Jesus Wasn’t a “GodKlingon”; The Problem with Biblical Literalists

This past weekend creationist Ken Ham, best known to most for his highly publicized debate with Bill Nye, posted an odd reflection concerning alien life to his blog. The impetus for Ham’s post appears to have been recent predictions by experts at NASA that we will find evidence of extraterrestrial life within the next twenty years.

Ham bemoans the search for extraterrestrial life as “desperate and fruitless,” and a waste of “countless hundreds of millions of dollars,” though his problem isn’t that we should be spending that money on other things of importance. Ham’s objections are theological:

Life did not evolve but was specially created by God, as Genesis clearly teaches. Christians certainly shouldn’t expect alien life to be cropping up across the universe.

The Bible, Ham notes, never mentions the existence of life anywhere else but on earth, which:

was created for human life. And the sun and moon were created for signs and our seasons—and to declare the glory of God.

More seriously for Ham, however, is his claim that the existence of alien life forms, especially other intelligent beings, would dissolve the meaning of the gospel:

You see, the Bible makes it clear that Adam’s sin affected the whole universe. This means that any aliens would also be affected by Adam’s sin, but because they are not Adam’s descendants, they can’t have salvation. One day, the whole universe will be judged by fire, and there will be a new heavens and earth. God’s Son stepped into history to be Jesus Christ, the ‘Godman,’ to be our relative, and to be the perfect sacrifice for sin—the Savior of mankind.

Because God became human and not something else, “salvation through Christ is only for the Adamic race—human beings who are all descendants of Adam.” There’s a reason why “Jesus did not become the ‘GodKlingon’ or the ‘GodMartian’!”

Of course it’s easy to ridicule Ham’s claims. That’s how the Huffington Post has dealt with them, though it’s worth pointing out that Ham’s thinking is not out of the ordinary among biblical literalists. Indeed, although Ham is regularly lampooned for his beliefs, they are widely shared among a sizable population of Christians—at least in the United States. That’s why someone like Ham and his organization Answers in Genesis can be successful in the first place.

What I find most troubling in Ham’s claims, though, is not so much their content. Sure, most of what Ham says about science, the origins of the universe, the origins of life, and theology doesn’t stand up to even the lightest scrutiny, but even more problematic is his lack of curiosity. For Ham, the question of whether or not there’s life elsewhere in the universe isn’t even worth asking—precisely because we already have the answer.

It’s this lack of curiosity that makes biblical literalism so damaging, scientifically, socially, and politically speaking, for once we have all the answers there’s really no need to explore, discover, or create.

It’s also what makes biblical literalism so damaging for religion. Many of my students are curious about why I study religion and what I get from it. I always tell them that for me, religion isn’t finally about providing answers but spurring questions; it isn’t about telling us what to think and do but about providing resources and spaces for our thinking and doing. That’s, unfortunately, something for which Ham’s approach, and biblical literalism more generally, doesn’t allow.


  •' Jim Reed says:

    Finding extraterrestrial life probably means microorganisms. It could be in the solar system like on on a moon with water. It could be a chemical signature from planets around other stars. This wouldn’t stop Ken Hamm because he would still have no other intelligent life to worry about. He does have a more pressing problem to solve. The Holy Scriptures talk of end times solutions on earth. We are now capable of spreading through the solar system, if we want to put in the effort, and in a few centuries there could be far more people not living on earth than there are here. Much of Christian theology would become obsolete. The logical solution would be Ken Hamm and those who think like him would have to work to keep us all here on earth, and not setting up independent civilizations in space and on moons or planets.

    Something HAS killed our glorious plans for space from 40 or 50 years ago. Did fundamentalist Christianity have anything to do with that? We might start to advance again, but it is hard to think we are not 30 or 40 years behind where we could easily have been. Ken Hamm might have his work cut out trying to stop us this time. I wonder what he (and they) will do?

  •' The_Physeter says:

    We don’t even go into space. We ride with the Russians. I wonder if JFK would have been okay with waiting for the Soviets to put a man on the moon, and then just stand at the side of the launch pad with our thumbs out?

  •' The_Physeter says:

    This is so silly. Even if Ken Ham’s weird fantasy world of 6,000-year universe and creation from nothing was real, there’s so much you could speculate about aliens. If they aren’t descended from Adam, maybe they are without sin. If they are affected by Adam’s sin, then presumably Jesus’ sacrifice applied to them as well, even if they aren’t of Adam’s race. Maybe aliens are like angels. Ken Ham isn’t any sort of “scientist” who just has a few wrong ideas. He’s a charlatan and a liar and he sells a brand rather than doing any kind of honest preaching.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    We are now in a 21st century space race. Who will be the first to get to Mars? In fact, who will be the first to put men into orbit? The two contestants in this race are NASA and SPACEX.

  •' Luis Gutierrez says:

    Biblical literalists often conflate patriarchal culture with divine revelation. In this regard, I think that St. John Paul II’s “Theology of the Body,” an exegesis of the Book of Genesis, provides a solid foundation for better understanding to resolve some vexing issues of human sexuality and human ecology. This possibility is explored here in the context of solidarity-sustainability issues:

    A case in point is the issue of male headship in family and church, witness the controversy about the ordination of women to the ministerial priesthood. This is a visceral issue that cannot be resolved by reasoning alone, but critical feedback would be very much appreciated. Let us pray that the church will be able to discern the difference between revealed truths and patriarchal ideology.

    God bless,

  •' Jim Reed says:

    Divine revelation has to be conflated with something, doesn’t it? It can’t stand on its own. Patriarchal culture is a natural choice since they are the cultures most likely to want to propagate themselves. A matriarchal culture would not have as much need for religion.

  •' Steve03 says:

    Back before 1492, nobody thought the Bible mentioned the existence of North and South America, Australia, the Pacific Ocean, or the fact that those places were inhabited by other races of humans. The Catholic Church engaged in a heated and prolonged internal debate about how to handle the peoples of the New World: were they actually human; were they eligible for salvation; could –and should — they be evangelized (and, later, ordained)? Modern literalists, of course, have no trouble finding references to the United States, the United Nations, the Soviet Union in the biblical text.

  •' Craptacular says:

    The US is too busy with internal politics and settling that age old question: who can get married and if all the bakeries must, in fact, sell them a same-sex topping to put on their cake. The Russians, on the other hand, are too busy attempting to reacquire their empire to worry much about space. Meanwhile, the asteroid with earth’s name on it continues hurtling towards us, sealing our doom while we fritter away what time we have remaining.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    That time should be about 50 million years. I think we should wait a couple more centuries before we worry too much about it, because by then we should be capable of shooting it down for pennies on the dollar.

  •' Luis Gutierrez says:

    See John 16:12-13. The patriarchal culture is passing away, but patriarchy is not a mark of the church. The church is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic, but not necessarily patriarchal. Let us pray that the church will be able to discern the difference between revealed truths and patriarchal ideology.

  •' lorasinger says:

    Re: If they are affected by Adam’s sin, then presumably Jesus’ sacrifice applied to them as well,


    But who, EXACTLY died on that cross? If it was Jesus-the-god, then how can God die? If it was only Jesus-the-human, then all Christians have in the death of Jesus is a human sacrifice.

    And what, EXACTLY does God say about human sacrifice in the Tanakh? In Deuteronomy, God calls Human sacrifice something that He hates, and an abomination to Him!:

  •' Wendy Johnson says:

    Always so disorienting for me, when I find a place where C.S. Lewis is more religiously progressive than somebody: He addresses the aliens-and-salvation issue in his Perelandra trilogy, by envisioning a distinct salvation narrative for each planet with complex life on it, and the inhabitants of each, as having their own choice between Good and Evil.

  •' SgtCedar says:

    What I find specially disturbing as someone who spent 4 years in seminary back in the ’80s is that Hamm has such a limited view of God. According to Hamm, God was able to create all the universe but was only able to create beings that worship/adore/whatever else humans do with or for him/her/it on one minor planet on an arm of one ordinary galaxy.

  •' cranefly says:

    From the link:

    “Excluding women from the ministerial priesthood amounts to an objectification of female human bodies that ignores the subjective dimension of women as persons and also ignores that neither men nor women become fully human unless they live in communion with each other.”

    Pope Francis said something just like that recently. Something about God being both male and female. It would be nice if the Church would follow its own doctrine to logical conclusions, once in a while.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    I am sure there would have to be only one Trinity for the universe as a whole, although each different world would probably work best with its own Devil.

  •' SgtCedar says:

    Not only do all or most religions say it is impossible to know the mind of God, Jesus said it. Apparently, according to Ken Ham Jesus was a liar. Wait in Christian orthodoxy Jesus is God. What did I miss in seminary?

  •' Jim Reed says:

    Have you considered the possibility that 4 years in seminary just left you more confused about religious issues?

  •' Wendy Johnson says:

    CS Lewis did his CS Lewis thing: One God with many names, just like in the Narnia books, where some worlds call him “Aslan,” some worlds call him something else, etc. I don’t know how personified he makes the Devil, he is a leetle unclear on that in his writings. Screwtape has a personified Devil, but it is also satire, so yeah.

  •' SgtCedar says:

    If we someday find advanced life under the ice on a moon of Saturn the religious right will discover somewhere in the Bible that Jesus took a trip to that moon and saved the fish people.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    Screwtape is satire? That explains a lot.

  •' Wendy Johnson says:

    It would depend on the seminary, wouldn’t it? I helped my ex through School of Theology at Claremont during the early 90’s, and it was the norm there for people to re-think their views about God and religion before they left. Word then was that if you wanted to be secure in your more conservative worldview, you went to Fuller, in Pasadena.

  •' Wendy Johnson says:

    Shouldn’t thinking deeply about religious issues lead to some confusion? At least at first, because these are some big, big issues. I did one year at seminary before I got married. That was just long enough to get me questioning everything. My ex did the full M.Div. program, and ended up papering over doubts with some re-phrases of the theology he’d gone there with. I’ve found over the years though, that our respective journeys have led us to think very similarly about these issues (AKA, way, WAY far away from the traditional place we both started).

  •' Wendy Johnson says:

    That’s how I read it. Did you interpret it differently?

  •' Jim Reed says:

    I guess the most important thing is to establish a barrier between what is taught and thought in seminary, and what is said to the general congregation in church. The people are not ready for the confusion, so it needs to be contained in that circle of people who are doing the thinking for them.

    I spent 3 years at a seminary for a cult in Pasadena from 68-71.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    I don’t remember. It was over 50 years ago.

  •' Wendy Johnson says:

    When you do it right, I think of it as being a teacher. You’re going to people where they are, and you are giving them the tools they need to think for themselves about complex issues. You’ve got to start from the basics of the faith, yeah, but at best, you will also show them a little of the possibilities for independent thought. When you do it wrong… Well, there was the guy my ex served under in Brea, who didn’t believe any of it, but yet he still parroted it week after week, for the ego boost he got watching people hang on his every word. I was honest, I bailed after the divorce, and became a Unitarian.

    Which cult?

  •' Wendy Johnson says:

    It was 30 years ago for me. The difference between when we each went to college, probably.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    Armstrongism. They did a good job of explaining what was wrong with all the other religions. Then their parting gift was showing what was wrong with their religion.

