home
RSS
Romney's faith a factor for GOP primary?
November 24th, 2011
12:03 AM ET

Romney's faith a factor for GOP primary?

By Rebecca Stewart, CNN

(CNN) – If half the public says they don't know very much about Mormonism and one-third of Republicans say the Mormon religion is not a Christian faith, how will GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney fare in his bid for the White House?

According to a new national survey, it won't affect Romney in a hypothetical general election faceoff with President Barack Obama, but his Mormon faith may have an impact on the former Massachusetts governor's chances in the GOP primaries and caucuses.

Romney is seeking the Republican presidential nomination for a second time and, as it turns out, opinions about his religion haven't changed since he ran the first time, in 2007.

A Pew Research Center poll released late Tuesday indicates that 52% of Americans said they knew "not very much" or nothing about the Mormon religion in 2007, when Romney sought the presidency for the first time, and 50% say the same now. The number who say Mormonism is a Christian religion-51%–is the same in 2011 as it was in 2007.

Full Story

- Dan Merica

Filed under: Mitt Romney • Mormonism • Politics • Polls

soundoff (413 Responses)
  1. AvdBerg

    Mitt Romney’s faith is not in the true and living God but rather the god of this world (Matthew 24:24; 2 Cor. 11:13-15; Gal. 4:8).

    The Mormon Church is no different than any other religion and serves the same spirit. Why are the Mormons so determined to put one of their members into The White House? For a better understanding of the 180 year history of the Mormon Church and their hidden agenda, we invite you to read the article ‘Mormon Church ~ Cult and Spiritual Harlot’ listed on our website http://www.aworlddeceived.ca

    The following is an excerpt from the article.

    “* The General Authorities (Mormon Church leaders) are bent on replacing the American free and pluralistic society with a society controlled and governed not by freely elected officials, but by the male hierarchy of the Mormon Church who would control the appointment of all elected officials, including the congressional members, governors, state legislators, local officials and even the President of the United States. The ultimate plan of the Mormon Church and its authorities is to take all power to themselves, their President/Prophet becoming the king of the world.”

    The members of the Mormon Church (and other religions) are spiritually blind and do not understand that God’s kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36; Isa. 9:6; Dan. 2:44; 7:14; Luke 17:20,21; John 17:14-16). God would have certainly not have asked Mitt Romney to be President of the United States of America, as most GOP Candidates claim.

    Mitt Romney was born in sin (1 Peter 1:23), as were all the other GOP Candidates and unless they repent they will die in their sin (Romans 8:13). They are spiritually blind and do not know what spirit they serve (Luke 9:55). Their faith does not stand in Jesus Christ and the church Mitt Romney belongs to serves after an image of a false god and a false Christ (Matthew 24:24). They do service unto them which by nature are no gods (Gal. 4:8). As a result of their spiritual blindness they do not know that all the other GOP Candidates are of the same spirit as well (darkness).

    For a better understanding what it means to be a sinner we invite you to read the articles ‘What is Sin’ and ‘Victory over Sin’, listed on our website http://www.aworlddeceived.ca
    It is not the same what they teach at BYU or in Mormon temples, which is after worldly wisdom and not after God (1 Cor. 2:14). How can they ask the members of your church for 10% of their wages to build new temples, some of them who can hardly afford it, while the Bible teaches us that God dwelleth not in temples made with hands (Acts 7:48; 17:24). Do you have any idea how much they spend in Salt Lake City on the Pagan Celebration of Christmas?

    God does not need any money to provide for his people. Remember the fish and the few loaves of bread and how he looked after a host of almost two million people that wondered through the desert and wilderness for forty years?

    As far as Joseph Smith Jr. (founder of the Mormon Church) being a ra_ist and a murderer. Would the Vatican inform the members of the Catholic Church that they are responsible for the killing of millions of people in the cruelest ways anyone can imagine? Surely not!! Many buildings and castles in Western Europe still display the torture chambers where the blood flowed of people because they did not accept Vatican doctrines. Please read the article ‘Popes and the Princes of This World’ listed on our website. Joseph Smith Jr. ra_ed and killed people for the same reason and the Mormon Church is not going to disclose any of this during the history lessons at BYU.

    Concerning the faith of Barack Obama, we invite you to read the article ‘Barack Obama ~ President of the United States of America’.

    Also, to give people a better understanding of the destructive forces behind CNN and US Politics and the issues that divide this world, we invite you to read the article ‘CNN Belief Blog ~ Sign of the Times’.

    All of the other pages and articles listed on our website explain how this whole world has been deceived as confirmed by the Word of God in Revelation 12:9. The Bible is true in all things and is the discerner of every thought and the intent of the heart (Hebrews 5:12). The truth is that the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned (1 Cor. 2:14). This is why we call all of mankind to repentance.

    Seek, and ye shall find (Matthew 7:7).

    November 27, 2011 at 8:31 am |
    • Internet Biz

      Your faith is measured by your doings. That is what God judges
      http://www.internetbizjunkie.com

      November 27, 2011 at 9:36 am |
    • .....

      TROLL ALERT – click the report abuse link to get rid of this TROLL. Don't bother viewing their site its in support of their cult. All they are doing is peddling their book and website.

      November 28, 2011 at 6:17 pm |
    • Yeah

      "The Mormon Church is no different than any other religion and serves the same spirit. Why are the Mormons so determined to put one of their members into The White House? For a better understanding of the 180 year history of the Mormon Church and their hidden agenda, we invite you to read the article ‘Mormon Church "

      Hey look MORE opinions and NOT the word of God.

      November 28, 2011 at 6:18 pm |
    • TL

      What is the intent behind your posts?

      November 29, 2011 at 12:12 am |
  2. Wonder

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ofNBuMdrbcg

    November 26, 2011 at 9:28 pm |
  3. Fred

    Mormonism is a cult, so it definitely is a major concern for the GOP. It would almost be as bad as voting a Muslim into office. Oh, wait, we already did that!

    November 26, 2011 at 9:13 pm |
    • Erik

      Only truly uneducated and theologically ignorant people would consider the LDS church a cult.

      November 26, 2011 at 10:13 pm |
    • hn

      So you believe that Obama is a muslim. Even Rush Limbaugh uses more brain cells than you.
      So your religion is not a cult? Does not it have a spiritual leader and book telling you what to do a dn what not to do? How is that any different from Mormonism or Islam or any other religion?
      You must think that the accident that your were born of was from a tough of god or something, right? The reality is that those days condoms were not strong enough and that night it brock. Sorry to bust your bubble, Fred.

      November 27, 2011 at 1:36 am |
    • johnfrichardson

      Flying the flag of ignorance again, Fred?

      November 27, 2011 at 8:34 am |
  4. Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

    So, on the Friday after Thanksgiving, instead of either spending their time with family and friends or devoting their energies to helping the homeless, the lonely, the sick, and the hungry, Heaven Sent and Chard spent their day here bellowing their beliefs and castigating all who don't share them or who question them.

    I'm sure Jesus wept.

    November 26, 2011 at 6:16 pm |
  5. TL

    In the quest to be right, how much damage is caused?

    November 26, 2011 at 6:02 pm |
    • Abinadi

      I am tired of the hypocrisy and experience tells me it is probably true.

      November 26, 2011 at 6:33 pm |
  6. LMB123

    AvdBerg – your post makes it sound that helping the poor and downtrodden is against Christ's gospel. That is the most twisted thinking I've ever seen, and clearly from the father of all lies.

    As for Joseph Smith being a rapist that is a false accusation. I could make the same accusations against you – would that make it true? Brigham Young did practice plural marriage, we don't deny that. There was a purpose for it.

    Anyway- Abraham the great prophet of the Old Testament who is revered by Christians, Jews and Muslims alike also practiced plural marriage. Polygamy is ok but only when God allows it for his specific purposes.

    November 26, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  7. AvdBerg

    @LBM123 & Abinadi

    One of your postings confirmed again what spirit you are of and what spirit you and your friend Mitt Romney serve (Luke (9:55; John 14-16). The Bible speaks of the natural and the spiritual body (1 Cor. 15:44) and your works are all after the natural spirit.

    Did you not even know that the word 'poor' does not speak of being poor in a material sense but speaks of those that are 'spiritually poor' (Matthew 5:3). You also used the word 'Humanitarian'. Did you not even know that friendship with this world and human nature is enmity with God (Romans 8:7; James 4:4)? Did you not even know that tsunamies and earthquakes are the works of God? The Bible has too many confirmation to list them all, but do you remember the story of the apostles being in prison and God creating an earthquake? Did you not even know that Joseph Smith Jr. used words from the Bible that he stole as you are but had no spiritual knowledge as they are spiritually discerned (1 Cor. 2:14)? Did you not even know that Joseph Smith Jr. was a rapist and a murderer as was Brigham Young? Can you imagine marrying 55 wives and still claiming to be a servant of God! Check your archives, this is a true fact and at the same time open your heart to the truth.

    As the Mormons are trying to establish a worldly kingdom with a Mormon as its head, it is in oppostion of the teachings of Christ as God's Kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36; 17:14-16). Did you not even know that Christ did not even pray for this world (John 17:9), so why would the Mormoms try to save it?

    For a better understanding of the history of the Mormon Church and the spirit it serves we invite you to read the article 'Mormon Church ~ Cult and Spiritual Harlot' on our website http://www.aworlddeceived.ca

    All of the other pages and articles listed on our website explain how this whole world has been deceived as confirmed by the Word of God in Revelation 12:9. The Bible is true in all things and is the discerner of every thought and the intent of the heart (Hebrews 5:12). The truth is that the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned (1 Cor. 2:14). This is why we call all of mankind to repentance.

    Seek, and ye shall find (Matthew 7:7).

    November 26, 2011 at 5:04 pm |
    • Abinadi

      I have learned that a person who calls the Lord's prophets rapists is usually a hypocrite and an adulterer. Is that true, Avd? How many lovers do you have?

      November 26, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
    • Abinadi

      Ok, Ok, the spirit is telling me I went too far on that one and I need to apologize. Sorry, Avd. You made me angry.

      November 26, 2011 at 6:45 pm |
    • obserer

      Really?-your posts have no relevance to the topic that is being dicussed in this thread. which part of the earlier post you failing to comprehend?

      You must be a real dense

      November 27, 2011 at 7:12 pm |
  8. David Johnson

    @Chad

    Odds and ends that I didn't comment on in my earlier posts:

    Wouldn't Die For a Lie
    Josh McDowell popularized this argument, as "proof" that the resurrection happened. The argument states that no one would die for something they knew to be false. So, since the disciples died, the resurrection must have occurred.
    This argument has a problem. People may not die for something they know to be false, but they would and do die for something they believe in.
    Believers, are willing (expected?) to endure hardships in exchange for a reward. The greater the perceived reward the greater the hardship they are willing to suffer.
    2 Timothy 2:3
    "Endure hardship with us like a good soldier of Christ"
    People have often died for things they believed to be true. Muslim extremists, blow themselves to bits, because they believe in an afterlife overflowing with virgins. Does their willingness to die, make the promise of virgins real?
    Consider Jonestown, Heaven's Gate and the Solar Temple . Do you think these people might have willingly died for a lie? Yep, all it takes is faith.
    Believers are victims of delusion. Dying for a belief, doesn't make it true.

    Concerning the 500 witnesses:

    1 Corinthians 15:5-8 where Paul says five-hundred people saw Jesus after his resurrection.
    And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. (KJV).

    Notice how it wasn't REALLY 500 people who reported seeing this reanimated carpenter / stone mason. It was only one person - Paul. Hmm... He didn't bother to take down any eyewitness accounts, something that would have been solid evidence. Paul could have proclaimed 500 or a million. Easy when its just story telling.

    Your god is very unlikely to exist.

    Cheers!

    November 26, 2011 at 4:52 pm |
    • Jared

      You happen to know with certainity the lives and times of the lord. Do you know what happened to the disciples as well?

      November 26, 2011 at 5:05 pm |
    • Abinadi

      David, you are full of baloney.

      November 26, 2011 at 5:07 pm |
    • Davey

      Suicide is a wilful act by a person.
      None of the disciples other than Judas committed suicide. Where did you get that from?

      November 26, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
    • Jose

      You may also want to enlighten us about why Saul became Paul?

      November 26, 2011 at 5:58 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Jared

      You said: "You happen to know with certainity the lives and times of the lord. Do you know what happened to the disciples as well?"

      The argument is used, that since the disciples were martyred because they would not recant their belief, that this proves Jesus was reanimated. No one would die for a lie.

      My argument shows this isn't true. Many terrorists die for a belief. Unless you think their dying, "proves" Allah is real?

      I bet there are people in any given church that would be willing to die rather than to deny their god. And they are working on PURE belief and faith.

      Cheers!

