

    August 17, 2011 at 7:23 pm |
    • Mark in Seattle

      "I find it amazing that CNN is releasing article after article against Christians and their beliefs."

      Wrong. There's nothing in here "against Christians and their beliefs"; this is material against hypocritical politicians who want to use those beliefs to control others without even controlling themselves based on those beliefs.

      I grow tired of every time we simply ask politicians to stop forcing their religion on the rest of us, it's somehow an attack on the religion. It's not an attack on your religion, it's the refusal for the rest of us to bow down to your religion just because you happen to believe in it.

      August 17, 2011 at 7:33 pm |
    • Kcc

      @Mark, this example does not explicitly go after Christianity, but when you combine it with the dozens of other articles that try to spin Christians in a negative light it becomes suspect. For example, articles about how Christians misinterpret the bible (as if the article writer really knows) and Anderson Cooper's now nightly rant against anything he can find in Christianity that is remotely disagreeable.

      August 17, 2011 at 8:17 pm |
    • Frogist

      @Kcc: Without actual examples, it's hard to take you seriously. I watch AC360 almost every night and have not ever heard him rant about Christianity once. Seems you are the one who has an agenda.

      August 18, 2011 at 11:55 am |
    • J.W

      I watch Anderson Cooper sometimes just cuz he has Isha Sesay on there.

      August 18, 2011 at 12:00 pm |
    • Free

      Kcc
      There are also dozens of articles that put Christianity in a very positive light. If you examine the blog carefully you'll see a rather balanced treatment of all faiths and the non-believing community as well. However, there is a certain element here who seem to think that this is a 'Christians only' blog. You might want to bring any concerns about 'balance' to them.

      August 18, 2011 at 6:02 pm |
    • Fred1

      No, it’s just when you print the truth about them, Christians look like fools

      August 18, 2011 at 10:00 pm |
  7. Paul

    So many on the left believe it is a terrible thing to be religious. When did this happen? It was not that long ago that Americans believed in God, went to church and prayed for those less fortunate. Now they are the butt of jokes. I think it's sad.
    I wonder how BO and Michele would answer questions about their beliefs.

    August 17, 2011 at 7:04 pm |
    • Ituri

      They've answered them, by keeping it semi-private and not allowing it to run their judgement or policies. If it motivates them, it does it with a respect for our law, and the basis of religious equality and freedom our nation is suppose to have.

      Unlike the zealots Perry and Bachmann, who think praying will "cure the gays" and solve problems in the absence of real action and policy making.

      August 17, 2011 at 7:23 pm |
    • Mark in Seattle

      It's not a terrible thing to be religious. What is a terrible thing is to try to inflict ancient, outdated tribal rules on citizens through national policy that the people trying to push them through can't even abide by themselves. Be religious and live your life your religion, no problem. Stop trying to flash it around and use it as an excuse to attack others and deny them free will through your personal ideology.

      August 17, 2011 at 7:24 pm |
    • Johnny

      +1 for thinking it is terrible to be religious. You're a great example of why.

      August 17, 2011 at 7:39 pm |
    • Free

      Just because you"re not religious doesn't mean that you've stopped thinking about ways to help the poor. Your presumption is either the result of being misinformed, or arrogant.

      August 18, 2011 at 5:55 pm |
  8. Chicagoan1

    I can't think of anything more hypocritical of a non-Christian asking Christian candidates questions about their faith taken out of context of a book that has a context. Are all liberals really this insane and concerned about baiting people they don't disagree with? And why is Christianity the only religion in this country that gets hated on by the mainstream media? The whole philosophy of Jesus was based on love. HOW about you take time to read about it and ask yourself why you hate it so much. The ignorant masses strike again.

    August 17, 2011 at 6:59 pm |
    • Johnny

      You actually believe that you understand the context of a book that has been written, rewritten, translated, mistranslated and edit hundreds of times over the course of a few thousand years?

      ...lolz.