  •' CitizenWhy says:

    There was no Adam. There was no Adam’s sin. Evolutionary biology does show us that we are born witha capacity for doing good or doing harm, with our drive to do good often being a source of harm for others (religion often being an example of this, and science, but less so). But this is our biological evolutionary heritage.

    It needs to be pointed out tah Islam does not hold to adoctrine of original sin. Instead it posits two dynamiocs of divine mercy. One is to fill the universe and every heart with God’s tender love. The other is to instill a capacity for humans to repsond to this divine mercy. But not responding is an option, with sin being a lack of response. Yet religious fetishists find a way to twist this teaching into terrorism.

  • It is ironic that when the ancient bishops put together the Bible that they left out all the books that encouraged the seeking of knowledge – not just of God, but of all things. Ham is merely the modern day version of those bishops, and just as the Bible was meant to be as much a political book as a religious one, it is not surprising that it is being used as such by people like Ham and Cruz and Bachmann today.

    God has always driven me, I guess, to seek out not only knowledge of what He wants, but knowledge in general. I have always believed that God wants us to be knowledgeable so that when we return to God upon our deaths, we can talk with Him. Now that might seem strange to some, but if you consider that in Genesis, it talks about God walking in the Garden of Eden and talking with Adam, is it really such a stretch that God would want us to seek to more knowledge, and like children when we see our Father share with Him all that we have learned? That the Christian Literalists are trying to limit that ability with claims of faith, I find highly offensive. In fact, of all the things that they spout, I find this one thing the most objectionable because it flies in the very face of what the Bible says and what God wants for us.

    Seeking knowledge of all of God’s creation should be as much a part of being a person of faith as reading the Bible or any other religious text. Without knowledge of all the things in the universe, how can a person even begin to understand God and how truly miraculous creation actually is? Ham should open his mind and then maybe he can figure out how to listen to God and follow God’s lead. As long as he maintains a closed mind, he limits himself and his followers to ignorance and cuts them off from God and the wonders of God’s universe.

    Rev. Devon J. Noll
    New Word Universal Fellowship Church

  •' Jim Reed says:

    There is a problem with that kind of thinking. “fill the universe and every heart with God’s tender love” is code for “listen to what the religion says about how to do that”. That is equivalent to dedicating your life to doing what is best for the religion. All this kind of thinking ever accomplishes is making these religions continue practically forever.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    I have recently learned that those old Genesis scriptures were originally written about the Gods (plural). Then when Israel became monotheistic, they went back and edited the plural references to Gods to be singular, but the editors did kind of a sloppy job, and they left some of the god references as plural.

  •' DKeane123 says:

    I wouldn’t put it past them…

  •' SgtCedar says:

    At the University of Chicago Divinity School if you did not leave with more questions than you had when you arrived they would have considered themselves a failure.

  •' SgtCedar says:

    I went to a small Unitarian Universalist school affiliated with the University of Chicago. The university business school is a nest of conservatism (at least it was back in the ’80s). The Divinity School and most of the rest of the university is a hotbed of liberalism.

    Yes, Clairmont is one of the more liberal schools while Fuller is certainly very conservative.

    The center of process theology moved from Harvard in the ’20s and ’30s to Universality of Chicago in the ’40s and ’50s to Clairmont today.

  •' SgtCedar says:

    Unitarian Univesalist churches get people from all backgrounds. They demand to be challenged. I suspect there may still be a few more conservative churches in some rural areas but we are mainly urban except in New England.

  •' SgtCedar says:

    You are talking far right. I am glad you managed to get out.

  •' Steve Bailey says:

    Your statement that Hamm’s beliefs are “shared by a sizeable population of Christians – at least in the United States” tells a great deal of the story. The peculiarities set forth by Hamm and many other American Christian spokespersons are blatant aberrations of classical Christian faith. That doesn’t seem to matter to them in the least. I would urge readers to have a look at NT Wright’s latest offering – a collection of his essays that touches on the unfortunate bent of American Christians in this direction. Wright, in his usual solidly biblical and principled theological approach, needs to be more well known and supported in American Christian circles if a serious battle against theological aberration is to be engaged and the Christian witness to become more fully understood. See NT Wright – Surprised by Scripture: Engaging Contemporary Issues, Harper-Collins, 2014.

  •' Luis Gutierrez says:

    🙂 We are all sinners who need conversion. The church is holy but made of sinners, and is always in need of reform.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    It could have been worse. They didn’t vote.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    I don’t think it is that simple. We are splitting into two widely separated parts. The gap is growing, and there is nothing that can bridge it. One side believes everything, whatever fundamentalist things Hamm or anyone else says or has said in the past. The other side might not quite know it yet, but they are basically rejecting everything, or at least making every belief optional which will ultimately lead to rejecting everything. That is progressive Christianity, a religion in the process of disassembling itself.

  •' Wendy Johnson says:

    Wowser. Furthest to the right I ever strayed was Foursquare Gospel. And I left there when I asked in a Sunday School class one time, why Jesus came when he did. Teacher answered, “Well, it was in the fullness of time.”

    Glad you got out.

  •' Wendy Johnson says:

    There was a school of Process Theology on the Claremont campus I think. At the time, I found their ideas somewhat intimidating; they were too different from the conservative theology I’d been raised in. Since then I have learned to see a lot of wisdom in them.

  •' Christopher says:

    It is indeed offensive. But what religion is not offensive…to at least some other people?

  •' Christopher says:

    So you have faith on the beliefs of others. You certainly do KNOW what you claim is true. You just believe the testimonies of scientists like the ones that once said the Vikings were not here in America before Columbus. it is a nice faith you have but that is all it is.

    I don’t believe Adam sinned. I certainly don’t believe Eve did. Instead she made the right choice and choose the higher law of the two laws that were given them.

    The question I have is how long were Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden where they could live forever and what was happening outside the garden during this perhaps multi-millions of years.

  •' Christopher says:

    You mean instead of listening to God directly? Or do you mean we should just listen to science, with weak fallible men and women that get it wrong all the time and have to constantly change their theories/religion?

    My religion says we must “Prove all things and hold fast to that which is good.”

    In my religion Christ’s job is to bring to pass the eternal life and glorification of man so that all men and women can be like the many individual gods that make up the ONE God. We are to be like the Father is what Christ told us. If Christ failed to do this another would have had to take his place. If God sins he ceases to be God. Even God has to obey eternal law or He/She ceases to be God.

    The purpose of man is to have joy. Eternal joy. That is what my religion preaches. So what is best for me eternally is my religion. So what is best for my religion is what is best for me. The two cannot be separated.

  •' Christopher says:

    Limited minds have need of a limed view of God.

  •' Christopher says:

    Are you placing a barrier up to your children when you don’t allow them to walk across the street on their own a two-year-old? Yes. And they need that because they are not capable of eating meat when they would choke on it. So you feed them milk and let them grow. Just as Paul explained.

  •' Smknws says:

    The problem with Ken Ham is he does not understand the real meaning of


    He is not alone millions of people still believe
    the earth is 6000 years old, actually some people in our own government believed
    that, that boggles my mind.

    I don’t know how many thousands of years ago it
    was when man first learned how to write, but I do know at that time there was no
    such thing as a calendar with days and months.

    The first writing of old testament Genesis did
    not mention days, in the past year I have reread OT Genesis up to the sixth day
    so many times and I knew there was something in there that I was not

    This is only my own interpretation of what I
    understand it to mean, the first 5 days of creation were created slowly over a
    very long time . I think the evolutionary scientists ( in the image of God
    ) have proved beyond any doubt our universe is billions of years old. It is the
    sixth day that I think is the most important day of creation.. That is the day
    when God decided he would like to live on this beautiful planet that he had
    created, that’s when he said.. Let US make WO /MAN in OUR image, I must have
    read it at least 50 times before I really took notice of US OUR .. Who was God
    talking to? US?

    WE WERE THE US with God before creation … On
    the sixth day he created the human ,WE all agreed with God that we would use the
    human body..The vessel that holds OUR image of God. WE are all God living and
    experiencing life on earth as WO /MAN . Billions of years before God created
    the human… and now it only takes 9 months to create the perfect new little
    creation of God her / himself . God placed his life in the first seeds of all
    life but he left the best for last the sixth day… humanity a new very
    special creation …making certain that all reproductions would be in the image
    of God … God creating by way of mankind, a creator who continues to create a
    creator ..a constant flow of God re-creating himself in wo /mankind..

    I see it as the perfect God plan so that maybe
    one day he would recognize HER /HIMSELF in the mind of WO /MAN yes US..Jesus
    understood the creation of man in his image.. but nobody understood Jesus when
    he said.. I am in you.. You are in me.. I am the father and the son.. In other
    words he was trying to tell them way back then, that we are “all one” that we
    are all God , that got him in a lot of trouble didn’t it? we are still living
    in the sixth day, the seventh day will come when we can believe and understand
    that we are all God in the flesh…

    When that happens the new earth is waiting , it
    will be perfect of course there will be no religion ONLY GOD so there will be no
    war, do you think we would have killed each other on this planet for thousands of
    years if we knew we were God. Well I did tell you this is my own interpretation
    of Genesis through day 6… and at 80 years old it’s possible I have Alzheimer’s
    and I don’t know it.. SMILE

  •' The_Physeter says:

    I don’t understand what you’re getting at.

  •' Christopher says:

    I have searched for the faults and flaws in the gospel I believe, for 45 years. At 18 I WANTED to walk away and did for a while but as I read much of the so called facts about my faith from formally educated people that called my faith a cult, people I wanted to believe, I found most of it to be half truths or based on statements taken out of context or some outright lies. I have been unable to find the faults and flaws in the gospel I follow but many faults and flaws in the people claiming they are true followers. Even leadership is often misled from the real gospel of liberty. But I have never found a single flaw in the perfection and simplicity I have found and follow and believe.

  •' Christopher says:

    Why not be like a modern day corporation with a CEO but also with single boss/god for each world or galaxy or universe? A god and devil for each one?

    My gospel preaches of worlds without number and inhabitants on whose worlds and that many interact depending on the advancement of the people on them.

    Our world is WAY behind the curve, so far, due to wickedness.

  •' SgtCedar says:

    If you look at the original process philosophy by Alfred North Whitehead it is very complicated. He developed a completely new terminology. John Cobb, who used to head the Process Theology center at Claremont is much easier to understand.

    The basis of all process philosophy and theology was the application of the new science (relativity and quantum theory) in the early 20th century.

  •' Christopher says:

    Why not just have God tell the leadership? Isn’t God capable of talking to men today as He was in the days of Joshua or Samuel or Paul or Peter?

    And if God wanted to have females in charge of the Church why didn’t God send a daughter too or call a female apostle or if a female apostle was called why did He allow that to be hidden?

    I believe Eve was blessed for her choice and Adam was condemned for not making it first and the condemnation included having to be in the leadership position which allowed for more freedom for Eve’s daughters than is allowed to Adam’s sons.

  •' Christopher says:

    You have such a limited definition of religion. The Courts call it “a belief in an ultimate reality” but the Courts don’t even limit it to that. You seem to limit it to organized churches. I have know people that make everything from chess to football as their religion.

    Religion is a personal belief system on what constitutes morality or ethics. It is the foundation of all government. A Church occurs when like minded religions come together for mutual benefits. I am my religion and I go to Church with people that share somewhat common faith.

