home
RSS
April 7th, 2014
12:41 PM ET

Megachurch pastor resigns, citing 'moral failing'

Fort Lauderdale, Florida (WPLG Miami) The senior pastor of Calvary Chapel Fort Lauderdale has resigned after confessing to cheating on his wife, according to WPLG Miami.

Pastor Bob Coy, 58, reportedly confessed a "moral failing which disqualifies him from continuing his leadership role at the church" to  Calvary leaders on Wednesday. A board meeting was called the next day, when he resigned.

Coy, who has led the church since its founding in 1985, said he will now focus his full attention on his personal relationship with God and his family. The radio, television and digital media that distributes Coy's teachings have also been suspended.

"The governing board of the church is providing counselors and ministers who will help guide him through the process of full repentance, cleansing and restoration," Calvary Chapel said in a statement.

Calvary is one of the largest churches in Florida, with some 20,000 members who worship in 10 locations across the state.

"Trusting in God's providence, protection, provision and direction, the staff of Calvary Chapel Fort Lauderdale will continue our mission to 'make disciples' through regular services at all campuses and through myriad other ministries the church has established over the years," the statement said.

At an open service at the church Sunday, a letter was read to the congregation from Coy and the board.

Assistant pastors who are on staff will continue their usual rotating schedule as teaching pastors for all services, the statement said.

 

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Christianity • Church • Ethics • evangelicals • Leaders • Sex

soundoff (1,760 Responses)
  1. hellsyeahs

    I took a dumb on Jesus, literally. Prove me wrong.

    April 8, 2014 at 12:41 pm |
    • kudlak

      How does one "take a dumb" on anything, or were you giving an example there?

      April 8, 2014 at 12:43 pm |
      • doobzz

        I think it means you believe the whole bible story of Jeebus. Most rational people would have to "take a dumb" to fall for that one.

        April 8, 2014 at 12:45 pm |
        • ausphor

          With ever increasing numbers of Gideon bibles ending up in toilets, taking a dump on Christian philosophy is much more prevalent. Dumb down on jesus is also a popular trend.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:12 pm |
  2. Vic

    ♰ ♰ ♰ Jesus Christ Is Lord ♰ ♰ ♰

    April 8, 2014 at 12:33 pm |
    • seedenbetter

      Eric Clapton is god.

      April 8, 2014 at 12:35 pm |
    • otoh2

      Jesus Christ is Lore.

      (as in folklore)

      April 8, 2014 at 12:40 pm |
    • doobzz

      Jesus Christ is a bore.

      April 8, 2014 at 12:44 pm |
    • ausphor

      Jesus Christ is Lord of the Myths

      April 8, 2014 at 12:47 pm |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      All are welcome into the loving embrace of His Noodly Appendage. Pasta be upon him.
      R'Amen

      April 8, 2014 at 12:47 pm |
      • ausphor

        GOP
        The sauce be with you and hearty balls of meat.
        RAmen

        April 8, 2014 at 12:57 pm |
      • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

        And also with you.

        In the Name of the Pasta, and of the Sauce, and of the Holy Meatballs,
        R'Amen

        April 8, 2014 at 1:30 pm |
    • Vic

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5e6IN_YbwM

      April 8, 2014 at 12:57 pm |
  3. samsjmail

    My totem pole told me to forgive Pastor bob.

    April 8, 2014 at 12:08 pm |
  4. samsjmail

    Do you find it ironic that hardly anyone in the "Holy Lands" where Jesus was born, lived, preached, and died worships Jesus, but the Romans who killed him are HUGE fans?

    April 8, 2014 at 12:05 pm |
    • Theo Phileo

      Ironic? No, but it does fulfill scripture. (John 6:41-71)

      April 8, 2014 at 12:38 pm |
      • doobzz

        It's easy to "fulfill scripture" when you're writing "scripture".

        April 8, 2014 at 12:43 pm |
        • kudlak

          And writing it long after the events.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:46 pm |
      • ausphor

        Theo
        I bet you yourself could predict planes flying into the World Trade Center on 9/11, go ahead try.

        April 8, 2014 at 12:51 pm |
      • igaftr

        In the future a man will declare that there is no such thing as monsters.

        There is no such thing as monsters.

        Hey look at that, I fullfilled scripture...see theo how easy that is?

        April 8, 2014 at 2:12 pm |
    • seedenbetter

      And it's only a twist of fate that Emperor Constantine chose Christianity as the religion that all must follow. If, say, Zeus were the one he prayed to and won that major battle then this little upstart cult we now call Christianity would've died out immediately.

      April 8, 2014 at 12:49 pm |
  5. tynkyrbelle

    MEGACHURCH SCANDAL TIMELINE:

    1. Pastor bilks unsuspecting dupes out of their money to fund his lavish lifestyle of wh0ring.
    2. Commences wh0ring.
    3. Gets caught.
    4. Makes tearful apology.
    5. Drops out of site.
    6. Resurfaces, later, having been "forgiven" by his wife, family, imaginary god, etc.
    7. Rinse, lather, repeat. Uh – I mean, go back to Step #1, above.

    April 8, 2014 at 11:41 am |
  6. Dalahäst

    We do not serve a distant God, but one who actually cares about how you treat people and how you are treated. People matter. Relationships matter. The diginity of human beings matters. May the church, of all inst.itutions, uphold this truth and ask forgiveness when we do not.

    April 8, 2014 at 11:40 am |
    • tynkyrbelle

      Wouldn't a church have to FIRST act that way to begin with?

      You'd think, after 2,000+ years to try, at least ONE would have. Funny how NONE of them EVER HAS.

      April 8, 2014 at 11:43 am |
      • Dalahäst

        That is why I follow Jesus, not a church. Even people outside of a church – who would never join such a failed insti.tution – fail to live up to their own ideals. NONE of them have either. Funny.

        April 8, 2014 at 11:46 am |
        • G to the T

          So you only follow the words written in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John or do follow the other books of the bible as well?
          By what criteria do you establish the validity of the authorship or their contents?

          If every christian had the same theology, I might believe what you are saying is possible. But when everyone creates their own christianity, how can anyone call another a heretic? If there is only one truth, how come no two people seem to be able to agree on it?

          April 8, 2014 at 12:27 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          I follow Jesus. Not just words written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Those words point to God. Like many other words in and out of the Bible point to God. I belong to an imperfect community of people who love Jesus and are committed to carrying out what he asks – which involves self-sacrifice and doing difficult things like loving our enemies. We often fail, but our ideals are commonly shared and we strive to do better.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:34 pm |
        • kudlak

          Aren't you just following what you think Jesus taught, just as churches and even denominations all just follow a common thought of what Jesus taught? How is your way a better one? Aren't you prone to self-delusion, forming a theology that exactly matches your presuppositions, where individuals in a church organization that does not allow individual interpretation are not?

          Then you have to ask yourself whether you're not simply cherry picking theological opinions off of other individuals? Did you pick up your understanding of grace from C.S. Lewis, or Billy Graham, for example? What makes their opinions better than those of churches, where many people contribute to the theology?

          So, where do you get your theology from?

          April 8, 2014 at 12:40 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          Of course I've asked myself those questions. No skeptic like myself wouldn't. My theology is taught from others and comes from my testing of them in my life. I don't have all the answers, but today I choose to follow Jesus and live how he asks me. God is real and exists. Access to him is available if you seek him.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:46 pm |
        • kudlak

          Dalahäst
          There's nothing stopping a member of a church from testing the theology they're handed against what they experience either, correct?

          I looked but didn't find God. Maybe he wasn't where I was looking, or maybe you'll tell me that I just didn't look hard enough. That I need to keep looking until I find him? Well, two people can go out prospecting for gold, one can find it the first place they look and another can waste their lives looking to no avail, but at least he would die knowing that gold is a real thing. If gold were as cryptically defined as God is the poor fellow could work himself into such a state that he'd pile up a mountain of granite thinking that this must be the "gold" that everyone promised. If he didn't have to actually show his pile to anyone, like Christians can't actually show that their belief indicates a real God, people would be fully justified in disbelieving him. If a dozen guys like him each had different types of rocks in their piles they could get together and all talk about how rich with gold they were, but would this be reality?

          I could spend my life looking for all the gods. Why be particular, right? Part of my interest in gods is engaging Christians such as yourself. So, tell me precisely, what makes you think that God is real?

          April 8, 2014 at 2:20 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          + There's nothing stopping a member of a church from testing the theology they're handed against what they experience either, correct?

          Depends. Some people belong to churches that don't encourage testing or questioning theology. I'm fortunate I belong to a church that allows and encourages the questioning of theology.

          April 8, 2014 at 3:43 pm |
        • kudlak

          Dalahäst
          I find that interesting because every church I've ever been to features sermons and and other "teaching" aimed at instilling specific theologies. I imagine any church that allows free thinking would also allow discussion of everything presented. I'm also interested in whether, after all that questioning, your congregation still ends up fairly h0m0geneous in it's theology, or is there a wide range of beliefs based on personal understanding of Jesus' example?

