home
RSS
August 9th, 2014
06:01 PM ET

Why missionaries put their lives on the line

By Daniel Burke and Ashley Fantz, CNN

(CNN) - It wasn’t as if God's voice boomed through sun-parted clouds, telling Kent Brantly to move his family to Liberia.

Still, the young doctor said, the call was clear.

It echoed through the congregation where he was raised, Southeastern Church of Christ in Indianapolis.

Standing before the church community in July 2013, months before he left for Africa, Brantly said he heard the call in the teachers who urged him to memorize Scripture and the neighbors who funded his first mission trip years ago.

He saw it in the aunts and uncles who spent their vacations running Bible camps, organizing youth groups and serving missions themselves in Africa.

“It may not seem like much,” Brantly said in an emotional address to the Southeastern congregation, “but when you connect the dots you see a grand design that God has used to draw my life in a certain direction.”

For Brantly, that meant serving a two-year medical mission in Liberia with Samaritan’s Purse, a Christian relief organization. But in a grim twist that garnered international headlines, the 33-year-old contracted Ebola while treating patients and was airlifted back to the United States.

Brantly and a fellow missionary, Nancy Writebol, who was serving with SIM, another Christian aid organization, are being treated for the disease at Emory University Hospital in Atlanta.

After Liberia's outbreak began in March 2013, Writebol volunteered at a hospital in Monrovia, where she disinfected doctors and nurses working with patients stricken by the disease.

Despite their weakened health, their trust in God remains strong, family members said.

“Mom is tired from her travel, but continues to fight the virus and strengthen her faith in her Redeemer, Jesus,” said Jeremy Writebol, Nancy’s son.

On Friday, Brantly said that he felt a spiritual serenity even after learning his diagnosis.

“I remember a deep sense of peace that was beyond all understanding,” he said. “God was reminding me of what he had taught me years ago, that he will give me everything I need to be faithful to him.

Though Brantly's wife and children had been in Liberia with him, they had returned to the United States when he became ill.

In addition to the American missionaries, a nun and a priest from Spain who worked in Liberia also contracted Ebola, two more victims in an outbreak that health officials describe as the largest and most complex in the history of the disease.

As of Saturday, 961 people have died, nearly all in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea, where more than 1,770 cases have been reported, according to the World Health Organization.

Heroic or foolish? 

In the United States, much of the attention last week focused on the missionaries, who knowingly put themselves in harm’s way.

Christians have long debated the effectiveness of missions, with some arguing that they can, at times, cause more harm than good – both to missionaries and the people they are trying to help.

But rarely has the debate ranged as far afield of Christian circles or become as bitterly divided as it has since the American missionaries' return to the United States.

Prominent Christians, such as R. Albert Mohler Jr. and Russell Moore, called Brantly and Writebol heroic.

The missionaries knew the risks of contracting Ebola but worked with patients, doctors and nurses to try to contain the outbreak, the evangelicals said.

On the other hand, real estate mogul Donald Trump tweeted that people who travel to foreign countries to help are "great" but “must suffer the consequences” of their actions.

Conservative commentator Ann Coulter was even more unsympathetic, saying Brantley’s health status had been “downgraded to ‘idiotic.’”

“Why did Dr. Brantly have to go to Africa?” Coulter wrote. “The very first ‘risk factor’ listed by the Mayo Clinic for Ebola - an incurable disease with a 90 percent fatality rate - is: ‘Travel to Africa.’”

Nancy Writebol's husband, David, who remains in Liberia, answered the critics on Friday.

Writebol said he knows that some think missionaries like his wife are "foolish, or worse," to "put everybody in danger by going" to places like Liberia.

"But it’s that very calling," he said, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, "that demonstrates the characteristics, the great things that Christ has done for humanity. He left heaven and he came to a place of suffering and trouble and went about doing good.”

The Great Commission 

Besides the personal pull described by missionaries like Brantly, for centuries Christians have followed a more general call to spread the Gospel through word and deed. Known as the Great Commission, it began when Jesus told the apostles to “go and make disciples of all nations.”

Since then, millions of believers – from Baptists to Mormons to Jehovah’s Witnesses - have stuffed scriptures into suitcases and preached the Gospel in nearly every corner of the globe.

For centuries, serving those missions meant spending decades abroad, learning a culture and its language, and trying, with varying degrees of success, to convert native peoples to Christianity.

But short-term missions - often defined as less than two years - exploded in the 1970s and ‘80s with the advent of cheap and safe travel, scholars say. For evangelicals in particular, mission trips have become almost a rite of passage. In his 33 years, Kent Brantly had already served missions in Haiti, Honduras, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda and Nicaragua.

In doing so, Brantly is one of an estimated 1.6 million Americans adults who embark on short-term mission trips to foreign countries each year, according to Princeton University sociologist Robert Wuthnow.

If domestic missions and Christians under 18 were included, that number would rise to about 2.4 million, said David Armstrong, executive director of Mission Data International.

It’s an indication of how seriously Christians take Jesus’ call to reach “all nations,” a task to which they bring ever-increasing technical sophistication.

The Center for the Study of Global Christianity at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in Massachusetts, for instance, keeps tabs on the precise percentage of the world’s population who have been “evangelized.”

As of mid-2014, about 71% of the world has heard the Gospel through personal preaching, radio, television books or other media, the center says.

But not all missions are about evangelizing.

There are basically three types of missionaries, said Albert W. Hickman, a researcher at the Center for the Study of Global Christianity: those who preach, those who do good works, and those who do both.

SIM, which Nancy Writebol joined in 2013, belongs in the last category.

'Do you mind if I pray with you?'

Originally know as Sudan Interior Ministry, the Christian group has been active in Africa since 1893, when two young Canadians and an American set out to preach the Gospel in sub-Saharan Africa.

Within months, the men contracted malaria. Two died, but one survived and went on to help lay the groundwork for the modern SIM, which now stands for the more general Serving in Mission.

“Even early on, our people were willing to sacrifice or to die for their faith,” said George Salloum, SIM USA’s vice president of finance and operations.

More than 1,600 SIM missionaries now work in 60 countries.

The majority are recruited online, a process that starts with questions for applicants like: Do you share your faith with others? Is prayer a regular part of your life? Are you disciplined, accountable? Have your really thought about how hard being a missionary will be?

The list of missions SIM offers is extensive – from a Bible school teacher in Mongolia to a water engineer in South Sudan. The group also sends medical professionals to mission hospitals and clinics throughout the world.

Before they travel, missionaries go through cross-cultural training, learning, for example, how close should they stand while taking to someone and how different cultures greet strangers.

Missionaries also are also trained in their most critical skill, Salloum said: How to provide practical help while simultaneously spreading the Gospel.

For instance, when a person suffers from an illness or injury, the medical missionary will approach and ask if they can help. “The missionary just shares something ... and then sometimes they’ll say, ‘Do you mind if I pray with you?’”

“People will say, ‘Why are you doing that?’ And we tell them that’s what Christ did,’” Salloum said. “It’s a natural transition – someone who has a physical need then to have a spiritual need.”

That's precisely what Nancy Writebol did in Liberia, said the SIM executive. “She talked to children, she shared the Gospel. She was just available, there for the people. That was her world.”

Writebol and her husband are originally from Charlotte, North Carolina, and have two adult sons, according to SIM.

In Liberia, before the outbreak, Nancy served as a personnel coordinator, guiding new missionaries as they entered the West African country. She also volunteered on the staff of ELWA hospital, where David Writebol worked as a technical services manager of the 100-building complex.

"We aren't going to stop our ministry – we believe we can serve wherever God sends us," David Writebol said on Friday.

Samaritan’s Purse, the Christian relief organization Brantly worked for, declined to speak to CNN.

David Armstrong, from Mission Data International, said the organization, which is headed by Franklin Graham, focuses chiefly on emergency aid, particularly the physical needs of native populations. But they also try to tend to spiritual needs, which means providing Bibles and setting up prayer meetings.

“They are sharing the Gospel, but it’s more of a one-on-one, person-to-person thing,” Armstrong said.

Good works (without preaching the Gospel) 

One of the world's largest faith-based organizations doesn't even like the "missionary" label, according to a spokesman, because of the word's association with proselytizing.

Though Catholic Relief Services says it is motivated by the Gospel to embody Catholic social and moral teaching, it does not preach to the people it helps.

In fact, you don't even have to be Catholic to work for Catholic Relief Services. Among its 4,500 workers are many Muslims, Hindus and members of other religions, said Bill O’Keefe, the organization’s vice president of advocacy.

“We assist people of all backgrounds and religions and we do not attempt to engage in discussions of faith," O’Keefe said. “We’re proud of that. We like to say that we assist everybody because we’re Catholic, we don’t assist people to become Catholic.”

Founded in 1943, CRS has 4,500 workers more than 60 countries, including 250 CRS workers in Sierra Leone, Liberia, Guinea and Nigeria, the West African nations hit hardest by the latest Ebola outbreak.

“The biggest obstacles they’re facing is misinformation,” said CRS spokesman Michael Stulman, who was recently in Sierra Leone. “The people believe that Ebola is a curse or that it’s a lie made up by authorities.”

Meredith Dyson, CRS’s health program manager in Freetown, Sierra Leone, said her job is to get the public to stop believing those myths.

Some Liberians, for instance, believe that a soft drink can cure the disease, or that Ebola is a nefarious plot concocted by nongovernmental organizations and the government.

“People say don’t go to the hospital, you won’t come back because healthcare workers are injecting people and killing them,” she said.

“Every myth is born of some kind of truth – it is partly what they’re seeing – people are going to hospital and not coming home.”

Dyson, 31, studied public health at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore where she met people who worked for CRS. Though not Catholic herself, Dyson said the church's teachings on human dignity and social justice resonated deeply with her.

Describing the recent Ebola outbreak, Dyson's voice breaks as she recalls two CRS colleagues - both Africans - who died will trying to help others.

“The people who work in this setting are close knit,” she said. “They become your family. It can be really hard.”

Unexpected places 

Back in the United States, sitting in an isolation room at Emory University hospital, Brantly said he didn’t move to Liberia to fight Ebola, but that it became necessary after the outbreak there.

He said he held the hands of countless patients who died of the disease, and still remembers each of their faces and names.

Brantly's mission may not have been what he imagined when he spoke to Southeastern Church of Christ those many months ago, but his focus remains the same: going wherever God leads.

“One thing I have learned," Brantly said, "is that following God often leads us to unexpected places.”

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Africa • Catholic Church • Charity • Christianity • Ethics • evangelicals • Faith & Health • Foreign policy • Health • Health care • Liberia • Missionaries

soundoff (2,880 Responses)
  1. Dyslexic doG

    one of the folk here posted the following:

    "The Holy Spirit interpreted the truth and delivered the experience of spiritual truth as recorded in His Word, thorough The Word who became flesh...........who is the great spirit of life , and eternal life."

    I'd like to reference this as a perfect example of "cult speak". In what twisted delusional fantasy word could this sentence even mean anything?

    August 19, 2014 at 10:13 am |
  2. kermit4jc

    ans here comes the cherry picking..apparently you read ONLY the parts you want to read.the passage ALSO includes men.....we are ALL oto submit to one another!! Sorry TP...your argument loses out of ignorance. PLUS..in submitting, there is nothing wrong with submitting to one another, it does NOT make one inferior to another..
    Hebrews 12:9 Moreover, we have all had human fathers who disciplined us and we respected them for it. How much more should we submit to the Father of spirits and live!
    Hebrews 13:17 Have confidence in your leaders and submit to their authority, because they keep watch over you as those who must give an account. Do this so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no benefit to you.
    Ephesians 5:21
    21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.
    we are ALL to submit to one another...even husbands to wives!!!!!!! so yotalk about interpretation? you ignore parts of the Bible and make up stuff. so there is NO discrimination against women...women are NOT the only ones to submit

    August 19, 2014 at 9:49 am |
    • Dyslexic doG

      Proverbs 12:22 Lying lips are abomination to the LORD: but they that deal truly are his delight.

      August 19, 2014 at 10:08 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @kermit
      It is only recently that the majority of Christians have begun to think of women as equals – and that is because our cultural zeitgeist has been moving in that direction for a hundred years or so.
      Traditionally, the prevailing opinion has been that they're here to service males – "for indeed man was not created for the woman's sake, but woman for the man's sake."
      – 1 Corinthians 11:9

      There are still Christian groups (like the Quiverfull sect) who teach women the old fashioned, Biblical role of a wife – which is to say that their role is to serve their husbands in all ways. They are counseled to never deny their husband their bodies, nor to question any decisions he makes.

      August 19, 2014 at 10:18 am |
      • kermit4jc

        your point? I think it Is irrelevant as we are talking about the Bible..not the abuse of the Bible..I will grant that there were many who viewed it such..but the churches as whole did not...and even if they did, it still is not the Bible itself...you have two kinds of issues here...what does the BIBLE teach and what does a certain Christian culture teach

        August 19, 2014 at 4:33 pm |
  3. kermit4jc

    you made it very clear it was interpretations..cause I said something about the other bloggers interpretations..and you came up with the 41,000 make up your mind..My reading comprehension is very good. what else was I to think? and you laugh? maybe laugh at individuals and such..but hey..the point is..the other blogger had a flawed interpretation and I have shown it already in the past..for example the supposed discrimination against women..yet Eve and Adam were NOTH said to be made in image of God..hmm..no discrimination there....the other blogger just does not use context but cherry picks

    August 19, 2014 at 1:54 am |
    • observer

      The all-too-typical response from kermit4jc – – cherry-picked "misinterpretation".

      August 19, 2014 at 2:03 am |
    • TruthPrevails1

      Oh my kermi, just because you say it is flawed doesn't mean it is. What makes your interpretation any more valid than that of another person? Why pull the Superiority Complex out?
      There is plenty of discrimination of women in the bible, here are two examples and if you deny them, then you truly deserve to be labeled as ignorant...they come from your book of fables and an open-minded read screams discrimination:
      "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the Savior of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. (Bible, Ephesians 5:22-24)"

      Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God’s sight. For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful. They were submissive to their own husbands, like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her master. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear. (Bible, 1 Peter 3:1-6)

      August 19, 2014 at 6:29 am |
      • Theo Phileo

        Wow, you really haven't read the Bible have you? You didn't even back up just ONE VERSE to see that submission is mutual in marriage. If you can't read the Bible, then you really shouldn't quote from it like you know what you're talking about because it really just makes you look foolish. Observe...

        The Bible teaches MUTUAL submission in marriage, and BOTH are to submit to God.

        1 Peter 3:1-7 – Mutual submission in marriage
        a)Wives be submissive to their own husbands (v.1)
        b)Husbands are to be understanding and honor their wife (v.7)
        c)Husbands and Wives are fellow heirs of grace (v.7)

        Ephesians 5:21-33 – Mutual submission in marriage
        a)Both husband and wife are to be subject to one another (v.21)
        b)Wives are to be subject to their own husbands (v.22)
        c)Wives are to respect their husbands (v.33)
        d)Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church, and gave Himself up for her. (v.25)

        In this verse, we see that conflict has NO PLACE within a marriage. Contrary to modern ideas, it is neither healthy, nor is it indicative of a Christian marriage to have conflict – did you ever see Christ bickering with His church?

        e)Husbands are to love their wives as they love their own bodies. (v.28)

        August 19, 2014 at 7:32 am |
        • zhilla1980wasp

          theo: i see a few problems with the above scripture.

          "1 Peter 3:1-7 – Mutual submission in marriage
          a)Wives be submissive to their own husbands (v.1)
          b)Husbands are to be understanding and honor their wife (v.7)
          c)Husbands and Wives are fellow heirs of grace (v.7)"

          REPLY:
          1) why is the woman the only one told to be submissive?
          the husband is told to honor and understand, yet not to submit.

          "Ephesians 5:21-33 – Mutual submission in marriage
          a)Both husband and wife are to be subject to one another (v.21)
          b)Wives are to be subject to their own husbands (v.22)
          c)Wives are to respect their husbands (v.33)
          d)Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church, and gave Himself up for her. (v.25)"

          REPLY:
          2) here wives are given the same command to "subject" to their husband twice; husbands only once.
          2a)if we take how things ended for jesus then line (D) basically saids for men to die for their wives. -shrugs- i would do that without being told.
          -----

          these verse truly cover the submission of women.
          Ephesians 5:22-30).
          Colossians 3:18-19).
          (Gen. 2:18).

          August 19, 2014 at 7:51 am |
        • TruthPrevails1

          Theo: Yes I have read the bible and I'm accepting your interpretation of it any more than I'm accepting Kermi's. The book says what I quoted and both point to discrimination no matter how you try to spin it...both indicate that women are not equal to men-that is very much discrimination. I understand how you would fail to comprehend that...everything you spew must support the bible being good because you are biased. The bible is full of contradictions and horror...maybe you should actually read it.

          August 19, 2014 at 8:06 am |
        • Theo Phileo

          zhilla1980wasp,
          Now, let's look at what the word "submit" means when the Bible uses that to refer to a husband and wife's relationship. It means to put oneself under authority. It doesn't mean that one is less valuable than the other, but rather, God designed roles for marriage, and for life. In this instance, God has placed men over their wives in a place of leadership and protection.

          Having established the foundational principle of submission in verse 21, Paul applies it first to the wife. The command is unqualified, applying to every Christian wife. The submission is not the husband's to command, but for the wife to willingly and lovingly offer. The phrase "your own husband" limits her submission to the one man that God has placed over her, and also gives a balancing emphasis that HE IS HERS as a personal, intimate possession. (See Song of Solomon 2:16, 6:3, 7:10)

          August 19, 2014 at 8:11 am |
        • kermit4jc

          True Theo..in fact, it seems that these people start thinking what they accusse us of doing! [utting oneself under authorty of another doe snot make us any less of a person.....I guess those who work for bosses are less human than their bosses lol. its shallow way of thinking of how they are worthy....

          August 19, 2014 at 9:58 am |
        • Theo Phileo

          both point to discrimination no matter how you try to spin it...both indicate that women are not equal to men-that is very much discrimination.
          ------------------–
          Of course you think that. That is because your determination to find fault brings disaster on your reading comprehension skills and prevents you from using proper hermeneutics.

          You seem to be lost in post-modernism that says that "truth is whatever you want it to be, and my interpretation is just as good as your interpretation."

          That is in fact a lie. Authorial intent trumps what you or I "think" the passage means. It only means ONE thing, and that is the author's intent. The truth CAN be discerned, because truth actually does exist, and what Peter and Paul were both intending to say can be easily understood by taking ALL of their writings in context with this one. And that is how hermeneutics is done – you don't take one isolated passage, break it out of a greater teaching, and try to say something they never intended. But isntead you must see this in light of everything they had to say.

          You haven't done that.

          August 19, 2014 at 8:17 am |
        • TruthPrevails1

          Theo: Pot meet kettle!! You're no more right than I am and I would expect someone as intellectually dishonest and arrogant as you to think your god is good when in fact it isn't. Grow up, stop being condescending and skip the arrogance. 41000 sects of your belief system and so many interpretations and we know that your book of fables is just that-a book of fables with very few facts in it.

          August 19, 2014 at 9:05 am |
        • TruthPrevails1

          Pot meet kettle!! You're no more right than I am and I would expect someone as intellectually dishonest and arrogant as you to think your god is good when in fact it isn't. Grow up, stop being condescending and skip the arrogance. 41000 sects of your belief system and so many interpretations and we know that your book of fables is just that-a book of fables with very few facts in it.

          August 19, 2014 at 9:06 am |
        • zhilla1980wasp

          theo: let's look at the defintion of submission, shall we?

          sub·mis·sion/səbˈmiSHən/
          noun
          1.the action or fact of accepting or yielding to a superior force or to the will or authority of another person.
          2.the action of presenting a proposal, application, or other docu ment for consideration or judgment.

          -now wouldn't a woman submitting to a man's will become his to do as he please?
          -----–
          Instructions to Women
          1 Timothy 2:12…11A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.…

          1 Timothy 2:15…14And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into tra nsgre ssion. 15But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanct ity with self-restraint.

          1 Corinthians 14:34
          Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says.

          -these verse are discrimination; they simply telling a woman her place.
          ------–
          Corinthians 11:3
          …2Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. 3But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.

          so if god is the head of christ and christ the head of man and man the head of women;
          does that not mean that what a man tells a woman comes from god?

          so i guess those good christian husbands that tell their wives " get back in the kitchen" are doing as god tells them.

          August 19, 2014 at 9:08 am |
        • kermit4jc

          -now wouldn’t a woman submitting to a man’s will become his to do as he please? NOPE..cause the men were NOT to do "as they please" they are to CARE for her! yo are making up something thats not even prescribed in the Bible...it does NOT say to do as he pleases as if man should do whatever he wants to the woman, whether it be good or bad....

          August 19, 2014 at 10:01 am |
        • observer

          kermit4jc,

          lol. The Bible said to KILL women who weren't virgins on their wedding night. It says men can divorce unfaithful wives.