    Your religion seems to be based on anger against Churches that deceived you when you allowed it.

  •' Luis Gutierrez says:

    The church was given the power of the keys to mediate divine grace, and the church must continually discern God’s will, as in Acts 15. Patriarchal rationalizations of traditional practices are no longer persuasive, and are increasingly becoming obstacles to the new evangelization. Would Jesus, in today’s world, appoint 12 males to represent the patriarchs of the 12 tribes of Israel? Faith transcends reason but cannot be irrational. Patriarchal ideology is not intrinsic to divine revelation.

  •' Christopher says:

    Yes. He would. And the Church was not given power. Men were. The Church is not alive. It is a creation of men.

    Men were given the priesthood which is the power of God given to men to use in righteousness which is why it was taken from the Catholic Church priesthood. What they have now is a name without any real authority or gifts.

    It was given as a penalty to Adam and his sons. A lesser gift and punishment of demanded duty. Eve and her daughters received the greater gift since she chose the higher law while Adam had to be led by Eve to partake of the tree of knowledge of good and evil and become as gods knowing good and evil.

  •' lorasinger says:

    You wrote “Jesus’ sacrifice’, as is the central theme of Christianity. But human sacrifice is a concept that is absent in Judaism (supposedly the “roots” of Christianity) but is an integral part of Greco-Roman mythology where there were a number of God/virgin products of a sacrificial man god who died for mankind and was resurrected.
    Believers usually counter that by saying that he wasn’t really a human but the bible clearly states that he “manifested as a man” thereby making him a human at least for part of the time.
    If he was a god, then there is no sacrifice since he didn’t actually die. If he was a man, then according to the bible, God abhors human sacrifice and forbid it. He used the example of the heathens who sacrificed their innocents to their gods.
    Christians cannot claim that Jesus was a blood sacrifice because to the Jewish Jesus, living in a Jewish world, with no Christianity yet invented, a mankind redeeming sacrifice is an impossibility.
    A man may have been crucified not as a God, but for committing a crime against Rome, in this case sedition since this and treason were the two transgressions that Rome would become involved over.

  •' Luis Gutierrez says:

    Oh my … are you suggesting that the church no longer has the power of the keys? I don’t see any limits to church authority in Matthew 16:19, 18:18.

    Could I suggest that you study John Paul II’s “Theology of the Body”? It is very instructive, and thoroughly sanitized from patriarchal ideology.

  •' Christopher says:

    Are you suggesting the “THE Church” is the Catholic church? If so then I must say yes. I can see nothing about those keys being not being able to be lost due to sin. I see that we must endure to the end in order to be saved so if the priesthood leaders did not do as commanded then they could not save the keys that were granted to them.

    I agree that this authority was ONCE had by Peter and the other apostles but then there was the “falling away” as per 2 Thessalonians 2:3

    I find it convincing that this falling away occurred as the fruit from the tree of Catholicism, especially the Bible where many truths were intentionally discards, is evidence of the loss of priesthood authority.

    If I have questions concerning my religion I will follow the advice of James in the First chapter of his instructions. I like to go to the source. Less chance of misinterpretation that way.

  •' Wendy Johnson says:

    I never even got as far as Cobb’s writings myself, maybe because I was also working two jobs to help my ex get through seminary. As I remember it, the quick explanation was that logically God could not be both all-good and all-powerful. It made quite an impression at the time, and I puzzled over it for years.

  •' The_Physeter says:

    That’s about what it was, Chris. In Lewis’ space trilogy, each planet has both physical inhabitants and “spiritual” inhabitants, with one great spirit to rule them all–a local god, or King Spirit, if you like. On most planets the King Spirit was good, and allied himself with the Creator, but on Earth the King Spirit had rebelled and turned evil. That was why there was so much evil and sadness on the Earth. On other planets there was no sin, everyone got along with each other, and there was no need for redemption.

  •' The_Physeter says:

    To be fair, we put a very good robot on Mars. What does Russia have on Mars?

  •' The_Physeter says:

    So wait, you’re a reverse-Christian? When Christians say Adam and Eve committed the original sin by eating the fruit, you actually believe it was good and necessary to eat it?

    What is your opinion on Jesus, then? What did he come to die for? What do you make of Paul’s argument that Jesus saved us from the sin instigated by Adam?

  •' Jim Reed says:

    Our nation is capable of great things, and we would really like to accomplish them, but NASA works for congress, and congress has the priority of first rich people have to get rich enough, then they can trickle on the rest of us. I think there is a flaw in this system because the more rich the rich get, the more we fall behind in helping them have enough. That is why I am betting on SPACEX. We should have noticed where this was headed back when congress killed the supercollider and shipped particle physics off to Switzerland.

  •' Luis Gutierrez says:

    I take it that you don’t think the pope is the successor of Peter, and as such remains in full possession of the keys? As a Roman catholic, I believe he is, and can use them at any time, as Peter did in Acts 15:28.

    The power of the keys is not contingent on the holiness of Peter and his successors. Likewise, the sacraments are channels of divine grace “ex opere operato,” i.e., they work regardless of the sinfulness or holiness of the priest.

    Are you in the Roman Catholic tradition? If so, with regard to biblical revelation, can you tell me what is the biblical source for the dogma of the assumption of Mary body and soul to heaven?

  •' SgtCedar says:

    It is not that process theology says God cannot be all good and all powerful but the problem of theodicy, how can an all-powerful God allow evil, was one of the questions Whitehead and process theologians tried to answer.

    I had enough trouble understanding process theology being in seminary and only working one part-time job. I understand you would not have gotten very far under the circumstance.

  •' Christopher says:

    C. S. Lewis, I believe, was a very spiritually enlightened man. His work on the Screwtape letters was just incredible. His explanation as to why he had to spend time between writing them was fascinating. Thinking like a demon had a very negative affect on this soul. That was how I felt reading them and could not read them for any length of time. They made me feel oppressed.

    I believe that this earth had a devil but that most have neither a devil nor a Christ as Christ’s sacrifice extends far beyond our world. The devil concentrated his efforts here because Christ would be here. You go where the battle is.

    My wife believes that most Christians will be very surprised when they die. I am not so sure. I believe that people will essentially go to the heaven they believe will be there. That’s why I feel sad for atheists. When I die I want to ask my Dad, you know, the Big All Father in Valhalla, for the keys to the starship and I want to go out and see His universe and maybe even His Brother’s or Sister’s universes. You know. Meet the extended family and have brunch.

  •' Christopher says:

    Sorry about this long answer, Physeter, but you hit a nerve tonight. My wife and I have had some very spiritual experiences of late. She has discovered a family line she had no idea she was related to and it has been amazing for us. Like their spirits have been with us.

    This is a special belief for me. I know it is odd but I believe it to be correct. My life is unique to say the least. Who else lives without a Social Security Number? Who else drive’s without a driver’s license?

    You mean when SOME Christians say such things. I do not believe in original sin. Because of my legal defense background and hatred of our penal system and because I have seen the never ending corruption by what is called the Department of Justice I believe Adam and Eve only transgressed against a law of God, How could they sin when they did not know good or evil or good from evil? Didn’t they need mens rea to sin? Can a child sin? It is like the difference between a cvil penalty and a crime. Both have penalties but only one is a crime. And I don’t believe that a child can sin. Adam and Eve had the minds of children on a good and evil level.

    Christ came to fulfill the law and the prophets. He came to pay the price for YOUR sins and MINE. Not the transgression in the garden. But I am sure the two sinned after they left the garden so He died for those sins too.

    I’m sorry but I am not a big fan of Romans. I am not a big fan of Paul. I like James and Peter but Paul just seems to me to get it just a bit wrong too often. He is almost right but just off to me. PAUL’s letter killeth and does not giveth life. I also believe he was very mistranslated. The Catholics had an agenda and it was very much in the opposite direction of the Gnostics, the First Century Christians. I am not even a big fan of the Bible because so much is obviously missing especially the Book of Enoch. To read the Bible without the Spirit directing you is like reading a court ruling when you don’t even know which law was in dispute. The Nag Hammadi library and the Dead Sea Scrolls (at a minimum) really demonstrate to me that the Bible is very limited. A small corner of God’s treasure map. Maybe even just clues to His REAL treasure map.

    Adam was given two commands. One was: Genesis 1:28
    …God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth…

    How could they do this if they did not know good and evil? How could they even have sex without knowledge of good. They didn’t even know they were naked? Eve didn’t even have desire toward her husband. They did not have the things they needed to multiple without the knowledge of good and evil. That was impossible IMHO. There were intentionally two conflicting commandments. No matter what, they had to violate one or the other. I believe the higher law was to multiple and replenish the earth. Without them doing this the eternal plan of salvation would be thwarted. Man would not be. Christ’s sacrifice would be unnecessary. I believe it was necessary not only for this world but for many others.

    Are you really punished when your parents kick you out of the house or is it an eternal blessing so you can grow and learn to make your own choices. Isn’t that what the FATHER did to His children, Adam and Eve?

    God was handing out the penalties when He allegedly said:
    16 … and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

    So who was penalized by this? Eve is basically absolved if her husband gives a wicked command while the husband is TOTALLY responsible for himself AND his wife. OUCH!

    I do not believe that slavery is freedom. I do believe that you have more freedom when you are less restrained by duty and regulations. But if you are a slave are you not to obey your master? Would God hold you accountable for sins committed by the master? If the master never lets you learn of Christ whose fault is that?

    Men are to do things women just do not need to do after the Garden. They have less responsibly because Eve made the right hard choice and choose the higher law. Adam should have made that choice but he wanted to stay at home and live in Dad’s basement with the cable TV and a full selection of video games. Eve wanted to be wise. Maybe she wanted to have children but knew she didn’t know how. Maybe the beasts were having children and she saw that and felt she needed something more than Dad’s garden to be happy. Maybe she felt unfulfilled? I believe she was. She NEEDED to multiply and replenish the earth. She NEEDED IT. Adam wanted to remain foolish and stay rent free in Pop’s garden but he wanted even more to be with his wife so he followed her. God made sure that would change. Adam was to lead the way from now on. Was that a penalty? Maybe. But does it really matter to MY eternal salvation? Nope.

    I have just never liked the way my great great grandmom, Eve, was treated by the Catholics or the Protestants. I don’t like how they treated Mary, Christ’s wife, either. I feel women are far more important than I was taught or how the Catholics or Protestants or Evangelicals treated them. But I don’t believe that giving them priesthood authority will make things better. Men have failed again to lead the way and instead have become carnal and just plain mean. Not Christlike at all.

    I have been repeatedly hired as a legal researcher because I think outside the box legally and in doing so win cases that were believed to be impossible to even stand a chance. I do very different things with the oath because most people don’t realize its great power in a courtroom. I just think that most Christians are just mean to women. Even Christian women are mean. I never liked it. Maybe because my father beat my mother. I come from a history of abusive men and I just abhor it.

    Maybe it is because my wife, at 18, was the one that told me that if I ever filed a Tax return again she would divorce me and then I had to take the lead so I know how Adam felt. Do the RIGHT thing or lose your wife. She is a VERY spiritual woman. Amazing. Maybe that is how I justify my beliefs. Our religion is our own. That is for certain.