          April 9, 2014 at 10:18 am |
        • Dalahäst

          Most of the sermons I hear in the various churches I go involve challenging people to live how Jesus asks us to.

          What do we question? Pastor, does Jesus really want me to love my g.ay neighbor like my straight neighbor? Yes? Pastor, does Jesus really want me to love my atheist neighbor like my fellow Christian neighbor? Yes?

          My church allows different forums. So we have a service where a pastor preaches her commentary on scripture/current events. But we also have venues where others can ask questions and choose to accept or reject dogma, doctrine, beliefs and ideas.

          Have you ever stuck around church long enough to see such actualities unfold?

          April 9, 2014 at 10:28 am |
    • Dyslexic doG

      more hokey, greeting card sayings.
      like safety blankets for Christians.
      they can spit them out on demand.
      and somehow think that they proved a point.

      April 8, 2014 at 11:44 am |
      • Dalahäst

        Oh, the irony.

        April 8, 2014 at 11:46 am |
    • bostontola

      Those words could be spoken truthfully by people from most religions.

      April 8, 2014 at 11:48 am |
      • Dalahäst

        Yes, good observation.

        April 8, 2014 at 12:01 pm |
        • G to the T

          And? All religious views cannot be correct as they are often diametrically opposed on foundational beliefs. So...?

          April 8, 2014 at 12:29 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          To thine own self be true.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:35 pm |
        • bostontola

          This above all

          April 8, 2014 at 12:42 pm |
        • G to the T

          "To thine own self be true."

          And? I'm sure Bin Laden was right up until the end. All your saying is that all views are equally valid. Again, this isn't possible especially when many are in direct conflict with each other.

          It sounds nice, but...

          April 8, 2014 at 1:49 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          I didn't say all views are equally valid. Not sure why you are imagining that.

          I'm saying I'm responsible for myself. I can't control what Bin Laden or others think and do. If they break the law or start harming others than I will do something.

          April 8, 2014 at 3:05 pm |
    • doobzz

      "We do not serve a distant God, but one who actually cares about how you treat people and how you are treated."

      Your god is quite the hypocrite then. Its behavior a poor example of how to care about and treat people.

      April 8, 2014 at 11:50 am |
      • Dalahäst

        I disagree. If I do what Jesus asks I will treat others well.

        April 8, 2014 at 11:59 am |
        • doobzz

          I particularly enjoy what he says about the treatment of your slaves. He's nice enough to say that when your slave doesn't know he's not doing the right thing, you should only punish him lightly. Luke 12:47-48

          April 8, 2014 at 12:09 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          Yea, if you take that out of context and imagine it is to be taken literally, it sounds kind of bad.

          But if you read what was said before and after that, understand what the society and people of that time were like and know the true message that Jesus was teaching you see it was a parable. Not to be taken literally, but a metaphor.

          He is saying we are responsible for our actions. The person who knows much and does little will face more punishment than the one who knows little and does little.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:16 pm |
        • otoh2

          Dala,

          You can also call others dogs and swine if they don't/can't buy into your tale.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:16 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          otoh2,

          I can. But I don't.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:19 pm |
        • otoh2

          Dala,

          It sounds like you are more of a humanitarian than Jesus purportedly was, then... and certainly 1000 times more of one than Paul of Tarsus.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:29 pm |
        • doobzz

          "Yea, if you take that out of context and imagine it is to be taken literally, it sounds kind of bad."

          You would know more about that than anyone.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:40 pm |
        • kudlak

          Dalahäst
          There are people who think that Jesus actually told people to deny marriage equality to gays. Tell me that they're not hurting people?

          Meanwhile, all Jesus did say to slaves was to obey their masters. No mention of working to gain your freedom, just obey whomever owns you. If everyone just followed what Jesus said there we'd still have slavery in countries with Christian majorities, and that would be causing harm, correct?

          April 8, 2014 at 12:52 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          No.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:53 pm |
        • kudlak

          Dalahäst
          So, you're saying that, if we still had slavery, that wouldn't be causing harm?

          April 8, 2014 at 1:22 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          No. We still have slavery. Evidence suggests that our lifestyles support slavery. We just don't see it so it isn't as bothersome to us.

          http://slaveryfootprint.org/

          How many slaves do you support?

          I know I belong to a church that fights slavery. We provide support to victims of slavery and are fighting to end it in America and other countries.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:25 pm |
        • kudlak

          Dalahäst
          Why does your church fight slavery? They're not following Jesus, but a PC ideal here, right?

          April 8, 2014 at 2:40 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          No, we follow Jesus. Not PC ideals.

          The PC ideals lead to slavery. That is why our culture we belong to supports slavery. We need to fight to end it.

          They way you and I are living today is supporting slavery. We are part of the problem.

          April 8, 2014 at 2:46 pm |
        • kudlak

          Dalahäst
          No, I'm asking whether Jesus' ideals weren't the radical, liberal PC ideals of his time? If the gospels cast the Pharisees as the Conservative legalists then that's where he falls, correct?

          Rampant consumerism isn't just a "PC" problem. Conservatives love their toys and fashions just as much. For every simple-life conservative there's a green, new-agey liberal out there growing their own veggies, darning old socks, and not being bigoted against anyone based on their race or s3xual orientation.

          April 8, 2014 at 9:37 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      The dignity of human beings matter.
      Unless they happen to be apostates, pagans, heretics or other assorted heathens.

      April 8, 2014 at 11:55 am |
      • Dalahäst

        No kidding.

        April 8, 2014 at 11:58 am |
      • Dalahäst

        “No one is born hating another person because of the color of his skin, or his background, or his religion. People must learn to hate, and if they can learn to hate, they can be taught to love, for love comes more naturally to the human heart than its opposite.”
        – Nelson Mandela

        April 8, 2014 at 12:05 pm |
        • G to the T

          With all due respect to Mr. Mandela, hate and love are not opposites. They both indicate an emotional investment in the target of the love/hate. The opposite of Love/Hate is apathy/indifference.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:17 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          love(noun) a strong positive emotion of regard and affection

          Antonyms:
          hate, hatred, detest

          http://www.synonyms.net/antonyms/love

          April 8, 2014 at 12:23 pm |
        • G to the T

          And – does this contradict what I said?

          Yes – "love"/"hate" are commonly held to be opposites. It is my belief that they are not, if for no other reason than they have properties in common (not usual for opposites yes?).

          Let me ask you this – which is more opposite, someone who loves a particular starlet, someone who hates that starlet or someone that doesn't concern themselves with that person one way or the other?

          April 8, 2014 at 12:33 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          I believe that we are taught to hate others because of their religion or background, like Mr Mandela suggests. I've partaken in such hatred and have had it put upon me by others. I strive to not take part in such activities.

          “Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that.” – MLK Jr

          April 8, 2014 at 12:38 pm |
        • G to the T

          "I strive to not take part in such activities"

          Precisely my point. To no longer hate someone, it isn't required to love them instead (it's not an either/or which to me would be true opposites) you can decide to not "play" anymore.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:45 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          I've been taught to hate others and live in fear. Today I'm learning to live differently. Jesus is the way I'm approaching this new way of life for me.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:49 pm |
    • lunchbreaker

      I actually agree with everything you said, minus the necessity of God. Not believing in a igher power, how people treat each other is the only real way I judge people, for lack of a better word.

      April 8, 2014 at 11:56 am |
      • Dalahäst

        That's great. I hope you can live up to your own standards.

        April 8, 2014 at 12:00 pm |
    • lewcypher

      To the rest of us we view religion kind of like if you saw a child writing on a blackboard that 2+2 = Fish. You have no proof it equals fish and there is countless proof that it equals 4. Religious people want to believe 2+2 = Fish. Religion requires willful ignorance to perpetuate.

      April 8, 2014 at 12:14 pm |
      • Dalahäst

        Broad generalizations and stereotypes of others are rarely sufficient.

        April 8, 2014 at 12:18 pm |
    • kudlak

      Dalahäst
      I actually care about how I treat people, which is why I'm not a Christian anymore. When all you have to get your god's opinion on something is a holy book that does not change with time, then you're forced to "reinterpret" that book to force it in line with current political correctness and scientific understanding. You also get stubborn people who prefer to force old interpretations even when they know that this hurts people. To me, that speaks more of their personal need to justify outdated thinking and behaviour rather than asserting some actual "truth".

      April 8, 2014 at 12:17 pm |
      • Dalahäst

        I'm sorry to hear that when you were a Christian all you had was god's opinion on something and a holy book that doesn't change with time, and you were forced to "reinterpret" that book to force it in line with current political correctness and scientific understanding. You had stubborn people who preferred to force old interpretations even when they know that this hurts people.

        If I had to do that, I wouldn't be a follower of Jesus either. Thank God I don't live by your standards or understandings!

        April 8, 2014 at 12:22 pm |
        • kudlak

          Dalahäst
          What did you have extra; someone telling you to follow what your mind was saying because that just had to be the Holy Spirit?