          Where does it say to KILL men who aren't virgins on their wedding night? Where does it say women can divorce unfaithful wives?

          lol. READ a Bible.

          August 19, 2014 at 10:16 am |
        • observer

          lol on me. Should be divorce unfaithful HUSBANDS.

          August 19, 2014 at 10:17 am |
        • zhilla1980wasp

          kermie: "NOPE..cause the men were NOT to do "as they please" they are to CARE for her! "

          1) i love how you chose the one part of my post and sweetly forgot those that you couldn't argue against.
          2) do you have any understanding of 'chain of command"? seeing you're not military i would seriously doubt it.
          here is how chain of command works- pres is god then orders flow down from him to those below him.
          so if males are thrid in the chain of command then yes men can do as they wish seeing women were instructed by a man on how to be quiet and those words were "inspired by god".
          3) remember back when you said it has mistakes, yet is still the word of god? which parts are the mistakes kermie?
          i thought your god didn't make mistakes.

          August 19, 2014 at 10:21 am |
        • kermit4jc

          ONE issue at a time ok? as for picking and choosing..number 1 YOU are the one who is ignoring things...the passage about wives submitting to husband was IMMEDIATELY followed by the admonishment to husbands to LOVE your wives as Christ has loved the church....what did Jesus do? He SACRFICED His life! I hardly think that is license for men to do as they will to their wives as you implied..and it makes me sick to see people argue this and not read the rest..yuo sir are really desperate to make an argument against the Bible

          August 19, 2014 at 4:36 pm |
        • LaBella

          Love=/=submissiveness. Ever.

          August 19, 2014 at 5:17 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          what does submissiveness mean to you? Labella? define it please, for somehow it seems submission to you is a terrible thing

          August 19, 2014 at 5:23 pm |
        • LaBella

          Kermit,
          Please indicate where I said anything other than love=/=submissiveness.

          August 19, 2014 at 5:28 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          huh? what are you saying then.please don't use the symbols =/= and state your point thanks

          August 19, 2014 at 5:30 pm |
        • Tom, Tom, the Other One

          Perhaps k believes in love as mutual submission:
          -You first
          -No, you
          -No, you
          -No, you
          .
          .
          .

          August 19, 2014 at 5:32 pm |
        • LaBella

          It means doesn't equal, Kermit.

          August 19, 2014 at 5:56 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          thats what I thought..ok..is submission ok within marriage (and I don't mean like a se x ual play type thing.....? what do you think of it?

          August 19, 2014 at 5:59 pm |
        • LaBella

          Kermit,
          If they are equally submissive to each other, then I see nothing wrong with that, but it may pose a problem when one expects the other to be submissive, and the other is unwilling. Submissive literally means ready to conform to the authority or will of others meekly obedient or passive.

          That, IMO, is not love of any sort. It is control over another.

          August 19, 2014 at 6:08 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          it can be done out of love and mutual....one has to be careful and not overstoe the bounds Paul laid out (to love one another, trwat each other with respect, abd do as like Christ cared for His church-namely sacrificing oneself

          August 19, 2014 at 6:13 pm |
    • zhilla1980wasp

      kermie: "for example the supposed discrimination against women..yet Eve and Adam were NOTH said to be made in image of God..hmm..no discrimination there...."

      1) adam and lilith were made in god's image.....not eve.
      1a) adam and lilith were created at the same time and lilith opted out on both of them.
      1b) eve was created from man, thus she belongs to man.

      2) there are plenty of verses that cover how women are property; for crying out loud you can throw your daughters to an angry mob to appease them just to protect someone else in your house.
      2a) where is the mother's say while lot was offering up his daughters to the angry mob?
      ANSWER: she was keeping her mouth shut so it wouldn't be her out there.

      August 19, 2014 at 7:13 am |
      • Theo Phileo

        Just because a story is told in the Bible, that doesn't automatically mean that the story is there to illustrate the "right" thing to do.

        Neither Lot, nor in a similar story in Judges 19 did the Levite do a "good" thing. And, nowhere in the Bible does it say that they did the right thing.

        Peter refers to Lot as "righteous," just as Noah was considered "righteous among his people" and Abraham was considered "righteous." But no human is perfect. Luther put it this way, the saved man is "simul iustus et peccator" that is, "at the same time just, and sinner." They were "righteous" in the sense that they were progressing in sanctification since righteousness was credited to them through their faith in God as revealed to them at that time, but no man is made perfect in this life, and he will sin in this life, but his life is marked by repentance.

        In other words, he's not perfect, but he's better than he was yesterday. That's sanctification.

        August 19, 2014 at 7:46 am |
        • TruthPrevails1

          Merely your interpretation...thanks for proving how many interpretations there are...you people keep helping prove out point.

          August 19, 2014 at 8:15 am |
        • kermit4jc

          well..it is the BEST interpretation, given the context...of which many people (as I pointed out like You did earlier) seem to ignore

          August 19, 2014 at 9:59 am |
        • TruthPrevails1

          So you say....stop pretending your interpretation is the right one when obviously there are many to pick from.

          August 19, 2014 at 11:05 am |
        • kermit4jc

          so you hate context when communicating? I don't pretend..i GIVE the context..something that you seem to ignore.....why do you ignore it? please give an honest answer

          August 19, 2014 at 4:37 pm |
        • Theo Phileo

          Merely your interpretation...thanks for proving how many interpretations there are...you people keep helping prove out point.
          --------------------
          That's a lie.

          The Bible means ONLY ONE THING. And that is authorial intent. Neither YOU nor I get to apply meaning to the text. Our job is to pull the meaning OUT of the text by seeing it as a whole, and discern authorial intent. You consistently fail to even TRY to find authorial intent.

          August 19, 2014 at 8:20 am |
        • zhilla1980wasp

          theo: lot had angels sent by god in his house; i'm certain if they had an issue with lot offering up his daughters to the angry mob outside his door they would have said so......and seeing they were angels, it would have been very quickly recorded in your book.

          now lot was also deemed to be righteous by your god, so righteous that he sent angels to him. that is basically putting god's seal of approval on what lot does because the next thing lot does is debate with god's messangers about how the town god tells lot to go to, isn't friendly toward lot.
          your god submits and allows lot to do as he requested of your god.

          so yeah that's not interrpting things, it reading it as it is written.

          August 19, 2014 at 8:29 am |
        • TruthPrevails1

          "That's a lie. "

          WRONG!! Not a lie at all. Your interpretation is no more valid than mine and yet you said mine was wrong, so why should your interpretation be any more acceptable? I understand the bible also...as a recovering Christian, I have read the book of fables and can see clearly what it says, the difference is I'm not interpreting with a biased closed-mind...your god is the epitome of disgusting and you the epitome of closed-minded.

          August 19, 2014 at 8:51 am |
        • kermit4jc

          His interpreetaiton is more valid cause it uses CONTEXT..where you ignore context

          August 19, 2014 at 9:59 am |
        • TruthPrevails1

          His interpretation is no more valid...stop the Holier Than Thou crap...it is very immature!

          August 19, 2014 at 11:06 am |
        • kermit4jc

          this has nothing to do with holier than thou cr ap you just do not like context..You want t omake up BS about the Bible and ignore whats the context that's given..I have always backed my arguments with context..have you?

          August 19, 2014 at 4:38 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          in fact, I noticed you totally ignored the context part in the post of mine you had responded to...that tells a lot

          August 19, 2014 at 4:39 pm |
        • TruthPrevails1

          So many interpretations, that is all they are!!! Every sect of Christianity has their own take on what scripture means and every Christian seems to also.
          It says a lot about you that you keep up this Holier Than Thou crap when it has been explained to you why you might just be wrong.

          August 19, 2014 at 4:42 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          SO WHAT there are so many interpretations? that does NOT negate that one is correct..and you STILL avoid the issue of context...IM pretty much made up my mind on what you think about context..you abhor context..you hate to use context when communicating with others....if that's not true..then show it...address the issue of context in the Bible..address why that when I use context you say I twist and all, yet YOU never show me how it is by using context yourself

          August 19, 2014 at 5:04 pm |
        • TruthPrevails1

          I posted scripture that showed discrimination against women, you said I was wrong...what makes your interpretation any better than mine (and that is all it is)?? I defended my position and like a little child, you couldn't handle it...stop being such a condescending ass and deal with the fact that you're not always right.
          Sadly you become abusive to people, so don't call me out for something when your yourself are no better.
          I'm done with this...you're wasting time and you're still wrong in my eyes.

          August 20, 2014 at 4:26 am |
        • kermit4jc

          I already said how mine was better....I used context...and you still have yet to address the issue of context

          August 20, 2014 at 9:34 am |
        • TruthPrevails1

          Yet yours isn't better necessarily, it is merely your opinion that it is. Skip the arrogance!
          This is over...I've stated my side and you refuse to be respectful, instead you like to THINK you are right when there's a good chance you're not.
          Thankfully none of what you claim exists in regards to your god can be proven and it has no pertinence outside of your home or church.
          Please register for high school and stick it out this time, an education will greatly benefit that closed, narrow-mind of yours.

          August 20, 2014 at 9:40 am |
        • kermit4jc

          then back it up! I been challenging you all that..BACK it up..show context

          August 20, 2014 at 9:45 am |
        • TruthPrevails1

          I did back it, the fact that you refuse to accept it is your issue, not mine!

          August 20, 2014 at 9:54 am |
        • Theo Phileo

          lot had angels sent by god in his house; i'm certain if they had an issue with lot offering up his daughters to the angry mob outside his door they would have said so......and seeing they were angels, it would have been very quickly recorded in your book.
          --------------------–
          The Bible tells us that we are constantly surrounded by angels, and are unaware of it. By your understanding, angels should always stop us from sinning, so that we would be able to go through life sinless. That's not the job of angels – they are messengers.

          now lot was also deemed to be righteous by your god,
          -------------------
          "righteous" doesn't mean "perfect." We've just gone over this.

          that is basically putting god's seal of approval on what lot does
          -----------------–
          Not in the least. Lot was considered righteous, just as all saved people are, by faith in the true God. Righteousness was imputed to him by grace through faith, just as it was to Abraham (Genesis 15:6, Romans 4:3, 11, 22-23). There was spiritual weakness in Lot (Genesis 19:6), immorality (Genesis 19:8), and drunkenness (Genesis 19:33-35). His heart was in Sodom (Genesis 19:16), and yet he did hate the sins of the peopls of his culture... He was not perfect, but he was righteous.

          your god submits and allows lot to do as he requested of your god.
          ---------------–
          How exactly does God submit? Because God answers a request? That doesn't even make sense. Atheists are fond of saying that God doesn't answer prayers, and now you're upset because God answered a prayer?

          so yeah that's not interrpting things, it reading it as it is written.
          ----------------------
          Learn to read it rightly.

          August 19, 2014 at 8:56 am |
        • TruthPrevails1

          Theo: Try not being a condescending, arrogant prick! Your interpretation is not necessarily the right one, stop pretending it is.

          August 19, 2014 at 9:01 am |
        • Theo Phileo

          Your interpretation is no more valid than mine
          -----------------–
          This statement could only come from one given over to post-modernism where "there is no truth, and my truth is just as good as your truth." Actually, truth does exist, and because it exists, there will always be those who are in agreement with the truth and are correct, and those who are in disagreement with the truth and are wrong. Sadly, the only "sin" left in the secular world is to tell someone that they are wrong. Well, sir, you are wrong.

          so why should your interpretation be any more acceptable?
          --------------------–
          Because it corresponds to authorial intent, not reader interpretation.

          you the epitome of closed-minded.
          -----------------
          Friend, you don't know how closed minded I am. I can't stand when people say that having an open mind is a good thing. Having an open mind is one step shy of insanity because it means that you let anything in – no discernment, no filter.

          Not all opinions are valid, because not all opinions correspond to truth. Until you understand that, then having an open mind is only going to lead you into further confusion.

          Well, I'm done with this conversation, I've got work to do. Have fun, God bless.

          August 19, 2014 at 9:05 am |
        • zhilla1980wasp

          theo:
          -smh- you have now fallen to the level of kermie, theo.

          i use to enjoy our banters back and forth, now you are claiming that we aren't reading "your" religious book correctly because we are modern atheists?

          ok that isn't something kermie ever claims when backed into a corner. LMFAO

          August 19, 2014 at 9:12 am |
        • Theo Phileo

          because we are modern atheists?
          ----------------
          I'll address this because it comes up so much, then I really have to get to work.

          Post-modern doesn't have to do with time so much as it deals with a mindset. Without going into the when's and how's, what post-modernism is, is existentialism – that the individual's unique position is a self-determining agent of authentication.

          When people are immersed into a culture that on a whole believes that the only ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth, the ability to rationalize is either severely handicapped or is destroyed altogether. This belief can only be popularized when entire populations are taught to "feel" rather than to "think," and when this happens, a desire to search the minds of intelligent forbearers fizzles out, and comprehension levels center only around what pleases them and their own unique worldview. A worldview which may or may not align with observable reality – a correlation that few in this belief system actually bother to observe.

          August 19, 2014 at 9:21 am |
        • Doc Vestibule

          "The Quran tells us that we are constantly surrounded by Djinn, and are unaware of it."
          "The OT III Manual tells us that we are constantly surrounded by Thetans, and are unaware of it."
          "The Yokaidangi tells us that we are constantly surrounded by Obake, and are unaware of it."
          "The Bhagavad Gita tells us that we are constantly surrounded by Bhoots, and are unaware of it."
          "Tobin's Spirit Guide tells us that we are constantly surrounded by Ghosts, and are unaware of it."

          Unlike all those other supernatural, invisible, mostly undetectable beings, angels are absolutely real.
          How else could Joseph Smith have known where to find the seer stones if the Archangel Moroni hadn't spoken to him?
          How could Muhammad have received his divine revelations if not from the Archangel Gabriel?
          If they weren't real, the Association of Priests in Opus Sanctorum Angelorum wouldn't exist, would they?

          People are touched by angels every day – they even made a TV show about that, if I recall.
          Whenever I am spiritually lost, I call upon my personal guardian angel. Occasionally He will make himself known to me by appearing from thin air – his diminutive, green form floating right next to my shoulder.
          Though I wish he'd stop calling me "dum-dum".

          August 19, 2014 at 9:41 am |
        • zhilla1980wasp

          theo: "Post-modern doesn't have to do with time so much as it deals with a mindset. Without going into the when's and how's, "

          -ok i will place my mind set in that time frame from which the bible was written.
          -concentrates very hard and POP- magic mindset.

          my daughter is worth 4 goats; if i catch my wife with another man, she dies; if my children don't do as i wish....well i can always have more; if i could read i would be able to know what this wondering guy is telling is true or not, however i need to feed my dozen children because the con dom hasn't been invented yet; floods and thunder are the god telling me he is angry.

          see magic mind set.
          ----------

          long story short every group of people had to fight for equal rights to be freed from under religious rules made law by men.
          women
          children
          minorities
          gay

          now the loudest ones screaming about why two gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry, are christian
          the loudest screamers in history of refusing women equal rights, christian
          the loudest people screaming about not giving minorities equal rights, christian

          see a pattern; or should i draw you a map?

          August 19, 2014 at 11:46 am |
        • observer

          Theo Phileo

          "Friend, you don't know how closed minded I am. I can't stand when people say that having an open mind is a good thing. Having an open mind is one step shy of insanity because it means that you let anything in – no discernment, no filter."

          The discernment comes from deciding what to do with the information that is openly CONSIDERED. It is "one step shy of insanity" that closed-minded people think they can't learn from entertaining conflicting ideas. There is nothing to be proud of for being close-minded and unwilling to accept ideas to analyze and learn from or use to valid what they already know. Really sad.

          August 19, 2014 at 10:19 pm |
      • kermit4jc

        and about Lot...NOWhEre was Lot supported by God to do such a thing! thus the Bible does NOT support discrimination there....

        August 19, 2014 at 9:55 am |
        • Doc Vestibule

          The story of Lot is not the only instance of a host offering up a woman to be gang ra/ped in the Bible.
          Judges 19 tells the story of a fellow who went to fetch his unfaithful concubine from her parents house.
          Just like in Sodom, the local townsfolk come around and demand that the home owner hand over his guest to be gang ra/ped – but instead of his guest, he instead offers up his daughter.
          The townspeople abuse and ra/pe her all through the night and when she comes home and collapses on the floor, her husband kills her, dismembers her and sends her bits and pieces to all the 12 Tribes in order to make them aware of the terrible crime that was committed by the Benjamites.
          So while gang ra/pe is considered a crime, the Bible once again shows that the life of a daughter is worth less than that of a guest. And also mailing dismembered body parts is a perfectly acceptable means of getting people's attention.

          August 19, 2014 at 11:45 am |
        • kermit4jc

          My God you really think that way? Ill bet then you hate newspapers when it reports of ra p e and murder!! Godness gracious! Its being REPORTED>.nowhere in the Bible did it say it was OKd by God...those guys were NOT following a command of God! They were being stupid! and SINFUL! I suggest you stop reading CNN, Foxnews, newspapers and watching the news on TV and internet...they all report accounts of ra pe and murder and from your argument, they approve of those acts cause they report it

          August 19, 2014 at 4:42 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          what those stories REALLY show was that SINFUL man did not value their daughters...that's certain INDIVIDUALS..not the BIble..use your brain ok?

          August 19, 2014 at 4:42 pm |
        • G to the T

          Perhaps – but in my book inaction = tacit approval

          August 19, 2014 at 11:51 am |
        • observer

          God's right hand man Moses even said that virginal women could be kept when captured. NOT ONE word if they WANTED to be the prize of the enemy. NOT ONE word about love. Pure male chauvinism and discrimination. Not unusual for the Bible.

          August 19, 2014 at 7:23 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          God’s right hand man Moses even said that virginal women could be kept when captured. NOT ONE word if they WANTED to be the prize of the enemy. NOT ONE word about love. Pure male chauvinism and discrimination. Not unusual for the Bible.<-right..becausr the author knew the reader would have ALREADY known the culture..instead of being a bu t head and assume without getting the context. The author pretty much figured that readers did not need every single detail spelled out and repoeated agin and again. The women wer enot kept as prizes, the Hebrews were to care for the women and make sure they were given a chance at getting a better life, thru marriage (either thru marrieg to the Hebrew fighting men, or given in marrige to another) IM sorry you seem too closed minded to figure that out...you make such outlandish assumptions without merit.

          August 20, 2014 at 1:59 am |
        • observer

          kermit4jc

          "..becausr the author knew the reader would have ALREADY known the culture..instead of being a bu t head and assume without getting the context. "

          "Knowing the culture" is one of the most PATHETIC and IGNORANT excuses of the apologists. So God wasn't concerned about what he thought was RIGHT, but just made decisions to be POLITICALLY CORRECT? Guess he supports gay marriage today. Lol..

          What a joke. Try again. That was PITIFUL.

          August 20, 2014 at 2:10 am |
        • kermit4jc

          so I take it you dont like context....thats fine..make up what you like then..you accusse it of being pathetic apologists stuff..come on now..prove it isnt the context..prove the culture was not for making sure the women got a better life..you say its ignorant...how is it ignorant? you saying that was NOT the culture? you saying the canaanite people were angels? come on..youre the ignorant one here...you really didnt even address the culture and set it straight....

          August 20, 2014 at 2:16 am |
        • observer

          kermit4jc

          "you really didnt even address the culture and set it straight...."

          WRONG. That was SUPPOSED to be God's job and he FAILED MISERABLY. You say God followed CULTURE at the time rather than CORRECT them.

          Ooops.

          August 20, 2014 at 2:25 am |
        • kermit4jc

          NOT so..YOU failed..YOU refused to read it all..its on you..YOU refuse to look into it..God gave YOU a brain to USE and expects YOU to use it..and you pretty much showed you refused to use your mind and think it through and find out the context...do You do this in the rest of your life as well? (IM assuming you dont-thus you are being dishonest and using souble standard with the Bible) Plus I did NOT say God FOLLOWED culture....I said YOU read with the culture in mind..the Hebrews were taught by God to care for the women and make sure they get provided for...this culture is nOT like American culture today...you failed....try again.

          August 20, 2014 at 2:31 am |
        • observer

          kermit4jc

          "prove the culture was not for making sure the women got a better life..you say its ignorant...how is it ignorant?"

          It's IGNORANT because the women had NO CHOICE. Stretch you mind to the max and see if you can imagine that the women might have PREFERED to return home to their families rather that being FORCED to live with a hated enemy soldier

          Apologists are a riot.

          August 20, 2014 at 2:30 am |
        • kermit4jc

          They DID have a choiuce idiot..read my words! They could either marry the Hebrew soldiers...or marry another..the soldiers were responsible for making sure they were cared for..either by marrying them..or marrying them off to another and my God you are really ignortant...you say these women would liked to return home??? a home where they were abused? se xually and every other way?? you are the ignorant one here who does NOT know the Canaanite culture of that time. wow..get some info (BTW you can find some of the atrocities the canaanites committed to their own families in Leveticus 18)

          August 20, 2014 at 2:33 am |
        • observer

          kermit4jc,

          "the culture at that time" is used as an EXCUSE over and over for apologists.