      November 26, 2011 at 6:09 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Davey

      I never said they took their own life. The story goes, that most were martyred. Read my comment to Jarred.

      Cheers!

      November 26, 2011 at 6:11 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Abinadi

      You said: "David, you are full of baloney."

      No, you are just mad because your sky daddy is no more real than Santa.

      I'm sorry if it hurts.

      Cheers!

      November 26, 2011 at 6:13 pm |
    • Jared

      The disciples of Jesus were a unique brand as they had witnessed in person the miracles, the crucifiction and the resurrection. They stood by their belief because they had witnessed everything about Jesus. They died in the process of testifying and witnessing what they had seen.

      Let us say that you have discovered some valuable medicinal information that will save human life, you are being threatened with a counter action (by the medical companies due to some vested interest), if you were going forward with your claims.If you moved forward with your claims that you have proof to be true would that make you delusional?

      As a side note:
      A person who chooses to take their own life is different from someone whose life is taken from them. While the former is delusional, the latter is not.

      November 26, 2011 at 7:41 pm |
    • Chad

      @David Johnson "People may not die for something they know to be false, but they would and do die for something they believe in."

      =>your logic requires that they believe in something they know to be false.. which is basically the same problem.. You are basically asserting that even though they knew that the resurrection was a lie, and all of their belief system a lie, they still died for it.

      @David Johnson "Believers, are willing (expected?) to endure hardships in exchange for a reward. The greater the perceived reward the greater the hardship they are willing to suffer."
      =>what reward? If they knew it to be a false belief, they knew there was no reward.

      The thing you just always miss, is that without the resurrection, Christianity fails.
      If they believed the resurrection was a fake, it makes -zero- sense for them to have died for it.

      The only atheist option is to believe in some kind of mass hallucination.

      November 26, 2011 at 8:23 pm |
    • AtheistSteve

      No...the atheist option is to accept that the stories are fabrications and that none of the proposed sightings ever really happened.

      November 26, 2011 at 8:27 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @AtheistSteve

      You said: "No...the atheist option is to accept that the stories are fabrications and that none of the proposed sightings ever really happened."

      Thank you Steve. I was tired of the conversation. You are exactly right.

      Cheers!

      November 26, 2011 at 8:46 pm |
    • Chad

      @AtheistSteve "No...the atheist option is to accept that the stories are fabrications and that none of the proposed sightings ever really happened."

      =>ah, the whole "Jesus is a myth, He never existed" viewpoint, well, you can certainly try it. However I would point out that the formost atheist currently (Richard Dawkins) believes Jesus was a real person.

      It turns out the Richard Dawkins is a member of "Atheists for Jesus"

      "Of course Jesus was a theist, but that is the least interesting thing about him. He was a theist because, in his time, everybody was. Atheism was not an option, even for so radical a thinker as Jesus. What was interesting and remarkable about Jesus was not the obvious fact that he believed in the God of his Jewish religion, but that he rebelled against many aspects of Yahweh's vengeful nastiness. At least in the teachings that are attributed to him, he publicly advocated niceness and was one of the first to do so" -Richard Dawkins
      http://richarddawkins.net/articles/20-atheists-for-jesus

      The "Jesus is a myth" theory is intellectually indefensible.

      November 26, 2011 at 9:12 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Chad

      You said: " the whole "Jesus is a myth, He never existed" viewpoint, well, you can certainly try it. However I would point out that the formost atheist currently (Richard Dawkins) believes Jesus was a real person.

      It turns out the Richard Dawkins is a member of "Atheists for Jesus"

      It turns out that Dawkins is a biologist. Not a historian. Dawkins doesn't even believe in a god. He is intelligent. He is comparing the supposed teachings of Jesus Vs. the Christian gods and other myths.

      I have posted my arguments against there ever being a Jesus, several times. You have not answered any of my arguments.

      I have answered any you have posted, including Paul's "500 witnesses" and "That people would not die for a lie".

      Your demigod has no clothes.

      Cheers!

      The "Jesus is a myth" theory is intellectually indefensible.

      November 27, 2011 at 12:00 am |
    • johnfrichardson

      @Chad All we have is after the fact claims about who the disciples even were (the list tends to vary from source to source) and what they supposedly believed and therefore did. ALL of it is just a bunch of stories absent corroboration. There were many tall tales said of many people back then. Why hang your hat on this one? And there have been many, many people who have been devoted to a person or cause until their death. Indeed, it is an extremely common phenomenon. Indeed, look at all the so-called heretics that Christians themselves killed who refused to recant their beliefs. Once you convince yourself that you know some special truth that bestows some special status on you, there's no telling what you will be willing to endure to cling to that sense of specialness. IF the gospels are even sort of true, the disciples are just another handful of people who have gone down this psychological path. They died for a fiction because they refused to admit it was a fiction, so heavily invested were they in their special relationship to their now dead leader. Their purported actions prove NOTHING except that they were fairly typical humans, people prone to enormous error.

      November 27, 2011 at 8:50 am |
    • Chad

      John: "They died for a fiction because they refused to admit it was a fiction, so heavily invested were they in their special relationship to their now dead leader."

      =>you keep saying that, but you offer absolutely no evidence for it other than your personal conviction.
      On the other hand, there are several pieces of concrete data that we know to be true.

      In all the below, remember that written Gospel accounts were circulating 20-30 years after Jesus death/resurrection at a time when many folks that personally witnessed the events were still alive to challenge them.

      Also, remember that the early Christians were intensely persecuted as a heretical sect and ANY factual misrepresentation in the Gospel accounts would have been pounced on as proof that the new sect was heretical and could be discounted.

      1. there was a tomb
      –a. Gospels record Joseph of Arimathea as having supplied the tomb
      –b. Had there NOT been a tomb, Jewish authorities seeking to discredit this new sect that they believed to be a heresy, could simply have pointed out that there was no tomb that Jesus could have risen from.

      2. the tomb was empty
      - a. Jewish authorities accused Christians of stealing the body
      - b. Had the tomb still contained the body of Jesus, those authorities could simply have pointed out that fact and destroyed the central tenant of this new sect.

      3. hundreds of people reporting seeing a resurrected Jesus
      - a. there can be zero doubt that the behavior of the disciples radically changed upon reporting that they witnessed a risen Christ. From denying the knew Jesus, hiding from authorities to proclaiming it publicly and enduring beatings/torture for same

      Those are facts, not speculation and personal opinion.

      The weird part of this exchange, is that the supposedly "faith based" person is offering concrete data, while the supposedly "science/factual based" person is offering only personal conviction in the face of opposing data (no counter data).
      A very common pattern on this blog...

      David, I have addressed all your points, I would submit that you post so much cut and pasted nonsense that you are probably unfamiliar with the content and don't recognize a refutation.

      November 27, 2011 at 9:58 am |
    • What the...

      Hey, I have an idea...why don't we start a debate about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Please support your position with "facts". Sheesh!

      November 27, 2011 at 12:13 pm |
    • Really?

      @Chad – using the bible as evidence supporting biblical claims is just plain moronic. Stop already.

      November 27, 2011 at 12:29 pm |
    • Jared

      Two of the gospels Matthew and John, testify about Jesus who they knew intimately. They say Jesus taught, He was the promised Messiah, the Savior of all mankind. They testify that Jesus verified these claims by working numerous miracles, acts of supernatural power.

      Their testimony is not based on a fleeting glimpse in a crowd. It's based on detailed, personal, face-to-face discourse with Jesus on numerous occasions over an extended period of time after the resurrection. These experiences turned them from skeptics into confident believers.
      A witness who has personal knowledge of the subject matter has the ultimate final authority of what his testimony is. Therefore the testimony of Matthew and John stands.

      November 27, 2011 at 1:28 pm |
    • Really?

      @Jared – using the bible as evidence supporting biblical claims is just plain moronic. Stop already. (Hey, copy & paste sure made that easy.)

      November 27, 2011 at 1:42 pm |
    • obserer

      Really? What do you know about the Bible? you seem to be positive about the Biblical references here?

      November 27, 2011 at 2:07 pm |
    • Really?

      @obserer (sic?) – my knowledge of the bible is irrelevant as I'm not questioning the content of Jared's or Chad's posts. My criticism is directed at the form of their arguments which commit the errors of "circular reasoning" and "begging the question". Consider this argument:
      A – "The bible is the inerrant word of God."
      B – "How do you know this?"
      A – "Because the bible says so."

      Got it?

      November 27, 2011 at 2:48 pm |
    • obserer

      really?-you are a pathetic troll..Did you read DJ's post? How relevant are your comments to DJ's post?

      November 27, 2011 at 4:03 pm |
    • Really?

      @observer – What part of "I'm not questioning the content of Jared's or Chad's posts. My criticism is directed at the form of their arguments" don't you understand? I don't know how I can make it clearer without pictures, but I'll try – I'm addressing Chad's and Jared's posts, not David Johnson (David is doing just fine and needs no help from me). If it's not clear to you now, it never will be.

      November 27, 2011 at 4:26 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Chad

      I didn't want you to miss my answers to stupidity. You simply deny what you know disproves your beliefs.

      I explained and supplied you with a fantastic video. My 13 year old watched and understood. You, not so much. LOL

      You said: "So you're going with "the universe was created out of nothing, by nothing". Ok, that's fine. I don't see how it's possible, but it's a free country."

      Keep re-watching the video. I can understand, after reading your posts, why you are slow at understanding.

      Just because you don't see / understand how it's possible, means nothing. Google: "Argument From Personal Astonishment".

      Then, you told a fib... there are many scholars that believe that. And I already explained that Arguments from Authority aren't effective, if both sides have competent experts.

      You said: " Not sure that you are quite understanding the Gospels, they were written by eye witnesses: John, Mark, Matthew, (Luke wasn't an actual eye witness). within decades of Jesus death/resurrection. This isn't my opinion on the matter, those are facts. You're nonsense about Jesus being a mythical figure is just that. There are ZERO critical scholars that embrace that. ZERO."

      You are an idiot. In my original argument I gave a number of scholars that believe the real authors were not Mathew, Mark, Luke and John. Only the most deluded believe this is so. The average life span in the first century was 29. Mark's Gospel "debuted" in 60 to 70 CE. So Mark must have been running around with Jesus, in diapers. I know, with god all things are possible! There is always a B.S. spin.

      These books are anonymous. They do not purport to have been written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Their t_itles do not affirm it. They simply imply that they are "according" to the supposed teachings of these Evangelists. As Renan says, "They merely signify that these were the traditions proceeding from each of these Apostles, and claiming their authority." Concerning their authorship the Rev. Dr. Hooykaas says: "They appeared anonymously. The t_itles placed above them in our Bibles owe their origin to a later ecclesiastical tradition which deserves no confidence whatever" (Bible for Learners, Vol. III, p. 24).

      Also re-read (try not to move your lips) my original argument on the Gospels.

      I again gave you a video that gives you info on (and where you can get further information) on the Cambrian Explosion.

      You said: "Evolution, again, you are woefully behind the 8-ball there. You need to read up on current thought.

      You mean current thought of Creationists trying ever so hard to falsify evolution.
      As I said, creationists fight like the dickens against evolution. It reveals the entire bible to be a fairy tale.

      Let's look at reality of thought on Evolution:
      "The vast majority of the scientific community and academia supports evolutionary theory as the only explanation that can fully account for observations in the fields of biology, paleontology, anthropology, and others.[22][23][24][25][26] One 1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".[27] An expert in the evolution-creationism controversy, professor and author Brian Alters, states that "99.9 percent of scientists accept evolution".[28] A 1991 Gallup poll of Americans found that about 5% of scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.[29][30]" – Source Wikipedia

      Even the courts (conservative judge) have rejected creationism /Intelligent Design

      Associated Press Updated 12/20/2005 9:20:37 PM ET:

      HARRISBURG, Pa. — In one of the biggest courtroom clashes between faith and evolution since the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, a federal judge barred a Pennsylvania public school district Tuesday from teaching “intelligent design” in biology class, saying the concept is creationism in disguise. "

      Face it Sparky. Christianity is a house of cards and Science is at the door with a bulldozer. LOL 'till my sides ache.

      There is no evidence for your god. Jesus was a myth. Were there some other Jews named Jesus living at the time? Yes. But none pretending to be the Messiah. Could just as well have been Herbie the Christ. LOL.

      There were tons of Messiahs in the first century. The Romans were tough to work for. Can't blame them for making up a savior.

      Stop preaching Chad. You have no evidence that what you are saying is any more true, than Homer's Odyssey. Or any other god past or present.

      You said: "Quality always beats quant*ity when it comes to presenting a viewpoint David..."

      Chad! I give you both quant_ity and quality.

      Cheers!

      November 27, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
    • Really?

      @David Johnson – Hey David...now this is an entertaining thread. I hope Chad has the metal to weigh in again soon.