          April 8, 2014 at 12:28 pm |
        • G to the T

          "Christian all you had was god's opinion on something and a holy book that doesn't change with time, and you were forced to "reinterpret" that book to force it in line with current political correctness and scientific understanding."

          1) Doesn't change with time – is a gross falisy. The collections of stories that were eventually compiled into the OT and NT respectively show A LOT of variation over time, both before they were compilated and after. To believe otherwise is either ignorant or disingenuous in my opinion.

          2) and you were forced to "reinterpret" that book – Everyone does this. Everyone creates their own "bible" in christianity (in my experience) and I'm sure it's the same in Hiduism, Sihkism, etc. Again, in my opinion, anyone who says otherwise is being either ignorant or disingenuous.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:38 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          No. None of what you suggested is my experience. Sorry to hear you had to go through that.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:39 pm |
        • kudlak

          Dalahäst
          What was your experience, then?

          April 8, 2014 at 12:42 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          My experience is that living the way Jesus suggests is difficult and quite radical. It goes against the status quo and the PC American materialistic culture that is being pushed on us. I'm trying to live it.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:52 pm |
        • kudlak

          Dalahäst
          Not burning suspected witches was pretty PC a while back. So was the heliocentric model of the solar system and abolition. It can be argued that Jesus himself was championing PC opinions over conservative Pharisee ones. He was radical and living a difficult life, but he also had a "popular" following, right?

          Living as a conservative Christian in certain areas is just as status quo as living as a liberal in others.

          Not every liberal is materialistic. My wife and I make very good money, but I struggle to find things to suggest she get me for birthdays and such. I return 4 out of every 5 things I get. I prefer to live simply. I really couldn't care less what other people have, or how famous people are.

          I know a number of Christians who would still go out of their way to meet a celebrity. They even have their own Christian celebrities. They dress up in better clothes for church than I own, and so on. So I really don't see your path as anything obvious, or definitive.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:14 pm |
        • Theo Phileo

          G tot he T,
          The Old Testament was pulled together into the Canon that we have now by the scribe Ezra in the 400’s BC. (Nehemiah 8, Luke 1:70, Romans 1:2, Acts 3:21) By the time John completed the book of the Revelation in 94-96AD, the New Testament books were completed and had already been widely circulated as scripture.

          The New Testament was not compiled by any church council or by any decree of a ruler, rather, the apostles themselves dictated what the Scripture was (Ephesians 3:3-5, 2 Peter 3:1-2, 15-16, Jude 17-18, Galatians 1:1-2, 12, Hebrews 2:3-4, Acts 2:42). No book is in the Bible that the Apostles themselves didn’t approve, and all of the authors approved by them are in the Bible – no more, no less.

          It was only later, in the 100’s AD when the Gnostics began circulating their own texts and claiming apostolic authorship, that the church decided that it became necessary to weed out all heresies that desired to creep into the canon, so they developed a standard test to determine the canonicity of scripture.

          In 398AD, at the Third Council of Carthage, the church once and for all settled the parameters of the scope of scripture by officially confirming the Canon. By using the standard, the church fitted together into a single list, all of the individual writings of the Canon of scripture.

          Remember, this standard was solely meant to weed out heresy, it was not intended to “create” the canon of scripture – the apostles had already done that, and it ended with John’s book of the Revelation.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:19 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          Nothing Jesus asks suggests that burning witches is ok. Or that I have to reject science. I am following Jesus, not mainstream conservative Christianity. It doesn't matter what area I live in. I didn't say every liberal is materialistic or intended to suggest that. I would say conservatives appear more materialistic than liberals, actually. There are those who call themselves Christians that don't do what Jesus asks. I guilty of that often, too.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:22 pm |
        • G to the T

          Theo "the apostles had already done that" – That is a faith statement. There is no evidence that the attributed authors were the aposltes (and a whole lot of reasons why that would make no sense anyways) and besides, there were many, Many other variety of christianity during that time period and ALL had authoratative books written by apostles (or even supposedly Jesus and Adam in some instances).

          That you considered these "canonical" (which didn't happen until several hundred years later btw) is the result of a process. Much like the collation of the various jewish histories/literature into the torah was a process. It was not a single event (though the final complilation may be considered so I suppose).

          Paul's chruch is the one that "won", so history has been written to show that as inevitable (even divinely so). The facts on the ground do not support that supposition.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:57 pm |
        • kudlak

          Dalahäst
          Meanwhile other Christians did freely burn people as witches feeling just dandy that Jesus was behind them. That's the point, "following Jesus" is up to everyone to decide for themselves, it seems. Nowadays you can follow Jesus all the way to sheltering your millions and buying a Bentley, or protesting the funerals of service people, and everyone believes that Jesus agrees with their actions. You can argue that those people are just deluding themselves into thinking that Jesus agrees with them, but that would work with people who want to do nice things too, correct? Maybe it's just a case that nice people do nice things and selfish, or bigoted people do those kinds of things, and Jesus is just the excuse that's mostly accepted by society?

          April 8, 2014 at 3:05 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          I disagree. If you follow what Jesus says you wouldn't be burning people at stakes or sheltering earthly treasures. You can say you are following Jesus and do such things. Yes. You can say you are a secular humanist that cares about others, but do the complete opposite, too.

          Actually doing what Jesus says is challenging. A lot of people who say they are, aren't. I've observed that, too. Doesn't mean I have to do what they do.

          April 8, 2014 at 3:11 pm |
        • kudlak

          Dalahäst
          I think that we'll have to agree to disagree on there being a set standard Jesus example that Christians ought to follow. Jesus' actual example would see people sell all that they have to follow him, but that's terrible advice in an age where few actually seriously expect him to return any day. Jesus was not about any kind of long-term planning, so his example wouldn't steer you towards saving for your retirement, writing a will, or even training for a career, right?

          The End Times was very near for him, and his example wasn't what you would call "family friendly", either. At least Peter abandoned his wife to follow Jesus. Jesus himself abandoned his family and most likely didn't start one of his own. How many Christians are willing to put that happiness aside for the mission?

          April 8, 2014 at 9:30 pm |
  7. Dyslexic doG

    It's utter mind-numbing nonsense that someone could die and somehow absorb every bad thought and bad deed that everyone had ever done or would ever do in the future. How does this work exactly? Seriously?!

    Believing in a daddy figure in the sky is crazy enough but believing that this crucified bronze age zealot died for your sins just because a bunch of his followers took his body and claimed a miracle ... you really should be embarrassed.

    April 8, 2014 at 11:30 am |
  8. lewcypher

    The God of the Bible demonstrates time and again that it is ruthless, bloodthirsty, selfish, and egomaniacle yet Christians will do whatever amount of rationalization they can to still worship and follow this supposed god. It's like a wife that keeps getting beat up by her husband, but never calls the police, and tells all her friends how much he "loves" her.

    April 8, 2014 at 11:17 am |
    • Theo Phileo

      To deny the existence of God is to say that which has been proven to be mutable (the physcial universe) is also somehow eternal.

      April 8, 2014 at 11:28 am |
      • bostontola

        Who says it isn't?

        April 8, 2014 at 11:29 am |
        • Theo Phileo

          Because if something is mutable, it is not eternal, unless you deny the law of non-contradiction, which is to say that you embrace irrationality. But then, it only works in the mind, not in reality.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:31 am |
        • bostontola

          Sorry, try that again for a person that is simple.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:33 am |
        • Theo Phileo

          The law of non-contradiction states that something cannot be both "A" and "Non-A" at the same time and in the same way. If something is mutable – that is, changes, things are born, things die, etc., then it cannot also be eternal – that is, no change, no birth, no death.

          The universe is shown to be mutable, therefore it cannot also be eternal.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:35 am |
        • Dyslexic doG

          garbage!

          The universe can absolutely be endless and eternal.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:38 am |
        • bostontola

          I don't get why things can't change forever. Our observable universe is over 13B years old and is constantly changing. Why can't change be eternal?

          Eternal is a concept within time. Can physical things exist outside of time?

          April 8, 2014 at 11:40 am |
        • Theo Phileo

          "The universe can absolutely be endless and eternal."
          ------------
          Then would you please explain to me how something that is mutable can also be eternal?
          I am mutable. There was a time when I didn't exist, and there will be a time when I will cease to exist. How then can I be shown to be eternal?

          April 8, 2014 at 11:40 am |
        • bostontola

          Theo,
          Are photons mutable?

          April 8, 2014 at 11:43 am |
        • Theo Phileo

          If something is eternal, then the power of "being" does not come from outside, or some other source, but rather the power of "being" comes from the thing itself. An eternal something is changeless since it is never losing any of the power of its being, nor is it gaining anything in the scope of its being. It is what it is, eternally.

          The universe is constantly changing, and if something changes, then it is not eternal: if its changes are positive, then that proves that it had a beginning. If its changes are negative, then that proves that it will have an ending. Nothing that exists eternally can change.