          It shouldn't matter AT ALL. If God really cared about the people, he'd say what's RIGHT rather than use your EXCUSE that his decisions are based on CULTURE. The politically correct excuse is amusing, however.

          August 20, 2014 at 2:37 am |
        • kermit4jc

          He DID say what was right.YOUR problem again is you refuse to read all of it..and you are such an idiot for ignoring cultural context...its not an excuse..you seem very pitiful in your communication skills and have NO idea what context even means..how is it yo made it this far in your life? huh? are you telling me culture has NOTHING to do with context? if so, I suggest you go to school and get into a communications class or such...you need serious help

          August 20, 2014 at 2:38 am |
        • kermit4jc

          let me ask you something else...WHY are you so against the women being cared for? do YOU want the women to be in abusive relationships with their relative (in cest) or such? do you??

          August 20, 2014 at 2:39 am |
        • observer

          kermit4jc

          "let me ask you something else...WHY are you so against the women being cared for?"

          Speaking of idiots, do you really believe that the women would overall be better taken care of by TOTAL STRANGERS who are ENEMIES than their own people? They were GIVEN to the ENEMY.

          lol. lol. lol. lol. lol. lol.

          August 20, 2014 at 2:46 am |
        • kermit4jc

          considering what the women went thru (in cest) they would love ot..and who says they right out marry strangers? nowhere does it say they were to marry immediately!

          August 20, 2014 at 2:49 am |
        • kermit4jc

          Also, these women would not see the Hebrews as enemies, they would seem them as liberators out of a vicious culture that comrpised the canaanites

          August 20, 2014 at 2:51 am |
        • In Santa We Trust

          kermit,
          God supposedly punished Lot's wife for a much less serious incident, but doesn't punish Lot for sins. Why?

          August 20, 2014 at 9:55 am |
        • kermit4jc

          Lot did get punished! for his in cest...family strife! God doesnot have to directly do ALL the punishment...sometimes he allows natural consequences to occur....try and read the Bible more ok?

          August 20, 2014 at 10:04 am |
        • In Santa We Trust

          Different scale – Lot's wife was killed for a minor incident. Don't you see the inconsistency – this omnipotent god gets credit for good events but for bad events it had nothing to do with them.

          August 20, 2014 at 10:46 am |
        • kermit4jc

          nOT a different scale at all..we ALL die cause of sins...whether God takes them immediately or natural causes. you are not getting the fullness of the BIble here.

          August 20, 2014 at 2:03 pm |
        • In Santa We Trust

          Oh but I am. You judge the inconsistency to be the capricious whim of an otherwise omnipotent and omniscient being who if it could create the universe could have avoided all of these "human problems" or handled them in a logical way.

          August 20, 2014 at 2:17 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          and yOU arrogantly presume to know more than God...do YOU see all things that he does? do YOU know every human, every thought of them, every act they do? to YOU it may SEEm inconsistent...but that's from your ignorant viewpoint (ignorant of knowing all the situations, etc)

          August 20, 2014 at 2:29 pm |
        • In Santa We Trust

          If there were any evidence of a god I would probably have a better chance of answering that. You seem to know the mind of this unknowable being yet in addition to having no evidence that it exists you have no evidence that it does know every human and know every thought. Why couldn't an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent being make itself known to all humans without this believe to believe nonsense?

          August 20, 2014 at 4:36 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          however, that's not the thing...YOU presume to TELL God what would be better, whereas I RECOGNIZE that God is all knowing and I never said I fully know the mind of God..i only know whats been revealed to us by God

          August 20, 2014 at 4:42 pm |
        • Doris

          "God doesnot have to directly do ALL the punishment...sometimes he allows natural consequences to occur..."

          lol – this is one of those points where, when you listen to a few different believers, it becomes obvious that people are "winging it" with their beliefs.

          August 20, 2014 at 10:26 am |
        • kermit4jc

          HUH????

          August 20, 2014 at 1:52 pm |
        • LaBella

          Is Lot even mentioned after Genesis 19:36 Thus both daughters of Lot were with child by their father?

          August 20, 2014 at 10:39 am |
        • kermit4jc

          Lot has been mentioned a number of times after Gensis 19.. in Deuteronomy 2:19, Psalm 83:8, Luke 17:28, and 2 Peter 2:7

          August 20, 2014 at 2:01 pm |
        • LaBella

          Why would the poor, abused non-virginal women not be cared for?

          August 20, 2014 at 10:59 am |
        • kermit4jc

          well, according to the other blogger..they wouldn't....they be prisoners instead of wives...according to the thinking of the other blogger.

          August 20, 2014 at 2:03 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          sorry..had to read the post again..the NON virginal......they already accepted the religion and all..the virgins have not...they are not affected by it yet.....

          August 20, 2014 at 2:04 pm |
        • LaBella

          Thanks for the verses; I didn't make my question clear enough.
          Deuteronomy mentions the sons of Lot.
          Psalms mentions the children of Lot.
          2 Peter mentions Lot, pre-incest.

          You posited that Lot was punished by God for his incestuous relationship with his daughters; I wonder where you got that, as it is not Biblically based.

          And another question: where is it said that virginity = not belonging to the established religion? Virginity means one thing: never having had sexual intercourse.

          August 20, 2014 at 2:22 pm |
  4. Vic

    For the new entry —closed for comments— :

    "Pope says ISIS must be stopped. But how?"

    STOPPED they shall be, that's definitely the right sentiment, and HOW is definitely the right question.

    In the news yesterday, ISIS just executed 700 civilian people because they were not Sunni Muslims, can you believe that?! I am still trembling with anger over it. Those murderers are not humans, they are ANIMALS!

    I am no military experts but I believe airstrikes are the best approach right now, especially given USAF unmatched superiority. Also, I remember in the last Iraqi War, John Kerry stressed upon sealing the borders to cut the supplies to the insurgents, I believe that's key but I don't know how that could be done without massive ground troops.

    August 18, 2014 at 8:23 pm |
    • Vic

      I should've used the next entry, I'll repost it there.

      August 18, 2014 at 8:32 pm |
  5. austin929

    And he said, “What have you done? the voice of your brother’s blood cries to me from the ground.” (Genesis 4:10.)

    And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaks better things than that of Abel. (Hebrews 12:24)

    August 18, 2014 at 10:02 am |
    • austin929

      Christ shed His blood and sprinkled it on the mercy seat in heaven. And it is this blood that atones for the soul and makes us moral in God's sight.

      Christ has declared us righteous through His sacrifice, and through faith and receiving the gift, His righteousness is imputed unto every believer.

      We are talking about the gift and glory of the truth. God's mercy is great.

      August 18, 2014 at 10:05 am |
      • evidencenot

        We are talking about imagination, delusion and mythology.

        August 18, 2014 at 11:52 am |
      • kudlak

        austin929
        Why did he need to do this, however? Doesn't this whole thing just point to some mistake of God's that he then had to correct? Maybe if he hadn't kicked humanity out of the Garden in the first place this gesture wouldn't have been necessary?

        At best, the whole story sounds like some dad kicking all his kids out of the house when they were young and only welcoming contact with them later in life after one of them commits suicide and, even then, he's not willing to treat them as adults, but still expects them to bow to his authority. Why would anyone feel compelled to love such a father?

        August 18, 2014 at 2:11 pm |
        • austin929

          By oppression[a] and judgment he was taken away.
          Yet who of his generation protested?
          For he was cut off from the land of the living;
          for the transgression of my people he was punished.[b]

          August 18, 2014 at 3:30 pm |
        • kudlak

          austin929
          Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the LORD makes his life an offering for sin, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.

          "Offspring" of Jesus? Maybe, if you believe Dan Brown, right?

          August 19, 2014 at 12:59 pm |
    • Reality

      And obviously, Austin929 has still not read the recommended studies on the historic Jesus making his commentaries nil.

      August 18, 2014 at 12:50 pm |
      • austin929

        The Holy Spirit interpreted the truth and delivered the experience of spiritual truth as recorded in His Word, thorough The Word who became flesh...........who is the great spirit of life , and eternal life.

        August 18, 2014 at 3:40 pm |
        • Reality

          Ahh, the holy spirit formally the holy ghost but in reality just another holy myth !!

          August 18, 2014 at 11:21 pm |
  6. lunchbreaker

    How about another logic exercise:

    A. Einstien believed in God, therefore God exists.
    B. Einstien did not believe in the Christian God, therefore Christianity is false.

    Either one logically valid?

    How about this:

    Smart people believing in God lends more creedance to the existance of God than does the belief of those with average intellegence, therefore smart people quoting stuff about God means God exists.

    August 18, 2014 at 9:54 am |
  7. ragansteve1

    OK, I am not sure why I would trust snopes over any other site, but how about these–not on snopes.

    “I want to know God’s thoughts. The rest are details.”

    —Albert Einstein - Quoted by E. Salaman in “ A Talk with Einstein”, Listener 54 (1955)

    “It is easier to denature plutonium than to denature the evil spirit of man.”

    —Albert Einstein - From an interview June 23, 1946. Reprinted in Einstein on Peace, 385

    “Mere unbelief in a personal God is no philosophy at all.”

    —Albert Einstein - To V.T. Aaltonen, May 7, 1952. AEA 59–059

    And then, to be fair, I must include the following.

    “The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even naïve.”

    —Albert Einstein - To Beatrice Frohlich, December 17, 1952. AEA59–797

    He seems a very humble and yet complex man. Any of you science folks have any perspective? It seems he is somewhat conflicted about religion.

    August 17, 2014 at 8:11 pm |
    • observer

      ragansteve1,

      The perspective is simple. Einstein was an AGNOSTIC who did NOT believe in the God that you believe in from the Bible.

      He did get fed up with BELIEVERS who TRIED to pretend he believed in God in the Bible. Please take the hint.

      August 17, 2014 at 8:21 pm |
      • ragansteve1

        Try not to be so aggressive. It makes your argument look weak. I am not saying he was a believer. But if he wasn't then what was he. He has a myriad interesting quotes that make me think he was more than just agnostic. He was curious and perhaps even seeking.

        August 17, 2014 at 8:39 pm |
        • observer

          ragansteve1

          It's sad that you consider that TRUTH "makes your argument look weak". I told you the TRUTH and you picked on the messenger.

          August 17, 2014 at 8:44 pm |
        • ragansteve1

          Observer, If you feel picked on, I am happy to apologize. I was offering a word of advice in debate. If I felt picked on every time an atheist told me I was living in fantasy land, or worshiping an imaginary friend, I would be hiding under my table. Just take it easy is all I am saying.

          August 17, 2014 at 9:00 pm |
        • observer

          ragansteve1,

          If you want to read about someone who was brilliant, curious, and seeking, I highly recommend Thomas Jefferson and a visit to Monticello.

          August 17, 2014 at 9:01 pm |
        • observer

          ragansteve1,

          No apology necessary. Kudos for offering. Your comments came on the heels of fred's frequent attempts to pretend that Einstein's comments about Spinoza's God were in any way related to the God portrayed in the Bible. Einstein's comments on God and his stated agnosticism should end any discussions but people like fred continue to FANTASIZE and twist.

          August 17, 2014 at 9:07 pm |
        • ragansteve1

          I don't know a lot about Jefferson, or at least as much as some of the other founding fathers. I do know that he was a Deist. That in and of itself is interesting. I also have a hunch that he is pushed forward by atheists because he was more interested in a strong central government than some of his peers. I also know that Professor Perry Miller, a Harvard atheist at , has written that Jefferson's influence in the founding of the nation, while substantial, has been overplayed.

          Perry is quoted as saying "'Rationalism' was never as widespread as liberal historians, or those fascinated by Jefferson, have imagined." From Nature's Nation (1967). Nonetheless, I certainly like Jefferson and will take your advice, although Monticello may be out of reach.

          August 17, 2014 at 9:15 pm |
        • observer

          ragansteve1,

          Jefferson was a brilliant man with an insatiable curiosity. Whenever he found anything new that fascinated him, he tried to find ways to incorporate it. Monticello is full of ideas that he brought there and applied. He kept extensive records of weather conditions, crops, etc. there in order to learn more. In spite of his obvious hypocrisy about slavery, he kept an open mind.

          I certainly won't claim you can believe everything you read on the Internet, but would recommend googling "Thomas Jefferson inventions" as a web search starting with looking under Google images.

          August 17, 2014 at 9:31 pm |
        • austin929

          I heard Jefferson was a Rosicrucian and I think that WAAAAAAAAAAAY more Christians ................like Hitler etc. were rosicrucians because they acknowledged God with mouth, but lived without fear or obedience.

          August 18, 2014 at 9:46 am |
        • observer

          austin929,

          Jefferson was a brilliant man who tried to maximize usage of the brain you think God gave him. It's not surprising that you disagree with him.

          August 18, 2014 at 11:37 am |
    • LaBella

      You don't have to trust it; it doesn't matter to me one way or another.
      It's attributed to him, but it's pretty clear he didn't say that. Other sources say that, too.

      I saw all of your other quotes on Einstein.biz.
      As I said to believerfred, Einstein was a complex man.
      He never stopped questioning.

      August 17, 2014 at 8:23 pm |
      • ragansteve1

        I hope you are right and I hope that he got his answers.

        August 17, 2014 at 8:40 pm |
        • LaBella

          Like I said, complex.
          From Wiki:
          Albert Einstein's religious views have been studied extensively. He said he believed in the "pantheistic" God of Baruch Spinoza, but not in a personal god, a belief he criticized. He also called himself an agnostic, while disassociating himself from the label atheist, preferring, he said, "an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being."

          August 17, 2014 at 8:58 pm |
        • ragansteve1

          Hmm, an interesting man. The reason I am interested is that the theory of relativity appears to be getting more attention recently (as in the past several years). And that has implication that are of interest to me.

          August 17, 2014 at 9:03 pm |
        • LaBella

          I find it interesting, as well. Why do you suppose that is?

          August 17, 2014 at 9:22 pm |
        • ragansteve1

          I don't know why you find it interesting, but I find it interesting that an older theory which kind of faded with the development of quantum theory, is now have a comeback of sorts. At least that's what I read in the popular scientific press.

          August 18, 2014 at 9:49 pm |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      steve,

      Isaac Newton was a believer....he also believed in alchemy...and he was a great scientist. What made him interesting is what he could demontrate (his science). His other beliefs are irrelevant...same with Einstein.

      August 17, 2014 at 9:38 pm |
    • zhilla1980wasp

      i love how christians are so good at cherrypicking through history when it benefits them.

      best known facts of the world, pagans created most of the "modern" devices humans use on a daily basis, from the common battery to the automatic door and further.
      leonardo di vinci; if you thought he was religious you're insane; devised most of the things we take for granted.

      so please wave your few deist/agnostics around history is made of volumes of people that would disagree with your veiw of god; just ask the greek. lmao

      August 18, 2014 at 7:58 am |
      • kermit4jc

        Yeah, and the list of Nobel Prize winners is made up of mostly atheists...uh huh...sure....better check it out again (if you already looked at it)

        August 18, 2014 at 9:53 am |
        • observer

          kermit4jc,

          Surveys show that scientists are more likely to be atheists than the average person.

          August 18, 2014 at 11:39 am |
        • kermit4jc

          that does not address what I said...those on the Nobel proze list, and those surveys only takes a sample, does not account for all scientists.thus those surveys are not accurate and should not assume that majority of scinetists are atheists (BTW, atheists account for about 1% of population-you telling me that all the atheists are scientists?)

          August 18, 2014 at 4:08 pm |
        • observer

          kermit4jc

          "those surveys only takes a sample, does not account for all scientists.thus those surveys are not accurate and should not assume that majority of scinetists are atheists"

          This is incredibly WRONG on so many levels. Reading comprehension is a major problem for you.
          I NEVER said that the majority of scientists are atheists. NEVER.

          Secondly, your ignorant comments on statistics and sampling theory shows that you know NOTHING about them. Just because they do not sample 100% does NOT make them inaccurate. Please further your education.

          When did you start caring about math numbers that are ACCURATE?

          August 18, 2014 at 7:47 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          you totally love to compare apples to oranges do ya? I have very good reading comprehension and judging from your words, you were trying to point that a majority of scientists are atheists. secondly, the statistics never are accurate readings and never meant to be. Third, with that being said, statistics are not same thing as measurement of something, I am concerned about accuracy..I would be concerned if the measurement given in the Bible about the size of the pool were directions on HOW to make the pool! ANd someone were to make them..the FACT is, the pools were already made, thus this was NOT instructions on how to make them. And again the size of the pool has NO bearing whatsoever on my Salvation. If it were somehow having a bearing on my salvation then precise numbers are to be needed

          August 18, 2014 at 9:22 pm |
        • observer

          kermit4jc

          "I have very good reading comprehension and judging from your words, you were trying to point that a majority of scientists are atheists."

          My EXACT COMMENT was "Surveys show that scientists are more likely to be atheists than the average person."
          With your reading comprehension problem, please look up EVERY word in a dictionary. NOWHERE did I say they were the "MAJORITY" (another word for you to look up). The AVERAGE person has little probability of being an atheist. WOW!

          Here is your most INANE comment of all. "the statistics never are accurate readings and never meant to be. Third, with that being said, statistics are not same thing as measurement of something"

          Wow. Your age is a STATISTIC. The number of times you have married is a STATISTIC. The height of the Washington Monument is a STATISTIC.

          Do yourself a HUGE favor. Never mention the word "statistic" again. You don't have a CLUE IN THE WORLD what the word means and you continue to make a fool of yourself. Do some research to save further embarrassment.

          Wow!

          August 18, 2014 at 10:16 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          OMG.....maybe YOu should get to what statistic is and what I was pointing to...statistics measuring on a WHOLE of a group is not accurate.....You however are doing the apples to oranges thing again....individuals.....sheesh....can you separate individuals from group? I am a statistic..but I do NOT represent the whole...I do NOT represent everyone in MY age group.....only a certain percentage..and even then..thats an approximate number, since if 50 percent of all makes at age 47 have a mid life crisis in a statistic profile..does that mean exactly 50 of ALL males at age 47 have mid life crisis? and so what then of yrou point they are likely (scientists) to be atheist? the fact is...majority are not...so who cares?

          August 18, 2014 at 10:23 pm |
        • observer

          kermit4jc,

          Again, for the sake not continuing to look so incredibly ignorant about the subject, don't try to talk about statistics again. You obviously don't have a CLUE in the world what statistics are, how they are gathered, how they are analyzed, and the mathematical soundness of sampling and estimating. For your sake, quit. You are in WAY OVER your head.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:38 pm |
        • zhilla1980wasp

          kermie: i am fully aware of the number of nobel prize winners.

          my statement is based on true history; if you knao of such a thing.
          polytheist cultures thousands of years before your little sect popped into existance were creating marvels of scientific achievement.

          did you know at one point in history bagdad,iraq was known as the "city of light" for the shear number of scholars that were there......now look at what it has become due to religion.

          August 19, 2014 at 7:06 am |
        • kermit4jc

          Of course I know! I do not say all scientists are thesists..not denyng that none are atheists...still I dont get your point....so what? Religious people brought us out of the Dark Ages (as did some atheists IM sure) so what? Just cause ONE religion (such as in Bagdad) cause its ruin, does not mean all others do too.

          August 19, 2014 at 9:51 am |
  8. ragansteve1

    Sometime back there was a discussion of where evil comes from. And I believe there have been several allusions more recently attributing evil to God, "since God created all things." I am interested in what everyone thinks of the following quote attributed to Albert Einstein on the website Goodsense.

    "God did not create evil. Just as darkness is the absence of light, evil is the absence of God."
    ― Albert Einstein

    August 17, 2014 at 6:22 pm |
    • ragansteve1

      OK SORRY!!! I must be hungry, getting the site mixed up with Mr. Goodcents. The site is goodreads.com

      August 17, 2014 at 6:24 pm |
    • LaBella

      http://www.snopes.com/religion/einstein.asp

      August 17, 2014 at 6:31 pm |
    • observer

      “The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. … For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish supersti-tions.”
      - Albert Einstein, letter 1/3/1954

      August 17, 2014 at 7:12 pm |
      • believerfred

        Einstein understood the God of Spinoza both were smart people. He would reject any suggestion that he was an atheist.

        August 17, 2014 at 7:19 pm |
        • observer

          believerfred,

          Einstein said he was an AGNOSTIC.

          Please do some research so you won't try to spread the LIE that Einstein was a BELIEVER in the God in the Bible.

          August 17, 2014 at 7:23 pm |
        • LaBella

          He was a complex man.

          August 17, 2014 at 7:30 pm |
        • observer

          LaBella,

          Yes, unlike MANY believers.