  •' Christopher says:

    I believe that the Pope is the earthly successor of Peter but I believe the authority was taken away along the lines of probably around the 2nd or 3rd century and after that the Catholic Church was no more than an earthly kingdom with a political leadership that originated with Peter. The Orthodox lost it too.

    I have no problem with you believing what you believe. It is your God given right. I do have a problem with Catholic history of force concerning religion. I would have to agree with Sam Adams on this.

    I do not believe that the priesthood authority is available to an evil man. I understand that you must because of the obvious history of the Catholic priesthood and Popes but I reject such as morally abhorrent and unjust. Just like I reject Socialism. If I am wrong I am damned but if your God is God then I reject Him as an evil tyrant. So I guess I am no better and maybe worse than Lucifer under Catholic doctrine. But there is just no way I can believe it was moral what the Popes did in history. There is no way my God, my eternal father in heaven would allow them to act in His Holy Name. And evil tree cannot have good fruit.

    My wife was a cradle Catholic until at the age of 8 when she went on a hunger strike because the nuns and priest at her school could not explain the Trinity in a way that she could accept. Her parents were told to never bring her back again. She believes that Christ is not one leaf on the three leaf clover but literally the Son of the Father and that they are separate beings with physical bodies. Christ didn’t ask Himself to remove the cup. He asked His physical dad.

    I was never a Catholic although I have studied Catholicism when I was in a religious crisis. Since then I have because they are anti-Communist although many members embrace the religion of Communism like they embrace abortion, pedophilia and contraceptives. But the doctrine remains anti-Communist. I like their doctrines more than Protestants or Evangelicals and I abhor Calvinists. That is the worst religion on earth. Satanism is more acceptable than Calvinism. Atheism is a better religion.

    So on the doctrine or principle or whatever you Catholics call it concerning Mary, I don’t know such specifics as I reject Catholicism as a fallen Church so didn’t study it enough to know. But then your Pope would call me a heretic or a cultist or damned or… So I don’t worry about that. I would rather to go to Hell than the Catholic Heaven so I am fine with it. My choice.

    My belief is that Mary, Christ’s mother, is God the Father’s wife and will become as one of the female gods of whom Eve was made in their image when the next earth rolls onto the production line.

    We are to be like the Father according to Christ and so the ladies will be like their Spiritual mom. I could be wrong. But I seldom am.

  •' Christopher says:

    And since He had the power to remove Himself from the Cross, was it not suicide? That has always bothered me. But then He did ask His Dad to remove that cup and the Big Boss Daddy did not allow it. So Jesus’ Dad required Him to stay up there. Maybe it was to satisfy a higher eternal law that mere humans do not need to follow. After all, only Christ could do it. Not any of us.

    Rome didn’t convict Christ. The Jews did. Christ was killed and His blood is on the Jewish leadership not the Romans.

  •' Christopher says:

    Kennedy. The only good president of the 20th Century. Maybe only Washington, Jefferson and Madison were any better and that is a question. Bush and Obama are nothing but traitors and scum. But then which ones were not besides a few early ones and Kennedy?

  •' Christopher says:

    And you have that on what authority? LOL. The HOPE channel?

  •' Christopher says:

    It is called Fascism or Corporatism and the Rothschilds told us what they were going to do to us clear back in the 1860s and they have done it.

    Go SPACEX. Why should I have to pay for NASA. Yes NASA. No NASA. I have never much liked the sound of that.

    Then SPACEX can claim Mars and the U.S. government can take it with their eminent domain powers.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    It is more just probabilities. There is a one in ten trillion chance a giant asteroid will hit us this week and cause massive damage around the globe. There is a higher chance more like 50% that it will hit us some time between 10 million and 200 million years from now. We can prevent the possibility this year for about a trillion dollars. In 2 or 3 hundred years we could have lots of people in space finding everything with hundreds of space telescopes, and have the space vehicles that can travel anywhere in the solar system and do the necessary job, and for less than a million dollars.

  •' Wendy Johnson says:

    Thanks for the clarification 🙂

    Would have helped if I’d been the one in seminary, instead of getting most of what my ex learned, filtered through his perceptions probably. Process is a subject I would have been drawn to if it had been me in seminary, because I loved having my beliefs challenged. But I decided very early on in the process that I wasn’t ready to be in the pulpit leading other people. I had too many questions of my own, and when I sat down and studied, it just led me to more questions. I did the sermons for about a year once, for a teeny-tiny Friends Meeting House in Central Indiana, and that worked, but mostly because everyone there was much older and wiser than I was, so I could just explain historical context for whatever part of the Bible we were looking at, and give them a few of the most prevalent interpretations, and they were fine with coming to their own conclusions.

  •' Kelly says:

    Kudos for the 42 gag, btw. I agree: it’s sad that Ken Ham doesn’t know science, but it’s a travesty of global proportions he doesn’t even understand the book he reads.

  •' jvkohl says:

    Re: “It’s this lack of curiosity that makes biblical literalism so damaging, scientifically, socially, and politically speaking, for once we have all the answers there’s really no need to explore, discover, or create.”

    For comparison: Evolutionary theorists think that neo-Darwinism answers all their questions. This simple-minded statement may be the best example of their answer to questions about the biodiversity manifested in morphological and behavioral phenotypes in species from microbes to man: “…genomic conservation and constraint-breaking mutation is the ultimate source of all biological innovations and the enormous amount of biodiversity in this world.”

    Those who are curious are left to wonder if genomic conservation and constraint-breaking mutation is the ultimate source of all biological innovations and the enormous amount of biodiversity in the UNIVERSE, or if alien life somehow seeded life on this planet and mutations somehow happened to result in the creation of extant biodiversity.

    That’s the problem with Evolutionary Theorists. They think they can claim that experimentally unsupported theories explain what Biblical Literalists accept based on their faith. If evolutionary theory is the answer, there is no need to explore links between ecological variation and ecological adaptations that obviously occur via conserved molecular mechanisms of cell type differentiation in species from microbes to man that evolutionary theorists believe “evolved.”

  •' Craptacular says:

    So pick the natural disaster of your choice…volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, tsunamis, etc. Humanity has plenty on its plate without inventing reasons to kill or even discriminate against segments of the population.

    Colonization of other planets/planetoids is the only viable means of ultimate survival for our species. As long as all our eggs are in a single basket (earth), we are vulnerable to extinction (like all those plants/creatures that we are burning for fuel now). And it will take the resources and talents of EVERYONE, not just a single nation or company, to get enough of us off this dust speck to raise the odds of survival in our favor.

    If we don’t want to end up as fossil fuel for the next intelligence that evolves on our planet, we need to put the petty bickering aside and get the frick off this rock.

  •' Luis Gutierrez says:

    I am never infallible. Peace be with you!

  •' Jim Reed says:

    A large number of people in space, or on other planets or moons, will NOT come from an exodus of millions of people from earth. A relatively small number of people will move from earth. They will multiply up there, and almost all of that large space population will come from descendants in space and not just moving off this planet. When there are resources available, humans can easily multiply a trillion to one in a thousand years. This will become even more apparent if we eventually move to other stars. Any place we touch, we will almost immediately fill to and use up all available resources (a thousand years which is short in the time required to move across the galaxy). This means we will still need contraception on earth because it costs more to move through space than it does to multiply in place.

    There is another reason why there won’t just be a mass immigration from earth to space. Once we have established a presence in space, we will start our split into two separate species. The optimal human in space will be different from the optimal human on earth, so these populations will start to diverge, and they will diverge rapidly as far as evolution goes. This will be because of the huge numbers of people involved, and because of the big pressures put on us because of the major differences of what works best down here and what works best up there.

  •' Smknws says:

    ,Adam & Eve were two microscopic organisms says the Vatican .. 3 popes said so .
    yet they still teach Adam & Eve and talk about sin Satan & hell as if it was true .

    the descendants are more than 7 billion and the earth is supposed to be the garden of Eden time to take care of it .

  •' Craptacular says:

    Looking through my post, I don’t see anything about “mass exodus.” I said it will take everyone’s talent and resources to make colonization viable, not to move everyone off the planet.

    Your reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired and I fear any further response I make will only lead to more typing on my part…and I feel no compunction to assist you with your reading skills.

  •' lorasinger says:

    Think about it, Christopher. The “Jews” who convicted Jesus were the priests but did you also know that those “priests” were appointed by Rome to function as peacekeepers whose job it was, was to discourage rebellion? Now if Jesus proved himself to be the leader/messiah that Jews were expecting, one of his tasks was to drive the oppressors (Romans) out of Israel. If the Jews accepted him as their leader and all banded around him, the Romans would have major rebellion on their hands and the priests would be out of job. As well there is the fact that there never was a custom of releasing a prisoner at Passover either on the part of the Romans or the Jews. That is an entirely Christian invention.
    In Jesus world (at least 30 years before Christianity) human sacrifice was forbidden and the Jews (that would include Jesus who upheld Torah law) believed that each person had to atone for their own sins – that nobody could do it for him – otherwise you would see, in Leviticus, directions for sacrificing humans too, but you don’t. It wasn’t done by Jews

  •' SgtCedar says:

    Don’t feel bad. After spending 4+ years in seminary I ended up working for the state as a social worker.

  •' lorasinger says:

    I’m “telling you this” because you are asking or it appears you’re asking and what I’m telling you is based on the customs, laws and understanding of the people of that time. It doesn’t support what the gospel writers wrote almost two generations later while manufacturing the Christianity of today, certainly, but what was possible in that time period and what later developed in Rome are two different things.

    And yes, Jesus own apostles, the so-called Jewish Christians, believed him to be a man, just as later followers of theirs, Ebionites also believed him to be a man. The concept of men-gods didn’t exist in that land in that time. It is for this reason that the Ebionites were declared heretics, hunted down and butchered by Paul’s Roman Catholics from Rome.

    NO, I’m not comparing the two religions in terms of value. What I’m saying is that with Christianity, two very different beliefs, Judaism and Roman mythology, have been woven together in a syncretistic attempt to combine two unlikes into one unbelievable story and only if you know what one is, can you unwind the myth and legend that also exists.

    Ham says stupid things because it brings in the money and that is the motive for most televangelists of today be they Ham, Hagee, Robertson or Comfort.

    Judaism says nothing about aliens any more than Christianity does, but it doesn’t say anything about what was beyond its realm of knowledge of that time. It doesn’t speak of any of the great events or places after it was written because it’s only a book, written by superstitious men with limited knowledge.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    I wasn’t trying to accuse you of saying that, but just using the conversation to make the point I wanted to make. Humans will leave behind where they were, and wherever they go, they will expand there. I think the point about us splitting into two species is important, and something you don’t hear talked about. Gravity is an interesting topic. Gravity works for us, but it doesn’t have to be full earth gravity. Half or one third or less would work even better for us. Lower gravity systems would be more economical, and would spur big evolutionary changes. Over time we will evolve into something approaching a zero G species. Atmospheric pressure is another big area of change. Over time we could evolve into lower and lower pressure environments, also with big economic savings. Just something interesting to consider.