          All of the evidence that we have demands that the universe had a beginning: this universe displays all of the characteristics of mutability – of negative change, of death, and decay, and if the universe itself is dying, then it is not eternal…

          April 8, 2014 at 11:45 am |
        • Theo Phileo

          "Are photons mutable?"
          -------------–
          They are contingent. Since they are contingent, they are mutable.

          However concrete physical reality is sectioned up, the result will be a state of affairs which owes its being to something other than itself. Every physical state, no matter how inclusive, has a necessary condition in some specific type of state which precedes it in time and is fully existent prior to the emergence of the state in which it conditions. There is not one example in the physical universe of a physical quant.ity that explains its own existence.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:46 am |
        • bostontola

          "There is not one example in the physical universe of a physical quant.ity that explains its own existence."

          Imagine how true that was 500 years ago. Now of course, many things that were mysterious have been explained. There are plausible explanations of physical existence with no conscious/self aware creator.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:51 am |
        • Theo Phileo

          "Eternal is a concept within time. Can physical things exist outside of time?"
          --------------
          Is "time" an agent unto itself, or is it contingent? If it is an agent unto itself, then is time eternal, or did it create itself? If it created itself, how can something create itself?

          If time is contingent, then what is it contingent on?

          April 8, 2014 at 11:53 am |
        • bostontola

          Time is contingent, that is a scientific fact. The Theory of Relativity predicts that time will change depending on velocity, mass, etc. That has been tested and verified. Time and space are one and began in our observable universe together. I don't know what time means outside that, and neither do you.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:56 am |
        • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

          Arguing for a mutable universe does not imply that there must be some external immutable eternal agent.

          Time may seem self-evident to us but, like distance, it is a concept which we use to measure our surroundings.

          The permanance of anything is purely speculative. Empirically, everything we see is impermanent.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:02 pm |
        • kudlak

          Theo Phileo
          "God" changes with the times, which makes him mutable, correct?

          April 8, 2014 at 12:23 pm |
        • Theo Phileo

          "God" changes with the times, which makes him mutable, correct?"
          ---------
          No.
          Malachi 3:6 – I, the LORD do not change...

          April 8, 2014 at 12:44 pm |
        • Theo Phileo

          "Arguing for a mutable universe does not imply that there must be some external immutable eternal agent."
          -----------------–
          It does if you wish to avoid infinite regress:

          The universe is mutable. Countless examples bear this out.

          Mutable enti.ties are not eternal.

          If something is not eternal, then it had a beginning. – This physical universe had a beginning.

          Infinite regress does not exist. (otherwise that which is mutable can also be immutable)

          Since infinite regress does not exist, and this physical universe had a beginning, then the agent through which this physical universe came to be is eternal.

          Multiple infinites cannot exist. Therefore the agent through which this physical universe came into being is singular.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:50 pm |
        • G to the T

          "If something is eternal, then the power of "being" does not come from outside, or some other source, but rather the power of "being" comes from the thing itself. "

          1) Eternal is a concept, and doesnt' exist "in real life". we have not basis upon which to assert the properties of "eternity".
          2) "then the power of "being" – Sorry but there is no "power of being" that I'm aware of. So again you are postulating based on an unfounded premise.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:50 pm |
        • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

          Infinite regress does not exist. (otherwise that which is mutable can also be immutable)

          Honestly I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:01 pm |
        • Theo Phileo

          G tot he T,
          Then if the "eternal" does not exist, then you have no way of explaining your own existence. If the "eternal" does not exist, then you are admitting that this physical universe once did not exist. But now that it does exist, you are forced to postulate that it created itself out of nothing, but that is impossible.

          If you then say that something else created this physical universe, but it was itself also not eternal, then you end up with infinite regress, which is also impossible.

          How then do you explain your existence?

          April 8, 2014 at 1:06 pm |
        • Theo Phileo

          "Honestly I have no idea what this is supposed to mean."
          -------------
          If infinite regress exists, then that which is mutable can die and come back, then die and come back, then die and come back – infinitely. Therefore that which is mutable is also immutable, thereby violating the law of non-contradiction – that something cannot both be "A" and "Non-A" at the same time and in the same way.

          It violates logic and reason to say that something that can be shown to be mutable is also somehow eternal.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:08 pm |
        • igaftr

          theo
          " This physical universe had a beginning. " In it's present state, it did begin with the Big Bang, but since you have no idea what was before the Big Bang, you do not know if this universe existed in a similar state, or if the Big Bang is part of a natural cycle.
          Since you do not know the state of things prior to the Big Bang, you argument fails. You have no idea if this universe is just the latest in an infinite string of universes, so you cannot show the universe as it is now if the Big Bang was actually a beginning, and you also do not know if it will end, or just reform, collapsing on itself triggering another Big Bang.
          Your argument is full of false assumptions, so is NOT a logical argument.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:10 pm |
        • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

          Oscillation is a completely natural phenomena.

          All waves exhibit this behavior without violating your (A + not A) rule.

          All light (visible, radio, microwave, etc) displays this behavior as does other electomagnetic phenomena like AC electricity. These waves appear to be inifinite in time and space (in so far as that term can be interpreted within the scope of our observable universe).

          This breaks your premise.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:21 pm |
        • Theo Phileo

          "but since you have no idea what was before the Big Bang"
          -------------
          Your argument makes the assumption that there is no God, but since such a postulate can never be proven, you have no reason to exclude it as a possibility. Since you assume first that there is no God, you are forced into not believing anything that He "may or may not" have said to humanity. By your assumptions, you are putting yourself into a position of denial of that which for all you know, may be true.

          You claim that you need empiricle scientific data to prove the existence of God. And yet there is no way to obtain empiricle, scientific data on the state of the universe before the Big Bang, so you – by your own admission – have no reason to believe that there even WAS anything before the Big Bang. If there was nothing before the Big Bang, then logic demands that there would be nothing now.

          What you posit is an unprovable position. All you can do is present evidence for your conclusions, but they will never be proven. All I can do is show you evidence for God, I say, the existence of the physical universe is proof enough, but to prove it to you is a scientific impossibility for the single reason that the scientific method is a SEVERELY handicapped method for obtaining knowledge because it redices "truth" to "only that which can be observed and tested." Even though you know that truth exists outside of that which is observable and testable, like the existence of reason for instance. Like the existence of love. Like the existence of consciousness.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:27 pm |
        • igaftr

          theo
          "Your argument makes the assumption that there is no God,"
          False. I never said that, and that is not implied, so no point in readin further. I said you do not know, and you don't.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:31 pm |
        • Theo Phileo

          "Oscillation is a completely natural phenomena.
          All waves exhibit this behavior without violating your (A + not A) rule."
          -----------------–
          I grew up at the beach and I know waves – I surfed them for over 20 years. I fail to see how the oscillation of waves violates the law of non-contradiction? I don't think you inderstand the law. The law says that two condtradictory facts cannot both be true. You and I cannot both be sitting on a train that is at the same time going to Chicago, and Berlin. I cannot be both dead and alive at the same time...

          These waves appear to be inifinite in time and space (in so far as that term can be interpreted within the scope of our observable universe).
          -----------------–
          Light has a source. So does every other form of radiation. Ergo, it isn't infinite because it has a beginning.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:33 pm |
        • Theo Phileo

          igaftr,
          Is reason not your strong point? (as you are so fond of telling me)
          OK, here we go...
          If you say that "you don't know" then you are saying that you, yourself don't know, otherwise if you knew, then you would understand that I MIGHT know, and you wouldn't automatically assume that I don't know. Since you tell me that I don't know, then you don't know, and since you don't know, you obviously aren't a believer, or you WOULD know. Ergo, YOU assume there is no God – or you WOULD know.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:36 pm |
        • observer

          Theo Phileo

          It's EMPIRICAL.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:39 pm |
        • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

          @Theo,

          when you say:
          "that which is mutable can die and come back, then die and come back, then die and come back – infinitely

          You describe oscillation, it's simply a matter of scale of the amplitude and frequency.

          I did say that oscillation does not violate non-contradiction.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:40 pm |
        • Theo Phileo

          Observer,
          I never claimed to be a good speeler.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:40 pm |
        • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

          "Light has a source. .... Ergo, it isn't infinite because it has a beginning."

          Do the math.

          Infinity minus zero = ?
          Infinity minus negative infinity = ?

          You will find that they are the same. 2 x infinity = infinity.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:42 pm |
        • Theo Phileo

          "I did say that oscillation does not violate non-contradiction."
          -----------
          My humble appologies then.

          But I still maintain that all radiation has a source, therefore is not infinite. We may not know when it stops, but we certainly can know when it starts. Like when I turn on a light.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:43 pm |
        • otoh2

          Theo,
          "I never claimed to be a good speeler."

          Heh... I'd go with "spieler"!

          April 8, 2014 at 1:44 pm |
        • igaftr

          theo
          "If you say that "you don't know" then you are saying that you, yourself don't know, otherwise if you knew, then you would understand that I MIGHT know, and you wouldn't automatically assume that I don't know. Since you tell me that I don't know, then you don't know, and since you don't know, you obviously aren't a believer, or you WOULD know. Ergo, YOU assume there is no God – or you WOULD know."