          August 17, 2014 at 7:32 pm |
        • believerfred

          observer
          No, you need to hit the books because you haven't a clue as to the God of Spinoza that fascinated Einstein. Spinoza's God only had the form and structure of the God of Abraham exhibiting substance unknown to man and totally lacked the anthropomorphic attributes given in the Bible. It is Spinoza's God that has proof because it is basically naturalism in a pantheistic veil.

          August 18, 2014 at 12:49 am |
        • observer

          believerfred,

          Speaking of being CLUELESS – –

          “I believe in Spinoza’s God, who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, NOT in a God Who concerns Himself with the fate and the doings of mankind.".
          - Albert Einstein, 1929

          Which ENGLISH words there STUMPED you? Or doesn't YOUR God deal with the FATE and DOINGS of MANKIND?

          Do some research to avoid making yourself look so FOOLISH. Albert Einstein DIDN'T BELIEVE In YOUR God. FACT.

          August 18, 2014 at 1:02 am |
        • believerfred

          observer
          Let me dumb it down for you. Spinoza's God is NOT the God of the Bible.

          August 18, 2014 at 1:08 am |
        • observer

          believerfred,

          Let me dumb it down for you.

          ALBERT EINSTEIN SAID HE WAS AN AGNOSTIC.

          Do you need that in another language so you might actually understand the words?

          August 18, 2014 at 1:13 am |
        • believerfred

          dumb and dumber in real life.

          August 18, 2014 at 1:19 am |
        • observer

          believerfred,

          It's always obvious when someone has lost a discussion, they resort to name-calling.

          Nothing new. Well done.

          August 18, 2014 at 1:20 am |
        • tallulah131

          People like Fred have driven me from this blog and from religion altogether. I was raised to be an honest person. It's very disheartening to see people like Fred, who is ostensibly an adult, choose to believe whatever makes him happy, regardless of the facts. Such deliberate dishonesty disgusts me.

          August 18, 2014 at 1:31 am |
        • observer

          tallulah131,

          Amen. It's sickening to see how very little regard some Christians have for HONESTY and INTEGRITY. And yet these HYPOCRITES lump all non-believers together as "without morals". Amazing.

          August 18, 2014 at 1:36 am |
        • kermit4jc

          without God yuo have no morals, that is no morals to get you to heaven..try and use context ok?

          August 18, 2014 at 1:59 am |
        • tallulah131

          The context of my morals is my own life and behavior, kermit. I am an honest person because I was taught that dishonesty is wrong and hurts others. I try not to harm others because it's fair and honorable to treat others as I would be treated myself. My morals have nothing to do with my own personal gain.

          Sadly, kermit, it appears that your "morals" are nothing more than a coin with which you seek to purchase eternal life. You do not wish to be a good person for it's own sake. You want to be rewarded for doing the right thing.

          I don't think you're a very good person, kermit. I don't think you're a decent person at all.

          August 18, 2014 at 3:41 am |
        • kermit4jc

          sadly, you are wrong again..I cannot be good enough to get to heaven!!!!!! yo are unaware iof the Gospel. We do NOT do good works to get toheaven! I do good things because I love God..just like when I ammarriedm I do good things for my wife cause i LOVE her, not cause IM trying to ge brownie points..yo uare assuming agaain and not even bothering to ask me about WHY I have morals and such... I do good things cause I love humanity....I do not like to hurt people. Try asking people before you assume (btw are you one who seeks facts?)

          August 18, 2014 at 9:48 am |
        • austin929

          talullah, Kermit believes in God. I'm sure he also believes that God is holy and that when Adam chose to disobey God's word, that God left Adam in the garden and the communion was interrupted by evil.

          furthermore.................talullah, good morals are not a ticket because being good is not an eternal reprieve.

          the blood of Christ was sprinkled on the mercy seat in heaven, when Christ took it there, and His blood speaks. Just like Abels blood was spilled out on the ground...................The blood of Christ and it's righteousness is imputed into those who know who the Lord is. By faith. and not morals.

          August 18, 2014 at 9:51 am |
        • austin929

          Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

          11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;

          12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

          13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:

          14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

          15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

          16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

          17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

          18 Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.

          19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,

          20 Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.

          21 Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.

          22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

          23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

          24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

          25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;

          26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

          27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

          28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

          August 18, 2014 at 9:58 am |
        • observer

          austin929,

          Actually, atheists and agnostics deserve more credit for "good morals" like following the Golden Rule than believers because they do NOT do it because of bribes (heaven) and threats (hell).

          August 18, 2014 at 11:45 am |
        • believerfred

          observer
          Get your Bible back out because it is not bribes that causes us to love God. Did someone need to bribe you to love them or do you need to bribe others to love you? I think not. So why make such a claim against Christians

          August 18, 2014 at 3:09 pm |
        • austin929

          the pain of rejecting God, and His ways and the suffering......that's why the law was given. Because of the suffering that was going to thrive unless it was given. Is much like the suffering that one goes through after salvation, and when one falls away repeatedly in spirit.......into the flesh and the mind of sin and death.

          man is helpless and lost and the evil result of this, was the compulsion to choose spiritual death, and the the death of God in the flesh was a power that came as the power of death.

          and this death you can see in this life, this evil is easy to see. and somehow we are all capable of treating God with this contempt and rejection of His holy life. His righteous life is shunned through the choice of death. spiritual death and suffering and isolation from freedom.

          Through His death and His life blood , we have been made new through the resurrection power of His spirit.

          this is the only acceptable way to repreive your compulsion to choose spiritual death and isolation....................because you hate it that God IS HOLY AND RIGHTEOUSS...........................AND YOU ARE NOT.

          August 18, 2014 at 3:36 pm |
        • observer

          believerfred,

          Lol. How many Christians would still go to church every week and love God just as much if he didn't BRIBE them with the promise of heaven or threated them with hell if the didn't do EXACTLY as he DEMANDED?

          Read the comments on here from Christians saying that atheists have NOTHING TO LIVE for if there was no heaven.

          August 18, 2014 at 3:56 pm |
        • observer

          typo - should be "threatened"

          August 18, 2014 at 3:57 pm |
        • believerfred

          observer
          There is the anticipation of being with the one you love who in your mind and heart first loved you and has gone before you to prepare a room in the Fathers house as the Bible says. Which atheists do not have. It does not matter if God or the Fathers house exists or not as the anticipation is now and is reality for me and others. Moses never entered the promised land while he was alive and neither did Abraham because it was a hope in promise.
          When trapped in mine looking into darkness Christians have a hope and an anticipation atheists do not have yet both are in same physical space and both are concerned about loved ones.

          August 18, 2014 at 5:19 pm |
        • observer

          believerfred,

          There is no doubt that Christianity (or any religion) offers great comfort to its believers. No problem there. The real problem comes when those believers use that comfort as an excuse to make other peoples lives worse (non-believers, gays, pro-choice supporters, etc.). That is my main complaint and reason for being on these blogs.

          If your religion makes your life better, don't use it to make others lives worse.

          August 18, 2014 at 7:55 pm |
        • observer

          austin929

          "you hate it that God IS HOLY AND RIGHTEOUSS...........................AND YOU ARE NOT."

          NOT AT ALL. God's WARPED idea of "righteous" is to support slavery, force marriage on people who may hate each other, discriminate against women, discriminate against gays, discriminate against the handicapped, beat helpless children for discipline, etc.

          I don't "hate". Who would want to support such terrible, HEARTLESS things?

          August 18, 2014 at 9:20 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          Wow..sure glad I don't worship THAT God..I worship the God of the Bible

          August 18, 2014 at 9:28 pm |
        • Doris

          kermit: "God..I worship the....."

          I think most who visit these pages are quite aware of that, kermit.

          Some of the stories from Gullible's Travels were fun for me as a child.

          August 18, 2014 at 9:37 pm |
        • In Santa We Trust

          kermit
          "... and not even bothering to ask me about WHY I have morals ..."

          Morals are not endowed by a god. Atheists do good things also.

          August 18, 2014 at 9:45 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          I never said atheists don't....please get the context..read what the blogger said in the post previous. MY point was they were making false accusations as to MY morals, that I only have them so I can purchase my way to heaven..to eternal life, which could be further from the truth

          August 18, 2014 at 9:50 pm |
        • In Santa We Trust

          kermit,
          The only other post from you on this thread says "without God yuo have no morals, that is no morals to get you to heaven ..."

          What other interpretation is there?

          August 18, 2014 at 10:13 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          im referring to the morals to get to heaven, secondly my other post was where tal accused me of having trying to be morally good to purchase my way into heaven....

          August 18, 2014 at 10:14 pm |
        • In Santa We Trust

          Which would imply that you believe that atheists do not have morals and consequently will not get to heaven.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:16 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          they don't have the morals to get to heaven....and they don't believe in heaven anyways..so right..they wont go there

          August 18, 2014 at 10:25 pm |
        • In Santa We Trust

          So you are saying that atheists don't have morals, the implication being that they are bestowed by god.
          Please see my original post.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:27 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          sigh..I don't think youll get it...never mind..I tried

          August 18, 2014 at 10:29 pm |
        • observer

          kermit4jc

          "Wow..sure glad I don't worship THAT God..I worship the God of the Bible'

          Sorry. I was talking about the God in ALL the Bibles in the Christian book stores.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:04 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          nope.....you were referring to your flawed interpretation of the God of the Bible....and perhaps ignorant interpretation as well

          August 18, 2014 at 10:08 pm |
        • Doris

          Flawed interpretation, kermit? Who are you to tell someone how to read Gullible's Travels? There are all kinds of clubs that have their own favorite interpretation of that book – over 41,000 of them evidently.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:16 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          how did yo uarrive at the number of 41000?

          August 18, 2014 at 10:24 pm |
        • observer

          kermit4jc,

          lol. And you CLAIM to have studied the Bible. lol.

          (Deut. 25:5) “If two brothers are living together on the same property and one of them dies without a son, his widow
          may not be married to anyone from outside the family. Instead, her husband’s brother SHOULD MARRY her and have
          intercourse with her to fulfill the duties of a brother-in-law.”

          LOL. Please READ a Bible.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:22 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          and your issue with this is..?

          August 18, 2014 at 10:26 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          LOL..I KNOW that's there anyways.....IM not stupid as you assume

          August 18, 2014 at 10:28 pm |
        • Doris

          41000 is just a number to approximate the estimated number of Christian sects.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:35 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          41000 sects/denominations does NOT equate 41,000 different interpretations..which goes to show your ignorance of the different deniminations.....not ALL are a denomination because of interpretation of Bible...you need to get to red into history of them

          August 18, 2014 at 10:44 pm |
        • Doris

          kermit: "41000 sects/denominations does NOT equate 41,000 different interpretations..which goes to show your ignorance ..."

          I didn't write "different interpretations" which goes to show your ignorance in taking time to read what I wrote.

          But now that you mention it, there is plenty enough differences between many sects, based on interpretation, to make the beliefs of all of them laughable.

          August 18, 2014 at 11:00 pm |
        • tallulah131

          Austin, Fred - your play-pretend eternity has no meaning to me. I don't try to be a good person because I want to go to heaven. I don't believe in heaven. I try to be a good person because that's how I was raised, and I have no expectation of a reward. My entire point is that you are apparently only "good" because you expect to be rewarded for it. You belief is entirely mercenary, and thus not terribly virtuous.

          August 19, 2014 at 4:40 am |
        • believerfred

          tallulah131
          You have it very wrong as from the start of Christianity Paul made it clear that good works are not a ticket to "heaven". James said good works flow from the presence of God in you not the opposite where we get into the presence of God by good works. Jesus asked why do you expect rewards in the kingdom of God for doing good, you should be doing good regardless. The ONLY good works that are stored up in "heaven" are those that come from the fruit of the Spirit (joy, peace, love, etc). Jesus said you can do none of this unless you are connected to me (i.e. it is God who works through you and in you). When we get to "heaven" there is recognition for the things we did but, we give that reward and accompanying glory to God because without God none of it was possible or worthwhile in the first place.
          Now, in "heaven" all glory is given to God so we are all equal. When say mother Teresa is observed we wonder at the good that came by her. Stalin happens to be there we wonder at the grace and mercy of God. Both of them would be filled with the glory that is God. It is not like here where there is a crowd around Tom Cruz or Putin and we are in awe of such great beautiful human specimens as we step over a Dalit on our way to get an autograph.
          Tallulah, if you reject Christ with your dying breath I don't know what becomes of your "good" works. Directly or indirectly God may have worked through you as all things work to the good of those who believe (i.e. God may have blessed someone through you and the fruit (affect) of that blessing is stored up and not lost). There are many things in the Bible I had a wrong impression about and I may be wrong about some of this, but the general outline has not changed over the years. That general outline entails a plan of creation that works to enlighten your being in such a way as to desire and thirst for that wonder of perfect love. All those that think they are good enough without any dependence upon a greater source (ideal), for whatever reason, can never desire the "heaven" intended for them.

          August 19, 2014 at 12:17 pm |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      Isaiah 45:7

      7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

      August 17, 2014 at 7:13 pm |
      • ragansteve1

        Cheese, When you quote the Bible, you probably should provide some context. God was speaking to Cyrus, I believe the king of Persia, and He was declaring His sovereignty. Another perhaps more accurate translation into English is the NIV. Here it si with context.

        I am the Lord, and there is no other;
        apart from me there is no God.
        I will strengthen you,
        though you have not acknowledged me,
        6 so that from the rising of the sun
        to the place of its setting
        people may know there is none besides me.
        I am the Lord, and there is no other.
        7 I form the light and create darkness,
        I bring prosperity and create disaster;
        I, the Lord, do all these things.

        8 “You heavens above, rain down my righteousness;
        let the clouds shower it down.
        Let the earth open wide,
        let salvation spring up,
        let righteousness flourish with it;
        I, the Lord, have created it.

        August 17, 2014 at 7:36 pm |
        • observer

          ragansteve1,

          Cheese's quote from the Bible summed it all up.

          August 17, 2014 at 7:39 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          yes..it summed up his ignorance of what evil is (absence of righteousness, thus not something to create, and the Hebrew word and context would then mean calamity

          August 18, 2014 at 1:50 am |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          steve,

          First all I did was quote the book you believe was divinly inspired to answer your question.

          Second I don't see how your "context" changes anything.

          August 17, 2014 at 7:49 pm |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          "If a bible verse furthers the cause, it is to be taken literally. If a bible verse is detrimental to the cause, it is either: taken out of context; is allegorical; refers to another verse somewhere else; is an ancient cultural anomaly; is a translation or copyist's error; means something other than what it actually says; Is a mystery of god or not discernible by humans; or is just plain magic."

          August 17, 2014 at 8:01 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          Not so..its called understanding Hebrew literature...and not pretending the Bible was originally written by Americans in the Englishlanguage

          August 18, 2014 at 1:51 am |
        • observer

          Blessed are the Cheesemakers,

          Accurate and well-said.

          August 17, 2014 at 8:17 pm |
        • ragansteve1

          My point is not that you are wrong in using that quote. My point is that the meanings of evil are multiple and I don't think God means "evil that lurks in the hearts of men" kind of evil that we are talking about in this passage. It is not ONLY a context issue. It is also a definitional and translational issue. In this passage I believe God is talking about the third definition, as shown in the translation I provided.

          Merriam-Webster has three quite different definitions. (depending upon the "context")

          EVIL
          1
          a : morally reprehensible : sinful, wicked
          b : arising from actual or imputed bad character or conduct
          2
          a archaic : inferior
          b : causing discomfort or repulsion : offensive
          c : disagreeable
          3,
          a : causing harm : pernicious
          b : marked by misfortune : unlucky

          I hope that helps.

          August 17, 2014 at 8:35 pm |
        • observer

          ragansteve1,

          It looks like Cheesemakers addressed your answer:

          "If a bible verse furthers the cause, it is to be taken literally. If a bible verse is detrimental to the cause, it . . . means something other than what it actually says". Ask BELIEVERS what the word "evil" means and see if they give your definition.

          August 17, 2014 at 8:51 pm |
        • ragansteve1

          If I asked them without the context, translation and definitions I provided you, I think you would be right. But, given what I have provided you, I think not.

          August 17, 2014 at 9:19 pm |
        • observer

          ragansteve1,

          You found 6 definitions in a dictionary and didn't like the first FIVE, but CHOSE the 6th.

          Again, ask BELIEVERS what the word "evil" means and see if they give your definition. Let's see what it means to NEARLY EVERYONE.

          August 17, 2014 at 9:36 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          observer...look it up ion the Hebrew..stop pretendiong the Bible was originally written in English

          August 18, 2014 at 1:53 am |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          steve,

          I get your point.

          But I don't think "evil" is a thing in and of itself. Humans label behaviors evil, and often rightfully so. But I don't have any reason to think evil is an outside force as is often asserted.

          August 17, 2014 at 9:42 pm |
        • ragansteve1

          That's because you believe that the material-energy world is all that there is. From that perspective, your conclusion makes sense.

          August 17, 2014 at 10:11 pm |
        • ragansteve1

          Observer, There were only three principal definitions and only one that fit the translation that matters for the text involved. Nice try though. Keep working at it. You'll get it.

          August 17, 2014 at 10:13 pm |
        • observer

          ragansteve1,

          Yep. It's the THIRD definition.

          "3a : causing harm : pernicious".

          Try again. You are getting DESPERATE. Ask BELIEVERS. Why don't you?

          August 17, 2014 at 10:20 pm |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          steve,

          It's not that I believe that the material-energy world is all there is....it is that there isn't any reason to believe otherwise.

          August 17, 2014 at 10:54 pm |
        • ragansteve1

          observer

          "Try again. You are getting DESPERATE. Ask BELIEVERS. Why don't you?"

          I am not "desperate" because I am not "asking." Just explaining.

          Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          "it's not that I believe that the material-energy world is all there is....it is that there isn't any reason to believe otherwise."

          OK. I would just say that if that's all there is we are all in deep trouble. Things are about to get a whole lot worse.

          August 18, 2014 at 5:42 am |
        • austin929

          I have experienced at least three demonic revelations.

          There are also no natural explanations for people like Hitler with a rationalization and desire to kill masses.

          This evil comes through the idolatry of error. the soul becomes desolated. the devil walks in and the person is soul enslaved. do they hear audible voices? I would say that they begin to listen to a demonic voice as their own thoughts.

          there is Satanic evil in this world!

          August 18, 2014 at 10:09 am |
        • observer

          ragansteve1

          "Things are about to get a whole lot worse."

          EXACT message that's been INSISTED correct for THOUSANDS of years.

          Nothing new. Same old, same old.

          August 18, 2014 at 11:47 am |
      • kermit4jc

        using logic and understanding Hebrew and the context...its not evil as like sin....its calamity, and evil is not a thing....just like darkness isnt a thing..darkness is merely absence of light..think about it...you dont have flashing darkness, green darkness, but you have flashing light, green light, red light, etc etc. its only a term..same with evilo....its absence of righteouness...thus evil isnt something created....

        August 18, 2014 at 1:49 am |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          Your problem isn;t with me...I just posted the quote from your book of myth. Take it up with the author.

          August 18, 2014 at 1:59 am |
        • kermit4jc

          yes..it is with you....YOU want to say evil is created? the author does not say it..its YOU who are misinterpreting the Sceipture..as I explained...so the problem is with you..the author already knows it

          August 18, 2014 at 2:02 am |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          I didn't write this...your book...your problem

          Isaiah 45:7

          7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

          August 18, 2014 at 2:08 am |
        • kermit4jc

          let me put it this way, what is point of quoting the verse?

          August 18, 2014 at 2:21 am |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          read the thread

          August 18, 2014 at 2:24 am |
        • kermit4jc

          im having difficult time getting t the thread...which is why I asked...so please answer

          August 18, 2014 at 2:26 am |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          Look at the first post ragansteve posted and the question he asked.

          August 18, 2014 at 2:31 am |
        • kermit4jc

          did you read my last post, I said for some reason IM unable to retrieve it, so please explain..thank you

          August 18, 2014 at 2:34 am |
        • LaBella

          Kermit,
          Read this blog through CNN, not WordPress.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:42 am |
  9. ragansteve1

    kudlak

    1. So, you are clearly more se xist than most Christians, right? Eve didn't twist his arm. He ate it, period.

    2. Sorry, that little revision was not clear. And even so, where do you think Paul, Timothy, and all the other missionaries got their converts? First, they went to the Jews. Only after that they went to gentiles. That went on for decades. Your quote was, "Easy to do once Christians were made unwelcome in the synagogues . . . " I would suggest that the lions made Christians much more unco mfortable than the synagogues.

    3. Pure su ppo sition and opinion on your part. The Jewish leaders were in league with the Roman Pilate. Taxes and trib ute through the Temple were the issues that got Christ crucified. Unless you have a reli able source to refu te that, then your statement de serves no further co mment.

    4. "God is clearly ignorant of where these people are." You know this of course, because God admi tted it to you? Get a gr ip on your language if not your thoughts. You don't know this, and you know it.

    5. So, your telling your son not to play football in the house doesn't give him a clue that it is wrong? I think you give your son too li ttle cre di t.