      November 27, 2011 at 5:03 pm |
    • obserer

      really?-you are stupid. Get it?

      November 27, 2011 at 6:04 pm |
    • Really?

      @obserer – I apologize. I was under the apprehension that this forum was for adult discussion. Had I not made that mistake, I would not have used reason and big words. If you'll forgive me, I'll be your friend and give you my favorite aggie.
      Sheesh!

      November 27, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
    • Chad

      @David Johnson “Then, you told a fib... there are many scholars that believe that”
      =>that believe what? That the universe was created out of nothing, by nothing? Again, I have no problem if you want to believe that, go right ahead.

      @David Johnson “You are an idiot. In my original argument I gave a number of scholars that believe the real authors were not Mathew, Mark, Luke and John”. The average life span in the first century was 29. Mark's Gospel "debuted" in 60 to 70 CE. So Mark must have been running around with Jesus, in diaper
      =>The average of 29 was due to a large number of people who died in the first 15 years of age: “If you made it to 15 yrs old, life expectancy an additional 37 years (total age 52). –wikipedia
      So, since all of Jesus companions were probably at least 15, they could be expected to live another 37 years on average.. Well into authorship time frames. You can argue all you want about who actually wrote it, but two facts remain:
      a) the authors claim to be eyewitnesses
      b) the time frames we are talking about (30-50 years after the resurrection depending on which gospel we are talking about) support authorship by eye witnesses (who would have been in their late 40’s to late 70’s depending). Your assertion fails.
      @David Johnson “I again gave you a video that gives you info on (and where you can get further information) on the Cambrian Explosion.”
      =>so? What did you purport to demonstrate by so doing? You need to get educated on Punctuated Equilibrium and what it claims. I am not a “young earth” Christian, in my view the fossil record is one of the most powerful evidences FOR God we have.
      “The sudden appearance of most species in the geologic record and the lack of evidence of substantial gradual change in most species—from their initial appearance until their extinction—has long been noted, including by Charles Darwin who appealed to the imperfection of the record as the favored explanation” – Wikipedia
      Species “appearing”, “fully formed”, simple to complex, fish first, man last (yes I am aware that birds appear out of order in the bible) – See Genesis 🙂

      The rest of your post was appealing to authority (% of scientists that are creationists, difficulties that ID has had in getting on some curriculum's, and name calling..)

      November 27, 2011 at 6:38 pm |
    • Chad

      @Really? – "using the bible as evidence supporting biblical claims is just plain moronic. Stop already."

      =>utter nonsense. Every book ever written has a viewpoint. Every book that purports to accurately record history needs to be examined critically for internal consistency and for its accuracy in detail. The bible succeeds on all accounts.

      November 27, 2011 at 6:41 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Chad

      John said: "They died for a fiction because they refused to admit it was a fiction, so heavily invested were they in their special relationship to their now dead leader."

      You replied: "you keep saying that, but you offer absolutely no evidence for it other than your personal conviction.
      On the other hand, there are several pieces of concrete data that we know to be true.
      In all the below, remember that written Gospel accounts were circulating 20-30 years after Jesus death/resurrection at a time when many folks that personally witnessed the events were still alive to challenge them."

      My Reply to your nonsense:

      People may not die for something they know to be false, but they would and do die for something they believe in.

      2 Timothy 2:3
      "Endure hardship with us like a good soldier of Christ"
      People have often died for things they believed to be true.
      Muslim extremists, blow themselves to bits, because they BELIEVE in an afterlife overflowing with virgins. Does their willingness to die, make the promise of virgins real?

      Consider Jonestown, Heaven's Gate and the Solar Temple . Do you think these people might have willingly died for a lie? Or do you think since they died, it proves their beliefs were true? They all died for what they BELIEVED to be true.

      So, you have examples. Your "Wouldn't die for a lie" argument is crap.

      You said: " written Gospel accounts were circulating 20-30 years after Jesus death/resurrection at a time when many folks that personally witnessed the events were still alive to challenge them."

      Actually, there are two problems with this. Mark was the first gospel. Created in 60 to 70 CE.
      The average lifespan of people in the 1st century was about 29 years. Very few would have been alive or well enough to dispute much of anything. According to the historian Richard Carrier: "We have reason to believe that only 4% of the population at any given time was over 50 years old; over age 70, less than 2%.
      Source – Wikipedia

      Besides, the stories had been told and retold so often... “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.

      There were no eyewitness accounts of Jesus. The Gospels were written by god knows who in the third person.
      No one bothered to draw a picture or leave a description of Jesus. Even Mohammad has a description.
      There were several historians alive when Jesus was doing all these marvelous things. NONE wrote a word about Him.
      Answer my original arguments, Chad.

      You said: "Also, remember that the early Christians were intensely persecuted as a heretical sect and ANY factual misrepresentation in the Gospel accounts would have been pounced on as proof that the new sect was heretical and could be discounted."

      Sure they were discounted. By the Jews, then by the Romans. Nobody believed any of the stories. There wasn't any proof, even then. LOL
      If it wasn't for Constantine, Christianity would just be one of many religions.

      Note On Gospels:
      Every bit of the Gospels are written to "prove" Jesus was the Messiah. It is just a myth.

      The author of Mathew even admits to Jesus riding on a colt for the sole purpose of fulfilling a prophecy.

      Mathew 21: 1-11
      Now when they drew near Jerusalem, and came to Bethphage at the Mount of Olives, then Jesus sent two disciples, saying to them, “Go into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find a donkey tied, and a colt with her. Loose them and bring them to Me. And if anyone says anything to you, you shall say, ‘The Lord has need of them,’ and immediately he will send them.”

      NOTE THIS NEXT VERSE:

      All this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying:
      “ Tell the daughter of Zion,
      ‘ Behold, your King is coming to you,
      Lowly, and sitting on a donkey,
      A colt, the foal of a donkey."

      It isn't really very hard for the writers of the New Testament to have Jesus fulfill the prophecies. You just choose a prophesy and write away! Many of the so called prophesies did not even pertain to Jesus.

      There were prophesies that the Messiah was supposed to fulfill. The Bible says that the Messiah will:
      A. Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28).
      B. Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6).
      C. Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore." (Isaiah 2:4)
      D. Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: "God will be King over all the world—on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One" (Zechariah 14:9).

      The historical fact is that Jesus fulfilled none of these messianic prophecies.
      The Christians say Jesus will get to these, on a second trip. The Jews say, "The Messiah will not need 2 trips".

      Consider that these prophesies did not get done by Jesus, because there was no one to do them. He was the work of fiction. Unable to do any of these real Messiah tasks.

      There are no known secular writings about Jesus, that aren't forgeries, later insertions, or hearsay. NONE!

      Why couldn't an almighty god have provided huge amounts of evidence for this "Miracle"?

      Only 33% of the world's population are Christians. What an awesome god! ???

      Cheers!

      Cheers!

      November 27, 2011 at 6:43 pm |
    • Really?

      @ Chad – Not only did you fail to address the intent of my post (that "circular reasoning" and "begging the question" are invalid forms of argument), but by stating "Every book that purports to accurately record history needs to be examined critically for internal consistency and for its accuracy in detail. The bible succeeds on all accounts", you have made it clear that I greatly overestimated your intelligence. "The bible succeeds on all counts" relegates you to the kids table...no more participation in conversation with the big people for you.
      @David Johnson – stop wasting your time with Chad...he's hopeless.

      November 27, 2011 at 6:52 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Chad

      In your last post you said: "@David Johnson “You are an idiot. In my original argument I gave a number of scholars that believe the real authors were not Mathew, Mark, Luke and John”.

      2. Not sure that you are quite understanding the Gospels, they were written by eye witnesses: John, Mark, Matthew, (Luke wasn't an actual eye witness). within decades of Jesus death/resurrection. This isn't my opinion on the matter, those are facts. You're nonsense about Jesus being a mythical figure is just that. There are ZERO critical scholars that embrace that. ZERO.

      November 26, 2011 at 7:03 pm | Report abuse |

      Gee, Chad it looks like you claimed the gospels were eyewitness accounts. Guess that make you a liar, huh?

      I weary of you. You use only the bible to support your arguments, and the bible, because it's all you got. Jesus was a myth. Your preaching is just your wishful thinking.

      I wanted anyone listening to your B.S. to be able to read and know your "truth" is just your opinion, formed by an overactive imagination and an ambiguous holy book.

      I won't answer further posts from you. I invite anyone to read our two comments and comment on their content. I think you answered nothing from my initial arguments.

      Cheers!

      November 27, 2011 at 7:07 pm |
    • obserer

      Really?-your posts have no relevance to the topic that is being dicussed in this thread. which part of the earlier post are you failing to comprehend?

      You must be a real dense

      November 27, 2011 at 7:14 pm |
    • Really?

      @obserer – Yup, you're right...I am a "real dense". Sorry for wasting your time.

      November 27, 2011 at 7:43 pm |
    • Chad

      @ David Johnson

      David, that was the most poorly organized post I think I have ever seen. I will attempt to organize and address your points.

      @David Johnson: “People have often died for things they believed to be true (Jonestown, etc).”
      =>The “thing” that Christians believed in and died proclaiming was the resurrection. They believed the resurrection to be true.
      I make the case that as we know there was a powerful group at that time (Jewish authorities who viewed this Christian sect as a heresy) that was very actively attempting to debunk the resurrection, we have powerful evidence that there was a tomb, and the tomb was empty.

      So, we have two things
      a) people died believing the resurrection occurred
      b) there was a tomb, and the tomb was empty, and early attempts to debunk the resurrection were restricted to an accusation of grave robbery by the disciples.

      There is no way that a person robs a grave, then goes to his death refusing to denounce a belief in resurrection. If that person knew the resurrection to be false, they KNEW there was not going to be any “reward”.

      @David Johnson: “So, you have examples. Your "Wouldn't die for a lie" argument is crap”
      =>what I said was that no one dies for something they KNOW is a lie. People die all the time for lies, but they think they are true. The disciples absolutely believed in the truth of the resurrection, at a time when people who were personally witnesses were still alive, and the most powerful group in that culture was actively trying to debunk the resurrection.

      @David Johnson “Gospels couldn’t have been written by eyewitnesses”
      =>Already demonstrated that was nonsense, as you point out Mark is dated 60-70AD(30-40 years after resurrection), latest Gospel of John was 80-100 (50-70 years after) AD.
      Given that if a person made it past 15, the average life expectancy was 52, this is certainly in the range of authorship by eye witnesses. John would have probably been 85 or 90 when he wrote the Gospel of John.

      @David Johnson “Besides, the stories had been told and retold so often...”
      =>We have original manuscripts from 40-50 years after authorship
      “Parts of the New Testament have been preserved in more manuscripts than any other "ancient" work, having over 5,800 complete or fragmented Greek manuscripts, 10,000 Latin manuscripts and 9,300 manuscripts in various other ancient languages including Syriac, Slavic, Gothic, Ethiopic, Coptic and Armenian. The dates of these manuscripts range from c. 125 (the John Ryland's manuscript, P52; oldest copy of John fragments) to the introduction of printing in Germany in the 15th century” wikipedia

      @David Johnson: “There were several historians alive when Jesus was doing all these marvelous things. NONE wrote a word about Him.”
      1) In worldly terms, Jesus was a nobody at the time, he had a three year public ministry then was executed for claiming to be the Jewish Messiah.
      2) There are first/second century extrabilical references to Jesus and Christianity in general. Pliny, Josephus, Suetonius, Tacitus, Mara bar Sarapion, The Talmud.

      @David Johnson “The author of Mathew even admits to Jesus riding on a colt for the sole purpose of fulfilling a prophecy”
      =>no, he is saying that in doing, so Jesus fulfills prophecy.

      @David Johnson “There were prophesies that the Messiah was supposed to fulfill. The Bible says that the Messiah will:”
      =>this is actually your first and only good, fact based point.

      A. Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28).
      =>Jesus IS the temple

      B. Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6).
      =>in process..

      C. Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore." (Isaiah 2:4)
      =>when Jesus returns..

      D. Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: "God will be King over all the world—on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One" (Zechariah 14:9).
      =>when Jesus returns..

      November 27, 2011 at 7:48 pm |
    • Jared

      David J-
      1) Have you heard of Flavius Josephus reference to Jesus?
      2) The Talmud references to Jesus

      November 27, 2011 at 7:59 pm |
    • Jared

      Johnson-You may also want to read Tacitus reference to Jesus for your own edification in addition to the other two references listed above.
      Ofcourse, Chad has provided you an exhaustive list of the direct evidence and witnessl.Thanks Chad.

      November 27, 2011 at 8:24 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Chad

      I will make one more post to you, because someone may see your references and think they are true:

      My only reason for showing there is no real evidence for a Jesus, is to keep people that have not already drank the Kool Aid, from doing so. I could care less about your beliefs.