          And you assume that if I believe I would know. I really wish you would learn how to make a logical argument. This one fails completely. It makes NO sense. If you believe you know? absurd. believeing does nothing for knowledge. nothing at all.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:45 pm |
        • Theo Phileo

          You will find that they are the same. 2 x infinity = infinity.
          ------------------------
          OK, you lost me on this one. If something has a source, how can you claim it is also infinite?

          April 8, 2014 at 1:45 pm |
        • Theo Phileo

          "And you assume that if I believe I would know. I really wish you would learn how to make a logical argument. This one fails completely. It makes NO sense. If you believe you know? absurd. believeing does nothing for knowledge. nothing at all."
          -----------------
          "Believe" in the context that I implied, was to be a "believer" in God. That is the same as saying "a disciple of Christ." This also means "to become convinced of." Once one has become convinced that God exists – through means that are evident to the one who becomes convinced – then that which His God conveys is also believed to be true. Ergo – if one becomes convinced that the existence of God is true, then he will believe that which He has said. God spoke about the origins of the universe when He spoke to Moses during the Exodus, so, although no man had ever laid eyes on it, he is convinced it is true, because He has become convinced of the existence of the God who authored it.

          April 8, 2014 at 1:50 pm |
        • G to the T

          "Then if the "eternal" does not exist, then you have no way of explaining your own existence. If the "eternal" does not exist, then you are admitting that this physical universe once did not exist. But now that it does exist, you are forced to postulate that it created itself out of nothing, but that is impossible"

          "Eternal" is dependant on time. Time (from our perspective) started at the Big Bang. "Eternity" represents a misconception about time and the universe.

          Could the universe (or something like it) existed "previous" to the Big Bang? Certainly, but because we are on the other side of the event, we have no way to access the timeline from "before" the event. So while "eternity" works as a convenient cognative placeholder, it has no "real" existence because we've yet to ID anything that contains that quality.

          That help?

          April 8, 2014 at 2:05 pm |
        • zendraxus

          Theo,

          William Lane Craig does the double talking antics....a bunch of pseudo-philosophical mumbo jumbo.

          April 8, 2014 at 2:10 pm |
        • zendraxus

          *same*

          April 8, 2014 at 2:10 pm |
        • Theo Phileo

          "That help?"
          ------------–
          Sure, but please tell me why it is safe to assume that there was anything physical prior to the "Big Bang" model? My reason here is to ask why one automatically assumes that there must have been a physical origin to our physical universe when, it seems to me, to make that assumption, assumes an infinite regress.

          April 8, 2014 at 2:12 pm |
        • igaftr

          theo
          "Once one has become convinced that God exists "

          Convinced of something is not knowledge of something. Man you really are on a roll today. You have not made one single argument that is even slightly logical.

          You can convince yourself that god exists, it does nothing to validate the existance of any gods. I know you do not know, because I also know you have not eliminated all other possibilities. The only way you could possibly know, is to have evidence that excludes all other possibilities...that is something you do not have, no matter how much you "convince" yourself.

          April 8, 2014 at 2:18 pm |
        • zendraxus

          everything has/had a cause.....we simply don't know YET what set the sage for the big bang.

          It certainly was not some hair brained notion hatched by a desert tribe 13.7 billion years after the fact.

          April 8, 2014 at 2:21 pm |
        • G to the T

          Theo "Sure, but please tell me why it is safe to assume that there was anything physical prior to the "Big Bang" model?"

          I'm not assuming there was, I'm saying there's nothing to prevent there having been. By jumping to "god created the universe" you are making an assumption. It's just as possible that a supreme being created a universe several trillion, trillion years ago and our universe "budded" off that one. So while the original universe was supernaturally created, ours wasn't. Or even more simply, the universe is uncaused and it's one of those wonderful quantum effects I've heard to much about.

          "My reason here is to ask why one automatically assumes that there must have been a physical origin to our physical universe when, it seems to me, to make that assumption, assumes an infinite regress."

          Nope – as I said above, there are literally an infinite number of possibilites for what existed (if anything) "before" the Big Bang. So to assume there was a creator means you are selecting one of these and giving it primacy because of your personal beliefs, which is fine, until you start making defintive statements about it. Infinite regression is an interesting problem, but it's only a problem because we can imagine a concept like "infinite", though we cannot actually experience it and/or find anything that exhibits this property. It may be that "infinity" doesn't exist in any partical sense. Just because I can conceptualize something, doesn't mean it exists in objective reality.

          April 9, 2014 at 8:04 am |
        • kudlak

          Theo
          God may say that he doesn't change, but the Bible indicates otherwise.

          (Genesis 6:6,7) – "And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7And the Lord said, "I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them."

          (Exodus 32:14) – "So the Lord changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people."

          (Jonah 3:10) – "When God saw their deeds, that they turned from their wicked way, then God relented concerning the calamity which He had declared He would bring upon them. And He did not do it."

          Why would an omniscient God have to change his mind about anything?

          April 9, 2014 at 10:26 am |
      • sam stone

        Even if it weren't, Theo, you still have not shown logically how creator = God

        April 8, 2014 at 11:34 am |
        • bostontola

          Especially that Creator = Yahweh.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:35 am |
        • Theo Phileo

          That's very true. But I didn't attempt to show that – just that the physical universe had a non-physical cause by logical necessity.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:37 am |
        • bostontola

          Theo,
          When particles are spontaneously brought into existence from the vacuum, is that a physical creation?

          April 8, 2014 at 11:42 am |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          He has to flush before he puts more in Sam.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:51 am |
      • lewcypher

        which god?

        April 8, 2014 at 11:37 am |
        • Theo Phileo

          That's for another discussion. I'm merely showing by logical necessity that the physical (natural) universe had a non-physical (supernatural) cause.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:39 am |
        • igaftr

          No theo, that is not what your argument shows. Since you have no idea what was before the Big Bang, you argument shows but one possibility, and by definition, nothing is supernatural. All that exists, exists naturally.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:44 am |
      • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

        Funny how you guys have to do mental gymnastics for your "proof"....sounds like a line of BS.

        April 8, 2014 at 11:39 am |
      • igaftr

        theo
        To accept the existance of god when NO EVIDNCE of such a thing exists, is illogically leaping to an unreasonable conclusion, where no conclusion can be drawn.

        Nothing you have said has ever shown any such thing as a creator. Your argument does not address the basic ignorance of what caused the Big Bang. You claim a "creator" when NOTHING indicates a creator. You have simply seduced your own mind into that belief because it jives with your belief, which is also completely baseless.

        You certainly do love to throw out a lot of smoke with you arguments to nowhere, such as your entire causality argument ( it does not lead to any conclusion ether, except that YOU make an unjustifiable conclusion.

        You seriously need to take a non-religious lesson in logic, witha focus on what you use, logical fallacies.

        April 8, 2014 at 11:42 am |
      • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

        Who says the (mutable) physical universe is eternal?

        Clearly it had a beginning, it seems probable that it would also have an end.

        April 8, 2014 at 11:43 am |
      • tynkyrbelle

        Bla bla bla. Your "logic" is nothing but hucksterism.

        Your "god" is imaginary.

        YOU ARE A LOON.

        April 8, 2014 at 11:45 am |
        • Doc Vestibule

          As a Canadian, I would appreciate if you could refrain from insulting our favourite bird, the loon.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:53 am |
      • sk8ter017

        Fear believes-courage doubts. Fear falls upon the earth and prays-courage stands erect and thinks. Fear retreats-courage advances. Fear is barbarism-courage is civilization. Fear believes in witchcraft, in devils and in ghosts. Fear is religion, courage is science. What is even more sad is that Christianity has such a contemptible opinion of human nature that it does not believe a man can tell the truth unless frightened by a belief in God. No lower opinion of the human race has ever been expressed.

        April 8, 2014 at 11:59 am |
      • MidwestKen

        @Theo Phileo,
        Not that I agree with your premise, but wouldn't that make your God non-eternal. The mere act of supposedly creating this universe would require a change would it not. And if He changes then He is mutable and according to you He is not eternal.

        April 8, 2014 at 12:34 pm |
        • lewcypher

          I had the same thought. The bible provides numerous examples of how this god exhibits different behaviors.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:45 pm |
        • Theo Phileo

          God's character does not change. The God of the OT is the God of the NT, and nothing done by Him violates His nature, because He cannot violate His nature.

          James 1:17 – Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow.

          Numbers 23:19 – God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should repent; Has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?

          Malachi 3:6 – I, the LORD do not change

          1 Samuel 15:29 – Also the Glory of Israel will not lie or change His mind; for He is not a man that He should change His mind.”

          April 8, 2014 at 12:59 pm |
        • observer

          Theo Phileo,

          Does God believe that people should CHOOSE negative verses about gays or CHOOSE Jesus's MUCH MORE IMPORTANT Golden Rule?