    6. "What pe nalty? The actual people whose souls Jesus' sacrificed himself for never suffered anything for this gesture, and Jesus dying on the cross would have been as ups etting for God as my lo sing a life in a video game."'

    AND THAT, my friend, is the who le point. We do not suffer the pe nalty, BECAUSE Christ did. He died for our sins.

    August 17, 2014 at 2:55 pm |
    • MidwestKen

      ragansteve1,
      "Forgiveness requires repentance and a penalty."

      Just curious, why is this necessary, when technically to forgive someone requires neither, just a willingness to forgive. Granted most people won't forgive easily without the other's at least symbolic repentance, but it isn't really necessary. For example, there are many things that children do that they never repent from nor are penalized for, but yet their parents forgive them, and vice versa.

      August 17, 2014 at 4:09 pm |
      • ragansteve1

        You are correct that we can forgive someone from our (the injured party's) side for something done, without having the person repent. But to repent essentially means to change direction. If the guilty party continues in the same manner, more injury will occur and there will be a cycle that creates a separation in the relationship between the two parties. That must be healed if the relationship is to continue. If it doesn't then the relationship will eventually be destroyed.

        August 17, 2014 at 5:55 pm |
        • tallulah131

          But you said this: "Forgiveness requires repentance and a penalty."

          If someone is truly contrite, I feel no need for a penalty. Perhaps because I'm not a bronze age patriarchal god.

          August 17, 2014 at 9:37 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          feeling contrite does not erase the sin/crime..try that in front of a judge "IM sorry your honor, it wont happen again" "ok, Ill excuse you this time, no jail time"

          August 18, 2014 at 1:55 am |
        • ragansteve1

          If someone is truly contrite, they will change their behavior. That is repentance.

          August 17, 2014 at 10:15 pm |
        • ragansteve1

          And, for the contrite, there will be no penalty. Christ paid it.

          August 17, 2014 at 10:16 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          but 1) how can Christ pay for other's sins, that's scapegoating and 2) why is it required for Christ, or anyone, to pay?

          August 17, 2014 at 11:36 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          1> because inorder to fully pay the requirements demands a perfect sacrifice...Jesus was perfect sacrifice. 2> Because God is a Just God, he cannot change that, it isnt based on feelings. It is His very nature that sins have to be dealt with

          August 18, 2014 at 1:57 am |
        • kermit4jc

          God also did not HAVE to do it..he could have just let us all go to hell...but God showed us His love in this, While we were still sinners, Christ died for us"

          August 18, 2014 at 1:57 am |
        • tallulah131

          Or your god could have accepted honest contrition and simply forgiven everyone without punishment. But as with so many gods invented by Bronze Age humans, the judeo-christian god required bloody human sacrifice. It's a primitive concept for primitive people.

          August 18, 2014 at 3:46 am |
        • kermit4jc

          God cannot do it without punishment..he is a JUST God..as I told you he doe snot base it on FEELINGS like you and me, He is Just by his very nature..he cannot change His nature. If he did it without punishment, then He ceases to be God

          August 18, 2014 at 9:50 am |
        • ragansteve1

          Ken, Have you ever gotten a speeding ticket? "You do the crime, you do the time." Except for Christ.

          August 18, 2014 at 5:25 am |
        • ragansteve1

          It's not about scapegoating. We recognize that Christ was innocent. We did not ask Him to do this. He volunteered. Otherwise it would not have worked.

          August 18, 2014 at 5:28 am |
        • ragansteve1

          Tal,Yes, with "honest contrition" there i forgiveness, as I have said before. But, unfortunately, in most cases there is not honest contrition. Recall I said honest contrition is another way of saying repentance. Repentance is a change in the direction of your life. Without that change, relationship is destroyed. This whole creation, salvation, elevation process is about restoring right relationship.

          August 18, 2014 at 5:31 am |
        • MidwestKen

          kermit4jc,
          1) What requirements?
          2) Why can’t He change it? Aren’t they supposedly His rules?

          If He is supposedly a just God then how can He accept someone else’s sacrifice? If Bob kills my family, I don’t want Jesse going to prison for it. Would you accept that?

          ragansteve1,
          Speeding ticket? Weak analogy. Traffic violations are not violent crimes. Unless there is an accident there is no victim. Additionally, we usually don’t make sacrifices to pay off speeding tickets.

          In the above example, the same applies even if Jesse volunteered.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:39 am |
        • kermit4jc

          1.requirements that sins must be paid for 2. I said God is Just because that is His nature...in other words..it is something that cannot be cganged. I cannot change my nature abd become a dog. If somehow that happened, Id cease to be human. 3. YOUR sense of justice, again is based much on feelings....JUSTicE means penalty needs to be paid. for God He demnded payment, but made a way for it to be paid and still allow us to heaven. Jesus paid that ransom and justice is paid for. YOu, using the humans only, is not a good example, since we are talking of God here.

          August 18, 2014 at 4:06 pm |
        • kudlak

          Also, even if Jesus did sacrifice himself for our benefit, why should people feel indebted to him for that? To me then, even if Jesus sincerely believed that he was sacrificing himself for the benefit of future people like myself, I don't recognize the supposed danger that his action supposedly protects me from. So, I really don't see why I would feel the need to worship him for that. I mean, if some character showed up at your door with the story that his granddad saved your granddad's life in some incident that you can't verify, would you still feel obligated towards him?

          August 18, 2014 at 1:50 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          kermit4jc,
          Sorry, guess I wasn’t clear.

          1) What requirements, as in where did these requirements come from? Why is ‘sins must be paid for’ a requirement? Who made up that rule?

          2) I’m not asking why God doesn’t change, but why the rules can’t change. Why would a blood sacrifice be required in the first place let alone in a proxy form like Jesus?

          3) Justice does not simply mean a penalty needs to be paid. In the sense being used here, I think, it means conformance with the law and specifically the supposed God’s law. My point is, who’s the idiot who made up the law that requires blood sacrifice for sin?
          And, yes I’m using human reasoning here, because apparently the supposed God won’t grace us with His reasoning.

          August 18, 2014 at 5:25 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          YOU pretty much should have ascertained the answers from my last post..as for blood sacrifice....when people sin..they turn from God..sin keeps them from God....it leads to death, since only GOD gives life. Without God there is no eternal life. its not idiotic....its hwo things are..its nota made up rule..again God is JUST by nature..so it isn't a made up rule. and God does grace us with His reasoning, just because he does does not mean we will get it, unless we USE that reasoning and get all the info. Im finding a paettern here that you are confused and unable to get this cause you don't have all the info to make the reasoning...study the Bible for more info...I cant post the whole Bible here for ya.

          August 18, 2014 at 9:13 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          another thing is this. God is righteous, not cause he feels like it..It is His very nature..as with Being holy....and with these, sin can NOT coexist within His full presence. Its not a rule..Thats how Holy God is...it has to take understanding what it means to be righteous and Holy

          August 18, 2014 at 9:15 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          kermit4jc,
          YOU still didn't explain how a blood sacrifice actually "pays" for sin.
          What aspect of slaughtering a living being "pays" for another's sin?

          Are you claiming that I don't understand it or admitting that you don't understand it enough to explain it?

          August 18, 2014 at 10:02 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          do I need to spellout every single little detail? The wages of sin is DEATH....spiritual ..physical....that's the "requirement of blood" -life....blood represents life...Jesus died to make that payment.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:05 pm |
        • Doris

          "The wages of sin is DEATH..."

          You can spell it out any which way you want, kermit. It still only represents a belief – and one based on some pretty self-serving rules.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:14 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          yeah..so when a robber bursts into your home, you wont do anything to protect yourself..to save yourself..you will just stand there and let him shoot ya eh? wow..such non self serving...what a way to go..so good..so moral

          August 18, 2014 at 10:16 pm |
        • Doris

          kermit, you're really reaching for new heights of absurdity with your correlations crossing between superst.ition and real-life situations.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:33 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          ahh now you wanna quit the argument with an ad hom? ok

          August 18, 2014 at 10:35 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          kermit4jc,
          Actually, you claimed that the wages of sin are death which require a blood payment. You didn't explain how that actually works. How does "sin" actually cause death? How does blood correct that? Why is whose blood is used seem to be irrelevant?

          August 18, 2014 at 10:34 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          Ill wait as you go back and reread my previous posts..I explained them to you...put it all together now

          August 18, 2014 at 10:38 pm |
        • Doris

          kermit: "ad hom"

          Lol. What in my last reply was ad hominem, kermie?

          August 18, 2014 at 10:52 pm |
        • LaBella

          Irony alert ...

          August 18, 2014 at 10:57 pm |
        • kudlak

          kermit4jc
          So, you're arguing that God was somehow "forced" to obey some law requiring a blood sacrifice in atonement for human sin. What power would it be that could force the almighty YHWH?

          August 19, 2014 at 1:09 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          POWER does NOT change nature! POwer has nothing to do with it..again it is WHO God is! God cannot change that, He is not "forced" anymore than You are forced to be white instead of black (whatever color youre not) you are going way over your head in being silly here about what it means to be all powerful..

          August 19, 2014 at 4:45 pm |
        • kudlak

          kermit4jc
          So, you're saying that God just can't help himself, he HAS to have blood sacrificed to himself in order to change his mind?

          August 20, 2014 at 12:38 am |
        • kermit4jc

          Yes..God HAS to have a blood sacrifice..he is unable to change that...again if he coulld, he would cease to be God//amd whats this about changing his mind??

          August 20, 2014 at 2:14 am |
        • kudlak

          kermit4jc
          What makes him different from all the other gods, especially the ones that demanded human sacrifice, then?

          He tossed humanity out of his house, and then supposedly made this gesture to invite them back in. That's how he changed his mind.

          August 20, 2014 at 3:32 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          to change his mind would say he didn't have knowledge of this..in other words, God already knew they would sin and has made a way to "invite" them back in before He Created them. As for the other religions, they do not do it out of love, and they also still include works for salvation-that the sacrifices may only make a partial payment. Plus, the other sacrifices were done by means of animals, or mere humans, and have to be repeated. Jesus was the final and full paying sacrifice done once and for all..not repeated over and over again.

          August 20, 2014 at 3:43 pm |
    • kudlak

      ragansteve1

      1. It's not my belief system, so don't call me se xist for pointing it out. What I was saying here is that this story was originally intended to explain the chauvinism that traditional Jewish society still holds, and which some Christian societies still hold. Many sects still teach that the husband is to be the head of the family, period, right? No discussion of which of the two actually has the better head on their shoulders, the male automatically has the last say which, may I say, is utterly stupid as far as decision-making choices goes.

      2. First they went to the Jews, sure, but they ran into the little problem of Jesus not fulfilling the requirements of scripture which would have made most Jews see him as the expected messiah. The followers of Jesus were like the other splinter groups such as the Essenes. Their beliefs were just too far removed from the popular faith for them to fit in the synagogue. Besides, they were actively trying to convert Jews to their new belief, right? The difference is that the gentiles that gravitated to Christianity were likely looking for something new in a faith, just as loads of other gentiles were joining other popular cults.

      What does the occasional persecution of Christians by the state of Rome have to do with the common people wanting to join? Remember that many new converts were slaves. Their life was dangerous enough as it was, so why would this added danger pose a problem? As for the other converts, since when is danger really a deterrent to anyone engaging in an activity frowned upon by the authorities, even the well-to-do? With slaves to do their work, what else was a well-off Roman citizen to do with their time, especially Roman women who probably converted faster than their husbands? I believe the NT mentions at least one rich Roman woman patron of the faith, correct?

      3. Why would Pilate need to be in league with any Jews? He controlled the taxation and could take what he wanted. All the excuse that the Romans needed to crucify Jesus was the spectacle of his grand entry into Jerusalem and the upset in the Temple. Add talk of his claim to be the king of the Jews and it actually becomes ridiculous to even entertain the idea that Pilate would hesitate in making an example out of him. Read some non-New Testament accounts on Pilate. Read Josephus. Either all these sources have it wrong about him and he really was a sweetie, or the NT created this version of him in order to try getting the Roman authorities off their back or, more likely, as part of their get back against the Jewish authorities who were making them unwelcome.

      4. Genesis 2 reads just like some of the Greek and Roman myth where their gods happen to be walking along and come across some human. Reading it any different than the way it was written is adding to the intended meaning something that simply is not there.

      Likely, it's just an ancient myth dating back to the days when YHWH was just another sky god, and as knowledgable as them too. The theology that YHWH was all-knowing, all-seeing, etc probably only developed after the Babylonian Exile as part of the explanation of how he could be the god of the Jews even outside of his traditional territory.

      5. If I tell my 14 year old he really out to get it, but if I tell my toddler not to do something should I expect compliance? The point that you guys keep ignoring is that the fruit of that tree was the thing that supposedly gave these child-like people the ability to know right from wrong. It served the same purpose as my 14 year old's maturity and mental development, right? Before eating that fruit, Adam and Eve were like my toddler in their child-like innocence and utter ignorance of what was right and wrong. How can they be the blame for what they did then, unless the fruit didn't actually have the properties that God said that it did, which would make him a liar, correct? That seems likely as they didn't actually "die" when they ate it, like he said. If I tell even my older boy not to eat something because he might die because of it, he isn't thinking of any other meaning than actual imminent death as a direct result of eating something poisonous, so spare me any inventive theological explanations like it's being a "spiritual death", OK?

      Besides, we're living up here in Canada, so it's hockey we don't ever play in the house, at least when mom is at home.

      6. What suffering did Jesus actually experience if he knew that he was actually an immortal god? Maybe if he was just an ordinary human he would have suffered like anyone else crucified, except that the Gospels clearly say that he hung for only a fraction of the time a typical victim did. So, we can probably say that he didn't suffer as much as most in that same situation.

      In a way, what you said cheapens all the thousands of Jews who were also crucified for what they did in defiance of the Romans, Jesus amongst them.

      August 18, 2014 at 1:11 pm |
  10. Vic

    ♰♰♰ Jesus Christ Is Lord ♰♰♰

    God save us all and bless the helping hands. Everything testifies about Him (Romans 1:20.)

    Early on:
    http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2014/08/09/why-missionaries-put-their-lives-on-the-line/comment-page-1/#comment-3056974

    August 17, 2014 at 12:33 pm |
    • kudlak

      Vic
      Maybe, everything use to testify about him, or some other god, being in control of nature, but science has revealed that there's no good reason to still believe that.

      August 18, 2014 at 1:53 pm |
  11. monica7c

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeedE8vH1FQ

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeedE8vH1FQ

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeedE8vH1FQ

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeedE8vH1FQ

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeedE8vH1FQ

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeedE8vH1FQ

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeedE8vH1FQ

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeedE8vH1FQ

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeedE8vH1FQ

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeedE8vH1FQ

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeedE8vH1FQ

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeedE8vH1FQ

    August 17, 2014 at 11:10 am |
    • Doris

      spam

      August 17, 2014 at 5:58 pm |
      • LaBella

        "I don't like Spam!"

        August 17, 2014 at 6:16 pm |
        • believerfred

          How about green eggs and spam ?

          August 17, 2014 at 7:14 pm |
        • LaBella

          "I do not like green eggs and spam. I do not like them, Sam-I-am."

          August 18, 2014 at 11:01 am |
  12. 19covenant19

    Jesus Christ has already returned

    with BIBLICAL EXCELLENT MIRACLES for the Salvation of all.

    See him, with your own eyes, right here.

    http://www.19covenant19.com

    August 17, 2014 at 6:43 am |
    • Reality

      Christians perform "miracles" every day by changing bread and wine into human flesh and blood. Not a big deal. Now stopping a hurricane in its tracks would be a miracle. Has that been done lately???

      August 17, 2014 at 7:19 am |
      • austin929

        your emotions just deceived your own self and your character has failed in bias

        August 17, 2014 at 12:39 pm |
        • Reality

          What are you yammering about?

          August 17, 2014 at 10:41 pm |
    • TruthPrevails1

      Seems you forgot about the commandments again!! BAD CHRISTIAN-sinning so you can promote your personal website-what would your imaginary friend think??

      August 17, 2014 at 7:33 am |
      • austin929

        your preset disposition has just revealed its substance.. error............this is a cite for islaam

        August 17, 2014 at 12:41 pm |
        • LaBella

          "Thou Shall Not Steal" isn't unique to Islam.

          August 17, 2014 at 12:45 pm |
        • TruthPrevails1

          Are you smoking the Christian crack pipe again? You're sounding more delusional than usual.

          August 17, 2014 at 1:03 pm |
    • austin929

      this is a great example of the biased against anything so called Christian that people do for a hobby.

      reason.......................truth prevails and reality................

      this is a muslim link.

      August 17, 2014 at 12:38 pm |
      • LaBella

        Bashing a faith and conflating Islam with atheism is absurd.

        August 17, 2014 at 12:46 pm |
        • austin929

          bella I see your point, but bashing a lie is that rude?

          what faith did I bash? at some point we can disagree and point out in truth, that the Christian faith does not tolerate disinformation concerning the Lordship and Diety of Christ. I love muslims, but I hate their idolatrous attack on truth.

          but all of us as humans were awarded patience and forgiveness by the Lord. another reason why Christianity stands alone. He did not attack his enemies. And yet He will judge.

          August 17, 2014 at 12:59 pm |
        • LaBella

          Muslims consider Christianity to be a lie, also; it's fine for them to bash your faith?
          All right, then.

          August 17, 2014 at 1:02 pm |
        • austin929

          as see it as a natural condition to be deceived and thus bash Christ. so is it fine? well basically Christ came to save the lost.....while we were yet sinners.

          that almost a "yes its fine" but not really.. its ok He makes progress.

          August 17, 2014 at 1:22 pm |
        • LaBella

          It seems to be a natural reaction to denigrate another's faith in order to validate their own, yes.
          Is that God talking, or Satan?

          August 17, 2014 at 3:11 pm |
    • kermit4jc

      Jesus says when he returnes, we need not say :He is here, or over there" ALL will know when Jesus has returned..ALL...and thus jesus return has not happened yet

      August 17, 2014 at 4:52 pm |
  13. aallen333

    I'm now eating a Bacon Threezy Smoke Cheezy Chicken sandwich from Schlotzskey's Deli. Reminds me of reading some of the cheezy comments from the atheists on this blog. I may amuse myself by eating them now, but I'll probably pay for it later!

    August 16, 2014 at 8:36 pm |
    • bostontola

      Plenty of cheese going around from all camps.

      August 16, 2014 at 8:50 pm |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      Fumunda?

      August 16, 2014 at 9:14 pm |
      • LaBella

        Ewwww! 😳

        August 16, 2014 at 9:22 pm |
  14. kermit4jc

    anything created is not greater than the Creator....God is from different realm (He created this one) and God's "time" thus is not same either....He says He is NOt Created, I trust His Word (not merely the Bible, but He Himself)....

    August 16, 2014 at 11:34 am |
    • MidwestKen

      You seem to be assuming that 1) God exists 2) He is telling the truth and 3) that the Bible is actually what He said. That seems like a lot of rather large assumptions.

      August 16, 2014 at 12:21 pm |
      • new-man

        MidwestKen,
        you believe the above mentioned 3 are "rather large assumptions" as opposed to what?
        Your "assumptions" will be just as large...no?

        August 16, 2014 at 4:35 pm |
      • MidwestKen

        new-man,
        How so?

        I don't assume God exists. I don't assume the He always tells the truth, if He exists. I don't assume that the Bible is verbatim He word, if He exists and tells the truth.

        August 16, 2014 at 5:28 pm |
        • new-man

          MidwestKen,
          You believe:
          1. God does not exist
          2. He is not telling the truth
          3. that the Bible is not the word of God, but of man.
          these are "rather large assumptions" to make... no?

          August 16, 2014 at 5:34 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          When did I make those assumptions?

          August 16, 2014 at 5:37 pm |
        • new-man

          MidwestKen,
          aren't these your words: "I don't assume God exists. I don't assume the He always tells the truth, if He exists. I don't assume that the Bible is verbatim He word, if He exists and tells the truth."

          The only other option is to be double-minded and that would render you unstable in all your ways.

          August 16, 2014 at 5:44 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          new-man,
          Not assuming something is not the same as assuming the opposite.

          August 16, 2014 at 5:48 pm |
        • new-man

          MidwestKen,
          you may enjoy your play with words... my point remains. A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways.

          August 16, 2014 at 5:51 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          new-man,
          I sorry, what exactly do you mean by a "double minded" man?

          August 16, 2014 at 7:40 pm |
        • evidencenot

          @new... "You believe:
          1. God does not exist"

          Typical apologist word twister..... It's not "I believe that I don't believe"........ Atheism = lack of belief in god. Try and get that through your thick skull.