      August 17, 2011 at 7:40 pm |
    • Frogist

      @Chicagoan1: How do you know Mr Prothero isn't a Christian? Are you bearing false witness? I heard that was frowned upon in your neck of the woods.

      August 18, 2011 at 12:00 pm |
    • Free

      Stephen Prothero may describe himself as "religiously confused", but who is to say that he isn't any more confused than the average person of faith, but just more honest about it?

      August 18, 2011 at 5:50 pm |
  9. Vincent Lacey

    Your 5 questions are valid. Bachmann and Perry may have interesting interpretations of the Bible. They, Perry more so hve ties to the New Apostolic Reformation. Which at best are radical Christian evangelicals, at worst a major problem for freedom.

    August 17, 2011 at 6:49 pm |
    • Chris

      Actually, Vincent, Christianity (in it's pure form) is the only religion that can truly tolerate freedom.
      It's sad that, to some degree, Christianity has been hijacked by radicals. But the same holds true for conservatism and liberalism.

      August 18, 2011 at 4:36 pm |
    • Free

      Chris
      'Pure' Christianity, then, can tolerate the freedom to choose another religion, or no religion at all, right? I know many Christians that I would label 'moderate' who have never tried to convert me, and haven't a bad word to say about any other religion. So, would I be correct in identifying these as the pure Christians to which you speak?

      August 18, 2011 at 5:44 pm |
  10. CTE

    This writer has described himself as "religiously confused". Need I say more. I do struggle with the death penalty, but I see absolutely nothing wrong with group prayer. Matthew 18:20 says For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them." He obviously encourages group prayer and worship. It happens every Sunday in churches around this country. By the way, you shouldn't be religiously confused. Jesus said, I am the way, the truth and the life and no one comes to the Father (GOD) except through me. Jesus is GOD's only son. You have to accept Him as such to spend eternity in heaven.. or else spend eternity in Hell separated from HIM.

    August 17, 2011 at 6:48 pm |
    • Free

      Maybe if you're not confused by religion then you aren't trying hard enough to actually understand it? 😉

      August 18, 2011 at 5:37 pm |
    • J.W

      Does the Bible say "If one prayers for show for political purposes I will be with them"?

      August 18, 2011 at 5:41 pm |
  11. Richard

    "Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest." – Denis Diderot

    August 17, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
    • Uncouth Swain

      Guess that also means that the last two ppl on Earth must be a king and priest. Ppl are too much like sheep ever to be really free.

      August 17, 2011 at 9:08 pm |
    • Free

      If anybody has the power to ensure that they survived to be the last two people on Earth it would be a king and priest.

      August 18, 2011 at 5:34 pm |
  12. shades

    Jesus , I think, would be appalled at the outreaced hands of the capable

    August 17, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  13. gctwnl

    I have become less scared by aggressive religious fanatics in Iran getting their hand on a few nuclear bombs, than I am of the US nuclear bombs falling into the hands of aggressive religious fanatics.

    August 17, 2011 at 6:19 pm |
    • shades

      really? thats too bad..
      Is your entire life that sad?

      August 17, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  14. Chris

    You've got to take these in context – at least most of them. I agree with Prothero that Rep. Bachmann needs to answer the question, simply because she's the one that brought it up in the first place. As for Matthew 6:6, remember that Jesus also tells us that if we deny Him before man, He will deny us before the Father (Matthew 10:33). The quote of Exodus 20:13 is simply wrong. It says "You shall not murder." The Hebrew word also covers causing human death through carelessness or negligence. As for Luke 20:25, this is taken out of context as well. The question was about should the Jews pay taxes to Caesar, and was intended to trap Jesus so they could charge Him before the Roman authorities. Jesus said (paraphrasing), "Who's picture is on the money? Then give it back to Caesar. But you belong to God, so give yourself to Him." And as for Luke 6:20, you also have to read verse 24 "But woe to you who are rich, for you have received your consolation." All of this has nothing to do with government taking care of people. WE, those of us who claim to be followers of Jesus Christ, are responsible for taking care of the poor. If indeed you espouse a complete separation of church and state, then this is the only logical conclusion you can come to.