          April 8, 2014 at 1:49 pm |
      • observer

        Theo Phileo,

        Even if it's found that intelligent design was true, that still does not in any way PROVE that God exists. There are an infinite number of possibilities for who or what created the universe including Zeus or a committee of zombies or the Three Stooges.

        April 8, 2014 at 1:46 pm |
    • bostontola

      I agree. It would be interesting for some psychologists and social scientists to study the similarities of religion and Stockholm syndrome. In a strange way, mankind has tamed itself under the threat of a self created God character that uses the ultimate omnipotent (conceptually) carrot and stick. The result is clearly effective, but the vestigial effects seem to linger beyond reason.

      April 8, 2014 at 11:28 am |
      • tynkyrbelle

        "The result is clearly effective"

        Is it? Really? All the violence and hate and wars and suffering that religion causes – you think that's "effective"???

        April 8, 2014 at 11:46 am |
        • bostontola

          Why do you assume effective means good or bad?

          April 8, 2014 at 11:52 am |
    • seedenbetter

      This behavior has a name. It's called the Stockholm Syndrome.

      April 8, 2014 at 11:32 am |
    • samsjmail

      ruthless, bloodthirsty, selfish, and egomaniacle

      You forgot stupid. I would have just killed the pharaoh instead of all of the first born sons of Egypt, but I realize that killing innocent babies, boys, and men makes a better story.

      April 8, 2014 at 11:49 am |
  9. Gary Coiro

    Every Saint has a past, and every Sinner has a future. I trust Bob Coy will engage with the God who is now inviting him into a desert season – to learn to fully trust in Him again. It is a difficult journey, but worth every minute... http://servantnetwork.wordpress.com/2013/09/13/purposeful-exile-my-journey/

    April 8, 2014 at 11:14 am |
    • lewcypher

      and if this was Central America 1000 years ago he would be working to trust in Quezacoatl again

      April 8, 2014 at 11:20 am |
    • observer

      Gary Coiro,

      He's been LYING to people for far too long. Good riddance.

      April 8, 2014 at 11:23 am |
  10. bostontola

    Married congressman 'sorry' after seen kissing staffer in video

    (CNN) – Newly elected Rep. Vance McAllister asked for forgiveness from God, his family and his consti.tuents after a local newspaper published what it said was surveillance video of the married Louisiana Republican making out with a female staffer.

    McAllister campaigned as a Christian conservative. He made headlines earlier this year when he invited “Duck Dynasty” star Willie Robertson to be his guest at the President’s State of the Union address.

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/04/07/married-congressman-sorry-after-seen-kissing-staffer-in-video/?hpt=hp_t2

    April 8, 2014 at 11:09 am |
    • bostontola

      I don't believe this is hypocrisy. I think this is more likely a straight up scam. Take advantage of people's beliefs for political gain. That is worse than hypocrisy.

      Religion + Politics => Money => Corruption.

      April 8, 2014 at 11:13 am |
      • samsjmail

        No different than most televangelists. Put an onion or some pepper spray on your hanky, so you can spend an hour crying over Jeebus on television. They make good money, though.

        April 8, 2014 at 11:52 am |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      This quote from the husband of the woman that McAllister kissed is telling. He describes an exchange he had with McAllister:

      "I know his beliefs. When he ran one of his commercials, he said ‘I need your prayers,’ and I asked, ‘When did you get religious?’ He said, ‘When I needed votes,’” Peac0ck recalled. “He broke out the religious card and he’s about the most non-religious person I know.”

      http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/04/08/husband-on-kissing-congressman-he-has-wrecked-my-life/

      April 8, 2014 at 1:14 pm |
      • bostontola

        What a sc:um bag.

        April 8, 2014 at 1:37 pm |
      • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

        One of Louisiana's finest.

        He replaced Rodney Alexander, who changed parties 30 minutes before the filing deadline on 6 August 2004, ensuring that no Democrat could run against him, having originally been elected to Congress as a Democrat in 2002.

        Bobby Jindal gave Alexander a job when he retired from Congress. Alexander and McAllister both identify as Southern Baptist.

        April 8, 2014 at 1:59 pm |
  11. Doc Vestibule

    Jimmy Swaggart – Caught with hoo/kers and cocaine.
    Excuse: "God has forgiven me, why won't you?"
    Result: Ministry continued with no ill effect.

    Ted Haggard – Caught with meth and a gay hoo/ker
    Excuse: "I've prayed away my gay!"
    Result: Excommunicated. New ministry is failing.

    Creflo Dollar – child abuse (attacking his 15 year old daughter)
    Excuse: "The Devil is responsible for the allegations"
    Result: Ministry continues with no discernible losses

    Eddie Long – Carnal, ho/mose/xual relations with teenage boys
    Excuse: Denial (none). Settled out of court for undisclosed sum
    Result: Voluntary "leave of absence" from ministry. Religious academy closed.

    These scandals seems to generate rather mixed results.
    I suppose it's all in how gullible the congregation is.....
    The lesson folk should learn from all this BS is that if your preacher is haranguing you for money, they're probably a con-man.

    April 8, 2014 at 11:04 am |
    • sk8ter017

      "Religion was invented when the first con-man met the first fool." -Mark Twain

      April 8, 2014 at 11:10 am |
      • bostontola

        One of my favorites. You could even shorten it:

        Religion was invented by the first con-man.

        April 8, 2014 at 11:21 am |
        • sk8ter017

          If that isn't the truth!!!!!!!

          April 8, 2014 at 11:33 am |
    • samsjmail

      David Koresh: murdered children

      Some of the survivors of the fire still believe he was Jesus.

      April 8, 2014 at 11:54 am |
      • Doc Vestibule

        The persistence of these lunatic cults never ceases to amaze me.
        Like why are the 7th Day Adventists still around when their religion is predicated on failed prophecies from the 1800s?

        April 8, 2014 at 11:56 am |
    • Alias

      Doc,
      Gay = end of church
      Everything else is forgivable.

      April 8, 2014 at 12:19 pm |
  12. Lucifer's Evil Twin

    Prediction... his 'flock' will forgive him... since domestic sheep are some of the dumbest creatures on the planet

    April 8, 2014 at 10:57 am |
  13. Lucifer's Evil Twin

    LET's Religiosity Law #13 – If you believe any of the christian ass-clowns on television (or the radio) are “helping” you get closer to Jesus and not doing it to get your money, but also have the capacity to be shocked when their misdeeds/lies eventually come to light… well, you are an imbecile. This law is immutable.

    April 8, 2014 at 10:52 am |
    • sk8ter017

      "If I were not an atheist, I would believe in a God who would choose to save people on the basis of the totality of their lives and not the pattern of their words. I think he would prefer an honest and righteous atheist to a TV preacher whose every word is God, God, God, and whose every deed is foul, foul, foul." -Isaac Asimov

      April 8, 2014 at 11:17 am |
  14. v2787

    Just another typical right wing religious hypocrite. The woods (and the pulpits) are full of them. Good riddance to this guy.

    April 8, 2014 at 10:33 am |
    • mk

      There will be no riddance. This guy will be "repentant" and then back up at the head of the something or other in no time. I hope his wife gives him enough grief for him to suffer at least a little bit. But then, she's got to put on the "forgiveness" face too.

      April 8, 2014 at 10:43 am |
    • sk8ter017

      We could only hope....... It's sad, but Jim Bakker is back and worse than ever. He now preaches of impending doom (God told him) and is subsequently selling survival supplies (dried food, generators, apparel, emergency fuel, etc.,). So, this clown spends 5 years in prison, and just like that he is back at it. The guy is a shyster and nothing short of a nutcase. Yet, people still continue to send him money. Unbelievable.

      April 8, 2014 at 11:31 am |
      • doobzz

        Why is he selling survival equipment? Can't they just pray for stuff?

        April 8, 2014 at 11:55 am |
        • sk8ter017

          That is good!!!! One would think so. He also goes on about how severe storms (tornadoes, blizzards, hurricanes, etc.,) hit certain areas because God is mad and/or upset at those people. Yet he can't explain why tornadoes have completely devastated and killed many people in cities such as Tuscaloosa, AL, Joplin, MO, and Moore, OK all of which are in the "Bible Belt." It's even more frightening when one realizes people actually believe him.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:09 pm |
        • doobzz

          Well, of course. And you know that Hurricane Sandy was god being pis.sed about hom.ose.xuality.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:37 pm |
  15. Bob

    Since Vic is busily doing his daily dumping of bible bile on us from his horrid Christian book of nasty, let's take a look at the evil instructions in there purportedly from his vicious, murderous sky fairy:

    Numbers 31:17-18
    17 Now kiII all the boys. And kiII every woman who has slept with a man,
    18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

    Deuteronomy 13:6 – “If your brother, your mother’s son or your son or daughter, or the wife you cherish, or your friend who is as your own soul entice you secretly, saying, let us go and serve other gods … you shall surely kill him; your hand shall be first against him to put him to death”

    Revelation 2:23 And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.