          August 18, 2014 at 9:12 am |
      • kermit4jc

        1> I have knowledge God exists-I dont assume, 2. He is telling truth, Ive known God over 25 yearsperaonally and I can trust Him. 3. The Bible is truth..what God inspired

        August 17, 2014 at 1:46 am |
        • TruthPrevails1

          All opinion...nothing more. There is no more valid reason for accepting that what you are saying is evidence of god then the person who believes they have evidence for Zeus.
          The bible is easily debunked...the flood couldn't have happened-science has proven this (http://www.skepdic.com/noahsark.html); virgin birth-impossible (unless you agree with the rape of a woman...thus impregnating her against her will); resurrection-impossible (we've been through this before-there is no other place in recorded history of such an event, no reason to accept the bible story to be any different regardless of how biased in your opinion you may wish to be).

          August 17, 2014 at 6:25 am |
        • MidwestKen

          kermit4jc,
          That seems unlikely, can you provide some reason why we should believe you?

          August 17, 2014 at 10:19 am |
        • kermit4jc

          are uo asking MWE to proiv it to you? why not seek God? HE would be the BEST proof! NO man proved God to me.....I never took mans word for it..i sought out for myself and found truth. SO what it is highly unlikely..that does not make it untrue..I gave evidence (testimony) before..I do not expect anyone to believe or accept it merely cause I said so-find out for yourself)

          August 17, 2014 at 4:54 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          kermit4jc,
          "why not seek God?"

          Because it seems unlikely that a god exists.

          August 17, 2014 at 5:12 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          so you giving up? throw in the towel? doctors didn't know if they could cure cancer long ago, seemed unlikely.....we can now do much more and are closer to it....Im sure glad you are not a doctor who had those doubts...are you a pessimist? you give up easily when things get too hard?

          August 17, 2014 at 5:17 pm |
        • Doris

          lol, kermit. You think gains in cancer research were made by spiritual means? Sorry – that's yet another sanctimonious bag of BS.

          August 17, 2014 at 5:29 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          lol..did you read my post all the way? I was making an analogy.....read it again..The point was GIVING up cause something seemed unlikely....

          August 17, 2014 at 5:30 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          kermit4jc,
          Do you play the lottery too?

          August 17, 2014 at 5:29 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          more excuses..come on...what are you afraid of?

          August 17, 2014 at 5:32 pm |
        • new-man

          MidwestKen,
          why is it "unlikely that God exists" to you?

          re: kermit4jc's point... He's correct, you have to prove God for yourself. Even if the miraculous was done for you or before you, you would find some other source to attribute it to. If you disagree with this statement, then I challenge you to research a church/organization in your area that goes out and does street ministry. If you remain unconvinced, my point is proven.

          1. Without faith it's impossible to please God.
          2. he that cometh to God must believe that He [God] is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him.
          3. What if some did not believe and were without faith? Does their lack of faith and their faithlessness nullify and make ineffective and void the faithfulness of God and His fidelity [to His Word]?

          August 17, 2014 at 5:30 pm |
        • Doris

          I understood what you meant kermit. Giving up is what we call the god of the gaps – when people either give up looking for a solution or are too impatient to wait for one – that's when they need a placeholder – that was the obvious answer to many mysteries of the past that were later solved.

          August 17, 2014 at 5:35 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          kermit4jc,
          Nice, taunting for Jesus now.

          I'm afraid of wasting my time on things that are unlikely to be true. By your logic, we all should "keep trying" to find nirvana, Moroni, Xenu, etc. Have you given up on them?

          August 17, 2014 at 5:36 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          so your li
          fe now and the after life are not that important to you? fine...Morni is a false god...why keep looking for something I already found? thus your question in that regards is irrelevant and comparing apples to oranges. I found God..why keep searching? unlike you, who has not found god, yet decided not to search, or has stopped searching cause youre merley giving up

          August 17, 2014 at 5:40 pm |
        • Doris

          new-man: "..Even if the miraculous was done for you or before you, you would find some other source to attribute it to. .."

          lol – reminds me of someone refusing to consider more reasonable explanations for UFO sightings.

          August 17, 2014 at 5:40 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          new-man,
          "...I challenge you to research a church/organization in your area that goes out and does street ministry. If you remain unconvinced, my point is proven."

          What kind of logic is that, 'heads I when, tails you lose'? If I took your challenge and remained unconvinced, then either you are right about me or no God exist or a god does exist that neither you nor I understand.

          End result: your "challenge" shows absolutely nothing.

          August 17, 2014 at 5:41 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          kermit4jc,
          my life is important which is why I don't want to waste it. A supposed afterlife is also unlikely.

          As for you finding God already, I think you are mistaken and gave up your search too early.

          August 17, 2014 at 5:45 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          and how can you be so sure? you presume to be me? to experience my life?

          August 18, 2014 at 1:43 am |
        • Doris

          kermit: "why keep looking for something I already found?"

          I suppose I could make up a fluffy god – like an invisible pet and start worshipping it – and create all kinds of rules it demands. But sorry – I have other things to do.

          August 17, 2014 at 5:46 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          fine for you..my God aint all fluffy and made up..but if you wanna make one up..thats your decision

          August 18, 2014 at 1:43 am |
        • MidwestKen

          should read 'heads I win, tails you lose'

          August 17, 2014 at 5:46 pm |
        • LaBella

          Lip service or not, what they're not is unbelievers.

          August 17, 2014 at 6:21 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          how do you know? do you talk to them? ever heard of cultural Christians..those who say they are Christians namely because mom and dad did?

          August 18, 2014 at 1:45 am |
        • observer

          kermit4jc

          "and how can you be so sure? you presume to be me? to experience my life?"

          GREAT LINE from someone who CLAIMS to know what goes on in the minds of gays and KNOWS they are not telling the truth when they say they have always being that way.

          CLASSIC HYPOCRISY!

          August 18, 2014 at 1:47 am |
        • kermit4jc

          apples to oranges..bad anology. Did I say it is in the minds and that they LIE? I have NEVER said they lied......you need to be more accurate of what I actually said...I dont look at the mind only anyways...like y ouare..I loook in the biology of it all as well..so again comparing apples to oranges..not a great idea. think it more thoroughly next time ok?

          August 18, 2014 at 2:01 am |
        • evidencenot

          "why is it "unlikely that God exists" to you?" Very simple... NO EVIDENCE. Sorry but your deluded imagination is not "evidence"

          August 18, 2014 at 9:14 am |
        • kermit4jc

          sorry, but you dont know my inagination and cant prove it is my imagination...youre the deluded one

          August 18, 2014 at 9:54 am |
        • observer

          kermit4jc,

          When gays say they have always been gay, you say it's NOT TRUE. You CLAIM and PRETEND that you know MORE about them than they do.

          WORLD CLASS HYPOCRISY.

          August 18, 2014 at 11:51 am |
        • kermit4jc

          not at all...you are sadly mistaken thinking there is only ONE option....(hence, I don't like the use of calling you people "freethinkers") how about that not I know more of them personally.....I mean if you want to go that route, scientists shouldn't say such things either, since the people know themselves better...

          August 18, 2014 at 4:11 pm |
        • Doris

          kermit: "God aint all fluffy and made up.."

          That's only because you have a lack of imagination – you must rely on others to tell what your air bud looks like. Goodness – don't take me clothes shopping with you.

          August 18, 2014 at 11:58 am |
        • kermit4jc

          where the heck do you get off telling me where I get my info about God? you say I rely on others..BS! that shows your ignorance of me and many believers

          August 18, 2014 at 4:12 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          kermit4j,
          "and how can you be so sure? you presume to be me? to experience my life?"

          Sorry, missed this one.
          I'm not sure, which is why I said "I *think* you are mistaken." I don't presume to be you nor have experienced your life, but my experience in life has shown me that people will often exaggerate confirmatory experiences, even in their own mind. This is often partially confirmation bias and partially wishful thinking. Granted, I can't be sure of your experiences, which is why I generally ask for evidence and not just take people at their word.

          August 18, 2014 at 3:59 pm |
        • LaBella

          not at all...you are sadly mistaken thinking there is only ONE option....(hence, I don't like the use of calling you people "freethinkers") how about that not I know more of them personally.....I mean if you want to go that route, scientists shouldn't say such things either, since the people know themselves better...
          Exactly. So when gay people say they were born that way, take them at their word.

          August 18, 2014 at 4:15 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          science doe snot support their version though! Are you not for science?

          August 18, 2014 at 4:24 pm |
        • Doris

          kermit: "God aint all fluffy and made up.."

          How do you know, kermit? Do you have any evidence that is free from the subjective opinion of humans that came before you? I still call your sanctimonious claims BS.

          August 18, 2014 at 8:46 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          I said I KNOW God personally..I experienced His presence! Ive known God over 27 years! Do you do same thing with your friends? take everything they say about someone you met and go from there, assuming everything is true about the person and never learning through personal experience? none of us are free from bias, but that doesn't mean bias will totally run our decision making

          August 18, 2014 at 9:25 pm |
        • LaBella

          not at all...you are sadly mistaken thinking there is only ONE option....(hence, I don't like the use of calling you people "freethinkers") how about that not I know more of them personally.....I mean if you want to go that route, scientists shouldn't say such things either, since the people know themselves better...
          Exactly. So when gay people say they were born that way, take them at their word.

          science doe snot support their version though! Are you not for science?

          You just argued against your own comment by saying that science doesn't support sexuality.
          Either hetero or gay. After all, they know themselves better, do they not?
          So, there's that.

          August 20, 2014 at 2:35 pm |
    • TruthPrevails1

      kermi: You should have added the disclaimer "This is my opinion".

      August 17, 2014 at 1:23 am |
      • kermit4jc

        not when I have personal knowledge of God.....would bve dishonest of me to put the "IMO" sorry..my concious wont let me

        August 17, 2014 at 1:53 am |
        • TruthPrevails1

          Okay, so here In Your Opinion you have personal knowledge of god...given that that can't be confirmed in any way, it is merely opinion.
          Sad that you're not capable of being honest about it, it makes one question what other things you've not been honest about.

          August 17, 2014 at 5:20 am |
        • evolveddna

          kermit. .It nice to know that god is looking after, and is giving instruction to a person presumably in North America, who is most likely well educated and reasonably well off, or at the very least having a comfortable life. I am sure that while you may have suffered some bad things in your life , as we all have, none could compare, i am sure, to the human size Ebola virus we call ISIS and the horror they are inflicting on other humans.. There are millions of folks world wide who would love to have the same contact before they suffer their last breath. If your god is real.. what is he waiting for? contact him and find out.

          August 17, 2014 at 11:34 am |
        • kermit4jc

          God is waiting for people to respond..he does not force people into a relationship..and don't bring up this crap about beibng in a "comfortable" lifestyle in North America..that has nothing to do with it....suffering is subjective...I still suffer...period....I just have a God who will see me trough it......suffering happens to all people, poor rich old young, man women..it knows no bounds

          August 17, 2014 at 5:01 pm |
        • evolveddna

          Kermit..your god could just be your self confidence by another name that allows you to handle your life issues..
          But at times you need more than confidence as those in Africa, Iraq Syria do at the moment but i bet you will not see any evidence of supernatural intervention

          August 17, 2014 at 7:09 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          I see it al the time! does not have to be somewhere else!

          August 18, 2014 at 1:47 am |
        • evolveddna

          Kermit.. what are you seeing...?

          August 18, 2014 at 2:44 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          I see miracles happen all the time..with myself and others, changed lives, myself included, I been Christian over 27 years, too many to post here

          August 18, 2014 at 4:22 pm |
        • evolveddna

          Kermit. How do you define a miracle? can it only be attributed to god? no other possibility?

          August 18, 2014 at 9:20 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          miracle, something that is done that goes against laws of nature....laws of human reason (note I did not say reason in general, but human reasoning) and when I got to know God He confirms Himself thru that..I experience His presence, getting to know Him personally over the last 27 years.

          August 18, 2014 at 9:28 pm |
        • austin929

          its interesting that you bring up ISIS and ebola. have you ever heard of Rome and crucifixion, or leprosy?

          The word's of God are written. If you aren't guided by what you know is true, then you will wake up and worship your feelings. And you will deceive yourself .

          For a non-believer, or say a selfish child molester who says "there is no God " because that emancipates his mind, as the violence of the devil is ratched up in world, he will say "where is God". Its a bunch of selfishness.

          August 17, 2014 at 11:53 am |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          Austin,

          If the only thing keeping yourself from molesting children is your belief in god...please, please keep believing.

          August 17, 2014 at 11:59 am |
        • austin929

          Blessed are the Cheesemakers.

          that was a very crafty twist on words. can you say something with substance about defending the dudes remarks about ebola and ISIS , ....................so then where is God?

          because he is really just saying..........."be scared and God is nowhere" " be scared therefore there is no God"

          that is manipulative

          on the other hand, bott radio network, the "fundamentalist" radio station........they play Obama's voice with an electronic demented tone. you see.....they are also trying to scare people into their political opinions.

          but the truth is that God's promises will be harder to grasp when the spirit of lawlessness is released, by the taking away of the spirit ..............who convicts the world of sin...........and sin will abound. it will be difficult.

          August 17, 2014 at 12:12 pm |
        • austin929

          my point is that selfish deceived emancipations of those who harbor idolaltry as lifestyles .......they will tend to be one's who will desire to reject God.

          furthermore they may insist on their unbelief vocally as a way to combat the fact that they are convicted by the truth of what sin is. that type of self deception is common in probably 95 to 100 percent of people, in some way .

          because all sin, and all justify the fact that they deny God in the smallest sins. it's human insanity.

          that's why peace was the answer that man on every continent could not afford to trust. because evil brews in every place.

          August 17, 2014 at 12:20 pm |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          Austin,

          That wasn't my point. You implied that without a belief in god people have no reason to treat each other civilly. That just isn't the case but it is something believers like you spout all the time. You equated a non-believer to a child molester and have no justification for doing so...it just makes you an ass.

          And beyond that I am serious...if the only thing holding a person back from commiting serious crimes against other people is their belief I hope they keep believing.

          August 17, 2014 at 12:22 pm |
        • TruthPrevails1

          Austin: Do you seriously think another form of the plague is coming? Please seek help, you keep showing why it is that you shouldn't be roaming any street or dirt path freely.

          August 17, 2014 at 12:27 pm |
        • austin929

          ok........we can talk about two different things.

          1. people who out of the gates trust in a written set of morals and place believe in them.............who have not considered what they are responsible for outside of the commands.

          2. people who reject the commanded set of morals because they naturally fell short of them, thereby also rejecting the notion of God.

          the common factor here is a simple human with no set of standard reasons.

          August 17, 2014 at 12:29 pm |
        • austin929

          t.p. why should I not roam freely ? what are you referring to man?

          August 17, 2014 at 12:30 pm |
        • austin929

          10Then he said to them: “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. 11There will be great earthquakes, famines and pestilences in various places, and fearful events and great signs from heaven.

          August 17, 2014 at 12:32 pm |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          3. People who do not ascribe to your claimed set of "moral standards" because....

          a. They do not view your claimed "authority" as authentic.

          b. The "moral" standards themselves are questionable at times and at others downright disgusting.

          August 17, 2014 at 12:37 pm |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          That prophacy sounds a lot like predicting a tornado in area known for tornado activety.

          August 17, 2014 at 12:39 pm |
        • austin929

          would it be immoral to reject God because you disagree with his view on a selfishly motivated act, that is an error of the intended function.....................

          what if you were seriously supposed to love God? and why can't you or we truly love Him? because we are sinners and He is holy . and so there is a comprehension gap.

          August 17, 2014 at 12:44 pm |
        • austin929

          do you agree that when someone is wrongly convicted.......that they deserve a settlement? that they receive a value of something for the damage that they received?

          August 17, 2014 at 12:49 pm |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          You are right there is a comprehension gap.

          Love is not forced...and telling someone to "love you or else" is not "love".

          You can't "reject" something that you do not believe to be real.

          August 17, 2014 at 12:49 pm |
        • austin929

          proof you are wrong...........go to the top of the page and look and their response to the "covenant 19 jesus has returned" link. look how they responded, and then look at the site, this is a muslim site and a false idea of Jesus. and they attacked it as Christian.

          so then if you can't love God, then don't you understand why the law was fulfilled by Christ? and this is better because the Holy Spirit will show you why His intercession is needed. because we need Him to prove His love.............IN our souls.

          Amen. we can't do it. Help us Lord.

          August 17, 2014 at 12:53 pm |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          Austin,

          1.

          I wasn't responding to the other posts...I was responding to what you said concerning non believers and child molesters.

          2.

          I don't believe your god is real, nor the holy spirit, nor Christ or a soul so your last paragraph is moot. You are putting the cart before the horse.

          August 17, 2014 at 1:02 pm |
        • LaBella

          Austin,
          With all due respect, you just used a tactic employed by scare radio by conflating non-believers with selfish child molesters in the same sentence. Naughty.

          August 17, 2014 at 1:08 pm |
        • austin929

          ok, fine I see. sin is an act of unbelief though. child molestation is an act of unbelief so its hard for me to understand how believers and child molesters would fit into a sentence together.

          why don't we figure up another sin that is more a life style of pride than say the lurking and hiding petaphiles.

          a life style say...........a se.x shop owner. do you think that these types of store owners have a high percentage of belief in the resurrected Christ..............? what do you think you would hear if you asked say ten different owners of a .po.rn toys store.

          August 17, 2014 at 1:11 pm |
        • austin929

          bella, were talking about self deception or rationalization to the point of deceiving ones self. I did not conflate anything, I was stating both sides of deception. but I do hold to two different opinions, one have nothing to do with the other. they each require reason and honesty.

          have I failed ??

          August 17, 2014 at 1:17 pm |
        • austin929

          blessed are the cheesemakers.

          I hear you. all things are possible........................I need help with things . can God deliver?

          August 17, 2014 at 1:20 pm |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          "sin is an act of unbelief though. child molestation is an act of unbelief"

          Really Austin? This is patently false.

          And what is the problem with se.x shops? The fact that se.x is demonized by christianity as something sinfull is more the issue. Can you reasonably justify "se.x" acts being immoral between consenting adults in and of themselves without your religious foundation?

          August 17, 2014 at 1:23 pm |
        • austin929

          correct.................discretion is a biblical principal and moral. and if that doesnt' work as an example we can just say a pimp. or s.ex trafficker. do you think they would profess the principals of a righteous God? and if not would any selfish motivation possibly play factor into that type of character?

          discretion and righteousness are reasons why people don't like God. because He is holy, this is a comprehension gap, kind of like the reasons for racism. the reasons to dislike God , Christ, and the continual presence of His spirit for even believers who run off to sin and reject Him many times a day. that's insane the disease is, its like being an alcoholic only on a deeper level. and its a serious issue. He is here .

          August 17, 2014 at 1:31 pm |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          Once again I don't believe your god is real, and therefore what you hold to be "rightous and moral" need justification first.

          August 17, 2014 at 1:37 pm |
        • austin929

          patently false is an incorrect statement due to you lack of awareness about unbelief... unbelief is in fact the reason people rebel. sin is unbelief. my statement was a true statement that child molesters and deviance is an act of unbelief.

          spiritual laws are the cause of all moral error. the law of sin causes death, all death is attributed to inherited sin.

          all lifestyles of sin are proof of the curse.

          August 17, 2014 at 1:38 pm |
        • austin929

          ok blessed........................I concede my friend and I respect you and will stand up for your freedom of mind!

          I am debating and I don't want to direct anything right at ya..

          have a great afternoon! thanks for your time.

          August 17, 2014 at 1:40 pm |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          It is patently false because there are plenty of examples of believers who are pedephiles who never stopped believing.

          Sin is a crime against god...non believers do not believe in god and are therefore incapable of "sinning".

          The fact that you equate what someone believes or doesn't believe as a foundation of morality makes you a deluded ass.

          Have a great day!

          August 17, 2014 at 1:52 pm |
        • austin929

          you are loved cheezy boundreezy. I gotta go sneezy.

          August 17, 2014 at 1:57 pm |
        • evolveddna

          Austin..not sure what you really saying in response to my comment to Kermit. I merely pointed out that IMO these ISIS fighters are just human sized Ebola viruses.. they just kill folks and move on and serve nothing to humanity.. I intended no supernatural connections to books that it looks like you may have added. Point I made to Kermit is that he believes he has a personal connection to god yet folks who apparently, and very urgently ,need some direct intervention from a deity have again been ignored...

          August 17, 2014 at 3:10 pm |
        • LaBella

          Austin, with all due respect, you might have a point if it weren't for the fact that most incidents of child molestation are committed by believers...

          August 17, 2014 at 5:29 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          by believers? or people giving lip service to God? (yeah, I know I may sound judging, but you wouldn't know either, do you?)

          August 17, 2014 at 5:31 pm |
        • LaBella

          Kermit,
          Lip service or not, what they're not is unbelievers.

          August 17, 2014 at 6:25 pm |
        • evidencenot

          "not when I have personal knowledge of God" = translation = knowledge of your IMAGINATION.

          August 18, 2014 at 9:16 am |
        • kermit4jc

          more delusions on your part, assuming you can know my imagination (You been inside my head or something>)

          August 18, 2014 at 9:55 am |
        • evidencenot

          Claiming to "know god" without evidence.... .. since it's not your imagination, I guess you're keeping this evidence a secret.