  •' Wendy Johnson says:


    Yeah, you know the ones I really don’t get, are the ones who give up on their past beliefs completely, and they still go on preaching them. Studying to be a pastor is great, but unless you work for a super-conservative church, you’re sort of expected to think for yourself, and then what happens if your thinking takes you away from the faith you’re preaching. I think I would make a fairly decent Unitarian minister now, but that’s after having been an atheist and an agnostic, on-again/off-again, most of the time I was attending various United Methodist churches with my ex and afterward. I’m just barely getting to a place where I am comfortable calling myself any kind of a “believer” at all.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    That sounds good, but it is a dangerous way to talk. The problem is others will think it sounds good, and then they will start to think it might be true, and then they will gather in groups with others who think it might be true, and then they will convince each other it actually is true, and then they will go out to recruit more to believe because the more who believe it, the more sure they can be it is true, but eventually they will come across some who think they are crazy, and then they will have to make it into a political battle because it takes more and more growth to keep it seeming true in the face of the skeptics. History shows us those kinds of religions tend to follow this path.

  •' cranefly says:

    Are you LDS, or some kind of LDS? Whenever you describe your beliefs, they sound a lot like Mormonism, or maybe fundamentalist Mormonism. Just curious.

  •' lorasinger says:

    Since Jews have been commanded to not change, add to or remove even a letter of “The Law” – Torah – the first five books of the bible, I doubt that they edited anything.

    Most likely the confusion comes from the Jewish use of words that appear to represent a plural but are, in fact, singular. This is an article that deals with that:

    Quote: “Christians see that the word in the verse used for ‘Gd’ is the word ‘Eloheem.’ They point out that the ending of ‘eem’ indicates a plural in the Hebrew language, and they are right:
    usually the ‘eem’ at the end of the word indicates a plural. For example, ‘sefer’ is ‘book,’ while ‘sefareem’ is ‘books.’

    However, not all words with ‘eem’ on the end are plural. For example, the word ‘mayeem’ is ‘water,’ and not ‘waters.’ One would not say, ‘pass the waters,’ one would say ‘pass the water’
    as in English. The same is true for the word, ‘paneem,’ which means ‘face’ and not ‘faces.’

    In the above examples, in order for the nouns to be understood as plural, whatever verbs and adjectives that apply to ‘paneem’ and
    ‘mayeem’ would have to match, and also be plural. However, the verb in Genesis 1:1 is Bara, and is not in the plural, which would be Bar-u. This means that the Hebrew does not recognize the word for Gd, Eloheem, to be in the plural.”

  •' cranefly says:

    Apostle is Greek for missionary, not leader, and there is at least one female apostle named in the Bible. Though if my theory is correct and you’re Mormon, you probably use the KJV, in which case the female name (Junia) has been changed to male (Junias).

    It’s not God who wants female apostles to be hidden. Though if you’re Mormon, or at least if you believe (as you wrote somewhere below) in something akin to the Great Apostasy that Mormonism teaches (whereby the Catholic Church lost the priesthood) you clearly must believe that God allows many important things to be hidden, for many, many centuries.

    The leadership of men has hurt women profoundly, in innumerable ways. It’s insulting to call it a “blessing” that men in patriarchal churches exercise dominance over women’s lives and control their access to salvation, as they do in every church that believes in literal priesthood ordinances.

    Also, if you’re saying that every male is punished for Adam’s failure, that goes against the LDS Articles of Faith (though it does seem to me that Mormons often completely disregard the Articles of Faith, like they were just a front for outsiders). But maybe you’re not LDS.

  •' Christopher says:

    I am the Founder of The First Christian Fellowship of Eternal Sovereignty. I have my own religion.

  •' Christopher says:

    You are so right, Jim. Ir could be like the Democrats and the Republicans? What an awful thought. I’d better be careful.

    Of course that is what the prophet Karl Marx did and look at the many religions that have grown out of his religious ideas. The newest one is “The Civic Religion of Positive Rights.” They are obviously making “political battles because it takes more and more growth to keep it seeming true in the face of the skeptics.”

    They have even admitted they are looking for members. The religion is called Public Rights/Private Conscience Project and it’s directed by Kara Loewentheil. And what are they going to do?:

    • mobilize scholars, lawyers, and advocates in an effort to reframe the debate so that compliance with civil rights norms is seen as compatible with faith-based doctrines;

    So they are trying to change other people’s religious belief through legislation, court rulings and public pressure. Scary stuff. And they want other “persons” to pay for their religious doctrine according to their High Priestess Kara Loewentheil
    So watch out. This new religion is coming your way and they are proselytizing and have big money with the Ford Foundation backing them. Hold on to your checkbook. They want the government to collect tithing for them.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    Were they commanded not to change the books before or after they wrote them? In order to write the creation stories, they had to pull together the creation stories from the different tribes and try to fit them together, and sometimes they didn’t fit very well.

  •' Christopher says:

    The Protestants teach of the falling away. It is why they are Protestants. If you are not a Catholic or of the Orthodox faith then you believe that the Catholics et al. lost the right to lead God’s church.

    If you are correct and Apostle means “missionary” then USA Today says that the Mormons have over 22,000 female apostles.

    My wife is definitely a “missionary” for our religion.

    God changes His laws to accommodate for His followers abilities. Adam had a different set of rules than Noah who had a different set of rules than Moses who had a different set of rules than Christ who even had a different set of rules than Peter.

    I agree that the religious leadership of men in all cults (that includes Catholicism and every other faith) has hurt women profoundly. They have hurt men and children too. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

    I am saying that God placed the leadership upon Adam knowing power corrupts because Adam did not do what he should have done. Is it a punishment? Maybe not a good choice of a word. But then I don’t believe that being removed from the Garden was a penalty. More a growing up experience. Is being taught to read a punishment. It felt like one to me when I was young.

    But since the “leadership” has “hurt women profoundly, in innumerable ways” what do you believe a just God will do to the men that hurt His daughters when they were to be Christlike leaders? They could have been glorified for taking the mantel of leadership and using it for the benefit of women and instead they abused that authority. The women martyrs will be blessed for their trials. God is just.

    If the Catholics do have the Priesthood then why haven’t they fixed this problem, as you see it? And are Nuns not apostles?

    Mormons often disregard far more than their articles of faith. Senators Harry Reid and Dean Heller of Nevada and Orrin Hatch of Utah disregard practically everything the Mormons believe. They are, after all, Socialists/Fascists. Few Jews follow the 10 Commandments or the law of Moses. Evangelicals are Corporate for profit for Christ organizations. Most Catholics have not followed the Pope in over a century. The Kennedys were Catholics for a prime example. The ancient Israelites demanded a king in direct opposition to God’s will. Shall I go on?

    The Calvinists don’t have to do anything because they are saved since their conception so they really can’t violate God’s law or do anything worthwhile either.

    Like I stated. I have my own religion. And it morphs as I learn. Churches are for meeting with like minded people. I have been unable to find such a place in a very ling time. Religion is what you are and shown by what you do….your fruit. I have known atheists that were better Christians in practice than most people that claim the Name. Matt 7:20 Yes, just as you can identify a tree by its fruit, so you can identify people by their actions. Amen to that.

  •' Christopher says:

    And you also.

  •' Christopher says:

    And God not allowing men to get pregnant amounts to the vilification of males. And why did God allow women to be better at multitasking. And of course they are better with their fingers with small things like computer assembly and maintenance. It is obvious that God hates all of us.

  •' Christopher says:

    The Church, any church, it no different than a business or a home. If the people running it are not holy then neither is the home or business. It is just another wretched hive of scum and villainy.

  •' cranefly says:

    Mormons use “apostle” to mean prophet/leader, which i think is very silly, though Catholics often do it too.

    I think Protestants tend to believe that the Catholic Church never had magic priesthood powers to begin with. Martin Luther believed in the priesthood of all believers, a priesthood without anyone set apart to control the salvation of the rest. Something the Catholic Church first denounced as a heresy then little-by-little snuck into their own doctrine, softening the literalism of the priesthood magic without doing away with it completely.

    Anyway, I guess if we’re different religions there’s no point in arguing. My only point is that I don’t think the biblical case against female leadership is all that strong, especially taking known changes to the Bible into consideration.

  •' cranefly says:

    I don’t know what you’re talking about.

  •' Christopher says:

    The temple for sacrifices was no longer needed as Christ had come and been sacrificed for the sins of all mankind.

    God ordered Abraham to sacrifice his son so that Abraham could understand how God the Father felt about what His son would have to do to save the rest of his children.

    The Jewish leadership were indeed Roman CIA NSA FBI agents and were corrupted by power. When it was realized that Jesus wasn’t there to free them from the Romans then they needed to be rid of this troublemaker. The way it occurred was a fulfillment of prophesy. God had a plan and stuck to it. I certainly do not understand why it was necessary. If it was necessary then that means that God must be bound by eternal law. I believe He is although I have not been allowed access to that set of law books yet.

  •' Christopher says:

    “Judaism and Roman mythology, have been woven together in a syncretistic attempt to combine two unlikes into one unbelievable story and only if you know what one is, can you unwind the myth and legend that also exists.”

    That is exactly what the Catholic Church did and why so much scripture of the 1st and 2nd centuries was not included in the Bible we are left with today.

  •' Christopher says:

    You don’t really believe that oil comes from fossils…do you?

  •' Christopher says:

    Venus is a new earth in embryo. I wonder when God will have it ready. It needs more meteorites. It’s only 97% the size of earth so far. Maybe when the water is added that will add the mass.

  •' Christopher says:

    Better odd than evolution… by chance.

  •' Anthony_McCarthy says:

    The whole thing is based on a totally bogus PR stunt by NASA, like those Martian squigglies twenty years back. Ken Ham is as addicted to getting his puss in the news as any has-been Hollywood figure or Richard Dawkins, to repeat myself. This is non-news from non-news.

  •' SgtCedar says:

    I suggest taking this discussion off this blog. I would be glad to continue the conversation. If you want you can contact me at This is a disposable email so I do not care it others see it.

  •' Christopher says:

    God did not make men and women to be equal. Women have duties. Men were given others. But women want to take away our duty while keeping what God gave women to themselves. Why was God so cruel to men as to not let them give birth to their own children? I understand that a quarter to third of children do not belong to the husband the woman was married to/living with, when she became pregnant. At least women KNOW the baby is theirs. Why are men and women so different in so many ways? Men and women are not equal. But the Feminist movement wants to take away men’s “ordained” duty. They seek to over throw the commands and will of God. They seek to rise above men not to be equal to them.

  •' Christopher says:

    The Jews/Israelites were commanded not to have a king too. There are many examples in the Bible of missing scripture. From the book of Jasher to the Sayings of the Seers. People in power do not let the commands of God get in the way of their agendas.

  •' Christopher says:

    No they didn’t. Moses wrote them from what he was given by God. Then they were treated like all scriptures. They were looked at by the people in power at the time and if they did not fit with their current agenda they were changed by the men that had control of them. The Catholics did it with great determination burning the books they disagreed with or that hurt their position and murdering those that kept or wrote them. The Jews did the same thing. The writing style analysis is pretty clear that such things occurred.

  •' Christopher says:

    Mormons use it to mean special witness of Christ. But that does not mean they do not have over 22,000 “apostles” called lady missionaries according to USA Today. Perhaps men are so weak they need an ordination to be an apostle while women can do it because of their nature and God given gifts. But feminist want everything men have even to their own detriment.

    The Biblical case against or for anything is very weak. It is an agenda created book used to control the masses. I read it like I would the Warren Commission report or the 9/11 official report or a molestation investigation by the Catholic Church or the IRS testifying before Congress about their missing Emails. There was an agenda and it was followed, the truth be damned.