      Assumptions:

      (1) Jesus died in about 30 C.E.

      (2) Hearsay is not acceptable evidence.

      Hearsay – hear•say/ˈhi(ə)rˌsā/
      Noun: Information received from other people that cannot be adequately substantiated; rumor.
      The report of another person's words by a witness, usually disallowed as evidence in a court of law.

      Synonyms: rumor – report – gossip – whisper – scuttlebutt – crap (mine)

      Hearsay evidence, if allowed, could be used to "prove" the Greek gods and demigods were real. Just as we have a brief mention of Jesus by Joesphus in his Antiquities, Joesphus also mentions Hercules (more times than Jesus), in the very same work (see: 1.15; 8.5.3; 10.11.1). Josephus wasn't born until 37 C.E. Is Hercules real, just because his tales were told?

      Pliny – Pliny the Younger (born: 62 C.E.) – Hearsay

      Josephus – (37 C.E.) – Hearsay

      Suetonius – (69 C.E.) – Hearsay

      I think I'm seeing a pattern...

      Tacitus – (64 C.E.) – Hearsay

      Mara bar Sarapion – Mara Bar-Serapion wrote anytime between 73 CE and the third century CE. – Hearsay

      The Talmud – (The Babylonian Talmud) – References probably date back to the Tannaitic period (70–200 CE). These early possible references to Jesus have little historical information independent from the gospels. – Hearsay

      I bet god is totally ashamed of you, Chad.

      Think how badly I would beat you, if I were only arguing that, Jesus was not the Messiah.

      I'm done.

      Cheers!

      November 27, 2011 at 9:19 pm |
    • Jared

      Johnson-
      A historian is a person who studies and writes about the past and is regarded as an authority on it.[1] Historians are concerned with the continuous, methodical narrative and research of past events as relating to the human race; as well as the study of all history in time. If the individual is concerned with events preceding written history, the individual is a historian of prehistory. Although "historian" can be used to describe amateur and professional historians alike, it is reserved more recently for those who have acquired graduate degrees in the discipline.[2] Some historians, though, are recognized by equivalent training and experience in the field.[2] "Historian" became a professional occupation in the late nineteenth century at roughly the same time that physicians also set standards for whom could enter the field.

      It does appear that you have failed in your understanding of what historians have historically recorded. You first have to start with the definition of how history is written before you can proceed with calling something hearsay. That reflects very poorly on your ability to reason.

      November 27, 2011 at 9:26 pm |
    • Jared

      Johnson-Oh, btw personally, direct evidence is always preferable(atleast in my field of work), am not sure what your field of work is or how you go about reasoning and keep coming to conclusions without looking at the evidence?

      For your enlightenment you may also want to study the witness of the disciples that have been preserved.

      November 27, 2011 at 9:46 pm |
    • Chad

      @David Johnson "Hearsay is not acceptable evidence."
      Noun: Information received from other people that cannot be adequately substantiated; rumor.
      The report of another person's words by a witness, usually disallowed as evidence in a court of law."

      =>agreed, hearsay is bad. But, are we talking about hearsay here?
      The key to something being hearsay is "that [which] cannot be adequately substantiated". You go on in your post to essentially claim that anything someone relates someone else did/said is hearsay, which is obviously NOT true, as then every historian that ever lived would be engaged in nothing else than hearsay, and no evidence would be admissible in court other than a confession by the perpetrator. Obviously you are misusing the word.

      So, we can critically examine evidence provided by one person, when they are reporting on another person. After all, that's what our news agencies do every day, right? It's all about credibility, are you a trustworthy source, have you lied in the past, can we corroborate what you are saying from other sources.

      @David Johnson: "Hearsay evidence, if allowed, could be used to "prove" the Greek gods and demigods were real. Just as we have a brief mention of Jesus by Joesphus in his Antiquities, Joesphus also mentions Hercules (more times than Jesus), in the very same work (see: 1.15; 8.5.3; 10.11.1). "
      =>so you have gone from NO HISTORIAN OF THE TIME MENTIONS JESUS to "well, that guy also mentions Hercules".
      More importantly, the fact that someone can be mistaken about Hercules being real, doesn't mean that he is wrong about Jesus, just as a person being right about Hercules being not real wouldn't prove in and of itself that Jesus was real (if he held that belief).
      Corroboration is the key. Multiple sources. Biblical and extra-biblical.

      @David Johnson "Pliny (born: 62 C.E.) Josephus (37 C.E.), Suetonius (69 C.E.) Tacitus – (64 C.E.) – Hearsay Tacitus – (64 C.E.), Mara bar Sarapion , Talmud [All}Hearsay"
      =>No, you are misusing the word. Just because a historian is not a contemporary of the subject doesn't disqualify them as a source of information that can be relied upon. Again, your definition would condemn all historians to be mere purveyors of rumor. Obviously you see the problem.
      Funny how quickly you flipped from "No historian mentions Jesus" to "Anything a historian says is hearsay"

      November 27, 2011 at 10:26 pm |
    • Chad

      @ Really? "Not only did you fail to address the intent of my post (that "circular reasoning" and "begging the question" are invalid forms of argument)"

      =>you're claiming that any reference to persons/events using the Bible as the source consti tutes circular reasoning, or begging the question.

      Lets see:
      "Begging the question (or peti tio principii, "assuming the initial point") is a type of logical fallacy in which the proposition to be proven is assumed implicitly or explicitly in the premise"
      To qualify here, one would have to take as a baseline premise (without any further substantiation) the validity of everything in the bible.
      Clearly I haven't done that, ALL OF my posts correlate the events and people in the bible with science, our understanding of the origins of the universe, the fossil record, docu mented secular history, philosophy (morals) etc. If I ONLY EVER used the content of the Bible as a source that would (perhaps) be different, but all you have to do is scroll up to see that I use all sorts of other information.

      "Circular reasoning, or in other words, paradoxical thinking, is a type of formal logical fallacy in which the proposition to be proved is assumed implicitly or explicitly in one of the premises".
      If I only ever said, "of course the bible is true, it says it's true", that would be circular reasoning, but again, all you have to do is scroll up to see that is a inaccurate accusation.

      so, no, my posts are neither circular reasoning or begging the question. If they were then telling me that I misspelled a word would be an example of same
      "you misspelled that word"
      " no I didnt"
      "yes you did, there"s a book that has all the correct spellings"
      "it says it has all the correct spellings?"
      "yes"
      "well, then it cant be consulted, that would be circular reasoning"

      November 27, 2011 at 10:44 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Jared
      @Chad

      I know it stings to think your Jesus was made up. I'm truly sorry.

      Guys! There were no eyewitnesses to Jesus! None. Not the Gospel writers whoever they were. Certainly not the the list of people you gave me. They were born too late. Christians and others either "put words in their mouths", or simply relayed the myth to them. Or do you think they actually saw Jesus, even before they were born? Historians do indeed look at different sources and come to conclusions. But in this case, No one wrote about Jesus until Paul, about 25 years after Jesus' supposed death. Even Paul never met Jesus.

      Why was most of Mark copied into Mathew- verse by verse – and also Luke, only not as much. Not very Jesus was real sort of stuff, is it? More like... oh damn! We need more people claiming this, sort of stuff. Quick, copy this one!

      Show me something guys! Hercules has more written about him and he has descriptions and even marble busts in his likeness. Jesus may not have even been able to write. Or could He not, because He didn't really exist? Hercules had the same problem.

      The gospels talk about all the miracles and crowds and yet, all the historians missed them? B.S.
      The historians of the time didn't write about Jesus, because the miracles and crowds hadn't had time to be invented. LOL

      Why don't you believe that an angel authenticated the Book of Mormon, in spite of the purported eyewitness statement that comes with every copy of the book? Certainly this is better evidence than for Jesus. Yet, I bet you choose Jesus but won't consider the eyewitnesses for the Book of Mormon.

      You don't find it odd that an all powerful god could not leave tons of evidence? Evidence enough to at least convince a majority of the earth's population?

      Read my original arguments against there being a real Jesus again. Talk to me about the 3 days and 3 nights vacation that Jesus predicted, that did not happen. Tell me how Jesus died outside Jerusalem. Tell me why no one mentioned zombies and 3 hour darkness. All these were because the stories were made up... by different people.

      Jesus predicted He would return in the 1st century. He didn't. I know, you will want to spin that one. But it says what it says.

      Jesus didn't return because He never existed.

      Your Jesus was just another mythological demigod.

      Cheers!

      November 27, 2011 at 11:47 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Chad
      @Jarrad

      This is interesting:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcPiUGGd25s&feature=player_detailpage

      Cheers!

      November 28, 2011 at 10:59 am |
    • David Johnson

      @Chad
      @Jarad

      This is even better!

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmhhZ-dex-k&feature=player_detailpage

      Your god and his "son" are fiction.

      Cheers!

      November 28, 2011 at 11:39 am |
    • Chad

      @David Johnson “There were no eyewitnesses to Jesus! None. Not the Gospel writers whoever they were. Certainly not the the list of people you gave me. They were born too late”
      =>already demonstrated that there were.. your argument that no one lived past the age of 29 fails..

      @David Johnson “No one wrote about Jesus until Paul, about 25 years after Jesus' supposed death. Even Paul never met Jesus. “
      => First doc uments in circulation 25-30 years after the resurrection, if they were say 25 at the time, that makes them 50 years old. Are you saying NO one lived to 50? Remember, if you made it to 15, the average life expectancy was 52.
      And, Paul DID meet Jesus on the Damascus road.

      @David Johnson “Why was most of Mark copied into Mathew- verse by verse – and also Luke, only not as much. Not very Jesus was real sort of stuff, is it? More like... oh damn! We need more people claiming this, sort of stuff. Quick, copy this one! “
      =>Certainly it makes sense for Matthew to make use of other docu ments when detailing history right? We do it all the time. Luke was not an eye witness; he researched it and presented it.

      @David Johnson “The gospels talk about all the miracles and crowds and yet, all the historians missed them? B.S. The historians of the time didn't write about Jesus, because the miracles and crowds hadn't had time to be invented. LOL”
      => Historians DID write about it, remember? You acknowledged that when you tried the “heresay” argument.

      @David Johnson “You don't find it odd that an all powerful god could not leave tons of evidence? Evidence enough to at least convince a majority of the earth's population?”
      =>There exists more manuscript evidence for the Bible than any other book of the time period.

      @David Johnson.” Talk to me about the 3 days and 3 nights vacation that Jesus predicted”
      => He was buried on Friday, rose on Sunday, “on the third day”. That’s what happened, you don’t need to have 72 hours pass for it to be on the third day, right?

      @David Johnson “Jesus predicted He would return in the 1st century. He didn't. I know, you will want to spin that one. But it says what it says.”
      =>no he didn’t, what he says was that NO ONE except God knows when.
      "But as to that day and the exact time no one knows–not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone. – Matthew 24

      November 28, 2011 at 11:47 am |
    • Really?

      @Chad – You've sown your own poison my friend and it will haunt you...
      – "Every book that purports to accurately record history needs to be examined critically for internal consistency and for its accuracy in detail. The bible succeeds on all accounts"
      Only a fool, liar or lunatic could make such an absurd statement. Priceless!

      November 28, 2011 at 5:01 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Chad

      I'm tired of you...but, I can't resist.

      @Chad

      I said: " “There were no eyewitnesses to Jesus! None. Not the Gospel writers whoever they were. Certainly not the the list of people you gave me. They were born too late”

      You said: "already demonstrated that there were.. your argument that no one lived past the age of 29 fails..

      "According to the historian Richard Carrier: "We have reason to believe that only 4% of the population at any given time was over 50 years old; over age 70, less than 2%. And that is under normal circu_mstances. But the Gospels were written after two very devastating abnormal events: the Jewish War and the Neronian Persecution, both of which would have, combined, greatly reduced the life expectancy of exactly those people who were eye-witnesses to the teachings of Jesus. And it just so happens that these sorts of people are curiously missing from the historical record precisely when the Gospels began to be circulated." [Carrier] Even if they lived to those unlikely ages, consider the mental and physical toll (especially during the 1st century) which would have likely reduced their memory and capability to write. Moreover, those small percentages of people who lived past 50 years were usually wealthy people (aristocrats, politicians, land and slave owners, etc.). However, the Gospels suggest that the followers of Jesus lived p_oorly, and this would further reduce the chances for a long life span. Although the New Testament does not provide the ages of the disciples, most Christians think their ages came to around 20-30 years old. Jesus' birth would have to have occurred before Herod's death at 4 B.C.E. So if Jesus' birth occurred in the year 4 B.C.E., that would put the age of the disciples, at the time of the writing of the first gospel, at around age 60-70 and the last gospel at around age 90-100! Based on just life expectancies alone, that would make the probability unlikely they lived during the writing of the first gospel, and extremely unlikely any of them lived during the writing of the last gospel (and I have used only the most conservative numbers)."
      Source: Richard Cevantis Carrier
      Degrees:
      • B.A. History (minor in Classical Civilization), UC Berkeley (1997)
      • M.A. Ancient History, Columbia University (1998)
      • M.Phil. Ancient History, Columbia University (2000)
      • Ph.D. Ancient History, Columbia University (2008)

      So, only about 2% of the population would have made it to 60.