          August 18, 2014 at 11:58 am |
        • kermit4jc

          not at all..are yo new here? I been doing it for the past year here....

          August 18, 2014 at 4:13 pm |
        • Doris

          Yeah – kermie keeps his evidence under wraps big time. Basically, he has the same kind of proof that Charles Manson has for the kinds of things that have rolled around in that head of his.

          August 18, 2014 at 9:41 pm |
      • kermit4jc

        it can be confirmed.....problem is you depend too much on scientific empirical evidence...not that emprirical evidence isbad..its just not going to help you answer and find all truths. if you want it to be opinion..fine....I know myself better than you know me and again my conscience tells me otherwise, I cannot say opinion when I know for fact God is in my life...maybe you can say it is YOUR opinion about me...but that's as far as it goes..and I think it is very disingenuous of you to ask me to go against my conscience

        August 17, 2014 at 5:28 pm |
        • TruthPrevails1

          Confirm it please. Of course I depend on science, just as you do when it's convenient for you.
          No matter how often you claim to know, it is merely your opinion because your experience don't count as evidence to anyone except you.

          August 18, 2014 at 4:20 am |
        • kermit4jc

          did I mention the word science? i did nto..as for the confirmation..we have told you over and over..how God works in our lives...we seen His work and You can see it too if youre willing to open your eyes

          August 18, 2014 at 9:51 am |
        • TruthPrevails1

          Once again it is still merely opinion.
          Notice the use of the word 'we'...mass belief does not equal fact.
          (jmo)

          August 18, 2014 at 10:02 am |
        • kermit4jc

          yet I see you all appealing to the masses (of scientists, in a similar way) thing is..you asked for CONFrIRMATION....thats what confirmation can be! seeing what others says!...youre being very picky and choosy and making excuses here. I am not the ONLY one that experiences this, others confirm same thing

          August 18, 2014 at 10:12 am |
        • TruthPrevails1

          Look up confirmation bias...it fits here and btw: I accept what science says largely but even I remain skeptical.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:56 am |
        • austin929

          T.P. mass belief does not equal fact. ................

          and an isolated person with the gift of prophecy , does not equal fallacy.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:18 am |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          "and an isolated person with the gift of prophecy , does not equal fallacy."

          Claiming prophecy is not prophecy.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:36 am |
    • evolveddna

      Kermit.. did your god say that nothing could be greater than him..or is that an assumption on your part?

      August 17, 2014 at 11:25 am |
      • kermit4jc

        did I say such? read again..NOTHING is greater than its creator.....apply it to yourself..are computers greater than you? (maybe some can do computations faster but its still only a computer and cant do everything else you can do) Its logic...God created the universe..how can it be greater than he is?

        August 17, 2014 at 4:56 pm |
        • evolveddna

          Kermit.. how do you know that nothing is greater than its creator or ever can be?

          August 17, 2014 at 7:07 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          I been giving examples in reality! have you been reading?

          August 18, 2014 at 1:46 am |
        • evolveddna

          Kermit.. may have missed it.. can you tell us again?

          August 18, 2014 at 2:28 pm |
        • evidencenot

          Kermi has been giving nothing but examples of his imagination, ...... deluded apologist.

          August 18, 2014 at 9:18 am |
  15. ragansteve1

    Below is a question I have addressed at least twice before. I cannot recall both people I answered, so here is a general response to anyone who wants to know what I think about this supposed contradiction.

    "kudlak

    Here's a basic biblical contradiction for you; not just a minor detail, but one linked to the salvation theology you seem to think is key.

    God punishes Adam and Eve for disobeying him, but how can they be held accountable for doing that if they decided to disobey him before gaining the ability to tell right from wrong that eating the fruit supposedly gave them?
    August 15, 2014 at 12:38 pm"

    There is no contradiction here. There is no unfairness. Adam had all the information he needed to know in order to obey. God said, you can eat of any of the fruit you want except this tree. God did not say it was bad; he did not say Adam would die. But Adam chose to follow the snake's advice. That is the basic choice we all have.

    Adam cannot blame Eve, although he attempted to do so, and most men have tried the same thing for all of our time on earth. He cannot blame God because God told him what to do.

    Now in terms of today's child rearing practices one could argue that the punishment did not fit the crime. But we do not know how long Adam was with God and had opportunity to learn from God. Before we go about judging God, perhaps we should think about how we treat others who betray us. Betrayal is a very serious issue. In fact, in the new testament, betrayal is the only legitimate way for one spouse to divorce, according to Jesus. But that level of sin against a partner is legitimate.

    I believe that we have all betrayed God, including and perhaps most especially me. And that means we deserve separation from God. But God has provided a way back to Him in the form of His son Jesus. Now, either we believe, or we do not. That is the choice. If there is no God, then you're off the hook. But if there is, then we deserve what we get and we can blame no one but ourselves.

    August 16, 2014 at 4:04 am |
    • ragansteve1

      Sorry, the last part of the last long paragraph should read, "But for that level of sin against a partner, separation is legitimate." Sometimes my fingers get ahead of my brain.

      August 16, 2014 at 4:07 am |
    • Reality

      There is no question involved as there were no biblical Adam and Eve. Now go enjoy the rest of your day and life !!!

      August 16, 2014 at 8:30 am |
      • ragansteve1

        Thank you I will. You too!

        August 16, 2014 at 8:59 am |
    • G to the T

      I know the first time one of my children was ignorant enough to disobey me, I kicked them out the house – just like Yahweh!

      August 16, 2014 at 9:28 am |
      • new-man

        G to the T,
        That's not what happened. In the same manner your children faced the unintended consequences (being hurt etc.) of disobeying you, that's what happened to A&E.
        Unbelief [in the word of God] is the root of all sin. Why? Because ultimately, unbelief leads to disobedience. Equally important, when you disobey God, you're choosing to obey another god or spirit.
        A&E started to doubted the word of God. This doubt gave rise to unbelief. Through unbelief the serpent was able to persuade them to disobey God. So in reality, they submitted to the authority of the serpent, rather than the authority of God which led to their spirits being separated from God. [Spiritual death – this is the death the Bible speaks of]
        They died spiritually that day, which was why "their eyes were opened" to the physical and they now knew and felt embarrassment at being naked – note: these things didn't affect them before.
        They died physically within 1000 years, [a day with God is as a 1000 years... so they died within a day].

        August 16, 2014 at 5:29 pm |
        • G to the T

          That's an amazing piece of theological thought you just put out. Problem is, from my point of view you are using something written much later (thousand years = day – which I now see as an excuse for why apocalypse hadn't happened yet) to interpret something else written much earlier. I can understand that you feel there is a single "author" to the whole of the Bible, but I don't. Kicking Adam and Eve out of the garden is like kicking a five year old out of your house because they got into the cookie jar.

          As for god and the consequences of disobedience –

          August 17, 2014 at 2:07 pm |
    • Dalahäst

      "God did not say it was bad; he did not say Adam would die."

      God didn't saying eating from that tree was bad – but he did say if Adam ate from it he would die, right?

      "for when you eat from it you will certainly die."

      August 16, 2014 at 10:35 am |
      • ragansteve1

        True. My error. I was thinking of the lie the serpent told when he said she would not die if she touched it. Sorry about that.

        August 16, 2014 at 10:53 am |
        • Dalahäst

          Yea, I think that is an important part of the story.

          I don't know if you've ever read this author, Nadia Bolz-Weber, sermon on this story, but I find it interesting:

          "Which makes me wonder about one thing: When Adam and Eve listened to a voice other than God’s and believed a voice other than God’s – and disobeyed – when they were trying to avoid God and God calls out and says where are you…and they say we are naked and God says “who told you you were naked” well, I wonder this: how would this story have ended differently if they simply said “yeah we screwed up…we were wrong – we listened to a voice other than yours and didn’t trust you, please forgive us”. How differently would this story have ended? I mean, maybe their disobedience (while not insignificant) wasn’t as big a deal as it’s been made out to be. Because from what I know of the God revealed in Jesus Christ, forgiveness is like, a really big deal to God. Reconciliation and the desire to make whole that which is broken is a big part of God’s redeeming heart for us. And when, like Adam and Eve we can’t just say the truth and instead we hide and are fearful and rationalize and justify and blame other people…when we do this, it’s like we rob God of being the forgiving and redemptive God God wants to be for us.

          Genesis tell us that God made us and indeed all of creation “good”, not perfect, but good. So given the good-but-not-perfect nature of humanity, maybe messing up and then speaking the truth of it and then allowing God to forgive and make whole that which we have broken has just always been part of the deal. If there was a fall, if there was something which tore at the fabric of our relationship with God maybe it wasn’t eating the forbidden fruit, maybe it the was fear and shame, and untruth."

          Read more: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nadiabolzweber/2012/06/sermon-a-re-telling-of-adam-and-eve-and-that-damned-snake/#ixzz3AZGvjQdn

          August 16, 2014 at 11:08 am |
        • evidencenot

          debating mythology (the bible) can be fun!

          August 18, 2014 at 9:20 am |
    • bostontola

      "I believe that we have all betrayed God"

      The the premise is, God created us (along with everything else).
      Adam and Eve failed.
      Every human ever born has failed.
      Therefore God created 100% failures.

      If some percent of humans were not failures, then I can see putting some blame on the failures. But if all humans are failures, how can any of that be our fault? We were created to fail.

      This entire construction seems allegorical to me. A very clever way for man to illuminate to themselves that they can be better, we can create more effective societies. For that, I am grateful, it has worked. We are the beneficiaries thousands of years later. The creation of God by man may be our most productive invention of all.

      August 16, 2014 at 10:38 am |
      • Dalahäst

        I know it is a pretty standard claim for atheists that man created God. You create your own theories as to why. And it is possible you assume that since your theories are created by you and feel real to you, perhaps everyone else is just creating their own theories and it feels real to them.

        I have a tough time believing that origin story is about creating an illuminated man who builds a better society. Especially when many of the things that plagued the people in those stories written so long ago is still a factor today. And for myself the power to overcome those issues comes not from a better society, technological advances, pride or a modern philosophical outlook.

        August 16, 2014 at 10:55 am |
        • bostontola

          Dalahast,
          I said it seems like, I.e. I am speculating. I don't know, I wasn't there. I make no claim to know the facts of how and why the bibles stories came into being. My comments simply weigh the possibilities as I see them.

          1. It is almost certain that man has created God(s). Unless you think the Greek Gods, Norse Gods, Hindu Gods, Egyptian Gods, the various Native American Gods are real, man has created God(s).
          2. That opens a reasonable question, are any of the purported God(s) not created by man? Specifically, is the biblical God not created by man?

          When I examine the bibles along with the other ancient sacred texts of other religions, I see the same fingerprints of man. As advanced as they were for the time, they still bear the indelible marks of mans limited imagination. The morality is advanced for the time, but still limited from that time. There are lots of elements that when looked at on its face are contradictory, requiring contorted interpretations to comport with contemporary thinking (which changes over time, and hence the interpretations adapt with the times).

          So you can claim these are standard atheist diatribes, but these are my conclusions based on my analysis. I don't go to atheist websites to get my ideas. They have been formed by my research, conversations, and debates right here on this blog. It is condescending to imply otherwise.

          August 16, 2014 at 11:14 am |
        • Dalahäst

          In just the same way you accuse me of being wrong about you and you using standard atheist diatribes – you are often wrong about me and others when you make similar accusations about us. I sometimes see you being just as condescending toward others and you see me being right now.

          I know God isn't man-made. God makes man. I know you are making your own intellectual theories. They are man made. And they may be helpful for you. It is nothing new. Nor anything I haven't considered for myself. And I didn't have to spend that much research or testing to come to those conclusions. Man has been coming to that conclusion since the stone-age. But I don't find them that compelling anymore. In some ways I look back and see it was me trying to play God. And I don't have to do that anymore.

          August 16, 2014 at 11:36 am |
        • bostontola

          In just the same way you accuse me of being wrong about you and you using standard atheist diatribes – you are often wrong about me and others when you make similar accusations about us.
          ==>I don't believe I have made accusations about you. Please show me an example. I try to be careful and frame my comments as my personal speculation and in question form. The only exception is scot. I do accuse him of lying and libel and I have presented my evidence which is his own quotes. I don't know if you are wrong, so I wouldn't have stated that, other than factual errors.

          I sometimes see you being just as condescending toward others and you see me being right now.
          ==>I can be condescending and arrogant, I admit that. I don't see that as an excuse for others though.

          I know God isn't man-made. God makes man. I know you are making your own intellectual theories. They are man made.
          ==>I accept that is how you feel. Of course my ideas are man made, I am a man.

          And they may be helpful for you.
          ==>Ok.

          It is nothing new. Nor anything I haven't considered for myself.
          ==>Ok.

          And I didn't have to spend that much research or testing to come to those conclusions.
          ==>Your choice.

          Man has been coming to that conclusion since the stone-age.
          ==>If you say so.

          But I don't find them that compelling anymore. In some ways I look back and see it was me trying to play God.
          ==>Your theory.

          And I don't have to do that anymore.
          ==>Your choice.

          August 16, 2014 at 11:53 am |
        • Dalahäst

          When I was about 16 I reached the same conclusions you talk about. I was certain God was totally man made. And I researched and found reasons to uphold that viewpoint. And I was pretty comfortable with that viewpoint for 20 or so years. Now I'm not so convinced. So if someone states that my belief in God was totally made by man and that there is no God, I have difficulty accepting their opinion. I understand it. I lived it. I accepted it for myself at one point. But today it doesn't work for me.

          August 16, 2014 at 1:27 pm |
        • bostontola

          Dalahast,
          In all sincerity, I have no desire to change your mind on God. I must be communicating very poorly. I have no idea if there is God(s).

          What seems apparent, is that man has created thousands of Gods (see the few I mentioned above). I am very open to the notion that some agent may have created what we see as the universe. What I am expressing is my opinion on whether the God character in the Bible is that creator. You are certain of that, I am skeptical of that.

          August 16, 2014 at 7:12 pm |
        • Robert Brown

          Bostontola,

          Are you familiar with biologos?

          August 16, 2014 at 7:23 pm |
        • bostontola

          Robert,
          I just checked out their site. I'm glad to see there is a group reconciling religion and science. I have always wondered why their approach wasn't developed, now I know that it was. If all Christians took this approach, there would be a lot less to argue about. The way I look at it, if we can get to the point where we all recognize that we are down to opinion, we can all deal with that. The Biologos approach takes us close to that.

          August 16, 2014 at 7:43 pm |
        • Robert Brown

          A lot of it goes right over my head, but since you are scientist you might enjoy a series of articles they did on the relationship between Asa Gray and Darwin.

          August 16, 2014 at 7:50 pm |
        • bostontola

          Thanks Robert. I am an engineer. I started as a scientist (biologist), but got my graduate degree in engineering. I have worked as an engineer since, but I work with many scientists daily (physicists and chemists). Most of them are Christian.

          Asa Gray is one of the most respected American Scientists. He did believe in design based on what was known then. I would love to know what he would think today. He might have subscribed to the Biologos approach as he was a devout Christian.

          August 16, 2014 at 8:01 pm |
        • LaBella

          You teach the Bible when you can't even explain something so simple:

          If it was for mankind, why? A&E were forbidden to eat of its fruits, so it obviously was NOT for mankind; if it was, it follows that He set it up so mankind would fail, and He knew it!
          If it were not for mankind, because He knows all anyway, it was unecessary!

          Knock off the ad homs. If you cannot explain it, fine; be adult enough to say that without shoring to your tennuous position by being deliberately insulting because you cannot explain it.

          August 18, 2014 at 4:32 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          I did make it simple..youre the one with the issue of not being able to connect the dots. It was for human kkind..to allow them CHOICE>.God di d not set them up to fail..God set them up tp be allowed CHOIcE..love/relationships are NOT coerced! Love and relationships are CHOICES...so in a way this situation did not "fail" as I said..I am able to explain it....the problem is on your end...I shouldn't have to spell everything out and do all the work for you

          August 18, 2014 at 9:10 pm |
        • Doris

          kermit: " It was for human kkind..to allow them CHOICE"

          I don't see any evidence that humans haven't had any different capability with regard to choice in what we know historically. Then if we get into that ridiculous rules and rewards system – I really start to become disgusted – don't get me started now...

          August 18, 2014 at 9:33 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          I did not say they had NO choce before..maybe I didn't say it clear enough (HOWEVER, if you actually READ the rest of my post youd seen it) Man ALWAYS had choice...this was a choice given by God...it allowed them to HAVE a choice somewhere. It gave them the OPPORTUNITY to use their choice making they have in their possession

          August 18, 2014 at 9:41 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          and what are you referring to when you posted the "rules and rewards" bit?

          August 18, 2014 at 9:42 pm |
        • LaBella

          Kermit,
          So it was pre-ordained.

          August 18, 2014 at 9:55 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          explain please, so that we are on same page

          August 18, 2014 at 9:57 pm |
        • Doris

          The self-serving, self-protectng, self-captivating notion of salvation and its requirements, kermit. Disgusting.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:10 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          ahh yes...taking care of myself is disgusting...apparently you don't care for yourself..you don't try to protect yourself do ya? by the way..its not just about slavtion..its about a relationship with God....wow..how disgusting is that?

          August 18, 2014 at 10:12 pm |
      • LaBella

        I think that the Genesis story of A&E is allegorical, also, Bostontola.
        The tree is what always bothered me. There was no need for it.

        August 16, 2014 at 11:25 am |
        • bostontola

          Akira,
          I like the tree. It separates knowledge from free will. In the story, God made us different from animals with free will. The knowledge of right and wrong were separate. That is a profound idea (not that I agree with it) and reflects the philosophy of mind of the people writing the story.

          August 16, 2014 at 11:33 am |
        • LaBella

          Yes, the tree is a good plot tool. Without it the story couldn't progress.
          I was referring more to the fact that God already knew everything. Unless He was using the tree as a learning tool for A&E, (and that turned out to be the case) it was unecessary to begin with.

          August 16, 2014 at 11:40 am |
        • kermit4jc

          Jesus didnt see it as allergorical, nor was the context in Genesis deemed allegorical. Also, if there was no tree...sin would still have happened...sin is mans disobedience, and at some point it was bound to happen when man is given free choice

          August 16, 2014 at 11:46 am |
        • LaBella

          Thanks for your input, Kermit.
          If there was no tree, there'd be no fall, if there was no fall, it follows there's be no sin, correct?
          I am talking about Genesis only here.

          August 16, 2014 at 11:56 am |
        • kermit4jc

          I was ALSO talking only of Gensis as well..Adam would eventually have sinned...so would have Eve..they were given freedom of choice.....given time it would happen...the tree isnt the issue..its disobedience..its man wanting to do things on his own, making himself God

          August 16, 2014 at 12:00 pm |
        • bostontola

          Akira,
          I agree, an omnipotent God makes the entire universe redundant.

          August 16, 2014 at 11:57 am |
        • bostontola

          kermit,
          That is my issue, if sin was inevitable, then we were created to sin. Why do we forgiveness for what we were created to do?

          August 16, 2014 at 12:00 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          we were created to have CHOICE...a choice to love God...you seem to not see the ends of this...we will eventually be in heaven..GODS home....do yo u invite people to your home and never have any sort of reltionship with them? LOVE is a FREE choice...not forced

          August 16, 2014 at 12:04 pm |
        • bostontola

          kermit,
          I see your point. Does that mean that we don't need forgiveness, we only need to choose God's love?

          August 16, 2014 at 12:07 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          there is still sin..which is trangression of Gods law....we were disobedient....justice needs to be taken care of. and in choosing to love God we also choose that Jesus died for our sins...we still need forgiveness for our disobedience.

          August 16, 2014 at 12:17 pm |
        • LaBella

          Kermit,
          You brought up Hesus in the first sentence. I wanted to stay on the subject of Genesis.
          You bring up a good point though; if you feel man was destined to sin, not only was the tree not needed, but man was created to. And that obviously could not be, because if man was created in God's image, (perfect) it follows that man would be too; incapable of sin.

          August 16, 2014 at 12:11 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          that would be assuning what being made in His image means..it means we are spiritual, we love, we can hate sin, etc etc. we are given feee choice. as for "Hesus" (Jesus, right?) He is right in the beginning in Gensis as well! Read Gensis 3 where God talks about putting emnimity between man and God)..though Jesus is not mentioned by name. it is very clear this foretells a Messiah

          August 16, 2014 at 12:19 pm |
        • LaBella

          *Jesus

          August 16, 2014 at 12:13 pm |
        • LaBella

          Yes, Kermit, Jesus, which I immediately corrected. Sometimes it's helpful to look at the thread instead of the viewer you use.
          If God made us in His image, we'd be perfect, since God is perfect.
          Your interpretation is yours, and I own mine.

          The tree was unecessary, IMO, if we were destined to sin regardless.