  •' lorasinger says:


    St. Augustine said: There are many things that are true which it is not useful for the vulgar crowd to know; and certain things which although they are false, it is expedient for the people to believe otherwise.

    One of the main church fathers responsible for translating the bible, Eusabius, admits to this:But we shall introduce into this history in general only those events
    which may be useful first to ourselves and afterwards to posterity.

    St. Jerome said: There is nothing so easy as by sheer volubility to deceive a common crowd or an uneducated congregation: such most admire what they fail to understand.
    The first Catholic church was carefully crafted as a means of control and in fact, differed in very little way from the cults of Dionysus or Mithra.

  •' Christopher says:

    And another viewpoint

    25 Wherefore, these things go forth from the Jews in purity unto the Gentiles, according to the truth which is in God.

    26 And after they go forth by the hand of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, from the Jews unto the Gentiles, thou seest the formation of that great and abominable church, which is most abominable above all other churches; for behold, they have takenaway from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away.

    27 And all this have they done that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men.

    28 Wherefore, thou seest that after the book hath gone forth through the hands of the great and abominable church, that there are many plain and precious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the Lamb of God.

    29 And after these plain and precious things were taken away it goeth forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles; and after it goeth forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles, yea, even across the many waters which thou hast seen with the Gentiles which have gone forth out of captivity, thou seest—because of the many plain and precious things which have been taken out of the book, which were plain unto the understanding of the children of men, according to the plainness which is in the Lamb of God—because of these things which are taken away out of the gospel of the Lamb, an exceedingly great many do stumble, yea, insomuch that Satan hath great power over them.

  •' lorasinger says:

    No, Christopher, the temple went down in 70AD, a full forty years after Jesus was dead. I’ve told you already that the concept of human sacrifice was forbidden to ALL Jews and Jesus would have known that. At best, he would have been taken for a pagan if he had even suggested it.l

    God ordered Abraham to sacrifice his son, but did you also noticed that when he was satisfied that Abraham would have carried it out, there happened to be a handy PERFECT sacrificial animal in the thicket. It’s a parable to show Abraham’s obedience.

    You wrote: ” God the Father felt about what His son would have to do to save the rest of his children” – Your triune god maybe, Christopher, but not the god of Abraham and the Jews who forbid human sacrifice, OR the drinking of blood, whether symbolic or not, which is a pagan custom. Jews are forbidden to drink/eat blood. And that is what makes the whole scenario unbelievable. The Christian story and the Jewish customs and laws are completely opposite. The story as Christians tell it, was impossible to have occurred.
    Christopher, you sound like a nice boy but you are too full of dogma and not enough history so that you can tell reality from fairy stories.

  •' lorasinger says:

    Not true. Herod was the king but since his line was that of the Idumean converts, he wasn’t considered to be a Jew as well as the fact that his origins were in Rome and he was appointed by Rome.

  •' lorasinger says:

    I would think after the five books were complete to be called the Torah or The Law which would be at least by 250 BC when Torah was translated into the Greek Septuagint for the library in Alexandria. Jewish tradition/history put them back much earlier than that.

    I would think that the Torah isn’t much different than the rest of the bible, written by a number of writers, each with a different slant. Witness Luke’s date for Jesus birth at 6AD while Matthew dates it at before 4BC while Herod was alive. I doubt that Moses having written it is tradition unless he had the precognitive abilities to “see” his own death.

  •' lorasinger says:

    That should be – I doubt that Moses having written it is ANYTHING MORE THAN tradition unless he had the precognitive abilities to “see” his own death.

  •' lorasinger says:

    Christopher, please give me examples or links to support that Jews ever burned holy scriptures? I don’t think you can unless you have supporting history outside of the Jewish bible that goes back 3000 years. Even the Talmud wasn’t written then. There isn’t any “writing style analysis” to support that theory either.

  •' Christopher says:


    I don’t have a triune god.

    Abraham got to feel what Christ’s Father wanted him to understand because of what Christ’s Father would go though. And as I wrote, the eternal law could be very different than the law the Israelites, (more than just the two tribes now called the Jews). The Mosaic law was not the law of Enoch.

    You believe in a limited standard and a limited written history. My religion is not so limited. I don’t trust the Jews or the Catholics so I expanded to the scriptures of the world. I use the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Nag Hammadi Library, the Veda, the Book of Mormon and more.

    The following is alleged to be from 100 years before Christ’s death and is alleged to be from Israelite prophets. They believe the type of Christ’s sacrifice was necessary but “not be a human sacrifice; but it must be an infinite and eternal sacrifice.” As I wrote, it was a higher law sacrifice that we do not understand because we don’t have THAT law book. So what you told me already does not fit into the history I have read.

    It is from the Book of Alma. That is an interesting name since it was discovered in the Dead Sea scrolls as a male Hebrew name and that was not known to science or the Jews until it was discovered in the Dead Sea Scrolls. It speaks of two Israelite prophets that are not found in Old World Jewish and Catholic text. More missing prophets so their agendas can be kept.

    Alma 34:8 And now, behold, I will testify unto you of myself that these things are true. Behold, I say unto you, that I do know that Christ shall come among the children of men, to take upon him the transgressions of his people, and that he shall atone for the sins of the world; for the Lord God hath spoken it.

    9 For it is expedient that an atonement should be made; for according to the great plan of the Eternal God there must be an atonement made, or else all mankind must unavoidably perish; yea, all are hardened; yea, all are fallen and are lost, and must perish except it be through the atonement which it is expedient should be made.

    10 For it is expedient that there should be a great and last sacrifice; yea, not a sacrifice of man, neither of beast, neither of any manner of fowl; for it shall not be a human sacrifice; but it must be an infinite and eternal sacrifice.

    11 Now there is not any man that can sacrifice his own blood which will atone for the sins of another. Now, if a man murdereth, behold will our law, which is just, take the life of his brother? I say unto you, Nay.

    12 But the law requireth the life of him who hath murdered; therefore there can be nothing which is short of an infinite atonement which will suffice for the sins of the world.

    13 Therefore, it is expedient that there should be a great and last sacrifice, and then shall there be, or it is expedient there should be, a stop to the shedding of blood; then shall the law of Moses be fulfilled; yea, it shall be all fulfilled, every jot and tittle, and none shall have passed away.

  •' Christopher says:

    I am writing of what happened with Samuel when the Israelites demanded a king when the prophet told them that was not what God wanted.

    1 Samuel 8:7

  •' crash2parties says:

    “Adam’s sin affected the whole universe.”

    What universe?
    Ohhh, you mean the one posited and confirmed by
    (wait for it…)

  •' crash2parties says:

    I’m still trying to figure out if he was born in Bethlehem or Nazareth…

  •' crash2parties says:

    Hey! What about Lilith? You know, Eve 1.0? Made from the same dust as Adam, her only Sin was refusing to be sexually subservient to Adam. For that she was kicked out & made to watch her children die, one per day.

    Lovely storybook. Great values.

  •' crash2parties says:

    Good luck getting the SCOTUS to certify that, they’ve gotten really stingy with the designation lately…

  •' The_Physeter says:

    So you didn’t have anything at all interesting to say, but you thought I sounded significantly Christian to be a good subject for your daily anti-Christian argument. Got it.

  •' Christopher says:

    I have been studying religion and scriptures of many religions since I was a teenager. In those studies, not at my finger tips today, I have read about those “writing styles.” A 20 second search gave me this but it is incomplete:

    Could the ones I read have been in error? Of course. I trust no one and no science as definitive. You do not know when the Israelites had their beliefs first written down. Moses was an Egyptian and they had a written language. Did Abraham have one? Did Noah? Did Adam? You have what is believed and discovered today and that changes daily. Clovis man was from China in 1990 A.D. Now he is probably from Europe. Neanderthals did not breed with humans in 1980 A.D. and now they did with Europeans having the greatest amount of Neanderthal’s DNA. In 1960 A.D. Columbus was the first European in the Americas. Now we KNOW the Vikings were here long before Ole’ Chris. In 1970 A.D. Alma was NOT ever used as a Hebrew male name but now the Dead Sea scrolls says it was a male Hebrew name. Shall I go on with what we didn’t know?

    What will we learn tomorrow? What happens if we find the Ark of the Covenant? What happens when the pre-classic Maya writing style discovered in El Mirador is translated? What was in the Maya Library burned by the Catholics? What happens if we find a hidden library like Alexandria or a hidden Maya library and everything we believe is turned on its head? I am WIDE OPEN to new possibilities. Are you?

  •' The_Physeter says:

    They all say he was born in Bethlehem. The question you’re thinking of is whether Joseph lived in Bethlehem before, and moved to Nazareth later (Matthew) or whether they were just visiting and stayed in a barn because the hotels were full (Luke).

  •' Christopher says:

    What about her?

  •' The_Physeter says:

    That’s an interesting theology. It’s something how everyone can find something they want to believe.

    You are right, you are very unusual. I’ve never met anyone who believes in Adam and Eve, but doesn’t believe in Genesis (which says God was angry at their sin).

    I still think that’s a bizarre view on women. You’re saying Eve was the responsible one, and as a *reward* she got the gift of never being allowed to be responsible again–having to give leadership over to the less responsible one, the Adam who ” wanted to stay at home and live in Dad’s basement with the cable TV” according to you.

    You say “I do believe that you have more freedom when you are less restrained by duty and regulations. But…” Your but makes no sense. I believe freedom is best for everybody. I don’t think anyone is best served by being forced into a position of subservience. Women who are adults should be treated like adults; it’s ludicrous to think their men are responsible for them, as if they were children.

  •' The_Physeter says:

    Are you blind? Haven’t you seen the Jesus symbol that’s been in use since Roman times, and now is commonly found on bumper stickers? It’s an omen!

  •' Christopher says:

    SCOTUS doesn’t certify religions. Congress certainly cannot. Since the 14th neither can States. SCOTUS just ruled that for profit corporations can have religious protections under the RFRA. And we have been recognized as a “religion” by Nevada even though they really cannot do so.

  •' crash2parties says:

    I just felt she was being left out again. 🙂

  •' crash2parties says:

    My point being that it seems the legal qualifications for a “church” (aka an organized religion in the eyes of the law) seem to favor those that accumulate and horde power while shutting out smaller ones that may only have a few members, minding their own business.

  •' crash2parties says:

    Perhaps I should have worded it, “of Bethlehem or Nazareth”. But while we’re on the topic, maybe you can help me figure something out. You know all those “begets” that go through the men? And how the Savior was to be in that line? How does that not get broken with a virgin birth?

  •' The_Physeter says:

    I don’t know about that one. I’ve never heard much about it. Both genealogies of Jesus purport to trace the lineage of Joseph, but they say Joseph wasn’t really his father. So doesn’t that mean Jesus wasn’t really a Son of David like he was supposed to be?

    The genealogies also disagree on who was Joseph’s father. Matthew says Jacob was the father of Joseph, but Luke starts with Jesus and works backwards: “the son (as it was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli…” I’ve been told that one of these genealogies actually traces Joseph’s father-in-law instead of his father–in other words, it traces Mary’s line. But no one has ever explained to me how this could be true when the Bible SAYS both genealogies are for Joseph.