      I think your eyewitness will tattle on any fibs in the gospels theory, is unlikely.

      -----------------------

      I said: “No one wrote about Jesus until Paul, about 25 years after Jesus' supposed death. Even Paul never met Jesus. “

      You replied: First doc uments in circulation 25-30 years after the resurrection, if they were say 25 at the time, that makes them 50 years old. Are you saying NO one lived to 50? Remember, if you made it to 15, the average life expectancy was 52.

      Your "made it to 15" numbers suck. 4% of the population made it to 50. Of the 4% how many were close enough to dispute that Jesus lived. How many would have listened?
      We heard nothing (written, that we know of), until Paul.
      That's 25 years of telling and retelling. Jesus got more super, at each telling.
      My thoughts are that people patterned Jesus after Attis, Mithra, Krishna, etc. Sittin' there, spittin' and spinning tales.

      Paul never met Jesus. Everything He "preached" was info learned by hearsay, or his "visions".
      -----------------------
      You said: " Paul DID meet Jesus on the Damascus road.
      No, he didn't. This meeting with Jesus was probably caused by a grand mal seizure. Occam's Razor demands we pick the simplest answer to a mystery. The simplest answer is probably the correct one.
      "In more recent times, this opinion has found support from the fact that sight impediment-including temporary blindness lasting from several hours to several days-has been observed as being a symptom or result of an epileptic seizure and has been mentioned in many case reports."
      Source: http://www.epilepsiemuseum.de/alt/paulusen.html
      ----------------------

      I said “Why was most of Mark copied into Mathew- verse by verse – and also Luke, only not as much. Not very Jesus was real sort of stuff, is it? More like... oh damn! We need more people claiming this, sort of stuff. Quick, copy this one! “

      You said: "Certainly it makes sense for Matthew to make use of other docu ments when detailing history right? We do it all the time. Luke was not an eye witness; he researched it and presented it.

      Mark served as the common element between Matthew and Luke and gave the main source for both of them. Of Mark's 666 verses, some 600 appear in Matthew, some 300 in Luke. – Wikipedia
      I think Mathew took the "making use of other docu_ments, a tad far. It would appear Mathew was not an eyewitness either. Otherwise, why the plagiarism? An eyewitness wouldn't need it.
      Whoever wrote the Mark gospel, simply wrote down the myth of the time. No eyewitness there.

      You already pointed out Luke was not an eyewitness. His writings were probably the result of the Mark Gospel and a docu_ment called "Q". A list of sayings and parables supposedly told by Jesus. It may or may not have ever existed. It does not exist now.
      The Mathew gospel may have utilized this docu_ment also.
      So basically, the gospels are just a compilation of folklore, mostly written by Mark.

      NOT INERRANT, because there are inconsistencies between the gospels.

      This is not evidence. It is even written in the 3rd person for the most part (Introduction to Luke). Eyewitness accounts are in the 1st person. Example: I saw Jesus part the Red Sea.
      One also wonders how the gospel writers knew what Jesus thought and said when they weren't around.
      ---------------------–
      There is no contemporary secular confirmation of the Jesus saga. All secular writing occurred after the Jesus legend was established. Any mentions were by people who weren't even born when the alleged demigod was killed. HEARSAY.
      No writings from contemporary historians. In spite of all the miracles, crowds, crucifixions and reanimations.
      The explanation that Jesus just wasn't famous yet, defies believability. He was a Rock Star.?
      --------------------–
      I said: “The gospels talk about all the miracles and crowds and yet, all the historians missed them? B.S. The historians of the time didn't write about Jesus, because the miracles and crowds hadn't had time to be invented. LOL”

      You replied: " Historians DID write about it, remember? You acknowledged that when you tried the “heresay” argument."

      You really are dim. Historians repeated stories they had heard. They were not eyewitnesses. They were born after Christ died. There was only the believers tale to tell.
      Again, there were no COMTEMPORARY Jewish or Roman that wrote about Jesus.
      Among others, the Roman historian Philo-Judaeus, who lived before, during, and after the time of Jesus, does not even mention Jesus, MUCH LESS his resurrection.
      -------------------------

      I said: “You don't find it odd that an all powerful god could not leave tons of evidence? Evidence enough to at least convince a majority of the earth's population?”

      You replied: "There exists more manuscript evidence for the Bible than any other book of the time period."

      Evidently, not enough to convince more than 33% of the world's population. 33% is sad, dude.
      Remember this is not just natural events. It is a predestined event. We are talking a god here. Perhaps an underachieving god, but a god nonetheless.
      ----------------------–

      I said:” Talk to me about the 3 days and 3 nights vacation that Jesus predicted”

      You replied: " He was buried on Friday, rose on Sunday, “on the third day”. That’s what happened, you don’t need to have 72 hours pass for it to be on the third day, right?"
      -------------------------

      No, as usual.
      Matthew 12:40 – Jesus said, that he would be buried three days and three nights as Jonah was in the whale three days and three nights.
      Friday afternoon to early Sunday morning is only 2 days at the most. Or, if you count Friday and Sunday as entire days, then you could get 3 days and 2 nights. This is a gimme though. The Mary's went to the grave at sunrise and it was empty.
      Obviously, the fundies spin this like a pinwheel. I have seen explanations like: Jesus was actually crucified on Wednesday or maybe Thursday; The prophesy actually means 12 hour days, and not 24 hour days; The partial days are counted as full days. This one is true, but still doesn't add up.
      The prophecy was not fulfilled.
      ------------------------
      I said “Jesus predicted He would return in the 1st century. He didn't. I know, you will want to spin that one. But it says what it says.”

      You replied: "no he didn’t, what he says was that NO ONE except God knows when.
      "But as to that day and the exact time no one knows–not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone. – Matthew 24"

      Hmm... Jesus may not have known the day or the hour, but He did predict a 1st Century return. How can the Messiah and God incarnate be wrong? Can you think of a reason?

      A number of New Testament passages indicate that Christ was supposed to return before his generation had died. This would have been sometime in the first century AD.

      First, there is the testimony of Jesus himself, who explicitly stated that some of his disciples would not die until Jesus inst_ituted the Kingdom, and that his generation would not pass away until all his prophecies of the end of the world had been fulfilled:

      Matthew 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
      Matthew 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

      Jesus' speech in 24 and 25 was given, when He was alone with His disciples.

      Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

      Matthew 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

      In this discourse, Jesus makes a number of assertions about the fate of his disciples. One of the signs of the end would be the persecution of his disciples:

      Matthew 24:9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

      While tradition records that the disciples were persecuted and martyred, this was not followed by the return of Christ, as he promised. Would they die for a lie? Apparently... Or at least for something they were told and believed. LOL.

      Jesus instructed his disciples to hurry because the time for preaching before his return was relatively short:

      Mathew 10:23 When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next, for truly, I say to you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

      Hmm... Seems like 2000 years and change, would be more than enough time. Even if you slept in and stopped for coffee. Let's see, Liar; Lunatic; or Lord. Or, the one I like, Fictional.

      The Apostle Paul, too, seemed to think that Christ would return for his generation:
      I Thessalonians 4:15-17 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

      Note that Paul twice uses the phrase '...we which are alive and remain...'.
      This seems to preclude the theory that Paul was speaking of some far future generation. Paul made a similar assertion in First Corinthians:

      I Corinthians 15:51,52 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

      Note that Paul said that '...we shall not all sleep...'. In other words, he expected that at least some of his generation would not see death.

      Again, there is nothing in the text to indicate that Paul was speaking about some far future generation.
      Paul reiterated his belief in a soon return of Christ in the Book of Romans:
      Romans 13:11-12 And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed. The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light.

      And John:
      1 John 2:18 Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.

      The other New Testament writers had similar thoughts about the iminence of Christ's return:

      James 5:8 Be ye also patient; establish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.

      I John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. WoW! Obama wasn't even born...How can this be???

      I Peter 4:7 But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.

      The Apocalyptic Book of Revelations repeatedly has Christ saying that he would return soon:

      Revelation 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly....

      By no stretch of the imagination can 2,000 years be considered 'quickly' LOL

      And, to say That a thousand years is like a day to the lord, is dumb. A thousand years is not like a day to humans. An almighty god would certainly understand what "quickly" would mean to humans.

      According to historian Charles Freeman, Early Christians expected Jesus to return within a generation of his death. When the second coming did not occur, the early Christian communities were thrown into turmoil." – Wikipedia: Freeman, Charles. The Closing of the Western Mind: The Rise of Faith and Fall of Reason, p. 133. Vintage. 2002.

      Cheers!

      November 28, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
    • fred

      David
      Thanks for the U tube on Krauss, good perspective on nothing. Got me thinking however, now I just back my God up from creating the universe to creating nothingness.................oops ! Oh wait by gosh the Bible say the Spirit hovered over a formless mass...........sounds like nothing to me. Darn that Moses must have had some physics in him.

      November 28, 2011 at 6:09 pm |
    • Chad

      David:
      first, well done on the formatting, makes it very easy to identify what you are responding to , and what your response is.
      Second, you need to start going to other sites than http://nobeliefs.com/exist.htm...
      Third: You are welcome to believe that Jesus is a myth, that no one lived past 29 in classical Rome, that all historians do is repeat hearsay, that Paul had a grand mal seizure changing his belief system 180 degrees, from relentless persecutor of the followers of Jesus, to perhaps the foremost advocate, that when Jesus said "no one knows the time" He meant "some time this century", that no one who writes an authentic recount of someone else life would use material from an other eye witness, and that the earth is flat.

      I'm happy to have demonstrated the irrationality of it, even though you don't see it yet. Bottom line, the argument is NOT about whether of not Jesus is real, that is settled amongst all serious scholars, and even atheists 🙂

      The ONLY argument is as to his divinity.

      check this out: http://www.atheists-for-jesus.com/
      Richard Dawkins is a member..

      Cheers!

      November 28, 2011 at 10:17 pm |
    • Really?

      @Chad – you're last post to David Johnson is quite measured and civil – some might say conciliatory. I think that's nice and your Jesus would be proud; but, could it perhaps be because your tail is between your legs for being busted for making the following ridiculous statement?
      "Every book that purports to accurately record history needs to be examined critically for internal consistency and for its accuracy in detail. The bible succeeds on all accounts."

      November 28, 2011 at 10:48 pm |
    • Chad

      @Really? "you're last post to David Johnson is quite measured and civil – some might say conciliatory. I think that's nice and your Jesus would be proud; but, could it perhaps be because your tail is between your legs for being busted for making the following ridiculous statement?"

      =>believe me, it had much more to do with recognizing that every single one of his "points" has been addressed by myself 3 or 4 times at a minimum. All he is doing is relentlessly cutting and pasting stuff from http://nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
      if you notice, 90% of my quotes are from wikipedia, as unbiased a viewpoint as anyone is going to find.

      Trying to argue that Jesus never existed, is like trying to argue that Mohammed never existed.. it's just silly. Time to move on to more substantial stuff.

      My goal in most of this is to get the atheist to clearly articulate their stance, and by doing so, illustrate how shaky it is.. Davids relentlessly arguing that Jesus never existed, does that reflect good or poorly on his intellectual acu men? "Jesus can't be real cause there are no statues of Him", please... give me break.

      @Really "Every book that purports to accurately record history needs to be examined critically for internal consistency and for its accuracy in detail. The bible succeeds on all accounts."
      =>now this has a bit more meat to it. Is the bible to be trusted, is it reliable. The answer is yes.
      Are you aware that there has never been a case where a historical detail in the bible has been disproved? Now, there are a lot of details that haven't yet been proven, but nothing has been disproved.

      Did you know that the first physical evidence of Pontius Pilate was found in 1961? For century's' people wondered if this central character in the trial of Jesus was real or made up, and what do you know, he is 🙂

      November 28, 2011 at 11:33 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @fred

      A formless mass isn't nothing. Mass is the amount of matter in an object (think weight). It usually lacks a definite shape (formless). Usually big.

      What you should have gotten from the video, is that it is possible for something to come from nothing.
      And, there doesn't seem to be a need for a god.

      Cheers!