          August 16, 2014 at 1:16 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          yes..in your finite limited view it is unnecessary..god is all knowing and knows more

          August 17, 2014 at 1:47 am |
        • LaBella

          Kermit,

          "yes..in your finite limited view it is unnecessary..god is all knowing and knows more"

          Thank you for confirming my point; since God knows all, the tree was unecessary.

          August 17, 2014 at 11:31 am |
        • kermit4jc

          don't twist what I said please...that's not the conclusion...why you say tree is unnecessary? do you know all? again GOD has a purpose that you wouldn have known..so to YOU it SEEMS unnecessary....youre not God (Thank God)

          August 17, 2014 at 4:58 pm |
        • LaBella

          Kermit,
          It is very simple.
          God knows all.
          God created the Tree of Knowledge.
          Why?
          He knows all.
          Did he need a reminder?
          The Tree of Knowledge, therefore, is unecessary.

          August 17, 2014 at 5:52 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          who said it is for HIM? you still dont seem to get the point of it all

          August 18, 2014 at 1:44 am |
        • evidencenot

          The POINT is it's all mythology. Just like debating Greek mythology. All fiction.

          August 18, 2014 at 12:04 pm |
        • LaBella

          Kermit,
          He created the tree. Who else would it be for?
          Your snotty commentary notwithstanding, I understand it.

          August 18, 2014 at 2:18 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          geez..youre pretty dense and unable to connect the dots.... again the tree is not for HIM.....He is not the one in question here..its for human race.....again tre or no tree..sins will happen. God just used it to begin with..nothing wrong and useless about that

          August 18, 2014 at 4:18 pm |
        • LaBella

          Positioned correctly:
          LaBella
          You teach the Bible when you can't even explain something so simple:

          If it was for mankind, why? A&E were forbidden to eat of its fruits, so it obviously was NOT for mankind; if it was, it follows that He set it up so mankind would fail, and He knew it!
          If it were not for mankind, because He knows all anyway, it was unecessary!

          Knock off the ad homs. If you cannot explain it, fine; be adult enough to say that without shoring to your tennuous position by being deliberately insulting because you cannot explain it.

          August 18, 2014 at 4:34 pm |
        • LaBella

          Kermit,
          ...again tre or no tree..sins will happen. God just used it to begin with..nothing wrong and useless about that

          Explain how sin would have existed if A&E didn't eat from the tree.
          A&E would have remained perfect, unless they were created to sin.

          August 18, 2014 at 5:43 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          sin is rejection of God..it is something that requires a choice making decision. A and E had the ability to make choices, (its very obvious since they had a choice to NOT eat of the fruit, or to eat of it) They would have rejected God in some other sense...maybe stop worshipping Him altogether, who knows.....the basic premise is that they had ability to choose

          August 18, 2014 at 9:17 pm |
        • LaBella

          So it was all pre-ordained, and since God is all-knowing, the outcome was already known.
          They were created specifically to fail.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:15 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          you did not address the ability to make a choice to love God..or to reject Him.....do you not see that issue I pointed out? or are you ignoring it for some reason? Again choice is very important....love/relationships are not coerced....you can accept it or reject it. and the only way it is "failing" is for the human who rejects God..he fails to obtain eternal peace, hope and joy..by HIS OWN choice.

          August 18, 2014 at 10:19 pm |
        • LaBella

          Oh, but I did, Kermit. You just can't connect the dots.

          August 20, 2014 at 5:20 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          Connect the dots to what?

          August 20, 2014 at 6:17 pm |
        • LaBella

          That a choice was never in the cards since the tree of knowledge was deliberately put them to make them fail.

          August 20, 2014 at 6:26 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          a choice was in the cards.....they could have CHOSEn to obey God and nOT eat of it....don't blame the object for being there....

          August 20, 2014 at 6:27 pm |
      • bostontola

        steve,
        Back to the central question:

        If some percent of humans were not failures, then I can see putting some blame on the failures. But if all humans are failures, how can any of that be our fault? We were created to fail.

        August 16, 2014 at 11:28 am |
        • Dalahäst

          I don't think the story ever says people are at fault. We are imperfect creatures. But we have a creator who will help us. There are forces that exist in this world that work against good. And work against us. But God has a better way. And that way is not created by man. It is much better than that.

          August 16, 2014 at 11:48 am |
        • bostontola

          If there's no fault, why do we need forgiveness?

          August 16, 2014 at 11:56 am |
        • Dalahäst

          I have harmed others. And I have been harmed by others. So forgiveness is needed. I think the point is that we are responsible for what we do. We reap what we sow.

          August 16, 2014 at 1:20 pm |
        • ragansteve1

          I do not believe we were created to fail/sin. I spite of the apparent prevailing opinion on this topic's discussion, I believe Adam was perfect until he failed. God does not create failure intentionally IMHO. Adam had a chance and he blew it. We can all speculate as to why, but that does not change the outcome.

          August 16, 2014 at 7:53 pm |
        • bostontola

          steve,
          Thanks for the response. My notion of omniscience tells me that God had to know Adam would fall.

          August 16, 2014 at 8:14 pm |
        • ragansteve1

          Knowing something will happen, and creating the situation so that it will happen are two different things. I can allow my son to drive the car knowing that eventually he will fail. But I did not preordain his failure, nor did I set up the conditions that would require his failure. It's his choice to obey my rules, or not.

          August 16, 2014 at 10:44 pm |
        • bostontola

          steve,
          With all due respect, you are not omniscient. An omniscient being knows everything, every detail, exactly how it happens for everything everywhere.

          August 16, 2014 at 10:55 pm |
        • ragansteve1

          I don't think I implied that I was omniscient? But being omniscient also does not commit one to the predestination of life events. Analogies are never perfect and often fall very short. Sorry.

          August 17, 2014 at 3:11 pm |
        • bostontola

          steve,
          I didn't mean to imply that you thought you were omniscient. My point was that IF you were, you would have known the precise moment your son failed at driving, and every detail of the circu.mstances, long before it ever happened. You would know ahead of time, every failure your son would ever make. Being omniscient is a scary thing. You would never be surprised, for good or bad. In fact, the actual unfolding of time would be like a replay. What we call the real world would seem redundant to a tiny fraction of what you already know, because you would know everything (everywhere and every time). I personally don't believe in omniscience.

          August 17, 2014 at 4:09 pm |
      • Bob

        Bostontola, you would probably find the book _The Bonobo and the Atheist_ by Frans de Waal to be an interesting read. His claim is that god myths and creation myths have overall been useful to mankind and we should not be too hasty in moving past them. Frans is a friend and colleague of mine, and we disagree somewhat about the likely impact of the abandonment of the popular god stories such as Islam and Christianity, but that has led to some very stimulating discussions.

        August 16, 2014 at 12:02 pm |
        • bostontola

          Thanks Bob, I'll look it up.

          August 16, 2014 at 12:08 pm |
        • bostontola

          Bob,
          Great research by Dr. de Waal. He seems to discount religion a bit because morality predates religion and even humanity. But there is another aspect of humanity that has been studied scientifically, we cheat. We especially cheat when we think no one is looking. God is an ingenious invention, an enforcer is always looking. Reduced cheating likely improves society overall. It was a uniquely human invention enabled by supersti.tion, that may have propelled social development to unprecedented scale. I wonder if Dr. de Waal considered that.

          August 17, 2014 at 9:53 am |
        • evidencenot

          Thanks for posting that Bob..... Helpful or not, the "myths" part is obvious...... well, to some.

          August 18, 2014 at 12:06 pm |
    • MidwestKen

      ragansteve1,
      "There is no contradiction here. There is no unfairness. Adam had all the information he needed to know in order to obey. "

      He didn't have the information that obedience was good or disobedience was bad. Why obey?

      August 16, 2014 at 11:32 am |
      • bostontola

        Ken,
        That is an interesting point I hadn't considered. It seems to go to the need in this society for blind trust and obedience. So much so that it trumps the knowledge of right vs. wrong. That is a key insight into their nature. It is not unlike the old military mindset.

        August 16, 2014 at 12:22 pm |
      • Dalahäst

        What if it isn't just about obedience?

        What if God's commandment to not eat of the tree was really just a warning. So, instead of – 'don't do this or I will punish you' it was 'the consequence of eating from that tree will be a bad one'.

        Part of that is the knowledge of the perpetual struggle to choose good – and the failure to always do so. God made them good. But they choose not to be good. This effects everyone. We try to make ourselves good. And everyone fails at that attempt. We can't make ourselves good. Only God can.

        August 16, 2014 at 1:39 pm |
        • midwest rail

          Serious question – has there ever been a good person who did not believe in the Christian God ?

          August 16, 2014 at 1:46 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          What is a good person?

          I'm not good. I'm working on getting better. But I have done some things that are not good – like lying, stealing, cheating, fighting and slander. I have harmed innocent people. I can't judge who is and isn't good. I know some people who are not Christians that are good examples of a better way. But they, too, would probably say they are not or have not always been good.

          August 16, 2014 at 1:50 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          what do you mean by "good" what standard is good? if you mean perfect..no..no one is perfect..with exception of Jesus

          August 17, 2014 at 1:49 am |
        • midwest rail

          Fair enough, thanks.

          August 16, 2014 at 1:59 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          Dalahast,
          As an allegory about man losing his innocence, i.e. living by instinct alone, and gaining knowledge, i.e. reason, that there are better ways than what nature, in its haphazard methods, has ingrained in us it does make some sense.

          But as a narrative of something that supposedly happened, why would God place such a supposedly dangerous object smack in the middle of the garden when He knows it is dangerous, especially when He also supposedly knows that A & E will eat from it anyway?

          August 16, 2014 at 2:39 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          Dalahast,

          p.s. It was God who did the cursing not some "natural" consequence, i.e. it doesn't seem like a "warning" as you put it.

          August 16, 2014 at 3:06 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          I think that is the kind of world we live in. One that is good, but not perfect. And the temptation to reach for the wrong things in life will always be there.

          Maybe there is some benign purpose in the curses God declares? Or maybe those curses are more like a prophecy; warning the couple of what is to come as a result of their choices?

          August 16, 2014 at 5:20 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          Dalahast,
          And maybe it only makes sense when translated into Alpha Centarian, which we won't know about for another 10,000 years. Why make up things in order for it to make sense?

          "I will put enmity between you and the woman,
          and between your offspring and hers"

          "I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing;
          in pain you shall bring forth children,"

          This hardly seems "benign" nor a simple prophecy. He is actively causing harm/pain/etc.

          August 16, 2014 at 5:36 pm |
        • Dalahäst

          Not necessarily. I'm not simply making up things in order to make sense of it. These are understandings others have shared with me. I try to approach it with questioning, and still considering the points you bring up. This could also be something like discipline being described, and not some Creator actively causing harm or pain for no reason or a bad reason.

          August 16, 2014 at 6:10 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          Dalahast,
          Sorry, didn't mean to imply that there was no possible purpose involved. A supposed God may very well come up with any sort of scenario in order to teach us a lesson.
          I'm just saying that the without knowledge of good and evil it seems unethical to hold someone responsible for those actions that are deemed "wrong" within said knowledge, such as disobedience.
          Not to mention the unethical nature of supposedly "cursing" all humanity of the action of two individuals.

          Therefore the idea that Man "choose" his condition or "caused" a fallen world, as some put it, seems incorrect. The supposed God of the story actively made the curses for actions which man, in that condition, should not be held responsible.

          August 16, 2014 at 7:50 pm |
      • ragansteve1

        Ken, As I was corrected to say, God said "if you eat that apple you will die." Why are we straining at gnats? If someone tells you that if you touch that wire you will die, and you don't know anything about electricity, and you touch it, was there something else you should have known?

        Just saying, if Adam and God had a relationship, which clearly from the Bible passage in Genesis they did, then what else is needed. Even of God had gone into a long explanation of the philosophical underpinnings of "good" vs "evil" do you think it would have helped? I think not. I've been around a sufficient number of people both highly educated and not to know that people will do what they do. If they are obedient to the relationship they have the relationship will fare well. If not, well . . . not.

        August 16, 2014 at 9:16 pm |
        • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

          And why should it be humanities problem...it's Adam's fault, don't blame the rest of us.

          August 16, 2014 at 9:31 pm |
        • ragansteve1

          Because with Adam's failure and separation from God, it became impossible for us not to fail too. It's not about blaming Adam or blaming God. It's is simply not possible, in this world, outside of the garden with daily communion with God, to be perfect.

          August 16, 2014 at 10:48 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          ragansteve1,
          First, is doubting God "wrong"? (Apparently not, since Adam did not die that day, but that another debate)
          Second, regardless of whether you think people are bad or not, your argument boiled down to "obedience", in this case to a relationship. Again, I ask how one can be held responsible for an "bad" action if one has no knowledge of "good" and "bad"?
          Third, how exactly did Adam's action make anything impossible? Especially for a supposedly omnipotent God.

          August 17, 2014 at 12:05 am |
        • ragansteve1

          Ken,

          First, is doubting God "wrong"? (Apparently not, since Adam did not die that day, but that another debate)

          Penalties in life do not always come immediately. God said he would die, and he did. God did not say he would immediately drop dead with the bite of apple in his mouth like snow white of cartoon fame. Doubting God is wrong.

          Second, regardless of whether you think people are bad or not, your argument boiled down to "obedience", in this case to a relationship. Again, I ask how one can be held responsible for an "bad" action if one has no knowledge of "good" and "bad"?

          Yes, often it does boil down to obedience. And Adam was told. Nothing else is needed.

          Third, how exactly did Adam's action make anything impossible? Especially for a supposedly omnipotent God.

          It's not about being impossible for God. But it makes it impossible in a sin filled world for us. Nothing is impossible for God. For us, not so much.

          August 17, 2014 at 3:03 pm |
        • MidwestKen

          ragansteve1,

          “but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” (gen 2:17)

          Why exactly is doubting a supposed God “wrong”? More importantly, how would Adam have known that without any knowledge of good and evil?

          You say nothing else is needed, but can’t answer how Adam was supposed to know that.

          (sigh) how does the sin of one make anything impossible for anyone else?

          August 17, 2014 at 11:54 pm |
  16. Tom, Tom, the Other One

    Most of us believe things that can't be verified. Even things that can't in principle be verified. Sometimes two or more such things form a self-reinforcing system: you believe you must believe. It's a real shame.

    August 15, 2014 at 10:20 pm |
    • ragansteve1

      I agree with the first part. But it's not a real shame. It's called faith. We believe lots of stuff. And we have faith in all kinds of things. We have faith in each other even in the face of contradictory evidence. We have faith in the goodness of life, or we would lose hope and not continue on. I love life, and I love faith.

      August 15, 2014 at 11:18 pm |
      • Tom, Tom, the Other One

        Faith is asking to be misled.

        August 15, 2014 at 11:26 pm |
        • ragansteve1

          Hmm, And some people call me cynical. It's a great line though.

          August 16, 2014 at 3:36 am |
        • hotairace

          The definition of faith I like the most is by Peter Boghossian, something like "Faith is pretending to know things you do not." I encourage all to watch his explanation of this definition.

          August 16, 2014 at 10:42 am |
  17. aallen333

    I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. Psalms 139:14

    August 15, 2014 at 8:58 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      Thank you. I'll try to be worthy of such praise. Please send a photo.

      August 15, 2014 at 9:02 pm |
    • TruthPrevails1

      Do you comprehend how babies are made? NO GOD is needed for that....we're sorry the education system failed you.

      August 15, 2014 at 9:04 pm |
      • aallen333

        Science has reached the point where the creation of self replicating nanobots are now a possibility. Based on your reasoning those ignorant on the nuances of nanotechnology would be considered intelligent if they assumed nanobots had no creator.

        August 15, 2014 at 9:32 pm |
        • TruthPrevails1

          aallen: Man-made opposed to supernatural. Your point is moot...one can be shown to exist, one can't be-I'll let you figure out which is which.

          August 16, 2014 at 5:03 am |
      • kermit4jc

        silly truthprevials...we kNOW how babies are made..the verse given did not negate that...God having a hand in it does not negate biology. what about the soul-oh..I think you dont believe there is a soul....just mindless piece of meat eaking out its existence here on earth

        August 16, 2014 at 11:41 am |
        • hotairace

          If you believe that some alleged god has a hand in making babies then you do not know how babies are made. Your baby making hypothesis is no better than the hypothesis that says babies are found in a cabbage patch.

          August 16, 2014 at 11:45 am |
        • kermit4jc

          LMAO....HOW can you say I have no knowledge how a baby is made? are you assuming about me again?? its not good to think that way buddy...listen..I know the BIOLOGICAL process...when its talking of God forming us..its nOT negating that at all....you are very smug in your false assumptions and seem to not care if you assume rather than get facts about someone (are yuo not all about facts in the first place?)

          August 16, 2014 at 11:48 am |
        • TruthPrevails1

          Silly old man! Geez, you should know by now that I don't agree.
          Since when does the soul equal the mind?

          August 16, 2014 at 11:47 am |
        • kermit4jc

          i rest my case.....let me ask you this..do you know of our bodies ridding themselves of all cells in 7 years time? whathappens to the mind then..the soul? its seperate from our body....read up on some philosophy look at some of the scientists and philosophers gathered in Lee Strobel's book "The Case for Faith" all those in the book are learned men..with Phds and had works peer reviewed in secular journals...they are professors at universities at one time or another.

          August 16, 2014 at 11:53 am |
        • LaBella

          Kermit,
          The cells of our bodies do not replace themselves every 7 years.
          Every body part is different.
          Some are replaced faster, some are not replaced at all.

          August 16, 2014 at 1:20 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          right..over the course of 7 years..not all replaced at same time.....thats what I was saying..still the point is..after 7 years, all the cells are replaced...where is your mind? does it go with the cells?

          August 17, 2014 at 1:48 am |
        • hotairace

          *If* you believe. . .

          No assumptions being made but you are reinforcing the possibility your reading skills are less than average.

          August 16, 2014 at 2:10 pm |
        • hotairace

          Learned men with PhDs, philosophy. . .

          In the absence of facts, it's a fallacy to appeal to authority figures.

          August 16, 2014 at 2:12 pm |
        • otoh2

          kermit,

          Regarding body cell 'replacement'... read:

          http://www.livescience.com/33179-does-human-body-replace-cells-seven-years.html

          August 17, 2014 at 2:22 am |
        • LaBella

          Kermit,
          The brain's neurons are never replaced once they die.
          So, they are not replaced every seven years, and your brain is most definitely part of your body.

          So, no. Your premise that every cell in your body is replaced every 7 years is false.

          August 17, 2014 at 2:57 pm |
        • kermit4jc

          I never said your brain is nOT part of yoru body..i said mind....HUGe difference

          August 17, 2014 at 5:08 pm |
        • LaBella

          The point is, the body doesn't replace cells every 7 years. So, that premise is incorrect.

          August 18, 2014 at 11:03 am |
  18. austin929

    ISIS is not full of forgiveness. Have they been bought by the love of Christ?

    intimidation is overcome by determination.

    what type of determination is Christ like today ? is this the age of the Church or the age of the military?

    well ask George Bush...............or is dick Cheney a Christian too? what about Sco.oter? good ol sco.oter!

    now theres a guy that has a great nick name! he's in the politics business. his name is sco.oter.

    August 15, 2014 at 7:33 pm |
  19. austin929

    Nah, no offense taken at all *smile*
    If you look at it in the sense that there was no one else there since they had not yet been created, and creation itself had not yet been created, then God was for all intents and purposes speaking to none other than God, Himself.

    August 15, 2014 at 6:01 pm |
    • austin929

      "If".....................".you" "look" "at it "..............................." in " "the sense"

      what does "sense " mean?

      if you feel?

      August 15, 2014 at 6:03 pm |
  20. Tom, Tom, the Other One

    ♰♰♰Jesus Christ is Bored♰♰♰

    August 15, 2014 at 2:36 pm |
    • ausphor

      TTTOO
      Nice to see you back on a regular basis. I find it passing strange that the majority of the "chosen people" are still waiting for their first Messiah and the jesus crowd are not p!ssed about himself stating I'll be right back; 2000 years and counting. Comedy gold.

      August 15, 2014 at 4:09 pm |
    • lunchbreaker

      I asked Jesus if He would pay for my sins and He said,"Over my dead body."

      August 15, 2014 at 4:16 pm |
      • ragansteve1

        And then He stretched out His arms and died.

        August 17, 2014 at 8:18 pm |
    • austin929

      how are my friends doing?

      August 15, 2014 at 5:52 pm |
    • tallulah131

      If Jesus is so bored, he can go outside and play while the weather is nice. Maybe later he can go to Osiris' house and play a friendly game of Gnip Gnop.

      August 17, 2014 at 2:48 am |
      • LaBella

        Gnip Gnop? Holy Parker Brothers, tal, I haven't thought of that game in years.

        August 18, 2014 at 11:10 am |
        • tallulah131

          All these years and I never realized that it was "ping pong" spelled backwards until now.

          August 19, 2014 at 4:42 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
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.