    August 17, 2011 at 6:19 pm |
    • Chris2

      You are right, Chris. And the first quote should be taken in context also of verse 21: "Submit yourselves to one another..." Paul is radically teaching humility, respect, love, compassion in the forceful Roman world. I'll vote for that!

      August 17, 2011 at 6:56 pm |
    • SD

      Thank you! Clearly this Blog is written by someone who either 1) doesn't know how to read in context, or 2) wrote it to mislead those who don't know the Bible. I think the latter, and that is a shame.

      August 17, 2011 at 7:10 pm |
    • Keith

      Well said, Chris.

      August 17, 2011 at 10:22 pm |
    • Free

      If this were the case then shouldn't Evangelicals now be teaching that all those women who had to promise to obey their husbands were wrong in doing so, and that that tradition was based on a false interpretation? I wonder if Bachmann promised to obey her husband?

      August 18, 2011 at 5:30 pm |
  15. Mister Jones

    You can not ask logical questions of an illogical system (such as religion) and expect intelligent answers.

    August 17, 2011 at 6:16 pm |
  16. Dave Davis

    Ther are some even better questions and answers concerning America's leaders and the Bible. However I have couple of answers that will have to do for now. 1. In the old Testament, there are women leaders of (non-Christian) Israel. Miriam, Deborah, Hester, to name a few. They show how a godly woman can be alternately submissive AND worthy of leadership, depending on the situation. 2.The same Ten Commandments that are PART of the Law of Moses are not broken by a decision to execute a murderer, defend your own home or to defend this Nation. The Old Testament laws quoted by the Lord at the beginning of the New Testament are clear about what it means to "committ murder". 3. I believe that the author of this article and many other self-proclaimed liberal know-it-alls actually know better than the foolish drivel they constantly churn out.

    August 17, 2011 at 6:06 pm |
  17. ipribadi

    Boils down to:
    How would Jesus live as a modern day US citizen? Would he be a law abiding citizen or an outlaw?

    What did the bible say how he lived in a land ruled by Romans and entrenched in Judaism?
    "Thy shall not kill" was given before God commanded the kings of Israel to "destroy" their enemies sparing none.
    How is wealth and poverty measured? Is it simply a state of mind based on relative comparisons?
    Jesus mentioned that "the poor will always be with you, but you will not always have me", does Jesus not care?

    God will give higher understanding to those who seek Him.

    August 17, 2011 at 6:00 pm |
    • shades

      I think Jesus would preach self responsibility with all the bounty at our disosal, theres no famine, no physical reason not to rely on ones self for what you need. teacha man to fish, dont give him fish...Im sure you've read that havnt you

      August 17, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  18. gateway

    Excellent questions! Would love to see some answers.

    August 17, 2011 at 5:26 pm |
  19. wwajdblogger

    Professor Stephen, where is my favorite bible passage? “The government authorities that exist have been established by God." (Romans 13:1). There is "no doubt that America has a special relationship with God." (Jordan Sekulow, American Center for Law and Justice). If Jesus were born today, he would surely choose to be an American. Our country was founded so he could rule on earth. He has made us the greatest and strongest country on the planet, not because we have vast natural resources or a legal system founded on the rule of law, but because Jesus wants it that way.
    So let's ask our candidates what they think about THAT bible passage.

    http://www.whatwouldamericanjesusdo.com

    August 17, 2011 at 5:12 pm |
    • Keith

      "If Jesus were born today, he would surely choose to be an American." - Amazing. Simply amazing. Apparently not Israeli. Self-righteous self-centeredness is always amazing to behold.

      August 17, 2011 at 6:08 pm |
    • Free

      The British and, before them, the Romans also 'knew' that they had a special relationship with God, and you can see where that got them. Have you ever considered that such arrogant presumption might anger your God and be the cause of our present economic downswing? Think about it!

      August 18, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  20. Keith

    Prothero, Once again, DON'T quit your job with the Ministry of Truth. If you were a farmer, you would have had loose clothing wound up in a PTO shaft a looooong time ago. Do they really PAY you for your incompetence?