      November 28, 2011 at 11:49 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Chad

      You said: "You are welcome to believe that Jesus is a myth, that no one lived past 29 in classical Rome"

      Ans: No, the average age was 29. An average always has values of less and greater values than the average. I gave you the % of people who lived beyond 29. I am not "believing" anything. My source was Richard Cevantis Carrier
      Degrees:
      • B.A. History (minor in Classical Civilization), UC Berkeley (1997)
      • M.A. Ancient History, Columbia University (1998)
      • M.Phil. Ancient History, Columbia University (2000)
      • Ph.D. Ancient History, Columbia University (2008)

      Prove it wasn't so. You can't just dismiss something and pretend you have shown it to be false.

      -------------------------------------–

      You said: "all historians do is repeat hearsay"

      Ans: The gospel authors did. You never were able to present any Roman or Jewish historian that wrote of Jesus during Jesus' life. All were born after Jesus died.
      You did not give an adequate explanation for why the contemporary historians did not mention a man who was said to have risen from the dead. Don't you think if Jesus was doing the miracles and clearing temples that were claimed, someone would have written about it? Written about it during His lifetime?

      -------------------------------------

      You said: Paul had a grand mal seizure changing his belief system 180 degrees, from relentless persecutor of the followers of Jesus, to perhaps the foremost advocate,

      Ans: It is the simplest answer. One that does not require the supernatural.

      ----------------------------------

      You said: when Jesus said "no one knows the time" He meant "some time this century", that no one who writes an authentic recount of someone else life would use material from an other eye witness, and that the earth is flat.

      Ans: All of Jesus' disciples believed He would return in the 1st Century. Why? Because He told them so. I showed many quotes, that lead to the conclusion that Jesus Himself thought He would return in the 1st Century. I know you Christians must spin this, to keep your Jesus from being a liar, but you certainly didn't show that I was wrong.

      -------------------------------------------

      You said: "I'm happy to have demonstrated the irrationality of it, even though you don't see it yet."

      Ans: You demonstrated nothing. You certainly offered nothing that would make anyone but a true believer shout: "AMEN" LOL

      Cheers!

      November 29, 2011 at 1:04 am |
    • David Johnson

      @Chad

      One more thing Chad. You ignore or dismiss anything that is detrimental to your belief(s).

      In my post to Jared and you I asked: "Why don't you believe that an angel authenticated the Book of Mormon, in spite of the purported eyewitness statement that comes with every copy of the book? Certainly this is better evidence than for Jesus. Yet, I bet you accept Jesus but won't consider the eyewitnesses for the Book of Mormon.

      Also: If Jesus existed and was the messiah, why are only 33% of the world convinced of it? With all the "evidence" that you claim, how foolish of them. Truly a mysterious god who goes to all the trouble to be born a human, die and then be reanimated, only to leave no evidence that this "most important event in history" ever happened.

      Joseph Goebbels once said something to the effect: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it." That is exactly what has happened with Christianity.

      As I said before:
      Stop preaching Chad. You have no evidence that what you are saying is any more true, than Homer's Odyssey. Or any other god past or present.

      Just lie out in the pumpkin patch, like Linus, and wait for your Great Pumpkin Messiah to appear. It's only been 2000 years. It could happen. LOL

      Cheers!

      November 29, 2011 at 2:08 pm |
    • Jared

      There is no doubt in the mind of a believer that Jesus indeed was the savior, the Messiah.

      There are some who have had personal encounters with the Lord himself which was the basis for their conversion, I absolutely believe them 100% .However, to add or take away from the Bible will be blasphemous, that is the problem with anyone claiming to be a prophet and giving messages(gold plate or otherwise) that is different from what the Bible says.

      Why is everybody not a believer? why do we have a free will? We present the gospels and the truth about who Jesus is, it is upto the individual to accept Jesus as their lord and savior.

      I am sensing that deep down your soul longs to have a personal relationship with the Lord, why not start that journey? Faith comes from hearing, hearing the word of God.Just go to a church or even listen to some message tonight on TBN , maybe God has a word for you!

      November 29, 2011 at 5:07 pm |
    • Chad

      The rest of Davids post has been refuted ad-infinitum, but I will speak to one point as it has a slightly different twist.

      @David Johnson “You said: when Jesus said "no one knows the time" He meant "some time this century",
      Ans: All of Jesus' disciples believed He would return in the 1st Century. Why? Because He told them so.”

      The twist in the point that David is making here, is that the disciples believing that Jesus was returning imminently, proves that's what Jesus said.

      My response: while Jesus said that no one knows the time of His return, indeed the disciples (at least from my reading of the bible) appeared to believe incorrectly that Jesus return was imminent.

      Point 1 (already made many times but re-iterated here) Jesus DID NOT SAY WHEN he was returning.
      "But as to that day and the exact time no one knows–not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone. – Matthew 24

      Point 2: did the disciples believe Jesus was returning that century, my personal opinion is yes they did believe that.
      Why? Well, part of it (again in my opinion) was that Jesus himself didn’t know, so He warned them to be ready at all times for that return.
      “Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come. But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into. So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him. Matthew 24:42

      This urging to be ready at all times, combined with the disciple’s understandable anxiousness for the second coming, combined to create an expectation that turned out to be incorrect. The bible, written to be accurate in all accounts, recorded exactly what they thought instead of (if it had been a made up myth) creating some sequence of events that showed the disciples in a much better light. Again, strong evidence for the authenticity (just as Jesus crying out on the cross “Why have you forsaken me”, peter denying Jesus, Paul acknowledging his inability to live a righteous life, etc, etc.. ). They aren’t made up characters in a made up story, they have flaws and make mistakes everywhere.

      November 29, 2011 at 9:12 pm |
    • Chad

      @David Johnson "Joseph Goebbels once said something to the effect: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it." That is exactly what has happened with Christianity. "

      =>20-30 years (death/resurrection in 30 AD, first docs in circulation 50-60AD source-wikipedia) isn't enough time for a myth to arise, especially when witnesses of the original events were still living to discount it, and the early church was under intense persecution by Jewish religious authorities who wanted nothing other than to debunk this sects claim of the resurrection. There were just to many people that would have immediately leaped on any error they could demonstrate was historically incorrect.

      November 29, 2011 at 9:17 pm |
    • Jared

      Thanks Chad!

      November 29, 2011 at 9:22 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Chad

      You said: "The rest of Davids post has been refuted ad-infinitum, but I will speak to one point as it has a slightly different twist."

      No, you have refuted nothing. As I pointed out before, it is a "trick" you believers like to use. You ignore or pretend the evidence is not worthy of response. You Complain that you have already answered, and you pick the points you want to argue.
      Believers perform theological gymnastics consisting of:
      If a bible verse furthers the cause, it is to be taken literally. If a bible verse is detrimental to the cause, it is either: taken out of context; is allegorical; refers to another verse somewhere else; is a translation or copyist's error; means something other than what it actually says; Is a mystery of god or not discernable by humans; or is just plain magic.

      -------------------------
      You are a total idiot. You admit that the disciples were "mistaken" but don't admit the reason they were mistaken.
      The reason the disciples were mistaken, was because Jesus (actually the gospel writers) told them He would be
      back. No mystery there. You can read the verses where Jesus tells them that.
      Jesus Speaking:
      Matthew 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
      Matthew 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

      Jesus' speech in 24 and 25 was given, when He was alone with His disciples.

      Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
      Matthew 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
      In this discourse, Jesus makes a number of assertions about the fate of his disciples. One of the signs of the end would be the persecution of his disciples:
      Matthew 24:9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.
      While tradition records that the disciples were persecuted and martyred, this was not followed by the return of Christ, as he promised. Would they die for a lie? Not for a lie, but they would for something they were told and believed. Something they were told, Jesus had said. LOL.
      Jesus instructed his disciples to hurry because the time for preaching before his return was relatively short:

      Mathew 10:23 When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next, for truly, I say to you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

      Reply to your 2 lame points:

      These guys also feel Jesus was "mistaken" LOL!
      The respected Christian apologist and author, C.S. Lewis 1960 essay "The Worlds Last Night"
      “Say what you like,” we shall be told, “the apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false. It is clear from the New Testament that they all expected the Second Coming in their own lifetime. And worse still, they had a reason, and one which you will find very embarrassing. Their Master had told them so. He shared, and indeed created, their delusion. He said in so many words, ‘this generation shall not pass till all these things be done.’ And he was wrong. He clearly knew no more about the end of the world than anyone else.”

      Bertrand Russell, in his book, 'Why I Am Not A Christian',
      He discredits the inspiration of the New Testament: "I am concerned with Christ as He appears in the Gospel narrative…He certainly thought that his second coming would occur in clouds of glory before the death of all the people who were living at the time. There are a great many texts that prove…He believed that his coming would happen during the lifetime of many then living. That was the belief of his earlier followers, and it was the basis of a good deal of his moral teaching." Russell later reasons that it would be fallacious to follow a religious leader (such as Jesus) who was mistaken on so basic a prediction as his parousia.

      parousia = second coming

      eschatology = the branch of theology that is concerned with such final things as death and Last Judgment; Heaven and Hell; the ultimate destiny of humankind

      Albert Schweitzer in his 19-century book, 'The Quest of the Historical Jesus', summarized the problem of "Parousia delay" as follows: "The whole history of Christianity down to the present day... is based on the delay of the Parousia, the nonoccurrence of the Parousia, the abandonment of eschatology, the process and completion of the 'de-eschatologizing' of religion which has been connected therewith."

      "Jesus and his apostles made MANY prophecies concerning the Armageddon. Christians would have you believe that it shall come as “a thief in the night”. Yet, the Bible is rather clear concerning when it would happen. Matter of fact, the Bible consistently said it would follow soon after Jesus’ death. When you point out such verses to Christians they will try to weasel it out of it by saying Christ was talking about his “future” apostles versus the ones he was directly speaking to. All it takes is a close examinations of the pronouns used in order to see that Christ truly did believe the end times would have happened nearly 2,000 years ago. Keep in mind that the Bible claims it is “fit for reproof’ and Christianity “lives and dies on the resurrection and end times”. If we are to believe these verses and accept that the end time prophecies failed then surely the whole book is invalid." – Evil Bible.com

      Again, Chad. Stop preaching. Jesus never existed. God is very unlikely to exist. Or do you have proof the Christian god exists?

      You never said why you aren't a Mormon. The book of Mormon has the signatures of eyewitnesses!

      Paul, never got the signatures or statements of the 500 witnesses he claims. Do you think god got smarter after the Jesus saga? Learned that you need eyewitness testimony?

      Jared: Read this and the rest of my posts. You seem young and maybe not totally convinced. Don't waste your time on super heros. There is no supernatural. Only the natural.

      Cheers!

      November 30, 2011 at 2:35 pm |
    • Jared

      @David J- I believe Psalm 139 was written for me and ofcourse Chad as well, I will include you in it but you might refuse to ack. that.. 🙂

      In all fairness Chad has walked your through this discussion giving you ample pointers and answers, you started with no evidence for Jesus to ‘hearsay’ and now you want to discuss the timing of second coming.

      Is your skepticism a product of your own thinking? Or, are you trying to be a skeptic that uses those standard skeptic websites to come up with questions?
      Honestly, I am not sure I understand what is it that you are trying to argue ? Have you moved on from your mythical assumption of Jesus, to yes he existed and want to debate the discourse the Lord had with his disciples about his second coming?
      If it is the latter…

      Clearly there are two events one is the destruction of Jerusalem. Unlike his second coming, which has no definite warning in terms of a specific, predictable time, the destruction of Jerusalem does.
      From Matthew 24:36 through 25:46, the passage is relatively unambiguous and clearly refers to our Lord’s answer to the disciples’ questions regarding his second coming. Certain things stand out. The theme throughout the parables of this section is that, unlike the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, there will be no warning sign, which believers can observe and then act upon. The time of the second coming will be utterly unexpected:
      24:36 No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.
      24:39 . . .they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.
      24:42 Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come.
      24:44 So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.
      24:50 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of.
      25:13 Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour.
      It is very clear from the above, that no man knows the hour or the day of the Lord’s coming, so let us all be watchful and be prepared lest it be in our own time!

      handing over to the expert-Chad,
      Chad-you are a very patient man indeed!

      November 30, 2011 at 4:26 pm |
    • Jared

      oh btw., if 500 signatures is all that took to prove to you, trust me Paul would have ensured he took those signatures.C'mmon Paul was not intending in parading these witnesses signature as proof, he was attesting to the fact that there were so many witnesses to the resurrection.
      The scriptures tell us about a lot of miracles including 5000 people that were fed, I don't see their signatures anywhere either..