  •' lorasinger says:

    Certainly I’m open to new possibilities provided that they aren’t something far out like Ham’s baby dinosaurs. Everything on earth is subject to natural laws and there are limits to what is possible.

    I don’t know whether Alma was ever used as either a female or male name but I do know that almah indicated a young woman with a variant for young men as well. There is a good concise entry in Wikipedia that is pretty accurate.

    I really DO wish we could find something of the Alexandrian library. From old descriptions it seems that a treasure in knowledge was lost when it went down.

    If one goes back to the time of Jesus, most boys learned their “letters” by studying Torah and very little else. Most of what was passed down was by oral means with the writing mainly in the hands of scribes and priesthood so I would think this is why there are many contradictions in the bible itself with its having at least 40 writers all at the tail ends of a virtual telephone game of legend. One thing is certain and that at least the first five books of the Jewish bible had been put to paper or parchment or whatever by 250 BC in order to have written copies to translate from.

    One nice thing about not always having the answers based on nebulous belief is that we DO have that opportunity to take in new facts, always with the possibility that it will change the whole picture somewhat.

  •' Christopher says:

    I don’t need Genesis to believe in Adam and Eve. There are more references to them than in just Genesis. Moses was only one source.

    Fathers often say they are angry even when they are proud. And as I have stated, you don’t know God was angry with Adam and Eve. I know that is what the Bible states and how many hands have had the ability

    You have a view of women that is not eternal. Life is a twinkling of an eye. Your view is all about here and now. I don’t view my life that way.

    Mark 9:35 And he sat down, and called the twelve, and saith unto them, If any man desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of all.

    Christ was the greatest of all servants serving all mankind. So Christ has made women the servants and therefore they shall be first? Men are on the short end of that eternal equation. Sorry if you believe Christ made no sense.

    A REAL man would treat his wife with the respect due mother Eve for her brilliant and brave correct choice. A REAL man would treat his wife as a treasure and a miracle. A real man is a servant to his wife. Most men are beasts Not REAL MEN. Real men have joy when they are in service to their wives. Wives have joy when they are in service to their husbands. Women are more natural at serving others. Men are weak in comparison to this great strength Christ gave as a gift to women and that men must learn, that goes against their very nature. To be in charge properly and Christlike is to be a servant.

  •' Christopher says:

    Okay. She is an interesting study. That is for sure.

  •' Christopher says:

    And big Corporations and big money individuals have more of a chance to get “justice.” El Centro using the RFRA proved that a little group can protect themselves from the filth of the Federal Government law enforcement Nazis.

  •' lorasinger says:

    That would be from the Mormon bible? Nephi 13:24-25,28.
    Yet another later religion using Christianity as a base just as Christianity used early pagan myths in its development.

  •' Christopher says:

    Christianity was far out in 32 A.D.

    When my wife told me almost 40 years ago that if I ever filed another tax return she would divorce me I thought she was crazy. Then I had a Spiritual conversion to the truth of her reasoning and the Lord has blessed my path to the knowledge I needed at very turn since then.

    There was an interesting article here on RD discussing the problems created between Aramaic, Hebrew, Latin and Greek during the creation of the writing that became the New Testament.

    Much of today’s law is based upon words like ‘welfare’ that did not mean poor relief in 1787 A.D. So they are based on verbicide. That is why I don’t trust other people’s written scriptures either. I have to have them confirmed by a Spiritual confirmation or they are just theories to me. The Gospel of Judas makes more sense to me Spiritually than much of what Paul is claimed to have written.

  •' lorasinger says:

    Sorry, for some reason I sense quite a young person and I’m going by that. Either that or I’m feeling my age.

    This is the write up I’ve got:
    Mormonism originated in the 1820s in western New York during a period of religious excitement known as the Second Great Awakening.[4] Founded by Joseph Smith, Jr., the faith drew its first converts while Smith was dictating the text of the Book of Mormon from Golden Plates he said he found buried after being directed to their location by an angel. The book described itself as a chronicle of early indigenous peoples of the Americas, portraying them as believing Israelites, who had a belief in Christ many hundred years before his birth. Smith dictated the book of 584 pages over a period of about three months[5] saying that he translated it from an ancient language “by the gift and power of God.
    This puts me in mind of another poster who was a firm believer of a “bible” of sorts which was based on information from aliens.
    My first impression of it is that it is a fine book of science fiction.
    DNA testing has shown that the Indians don’t share DNA with any of the people of the middle east.
    Sorry Christopher, I just can buy it. But then I don’t buy Christianity based on a man-god either. Judaism is acceptable only as a book of history, poetry and the laws of an ancient people.

  •' lorasinger says:

    This doesn’t even warrant a reply, phys.

  •' lorasinger says:

    I see now. Wow, you’re going back a ways. From what I read “Samuel initially appointed his two sons as his successors; however, the Israelites rejected them and insisted on having a king rule over them. Samuel, who is opposed to a king, warns them of the potential negative consequences of such a decision, but at the people’s insistence, asks God for a king. Samuel is told to seek out Saul, an animal herder said to be a head taller than his peers, and anoint him as the first King of Israel.”

    I was thinking at a point much later in time.

  •' lorasinger says:

    Matthew wrote that he was born in Bethlehem (before 4BC) and after the birth the family was forced to flee to Egypt to escape Herod. Luke wrote that he was born in Bethlehem in 6AD and the family returned to Nazareth where Jesus grew up.

    Matthew wrote that this was based on a prophecy in the OT – Micah 5:2.

    “Michah 5:1 says “And you, O Bethlehem of Ephrath, least among the clans of Judah [refering to a clan, not a town], from you shall come forth to rule Israel for Me–one whose origin is from old, from ancient times. ” (JPS–notice the verse has a different number in the Jewish Scriptures.)

    Bethlehem, in the original Hebrew is Beit-Lechem, the house of Lechem (lechem = bread), and can refer to a city or clan. In this case, since the text says clan, it means clan. It does not matter what city the Messiah is born in, just what clan he is from. Since Jesus was claimed not to be Joseph’s son, he is not a descendant of David or Solomon and, therefore, not from the clan Bethleham of Ephrath.”

  •' lorasinger says:

    A Jewish mother can’t give lineage. The Jewish father can give lineage ONLY to a natural son, NOT to an adopted one. An adopted child can inherit goods and property but never lineage.

  •' lorasinger says:

    Consider then that Paul never knew Jesus nor did he study under the apostles. Immediately after his “conversion”, according to Paul’s own account (Galatians 1:17), he went into the desert of Arabia for a period, seeking no instruction. He claimed that he had received his knowledge “from no man”.

    He was recalled by the apostles several times for his questionable preaching until the last time in Antioch where he made his final break with the apostles, returning to Rome.

    Later followers of the apostles (Ebionites) called him a heretic and liar because his teachings differed from those of Jesus and the apostles. His teachings are different because he based his dogma on a different source. Jesus taught works, following of the commandments (law) and charity and this was echoed by his brother James. Paul said the law was a curse and was dead and preached “faith”.

    Like you, I question Paul and his teachings.

  •' Christopher says:

    The Mormon bible is the King James version of the Bible or perhaps also the incomplete Joseph Smith’s translation of the Bible that is only similar to the KJV.

    Nephi is found in the Book of Mormon. My study does not agree with Joseph Smith using Christianity as its base. It is unique faith based on Joseph Smith’s revelations that are very different form any other so called Christian faith today that is not based on Smith’s alleged revelations like the FLDS or the former RLDS. I believe there are over 100 LDS “protestant” churches today.

    The Catholics do not even consider their baptism as valid and calls them a cult. The Baptists consider them demonic or Satanic. The Supreme Court did not consider them to be a Christian organization in the late 1800s. Basically they are shunned by most large Christian Churches. From my studies they were at first closer to Islam than Catholicism but after much more study they appear to be closer to the Gnostics than Islam. Gnostics and Catholics have very little in common. I am also closer to the Gnostics than to Catholicism. We shall see where my continued studies and new discoveries lead me.

    One thing is certain. Joseph Smith was an incredible man and the Book of Mormon is proving to be hard to disprove especially with the new discoveries in Yemen and the Arabian peninsula. DNA evidence is their biggest obstacle along with a lot of Mormon myth and culture that make claims that are easily disputed. Those those are not, however, found in the Book of Mormon itself. The Mormon scholars are now world renowned and there have even been article written by Evangelical scientists says the Mormons are WAY ahead of them concerning the debate about the Book of Mormon. I have an odd copy of the Book of Mormon, not published by the Mormons, that is used by a Baptist Minster who believes it is what it clams to be.

    I have tried to dispute it and I have been unable to do so after years of trying. And the evidence keeps growing in its favor. The new discoveries in El Mirador give the book even more credence.

    How could an uneducated backwoods farmer get so many things right that no one could have even guessed at? I have come to trust the Book of Mormon more than the Bible on Christian doctrine. One thing I like in the Book os that there is no question about Christ being a God. It just makes more common sense. Interestingly the Book of Mormon condemns polygamy whereas the Bible NEVER does.

  •' Christopher says:

    I’m 60.

    Don’t buy it. DNA testing is a real problem for the Mormons. But then the new discoveries in Yemen and the Arabian peninsula and discoveries of Hebrew poetry unknown in the 1830s and the use of words from unknown dead languages Smith used make it difficult to just discount it.

    How was it done? His wife said that he would start up exactly where he left off while translating/dictating never even asking where he left off with no notes next to him. He wrote/translated it in 3 month? How? I studied the possibilities for decades and I can’t tell you the trick that he used. Do you know?

    I found it very interesting that a Saudi Arabian. Muslim, Arabic language professor working for Utah University was asked to translate the Book of Mormon into Arabic. He joined the Mormons before he was finished claiming the Book was written in perfect Arabic and not in bad English, something that had long been claimed by critics. How could an uneducated farmer pull that off?

    If Smith was not a prophet he claimed to be he is the greatest scam artist in American history.

    Much like you could say about Christ if He is not what He claimed but on a world-wide level.

    He also claimed his religion would be in every nation of the earth. I understand that is almost true today.

    When you can do it it ain’t braggin’.

    How did he do it? I want to know…I know that.

  •' lorasinger says:

    You wrote: “incomplete Joseph Smith’s translation of the Bible that is only similar to the KJV.”

    The KJV is probably the poorest translation there is but was the common one in usage. “The King James version
    was originally written from 1607 to 1610, with a group of 54 Biblical scholars from only Great Britain. One of the rules in translating the KJV was the committees were to follow an older translation known as the Bishops’ Bible
    (written in 1568) Even most of that translation was based on the Geneva Bible and the Great Bible which were revisions of the Tynedale Bible which was published in 1533.

    What makes all of this significant is that England didn’t have any ancient Greek manuscripts until 1628. The translators were at a disadvantage when trying to decide which passages were in the texts originally, and which were added later by someone who was copying or translating another copy or translation.”

    It seems that, like with Judaism, only the name Jesus is the common factor between Mormonism and Christianity. The Jewish Jesus was a man, the Christian Jesus was a man-god and the next religion, Mormonism still carries on with the man-god figure but lays down a new theatre of action. I agree, they are two different religions.

    The Catholics generally don’t consider anyone else to be valid anyway.