    August 17, 2011 at 5:04 pm |
    • Jim

      And which university do you do your scholarly work at?

      August 17, 2011 at 5:13 pm |
    • Keith

      Professors have to be some of the most stupid people on the planet.

      August 17, 2011 at 10:18 pm |
    • Jim

      So, you're saying that the experts in biblical interpretation are the biggest incompetents, and that the untrained armchair Bible readers out there, few of whom can agree to any degree, are the real authorities? That's like saying that witch doctors are better at medicine than trained MDs.

      August 18, 2011 at 12:13 am |
    • Keith

      I don't care how many degrees Prothero has-unless you're born again, you can't understand the scriptures. But in his case, he doesn't read them. The death penalty is mandated for murderers in the Bible. Leviticus 24:17 "And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death." Now, there's an acception for accidental death, but it's pretty straight forward. Prothero is either ignorant or being intentionally deceptive, or both. If he is blaspheming the name of the Lord, then he should read verse 16.

      August 18, 2011 at 9:50 am |
    • Frogist

      @Keith: Isn't it also clear that Jesus said to "turn the other cheek"?
      BTW LOL@ that whole born again thing. That's an excuse, a diversion, so that you can condemn those who disagree with you without providing a cogent argument.

      August 18, 2011 at 12:13 pm |
    • J.W

      I take it that Keith is Jewish. He reads the first 5 books of the Bible and nothing else.

      August 18, 2011 at 12:16 pm |
    • Free

      Keith
      Don't you mean that, unless you are born again but more importantly take it on faith that the scriptures cannot be in error, then you can't help but be bothered by the incredible number of inconsistencies and outright errors found within them?

      "And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death."
      Didn't Moses murder an Egyptian man?

      "Glancing this way and that and seeing no one, he killed the Egyptian and hid him in the sand."
      Exodus 2:12

      I know that he wrote the law on this afterwards, but if Cain is still considered a murderer then he should be too, right?

      August 18, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
    • Keith

      Frogist, let me guess...You know two more verses, "judge not lest ye be judged" and "let he who is without sin cast the first stone"?

      August 18, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
    • Keith

      Free, Moses did pen the Pentatuech, but as with all the writers of the Bible, it was inspired by God.

      August 18, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
    • Keith

      Free, have you ever thought of someone with hate? If so, you just qualified as a murderer.

      August 18, 2011 at 5:58 pm |
    • J.W

      So are you saying Jesus is wrong Keith? You still havent explained that.

      August 18, 2011 at 6:00 pm |
    • Keith

      J.W. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:1. Don't put words in my mouth. When did I say Jesus was wrong? I did not. There is nothing to explain. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. v.5

      August 18, 2011 at 7:56 pm |
    • Free

      Keith
      But I've never actually killed anyone while Moses did, and he attempted to cover up his crime as well. Moses wouldn't fair well in Texas.

      August 19, 2011 at 12:34 am |
    • Free

      Keith
      "the Bible, it was inspired by God."

      Like how Twilight was inspired by Pride and Prejudice? 😉

      August 19, 2011 at 12:43 am |
    • Keith

      Free, are you saying you've hated someone? If so, then, when you stand in judgement before a Holy God, you will be guilty. Moses repented. He will be found "not guilty" based on the fact that he was an old testament saint. What will you claim as your defense?

      August 19, 2011 at 1:19 pm |
    • Free

      Keith
      Ah, no! I've disliked as few people in my life, but never enough to hate them to the point where I actually thought about killing them, which I thought was your point. You can argue that thinking about killing someone being as bad as actually doing it, but that's just silly. People have all kinds of random thoughts and dreams. That's normal, but acting on them is a whole other thing.

      Where, exactly, in the Bible does it say that Moses repented and made it to heaven as a 'saint', and who are you to pass judgment and declare him 'not guilty', or me 'guilty'? I thought you folks believed only God can do that?

      August 20, 2011 at 12:43 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
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.