    Leviticus 25
    44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves.
    45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property.
    46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

    Note that the bible is also very clear that you should sacrifice and burn an animal today because the smell makes sicko Christian sky fairy happy. No, you don't get to use the parts for food. You burn them, a complete waste of the poor animal.

    Yes, the bible really says that, everyone. Yes, it's in Leviticus, look it up. Yes, Jesus purportedly said that the OT commands still apply. No exceptions. But even if you think the OT was god's mistaken first go around, you have to ask why a perfect, loving enti-ty would ever put such horrid instructions in there. If you think rationally at all, that is.

    And then, if you disagree with my interpretation, ask yourself how it is that your "god" couldn't come up with a better way to communicate than a book that is so readily subject to so many interpretations and to being taken "out of context", and has so many mistakes in it. Pretty pathetic god that you've made for yourself.

    So get out your sacrificial knife or your nasty sky creature will torture you eternally. Or just take a closer look at your foolish supersti-tions, understand that they are just silly, and toss them into the dustbin with all the rest of the gods that man has created.

    And further, ask yourself why we should have to rely on very stale, thousands-of-years-old, many-versioned old text, that is only reasonably subject to debates over its meaning. Why is it that your pathetic sky fairy can't even get with the past decade and create his own web presence (no, religious shill sites don't count), or push some tweets out? Even the pope, that creepy hider of criminal priests, could do that much, as can most children. After thousands of years of radio silence, reasonable doubt in the existence of your sky creature is easily justified, to say the least. Your absurd "god" is also apparently less capable at communication than any modern 10 year old.

    Ask the questions. Break the chains. Join the movement.
    Be free of Christianity and other superstitions.
    http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/

    April 8, 2014 at 10:18 am |
  16. Robert Brown

    These are the biblical requirements for the bishop, preacher, pastor, minister, elder, or the leader of the church.

    1 Timothy 3: 1-7

    This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;(For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

    April 8, 2014 at 10:17 am |
    • Bob

      Since Robert Brown is dumping bible bile on us from the horrid Christian book of nasty, let's take a look at the evil instructions that are really in there, purportedly from his vicious, murderous sky fairy. From both foul testaments of the disgusting Christian myth book:

      Numbers 31:17-18
      17 Now kiII all the boys. And kiII every woman who has slept with a man,
      18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

      Deuteronomy 13:6 – “If your brother, your mother’s son or your son or daughter, or the wife you cherish, or your friend who is as your own soul entice you secretly, saying, let us go and serve other gods … you shall surely kill him; your hand shall be first against him to put him to death”

      Revelation 2:23 And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.

      Leviticus 25
      44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves.
      45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property.
      46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

      Note that the bible is also very clear that you should sacrifice and burn an animal today because the smell makes sicko Christian sky fairy happy. No, you don't get to use the parts for food. You burn them, a complete waste of the poor animal.

      Yes, the bible really says that, everyone. Yes, it's in Leviticus, look it up. Yes, Jesus purportedly said that the OT commands still apply. No exceptions. But even if you think the OT was god's mistaken first go around, you have to ask why a perfect, loving enti-ty would ever put such horrid instructions in there. If you think rationally at all, that is.

      And then, if you disagree with my interpretation, ask yourself how it is that your "god" couldn't come up with a better way to communicate than a book that is so readily subject to so many interpretations and to being taken "out of context", and has so many mistakes in it. Pretty pathetic god that you've made for yourself.

      So get out your sacrificial knife or your nasty sky creature will torture you eternally. Or just take a closer look at your foolish supersti-tions, understand that they are just silly, and toss them into the dustbin with all the rest of the gods that man has created.

      And further, ask yourself why we should have to rely on very stale, thousands-of-years-old, many-versioned old text, that is only reasonably subject to debates over its meaning. Why is it that your pathetic sky fairy can't even get with the past decade and create his own web presence (no, religious shill sites don't count), or push some tweets out? Even the pope, that creepy hider of criminal priests, could do that much, as can most children. After thousands of years of radio silence, reasonable doubt in the existence of your sky creature is easily justified, to say the least. Your absurd "god" is also apparently less capable at communication than any modern 10 year old.

      Ask the questions. Break the chains. Join the movement.
      Be free of Christianity and other superstitions.
      http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/

      April 8, 2014 at 10:21 am |
      • lewcypher

        Thanks Bob.

        It is amazing how they become cherry pickers so quickly

        April 8, 2014 at 10:30 am |
      • Robert Brown

        “dumping bile horrid nasty evil vicious murderous foul disgusting burn sicko waste pathetic torture foolish stale creepy criminal”

        As before Bob, I’m afraid your word usage reveals the condition of your heart.

        Luke 6:45
        A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.

        April 8, 2014 at 10:43 am |
        • mk

          He's quoting from your own book delivered from your own god. Who is really the one with the brutal heart?

          April 8, 2014 at 10:50 am |
        • Bob

          Enough with your ad hominems, Robert Brown. These are direct quotes from your horrid myth book, and note more carefully the following text:

          Numbers 31:17-18
          17 Now kiII all the boys. And kiII every woman who has slept with a man,
          18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

          Deuteronomy 13:6 – “If your brother, your mother’s son or your son or daughter, or the wife you cherish, or your friend who is as your own soul entice you secretly, saying, let us go and serve other gods … you shall surely kill him; your hand shall be first against him to put him to death”

          Revelation 2:23 And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.

          Leviticus 25
          44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves.
          45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property.
          46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

          Note that the bible is also very clear that you should sacrifice and burn an animal today because the smell makes sicko Christian sky fairy happy. No, you don't get to use the parts for food. You burn them, a complete waste of the poor animal.

          Yes, the bible really says that, everyone. Yes, it's in Leviticus, look it up. Yes, Jesus purportedly said that the OT commands still apply. No exceptions. But even if you think the OT was god's mistaken first go around, you have to ask why a perfect, loving enti-ty would ever put such horrid instructions in there. If you think rationally at all, that is.

          And then, if you disagree with my interpretation, ask yourself how it is that your "god" couldn't come up with a better way to communicate than a book that is so readily subject to so many interpretations and to being taken "out of context", and has so many mistakes in it. Pretty pathetic god that you've made for yourself.

          So get out your sacrificial knife or your nasty sky creature will torture you eternally. Or just take a closer look at your foolish supersti-tions, understand that they are just silly, and toss them into the dustbin with all the rest of the gods that man has created.

          And further, ask yourself why we should have to rely on very stale, thousands-of-years-old, many-versioned old text, that is only reasonably subject to debates over its meaning. Why is it that your pathetic sky fairy can't even get with the past decade and create his own web presence (no, religious shill sites don't count), or push some tweets out? Even the pope, that creepy hider of criminal priests, could do that much, as can most children. After thousands of years of radio silence, reasonable doubt in the existence of your sky creature is easily justified, to say the least. Your absurd "god" is also apparently less capable at communication than any modern 10 year old.

          Ask the questions. Break the chains. Join the movement.
          Be free of Christianity and other superstitions.
          http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/

          April 8, 2014 at 10:54 am |
        • Robert Brown

          mk, the words I pointed out were Bobs, but he did include some bible quotes in his post. Also, based on his reply Bob may be a computer program rather than a person. What do you think?

          April 8, 2014 at 11:11 am |
        • mk

          Robert, conveniently you forgot to notice the brutal nature of your god in those bible quotes, yet noticed Bob's "hard-hearted" text. Typical judgmental christian, condemning those around them but never the horrid god of the bible.

          Also, even if Bob were a computer programmer, he still makes more sense.

          April 8, 2014 at 2:00 pm |
    • samsjmail

      Even If Bob is a computer program, he's smarter than you are.

      April 8, 2014 at 11:59 am |
  17. Vic

    This Mortal Flesh

    Abraham, the father of Faith and many nations, and the friend of God, was a liar.
    Moses, the father of Judaism, was a killer.
    David, king of Israel, was a murderer and an adulterer.
    Simon Peter was a denier of Jesus Christ under scrutiny.
    Paul of Tarsus was a persecutor of Christians.

    And the list goes on and on.

    Why then did God reveal His messages through them?! The answer is SIMPLE, they TRULY BELIEVED.

    God imputes righteousness unto people on the basis of Faith and NOT on the basis of works, since the beginning of time.

    This mortal flesh is corrupt due to the "original sin," and it can never be clean, until the end of time.

    A sinless human is an oxymoron, a paradox.

    Romans 3:10
    "10 as it is written,
    “There is none righteous, not even one;" (NASB)

    1 Timothy 1:15
    "15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief." (KJV)

    It is imperative for whoever hears the Good News of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ to discern this truth:

    The FREE Gift Of SALVATION

    John 3:16,17
    "16 For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him." (NASB)

    Romans 6:23
    "23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." (NASB)

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

    April 8, 2014 at 10:00 am |
    • lewcypher

      quoting your bible to people who don't believe in it is stupid

      April 8, 2014 at 10:04 am |
    • seedenbetter

      “In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit. Not a nasty, dirty, wet hole, filled with the ends of worms and an oozy smell, nor yet a dry, bare, sandy hole with nothing in it to sit down on or to eat: it was a hobbit-hole, and that means comfort.”