      November 30, 2011 at 5:06 pm |
    • Chad

      @David Johnson You are a total idiot. You admit that the disciples were "mistaken" but don't admit the reason they were mistaken.
      =>no… I indicated the reason clearly as: “This urging to be ready at all times Matthew 24:42, combined with the disciple’s understandable anxiousness for the second coming, combined to create an expectation that turned out to be incorrect. The bible, written to be accurate in all accounts, recorded exactly what they thought instead of (if it had been a made up myth) creating some sequence of events that showed the disciples in a much better light”

      @David Johnson “The reason the disciples were mistaken, was because Jesus (actually the gospel writers) told them He would be back. No mystery there. You can read the verses where Jesus tells them that.
      Jesus Speaking: Matthew 16 21 From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life. Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. “Never, Lord!” he said. “This shall never happen to you!” Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.” Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life[f] will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it. What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul? For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done.”

      =>as I have said 3 or 4 times at this point, yet you persist on insisting it has never been answered, is this: Jesus came into His kingdom when He was resurrected (Jesus always rejected an earthly kingdom). Many scholars argue that Jesus is talking here about the destruction of the temple in AD 70 here, but that is not my reading of it.

      Matthew 23: Therefore I am sending you prophets and sages and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town. 35 And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. 36 Truly I tell you, all this will come on this generation.
      =>Jesus is talking about the fate of the disciples not the second coming, but as with the other verses, scholars also argue that Jesus is talking about the destruction of the temple in AD 70.

      Matthew 24: 30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth[c] will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.[d] 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.
      32 “Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. 33 Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it[e] is near, right at the door. 34 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away. “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,[f] but only the Father.
      =>obviously the last sentence (the one you ALWAYS cut out, pretty dishonest of you) governs. No one knows, only God.

      Mathew 10:23 When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next, for truly, I say to you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.
      =>same as above, Jesus came when He was resurrected. Many scholars argue that Jesus is talking here about the destruction of the temple in AD 70 here, but that is not my reading of it.

      @David Johnson The respected Christian apologist and author, C.S. Lewis 1960 essay "The Worlds Last Night" “Say what you like,” we shall be told, “the apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false. It is clear from the New Testament that they all expected the Second Coming in their own lifetime. And worse still, they had a reason, and one which you will find very embarrassing. Their Master had told them so. He shared, and indeed created, their delusion. He said in so many words, ‘this generation shall not pass till all these things be done.’ And he was wrong. He clearly knew no more about the end of the world than anyone else.”

      =>david, you are one dishonest fellow. Fortunately I read the entirety of the small pieces atheists post, and it is usually there (in the portion you cut out) that the truth comes out.

      C.S. Lewis goes ON to say, clearly showing that C.S. felt that Jesus was confessing ignorance by making that statement, which is the exact point I have been making, Jesus did NOT know the time or place.

      “The one exhibition of error and the one confession of ignorance grow side by side. That they stood thus in the mouth of Jesus himself, and were not merely placed thus by the reporter, we surely need not doubt. Unless the reporter were perfectly honest he would never have recorded the confession of ignorance at all; he could have had no motive for doing so except a desire to tell the whole truth. And unless later copyists were equally honest they would never have preserved the (apparently) mistaken prediction about “this generation” after the passage of time had shown the (apparent) mistake. This passage (Mark 13:30-32) and the cry “Why hast thou forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34) together make up the strongest proof that the New Testament is historically reliable. The evangelists have the first great characteristic of honest witnesses: they mention facts which are, at first sight, damaging to their main contention.”

      @David Johnson Bertrand Russell, in his book, 'Why I Am Not A Christian', blah-blah-blah
      =>Jesus explicitly said He did NOT KNOW. end of story.

      November 30, 2011 at 11:41 pm |
  9. LMB123

    Abinadi – You tell them man! The honest will listen...the others...who cares...they are making their beds and will have to sleep in them (I hope that people in this "enlightened" age still know what that means).

    November 26, 2011 at 4:13 pm |
    • Abinadi

      Thanks, LMB. I appreciate having another witness.

      November 26, 2011 at 4:17 pm |
  10. Abinadi

    If anyone would like to know more about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints known to you as the Mormon Church, they can find more information at mormon.org.

    November 26, 2011 at 3:28 pm |
  11. Abinadi

    There is ample evidence in the New Testament that not just any baptism will do. In Acts 19:3, Paul relates the following: " 1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,

    2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

    3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism.

    4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

    5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus."

    If we have been baptized by any other baptism than by the authority of living apostles and prophets, we must be rebaptized and we must then receive the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands by persons of authority. Otherwise, our baptism is no good and we will in nowise enter into the Kingdom of God!

    November 26, 2011 at 3:17 pm |
  12. LMB123

    johnfrichardson – LOL – the pot calling the kettle black? – LOL. I've been on both sides of the fence...and I sure like the side I'm in now, much much more. I now have , purpose, direction and fullfilment in my life. What else matters, anyway?!

    November 26, 2011 at 3:14 pm |
  13. LMB123

    AvdBerg – isn't it ironic that we use the exact same scriptures against YOUR beliefs – True – scripture is not for private interpretation... and your conduct clearly shows "the spirit that you follow...the father of all lies.

    The scriptures also say that "by their fruits you shall know them" (the true believers that is). It also says that a bad tree can not bring forth good fruit. I just checked last night in LDS.org all the Humanitarian Projects that the Mormon Church is currently involved in all the world, helping the poor. The total number of ongoing present projects came to 2167. That does not include all the help the Church gives whenever there is a natural disaster i.e. tsunumies, earthquakes, etc. THe fact is the Church is always one of the first organizations to volunteer help and contribute tons of needed goods etc. What do you think about all those good "fruits"?

    I'm sure you'll find a way to discount them. Show me another religious organization that does more. Talk is cheap, action speak louder than words – that too is what Christ, our Savior, preached.

    November 26, 2011 at 2:45 pm |
  14. Abinadi

    The false prophets referred to in Matthew 24 are false prophets like Harold Camp, wolves in sheep's clothing, who use peoples gullibility to predict the end of the world so that they will give up all their earthly possessions to Mr. Camp and ministers like Jeffress who preach for money and personal gain. The Lord condemned such when he said: " 20 And the Gentiles are lifted up in the pride of their eyes, and have stumbled, because of the greatness of their stumbling block, that they have built up many churches; nevertheless, they eput down the power and miracles of God, and preach up unto themselves their own wisdom and their own flearning, that they may get gain and grind upon the face of the poor."

    What gets me is, how do the protestant churches think they have any authority to preach at all seeing they are all apostates from the Catholic church? That's why they are called protestants, right? So, why do they believe they have any authority?

    November 26, 2011 at 2:13 pm |
    • Abinadi

      Don't get me wrong. We don't look down on the great reformers at all. We see them as preparing the way for the restoration of the true church of Jesus Christ just as John the Baptist prepared the way for Christ. But, when Christ appeared, John the Baptist told his followers that a greater one than I am in your midst, and told them that he must decrease while Christ must increase. In response, many of his followers left him and followed Christ. In like manner, the protestants must leave their watered down teachings and unite to the true Church of Jesus Christ. If they are good Christians now, they can only be better Christians in the true and living church of the latter days. We call on Christians everywhere to repent and be baptized by authority and to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost

      November 26, 2011 at 2:33 pm |
    • Abinadi

      The watered down doctrines of the false churches have no power to save and those who refuse to repent and are lifted up in the pride of their hearts will hear Christ say, "I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

      November 26, 2011 at 2:42 pm |
    • Abinadi

      These are the thieves and robbers spoken of by Christ in John 10, when he said, "1 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber." Those who are baptized without authority are trying to climb into the kingdom of God over the back fence instead of coming through the door like an honest person would do.

      November 26, 2011 at 2:54 pm |
  15. LMB123

    AvdBerg – I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Personally I think YOUR Jesus is the false one. I guess you'll find out when we get there, being that you're not willing now to talk to the one true and living God, the Father of Jesus the Savior and our Father too.

    November 26, 2011 at 11:38 am |
    • AvdBerg

      Spiritually speaking let me explain who your father is.

      John 8:43-45. Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word. Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.

      For this reason do we preach mankind everywhere to repent. Please study what it means. We have provided the article ‘Repent’ on our website http://www.aworlddeceived.cayou’re your perusal. If you are interested how you have been deceived we invite you to study 2 Cor. 11:13-15.

      “For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
      And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
      Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.”

      November 26, 2011 at 12:55 pm |
    • AtheistSteve

      "For this reason do we preach mankind everywhere to repent."

      Here's an idea. Why not keep your preachy ideas to yourself? If you've come to the conclusion that you have the correct path to salvation, then goody for you. The people existing outside your head didn't ask for or require your input. We can make up our own minds about what we choose to believe in and if you're so sure that the Bible is the true word of God then shouldn't it be able to convince us as it did you? Why does it require your assistance?

      November 26, 2011 at 1:09 pm |
    • AvdBerg

      AtheistSteve
      It certainly does not require our assistance. It only pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe (1 Cor. 1:21).
      http://WWW.AWORLDDECEIVED.CA

      November 26, 2011 at 1:29 pm |
    • tallulah13

      I suspect that some people embrace christianity because it gives them a supernatural "mandate" to flap their gums. There's this elderly gentleman who plants himself at one of the downtown bus stops near where I work. He spends the day repeating the same well-practiced speech at the top of his lungs about how Jesus will save you from death.

      Perhaps it's his own fear of mortality that spurs him on. Perhaps it's the need for attention. Preaching certainly gives christians a feeling of self-importance. How many christians on this site like to think they speak for "god", using their personal interpretation of the bible as the source of their authority?

      I'm not sure if it's arrogance or the simple desire for attention that drives so many christians, but the sad truth is that their preaching is nothing more than blatant act of disrespect.

      November 26, 2011 at 1:51 pm |
    • AvdBerg

      tallulah13
      Sorry but the Bible and no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation (1 Peter 1:20).
      Seek, and ye will find (Matthew 7:7).
      http://WWW.AWORLDDECEIVED.CA

      November 26, 2011 at 1:58 pm |
    • tallulah13

      AvdBerg, prove your god exists. Prove that the bible is the word of that god. Then you can use it as a point of authority. You are not as important as you think you are.

      November 26, 2011 at 2:01 pm |
    • AvdBerg

      tallulah13
      It is obvious that the elderly gentleman you are referring to is in bondage to some kind of religious organization. The next time you run into him would you please mention our website to him. Thank You!!
      http://WWW.AWORLDDECEIVED.CA

      November 26, 2011 at 2:05 pm |
    • AvdBerg

      tallulah13
      The Word is God and has proven to be the truth for the last 6000 years, even the Spirit of truth: whom the world cannot receive (John 14:17) as mankind prefers darkness over light (John 3;19). Mankind in his natural cannot understand the Bible as, this includes all religious organization, who rely on interpretation as they remain separated from God.

      It is obvious by your comment that you are spiritually blind and that you don't know what spirit you are of (Luke 9:55). Therfore, unless you you repent you will remain spiritually blind and separated from God. To repent means a lot more than what you nature you have been conditioned to believe. It means to turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan (whose power you are of) unto God (Acts 26:18).

      November 26, 2011 at 2:13 pm |
    • tallulah13

      It's obvious, AdvBerg, that you are using this blog as a means to sell a product. The elderly gentleman's delusion is no different than your own, but a least he doesn't seek to profit from it.

      November 26, 2011 at 2:14 pm |
    • AvdBerg

      tallulath13
      Christ was living proof that He was God in the flesh. So were the apostles and so are all the true believers. Please read the content of our website and you will learn that the Gospel we preach is not after man but is the same Gospel that was preached by Christ and the apostles Gal. 1:11,12). The Bible (Word) is true and we are living proof thereof.

      November 26, 2011 at 2:22 pm |
    • AvdBerg

      tallulah13
      In twenty six years of service we have never accepted or requested a penny. The Book project has cost us so far over 20K and we never received a penny from any sale. More distributors go bankrupt than stay in business. The website does not generate any revenue and all expenses, including administration, is paid for by us. We do not charge for our Speaking Engagements, they are free and do not generate any revenue. The Gift of Life we freely received and freely is given to all those that believe. So before you publicly and falsely accuse us (Matthew 5:10-12) please obtain your facts first. Thank You!!

      November 26, 2011 at 2:32 pm |
    • tallulah13

      Let me cut to the chase here, AvdBerg. What you're saying is that you have no proof of any god, but I am "spiritually blind" because I don't believe exactly what you want me to believe? You can't offer any facts to support your position, but I am the bad person here, because I ask for proof of your supernatural and outlandish claims?

      Honestly, you sound just like the snake-oil salesman I suspect you are.

      November 26, 2011 at 2:35 pm |
    • AvdBerg

      tallulah13
      We forgot to mention that the product we sell is called the "Gift of Life". It is absolutely free, even for atheists,members of any religious organization or even now the gay community and so-called Christians. All you need to do is believe.

      November 26, 2011 at 2:40 pm |
    • tallulah13

      AvdBerg, not all profit is monetary.

      November 26, 2011 at 2:41 pm |
    • tallulah13

      AvdBerg, if you want people to believe, all you have to do is provide proof.