      From the book of Bilbo, 1:1

      April 8, 2014 at 10:08 am |
      • Lucifer's Evil Twin

        +10

        April 8, 2014 at 10:54 am |
    • G to the T

      "God imputes righteousness unto people on the basis of Faith and NOT on the basis of works, since the beginning of time."

      I have trouble believing in a god that cares more about what we believe than what we do. It seems very much like the greek pantheon always fighting each other for the praise of their worshipers.

      April 8, 2014 at 10:17 am |
      • Robert Brown

        Would you agree that what you do is related to what you believe?

        One of the reasons God doesn’t want us trying to earn it by our works is because you will do whatever you think you will be rewarded for doing. God isn’t interested in your actions in expectation of a reward. You could hate God and do good things to earn a reward. God looks at the intent of the heart and knows we are most times motivated by selfishness.

        April 8, 2014 at 10:28 am |
        • lewcypher

          Christians are such a self-loathing bunch.

          If you need religion and the worship of god(s) to be a good person then you have larger issues

          April 8, 2014 at 10:33 am |
        • observer

          Robert Brown,

          Right. God is far more interested in you guessing right on his existence that he won't prove, than if you are a "good person" or not.

          April 8, 2014 at 10:33 am |
        • Robert Brown

          "good person" = no such thing.

          April 8, 2014 at 10:47 am |
        • observer

          Robert Brown

          lol.

          So rewarding people because they have been good is wrong and it's better to reward them because of bribes (heaven) and threats (hell). Good thinking.

          April 8, 2014 at 10:56 am |
        • Robert Brown

          What we think of as good people do good and bad things. What we think of as bad people do good and bad things. God looks at the intent of the heart and has determined our motivations are not good apart from him. If the motivation is the love of God and the love of their neighbor, then they are good intentions. Instead, many times it is duty, guilt, to feel good, the approval of others, something in return, and so on.

          Some seek God for the hope of heaven or the fear of hell. Some seek him because they hear he is a present help in the time of need. Others seek out of curiosity. When you need him, he will find you.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:34 am |
        • sk8ter017

          The old doctrine that God.........rewarded the virtuous and punished the wicked is gradually fading from the mind. We know that some of the worst men have what this world calls success. We know that some of the best men lie upon the straw of failure. We know that honesty goes hungry, while larceny sits at the banquet. We know that the vicious have every physical comfort, while the virtuous are often clad in rags.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:43 am |
        • G to the T

          "Would you agree that what you do is related to what you believe?"

          Often, but same outcome can be predicated on a variety of beliefs. For instance, I do charity because I believe it is my social responsibility to give back to the society I live in. Others may do charity because they enjoy the adulation or because they feel guilty. I really don't care, so long as the benefit is real in the end.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:43 am |
        • G to the T

          ". God looks at the intent of the heart and has determined our motivations are not good apart from him"

          Oh, and this is crap exactly for the reasons I just stated. While intention is important, it is not what really matters, the actions you acutally perform are what matter.

          April 8, 2014 at 11:45 am |
      • samsjmail

        Without "faith", you don't need a god, or a preacher to take your money.

        It's pretty simple, and very obvious.

        April 8, 2014 at 12:01 pm |
    • lewcypher

      But Christianity makes so much sense!

      An omnipotent god who created the first man out of dirt and the first woman out of the dirt man’s rib later impregnates a man’s wife/fiance' (something about Thou Shall Not Commit Adultery comes in here) to reproduce itself. After the baby (Jesus) is born it disappears for over 30 years, reappears and sacrifices itself to itself with the aid of the Romans. Before it is killed though it walks on water, turns water into wine, heals lepers and makes a zombie out of a man named Lazarus (funny that there is only one source docu.ment for these spectacular events). Jesus tells us that its death is redemption (loopho.le) for having created imperfect beings (so much for omniscience) and that its crucifixion is better than the previous attempt to rid the world of evil a few thousand years earlier. That effort involved 40 days and nights of rain to drown every single living thing except good fish and that which boarded a large wooden boat and dispersed themselves on island continents thousands of miles from where the boat eventually landed. After Jesus’ death it reawakens three days later and tells its followers that if you telepathically promise that you accept it as your master, symbolically eat its flesh and drink its blood it will accept you and cleanse you of an evil force you inherited from the dirtman and ribwoman who was convinced by a talking snake to eat a fruit from a magic tree.

      How can you not believe that?

      April 8, 2014 at 10:21 am |
      • squeegeny

        I can and I do believe that. Now what's your point? How would you have gone about it? Got any better ideas than God?

        April 8, 2014 at 11:46 am |
        • G to the T

          "Better ideas than god"

          Yup – a whole bunch. Granted hindsight is 20/20 but yes, I can think of several ways it could have been done differently (and potenially better) than what is described in the bible.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:22 pm |
        • lewcypher

          The point is if you believe that then you have no reason not to believe any other religion, any other god. In fact if you had been born and raised in China, Central America, North America, India ...... various other locations thousands of years ago you would be worshiping various other gods, practicing various other religions, defending them all just as vigorously. To claim otherwise would be patently dishonest.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:27 pm |
      • sk8ter017

        Not to mention how Noah, building his "ark" in what is now somewhere near Baghdad, Iraq. Needless to say, it's hot there. So, that being said, how did he manage to get 2 polar bears and 2 penguins onto the ark??? Not to mention that this Noah guy was 480 years old, give or take a decade. Go figure.

        April 8, 2014 at 12:21 pm |
        • lewcypher

          Jesus spoke of Noah and the Genesis global flood in Matthew. If Jesus was a god incarnate and omniscient as Christians claim then he would have known that the flood as depicted in the Bible never happened. I’m not saying he was a liar but that knew no more than any mortal man.

          April 8, 2014 at 12:37 pm |
    • sk8ter017

      The notion that faith in Christ is to be rewarded by an eternity of bliss, while a dependence upon reason, observation, and experience merits everlasting pain, is too absurd for refutation, and can be relieved only by that unhappy mixture of insanity and ignorance, called "faith."

      April 8, 2014 at 11:47 am |
    • Vic

      Obviously, many see this as confusing.

      This is not a call to do bad, rather, it is a call to be saved. And to be saved, God bestowed His Grace upon humanity to make it through Faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, and regardless of sins, flaws, shortcomings, etc. That's the epitome of Mercy and Grace.

      Works of the flesh are of this world, and choose wisely, but know that God Almighty, the Father, Son (Lord Jesus Christ) and Holy Spirit, saves by His unlimited Loving & Saving Grace, and not because we are any good.

      April 8, 2014 at 12:32 pm |
  18. bobhamiltonchicago

    Well, not quits, as in faithful, but quits until his friends have said he has been whatever, then it's back to lying.

    April 8, 2014 at 9:54 am |
  19. anxovies

    So the pastor turns out to be just another cheating swine like the rest of us. Well here's to you,, Bob, I sincerely hope that she was worth it and that despite your resigning as Senior Pastor they let you keep your shares in Calvary Chapel World Media Enterprises, Inc., or whatever you call the media company disguised as a church. If you are not successful in crawling around the house looking repentant in the next few months you are going to need those shares in the divorce settlement. One more piece of advice, Bob, don't hire my divorce lawyer. Cheers!.

    April 8, 2014 at 9:50 am |
    • ynotblue

      What makes him like the rest of us is he must have gotten caught triggering the confession and resignation, a wise move keeping the wrong kind of attention from his church. The remarkable part of this story is fallen pastors and church leaders seem to have a predestined path for restoring their prior innocence, an opportunity most mortals don't have. Our redemption usually comes via divorce lawyers and family courts, after wallets have been emptied.

      April 8, 2014 at 10:01 am |
    • seedenbetter

      Actually, this scam artist might even be forgiven by his flock and allowed to return as if nothing ever happened and continue to rake in the cash from the deluded imbeciles. Fallen pastors survive these little slip-ups all the time and even come out the other side thriving even more so. Look at Bishop Long in Atlanta who was having sex with boys for years. His sheep are even more licking the backside of his nut-sack than ever before.

      April 8, 2014 at 10:06 am |
  20. ghammons714

    This is about to get real interesting when details come out. He is stepping away to calm the storm. Just watch!

    April 8, 2014 at 9:44 am |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      I am compelled to agree. My guess is that the Calvary Chapel Association ("corporate HQ") has stepped in to manage damage control. There is more to this than is being reported here.

      Unless the law was broken, it really isn't necessary for further details to be divulged, but I smell smoke here. It feels like the Calvary Chapel Association is taking steps to limit their financial liability.

      I wonder what happens when the pastor of a mega church divorces. Who owns what assets?

      April 8, 2014 at 11:47 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
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.