      November 26, 2011 at 2:42 pm |
    • AvdBerg

      tallulah13
      We did explain the proof part but even before we did you had already decided to deny it.

      November 26, 2011 at 2:43 pm |
    • AvdBerg

      tallulah13
      "AvdBerg, not all profit is monetary."

      You are correct. God has provided for us and blessed as he did for the Israelites for fourty years in the desert.
      http://WWW.AWORLDDECEIVED.CA

      November 26, 2011 at 2:48 pm |
    • AtheistSteve

      So just like the casting of pearls to swine why bother with spreading your message to us. Those who believe need no convincing and we who do not are not interested. I've been on that road, found it goes nowhere and chose to board the train instead. Your fantasies about your deity have no meaning to us. The proverbial wool has been pulled over your eyes and we have but pity for your plight. It might satisfy you to succ.umb to eternal tyranny but we are complete in and of ourselves. Never will we sacrifice our dignity, intelligence and inspiration to self-depricating delusion. Yours is an utterly insufficient approach to life. The only thing you value is death. The death of your supposed savior to abolish sin, the death of your body to free your soul and the death of your intellect to embrace the absurd.

      November 26, 2011 at 2:48 pm |
    • AvdBerg

      tallulah13

      "AvdBerg, if you want people to believe, all you have to do is provide proof".

      I didn't know that we were wasting our time with someone that could not read but here is what we wrote earlier.

      "Christ was living proof that He was God in the flesh. So were the apostles and so are all the true believers. Please read the content of our website and you will learn that the Gospel we preach is not after man but is the same Gospel that was preached by Christ and the apostles Gal. 1:11,12). The Bible (Word) is true and we are living proof thereof."

      Enjoyed the dialogue but have to leave for now. You can write us via the contact page of our website.
      http://WWW.AWORLDDECEIVED.CA

      November 26, 2011 at 2:55 pm |
    • Abinadi

      Yes, Steve. I keep wondering, this is a "belief" blog. What are you atheists even doing here? Why don't you go get your own blog? Are you lost?

      November 26, 2011 at 2:59 pm |
    • AvdBerg

      AtheistSteve

      "So just like the casting of pearls to swine why bother with spreading your message to us."

      The postive thing about this Blog is that there are thousands of people that have read our dialogue and yes they do take the time to write us with questions and that includes atheists. In fact one of the first people that read a copy of our Book was an atheist. He used to teach at a US College and his comments were most surprising. So, our message was obviously not for you as you stated but please know that our time was not a waste.

      November 26, 2011 at 3:03 pm |
    • AtheistSteve

      As a forum to discuss beliefs I'm all for exercising our freedom of speech. I also have beliefs, they just don't delve into the supernatural. It isn't the "Supernatural Belief Blog". And for debate this is a good place to see if we share any common ground. I'm not interested in being proselytized to or having someone pursue an agenda to convert others to their point of view. If you have solid basis for your beliefs then I want to hear it. If instead you have your head buried in the Bible as your sole argument for your position then we have a problem. The idea of basing your entire worldview on a single book is outrageously shortsighted.

      November 26, 2011 at 3:09 pm |
    • AvdBerg

      AtheistSteve
      The Word is God (John 1:1) and unless you repent and turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan (whose power you are of) unto God (Acts 26:18) you will not be able to understand it as it is spiritually discerned (1 Cor. 2:14).
      He that is spiritual judgeth (discerneth) all things, yet he himself is judged of no man (1 Cor. 2:15).
      Hope you will take the time to read the article CNN Belief Blog ~ Sign of the Times. Sorry but have to run. Feel free to write us via the contact page of our website http://www.aworlddeceived.ca

      November 26, 2011 at 3:17 pm |
    • AtheistSteve

      OK....this is what I'm talking about. Here is an excerpt of one of AvdBergs last posts.

      "Christ was living proof that He was God in the flesh. So were the apostles and so are all the true believers. "

      How is that proof? The historical mention of a guy and his followers isn't proof of anything let alone an all powerful creator God. That is such an incredible leap it just defies explanation. So some ancient preacher and his followers went about spouting their concept of God and for some undefined reason this is acceptable evidence of the existence of God? Sorry but that just doesn't cut it. You're gonna have to come up with a heck of a lot more convincing details to get any rational person to buy into this.

      November 26, 2011 at 3:28 pm |
    • David Johnson

      AvdBerg

      You said: "Sorry but the Bible and no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation (1 Peter 1:20).
      Seek, and ye will find (Matthew 7:7)."

      There are ~ 38,000 different denominations of Christianity in the world. Each read, meditate and fast upon the Bible, in an effort to understand the will of their god. Each denomination believes Jesus wants different things. The bible is ambiguous and you are an idiot.

      Prove your god exits. ?

      Cheers!

      November 26, 2011 at 6:19 pm |
    • tallulah13

      AvdBerg, I didn't acknowledge your "proof" because your belief is not proof. Repeating an idea you like doesn't make it true. Unless you can substantiate your position with verifiable evidence, you have nothing.

      I say it again: If you want people to believe, provide proof.

      November 26, 2011 at 7:01 pm |
    • johnfrichardson

      @AvdBerg Your website is full of your own private interpretations. Your hypocrisy is astonishing even by Christian standards.

      November 27, 2011 at 8:41 am |
  16. LMB123

    AvdBerg – The Mormon Church does not support any political party or person. (contrary to your twisted views on that.) It does however encourage its members to be good citizens, which includes running for office if they so desire. And given the crop of candidates running, I'm glad that Romney, an honest and man with some morals and integrity, is running.

    November 26, 2011 at 11:19 am |
    • AvdBerg

      How about the Republicans? Isn't that a political party? Talking about hypocritical!!
      http://WWW.AWORLDDECEIVED.CA

      November 26, 2011 at 11:24 am |
    • AvdBerg

      LMB123
      Through the above comments you condemn yourselves as they confirm what spirit you serve (Luke 9:55). They also confirm that you are of the world, while the believers are not of this world (John 17:14-16). In fact they have overcome the world (1 John 5:4).
      http://WWW.AWORLDDECEIVED.CA

      November 26, 2011 at 1:53 pm |
  17. AGuest9

    LOL! Welcome to the 21st century. We realize that "spirits" don't really exist.

    November 26, 2011 at 11:14 am |
  18. LMB123

    Jimtanker – When God communicates with man he makes sure you know it's from him. I can't really explain it, you kinda have to experience it to get it. The beauty however, is that anyone who really wants it can have it. So, try it and see. You won't be sorry. God is you loving Father and he wants you to call home.

    November 26, 2011 at 11:03 am |
    • Sarah P

      I guess you've never read your Bible all the way through. That's nothing but an insane monster of a god character in a book filled with lies. Just as you are filled with lies. Your fantasy delusion might feel wonderful, but it is just a fantasy in the end.

      November 26, 2011 at 11:09 am |
    • HeavenSent

      Sarah P, you babbled "I guess you've never read your Bible all the way through. That's nothing but an insane monster of a god character in a book filled with lies. Just as you are filled with lies. Your fantasy delusion might feel wonderful, but it is just a fantasy in the end."

      Answer: You're the one that hasn't figured it out. Those lies that you claim Jesus to be teaching, are what you need to work on if you are pointing them out. Every personality that a person can adopt has been written in Jesus' truth. Pray tell, exactly what scriptures irk you (LOL)?

      Amen.

      November 26, 2011 at 11:58 am |
    • johnfrichardson

      You are dangerously delusional LMB123.

      November 26, 2011 at 12:04 pm |
  19. AvdBerg

    Romney’s faith is not in the true and living God but rather the god of this world (Matthew 24:24; 2 Cor. 11:13-15; Gal. 4:8).

    The Mormon Church is no different than any other religion and serves the same spirit. Why are the Mormons so determined to put one of their members into The White House? For a better understanding of the 180 year history of the Mormon Church and their hidden agenda, we invite you to read the article ‘Mormon Church ~ Cult and Spiritual Harlot’ listed on our website http://www.aworlddeceived.ca

    The following is an excerpt from the article.

    “* The General Authorities (Mormon Church leaders) are bent on replacing the American free and pluralistic society with a society controlled and governed not by freely elected officials, but by the male hierarchy of the Mormon Church who would control the appointment of all elected officials, including the congressional members, governors, state legislators, local officials and even the President of the United States. The ultimate plan of the Mormon Church and its authorities is to take all power to themselves, their President/Prophet becoming the king of the world.”

    The members of the Mormon Church (and other religions) are spiritually blind and do not understand that God’s kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36; Isa. 9:6; Dan. 2:44; 7:14; Luke 17:20,21; John 17:14-16). God would have certainly not have asked Mitt Romney to be President of the United States of America, as most GOP Candidates claim.

    Mitt Romney was born in sin (1 Peter 1:23), as were all the other GOP Candidates and unless they repent they will die in their sin (Romans 8:13). They are spiritually blind and do not know what spirit they serve (Luke 9:55). Their faith does not stand in Jesus Christ and the church Mitt Romney belongs to serves after an image of a false god and a false Christ (Matthew 24:24). They do service unto them which by nature are no gods (Gal. 4:8). As a result of their spiritual blindness they do not know that all the other GOP Candidates are of the same spirit as well (darkness). For a better understanding what it means to be a sinner, we invite you to read the articles ‘What is Sin?’, ‘Victory over Sin’ and ‘Repent’, listed on our website http://www.aworlddeceived.ca.

    Concerning the faith of Barack Obama, we invite you to read the article ‘Barack Obama ~ President of the United States of America’.

    Also, to give people a better understanding of the destructive forces behind CNN and US Politics and the issues that divide this world, we invite you to read the article ‘CNN Belief Blog ~ Sign of the Times’.

    All of the other pages and articles listed on our website explain how this whole world has been deceived as confirmed by the Word of God in Revelation 12:9. The Bible is true in all things and is the discerner of every thought and the intent of the heart (Hebrews 5:12). The truth is that the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned (1 Cor. 2:14). This is why we call all of mankind to repentance.

    Seek, and ye shall find (Matthew 7:7).

    November 26, 2011 at 11:00 am |
  20. Jimtanker

    @HeavenSent

    “No wonder you atheists haven't a clue to what Jesus wisdom is all about! You're too busy being lazy not reading, comprehending His wisdom. You fall back on taking scriptures out of context on purpose so you don't have to learn what He's written.”

    Unlike preachers and the like who don’t take scripture out of context? The problem with your book, which is an obvious work of fiction by the way, is that most of what is in it can be taken any way that you want to. That is why there are over 38,000 different denominations of Xtians. And the offsho-ot of Xtianity, Isl@m. How can all of this be taken from ONE book that is supposed to be the perfect, inerrant word of god?

    November 26, 2011 at 10:53 am |
    • Sarah P

      Yah, Heavensent, explain the many thousands of separate, different beliefs coming from your ambiguous Bible. Do.

      November 26, 2011 at 10:57 am |
    • HeavenSent

      Jim and Sarah, that's an easy question to answer. It's called the sin of pride blinding man (meaning women too) which cause all the denominations.

      Amen.

      November 26, 2011 at 12:08 pm |
    • PonderItYourself

      Why do I always out of context? DAMN! I'm nothin but a piece of pap like the Book of the Origin of the Species.

      November 26, 2011 at 12:15 pm |
    • HeavenSent

      PonderItYourself, you're just another one that has to attend summer school after you leave this life.

      Amen.

      November 26, 2011 at 12:29 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      "blinding men (meaning women too)." Jesus, what a moron. Who else would imagine that anyone needs the parenthetical explanation but some dope with the fattest ego on the planet?

      November 26, 2011 at 6:12 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @HeavenSent

      You said: "that's an easy question to answer. It's called the sin of pride blinding man (meaning women too) which cause all the denominations."

      No HeavenSent that doesn't seem likely given god is almighty.

      Most Christians believe god's purpose in creating the Bible is to guide human beings towards a knowledge of God, and to help them lead moral lives. To convey to man, the will of the one true god. This being so, it is imperative that everyone understand the will of god with equal clarity. Otherwise, we will end up with several thousand different versions of god's will. LOL
      Most Christians believe, that god is perfect, where to be perfect is to be the greatest being possible or, to borrow Anselm’s well-known phrase, the being than which none greater can be conceived.

      If the Christian god exists, and He is all knowing and all powerful and all present, why didn't He provide a bible that could not be misinterpreted? That everyone's comprehension of His will would be the same?

      The bible says:
      1 Corinthians 14:33 – KJV
      33For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

      Being all knowing, your god would have known of human flaws. Being all knowing, your god would have known how to construct a bible that would be interpreted the same by every human. Being all powerful, god would have been able to construct such a bible.

      The bible was written by men. Probably by many of the same men, that created god to begin with.

      Cheers!

      November 26, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
1 2 3 4
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.