    There again, I can’t buy the idea of a man-god or a man who IS God. To me it is far from embodying common sense but my common sense tells me its an impossibility as well and is closer related to the Dionysus man-god myth of a man-god, born of the great god, Zeus and a virgin Semele, sent to die for mankind and being resurrected on the third day. In fact, I think the Christ myth is directly drawn from such a source.

  •' Christopher says:

    Samuel is told to seek out Saul only after God says the Israelites have rejected God as their king.

    And Saul became everything God warned would occur. The Israelites sold their birthright of individual sovereignty to become subjects to a wicked king. That same basic thing happened in the USA with Social Security and Income taxes where Americans lost their sovereignty and their rights and became subjects. They lost Article III courts and were subjected to Article I courts. They became voluntary tax slaves, just like the ancient Israelites that rejected God. History repeats.

  •' Christopher says:

    For obviously good reasons.

    I had never heard that about the Ebionites. I will research that. My wife would love to know that. She HATES Paul and believes he was a woman hater.

    Faith without works are like hoping you bought your wife a present for her birthday. Hell hath no fury!

  •' Christopher says:

    Joseph Smith said the most correct Bible of the time was the “German bible.” I don’t know which one. It appears to me that the KJV was the de facto Bible of American and the Mormons were so persecuted that they didn’t want to give anyone more reasons to hate them. The Bible to them was completely secondary anyway. In fact it was more like fourth or fifth.

    I am not only a Gnostic type Christian but have strong Wodinist beliefs. The Wodinists believed that Wodin and Thor, etc. were once men and women that became gods because of their great works on earth. So I have no problem with the man-god theory and consider it not only possible but probable.

    I don’t believe Christ to be a myth. Especially since he personally visited my daughter and she gave an amazing description of Him that came rom outside anything she had ever scene in pictures of Him. And that was only one of innumerable miracles in my life linked to Christianity. It is hard to deny Christ when you have seen and heard and felt what I have. It would be like rejecting the stars.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    There was no actual Moses. We know from archaeology the nation of Israel didn’t spend 40 years wandering in the desert because that would have left lots of evidence that is not there. No wandering means no exodus, and no exodus means there wasn’t really a Moses.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    As far as what happened to Paul you have to go by his epistles. Acts is total fiction, like Luke and the rest of the gospels.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    Read the new Richard Carrier book on the historicity of Jesus.

  •' lorasinger says:

    True. Keep in mind that Paul admitted to “stretching things” by appearing to be “under the law” to those who were or not under the law to those who weren’t, asking why he was condemned for preaching his package if it was for the glory of god. Several times he gripes about being condemned as a liar and argues as to why he is not. The bottom line is that there is the question of whether he is a liar, coming both from him and from the Ebionites who called him “Dat Kazav” – the liar.

  •' Smknws says:

    Thank you , for telling it like it is how long will it take for the world to understand .. the books are full of mythological stories .. good for 6000 yrs ago .

  •' Jim Reed says:

    When you look at first century Christianity with a written record from Paul, and Christianity of the following centuries as recorded in the gospels, there seems to be no actual Jesus because Paul only knew of the scripture Jesus of visions, and the later version of Christianity was all made up. Christianity made the mistake of taking a Jesus concept from the first century and trying to make it into an actual person through second century edits, and third and fourth century reinterpretations.. It worked pretty good for almost 2000 years, but it seems to be falling apart now.

  •' lorasinger says:

    I don’t think that the living man, Jesus, or someone like him existed, but only as a fully human messianic candidate which involves no belief in the supernatural.

    The god-man Jesus who comes in visions is another thing and I believe they are a product of the mind experiencing it. These religious experiences including the visions can all be duplicated in the lab by passing an electromagnetic current across the temporal regions of the brain and, in fact, this is essentially what happens with the visions, lights and such experienced during epileptic seizures such as Paul had. The electrical activity in the temporal lobes is the origin of the experience.

  •' jonquilofmars says:

    You mean there’s no such thing as Sto’Vo’Kor?

  •' The_Physeter says:

    That’s what I’m sayin’

  •' Jim Reed says:

    I think a lot of Jewish intellectuals now understand. That is a main source for hearing about these things. Christians might take a little longer.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    No, the universe with the firmament dividing the waters above the firmament from the waters below the firmamant.

  •' crash2parties says:

    Okay, I’m totally curious. What are you referring to, please? 🙂

  •' Jim Reed says:

    Its in the Bible. That was the scientific thinking from back then.

  •' Christopher says:

    “We know from archaeology…” Jim Reed

    Jim, you obviously don’t know anything about the science/art of archeology. I mean like zip zero zilch.

    There were no lions discovered by archeology in Israel until after 1970 A.D. But the Bible says king David, as a boy, killed one so the Bible must have lied UNTIL the lion bones were discovered? RIGHT?

    We KNEW from archeology that Clovis man came from China…Ooops. Nope…looks like Europe now. And only the Bible speaks of Adam a OOOPs…What are these. Why it looks like the Nag Hammadi library of the Gnostics.

    I don’t need to mention the Vikings in America again…Do I? And what of the Chinese being here and the polynesians being here and the Welsh and the Templars and the Romans. The Minoans had a mine in Michigan circa 500 B.C. And where did all those 7 foot tall red headed mummies come from found in Northern Nevada? No one knows so they must not have been found even though they were found.

    Neanderthals died out of course and oops. Nope. We are the Neanderthals according to new DNA evidence. They were just bred out NOW. And you know how hard it is to procreate when you are uglier than most people.

    Wandering in the desert for 100 years let alone 40 wouldn’t leave any evidence at all if they just wandered. Many cities go undiscovered let alone tent dwellers in a desert.

    A CURRENT lack of evidence means that nothing has YET been found.

    There is a story in the Hindu scripture that describes a huge battle between gods but of course the city where the battle was didn’t exist so of course…oops. Look what we found off the coast under 200 feet of water.

    When the Book of Mormon was published there were no rivers running into the Sea from the Arabian peninsula so Ole’ Joe Smith was an obvious liar. And then guess what was found in Yemen? A river running into the Sea in a place that 2,600 years later still looks like it was described in Joe’s Book. And of course a burial site was found with the same name as was mentioned in the book. That Ole’ Joe was quite the magician. Wasn’t he? Maybe he was a time traveler?

    We know the Olmec were around but we have no DNA because the soil is acidic and it eats such evidence so I guess the Olmec didn’t exist even though we have stuff they made? Is that how you think?

    And speaking of the Book of Mormon Ole’ Joe said they were written on gold plates and everyone knew that ancient people didn’t make gold books UNTIL a book with 6 paes of gold written in the lost Etruscan language and dated circa 500 BC was discovered in the late 20th century. And of course the Copper scroll was discovered among the Dead Sea scrolls so Israelites obviously knew how to write on thin sheets of metal to preserve their records but it was not known when Ole” joe was claiming it in the1830s. So was he wrong UNTIL they found evidence or maybe he is still wrong since you don’t like the evidence? And dozens of metal plates with writing have been discovered from the Maya ruins. Many on gold.

    We have barely scratched the Maya cites. We didn’t even suspect until the 1970s that the early Classic Maya built large complex cities and then El Mirador proved to be a 300 BC-100 AD complex large pre-classic Maya city. We don’t even know where all Maya cites are yet.

    Do you know how they discovered in 2013 AD a huge site near the biblical birthplace of Abraham ? “Discovery of the site was first made via satellite” and that was last year. The desert hid a “huge complex” and you claim NOT yet finding evidence of 40 nomadic years in the desert is proof of what was that again? Ridiculous.

    The archeology on the nomadic North American Indians is abysmal. ABYSMAL! In fact it is abysmal on ALL North American Indians. There were probably 50,000,000 inhabitants that disappeared in less than 200 years.

    Do I need to go on about your RIDICULOUS belief that since we haven’t discovered it yet it isn’t there and that we know Moses wasn’t real. RIDICULOUS to claim you “know”!

    Did you know there is evidence of intelligent life on the moon with possible mining sites?

    We haven’t scratched the surface of what we DON’T know about history.

  •' lorasinger says:

    You wrote: “like you could say about Christ if He is not what He claimed but on a world-wide level”

    The “Christ”, Paul’s man god could be in any role that his writers invented for him to be in. They were inventing a new religion. He could say anything, do any kind of miracles and all kinds of things could be claimed for him. Like Superman, but in the ancient times, it is a novel woven around a supernatural figure .

    Not so for the man who would have lived within the limits of his own culture and beliefs. For the man, walking on water and raising the dead was impossible because he was limited by the bounds of natural law and those of his own culture and belief system.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    And yet the documentaries are saying the nation of Israel being there for 40 years would have left tons of evidence that is just not there. Most of those saying this on the documentaries were Jewish experts. Science is always hard to believe if it goes against your religious beliefs, and you can probably list dozens of reasons why.

  •' cranefly says:

    If your love is conditional according to genetic lines, and/or if you think that the blessings of God have anything to do with genetic lineage, then your religion has been disproven to me.

    There is only one thing I know about God: That he is the God of everyone equally, not of some over others. Thus he does not justify human power dynamics, not even this tired, masturbatory patriarchal dream that women are so lucky to have childbirth, that men should be allowed to get even by keeping them in subjugation.

  •' cranefly says:

    Skepticism is healthy.

  •' Christopher says:

    And there are documentaries about men/intelligent beings building mines and buildings on the moon and lost giants and lost treasure and magic bullets and how three sky scrappers all fell down from being hit by two jets and they fell in their own footprint. Yes. You can get your knowledge from documentaries on the history channel and NOVA or even the CIA or you can actually talk to Scientist and read the research and learn that scientists disagree and so you DO NOT KNOW you just have selective choices made with faith in the person telling you.

    Yes. The science I posted must be very hard for you to believe as it goes against your religion.

  •' Christopher says:

    I don’t. My love follows my heart. Christ is clear that He gave specific blessing to Israel and that if they rejected Him that He could raise up stones to be children of Israel. And of course anyone can e adopted into the house of Israel by obedience to His teachings. And anyone can lose the blessing of Israel by rejecting His gospel.

    I don’t know that He is the God over everyone equally. I wish I believed that. I don’t even know for sure that the Buddhists and Hindus don’t have a different god that watches over them. I don’t know for sure. It must be nice to believe what you believe but for me that is still a question.

    I am NOT a monotheist. I rejected that myth long ago.

    Men will never get even with women. Women will not get even with men. A horse will not get even with a leopard or a pig or an armadillo. A factory will never get even with a farm. A plane will never get even with a boat. A forest will never get even with a meadow. But all those things can be the best at what the are. But no leopard will ever be a good horse.

    it is best to be the best you can be…unless you can be Batman and then be Batman.

  •' Christopher says:

    The following are from our religious scriptures for the Fellowship.

    The important thing is not to stop questioning. –Albert Einstein

    Only the educated are free. –Epictetus

    Those who stand for nothing fall for anything. –Alex Hamilton

    What luck for the rulers that men do not think. –Adolf Hitler

    If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be. –Thomas Jefferson

    Greater than the threat of mighty armies is an idea whose time has come. –Victor Hugo

    Where all men think alike, no one thinks very much. –Walter Lippmann

    During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. –George Orwell

    And my two favorites:

    “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”Johann W. von Goethe

    “Freedom—is the absence of the awareness of restraint.” David Rockefeller

    I was forced to question the Federal Income Tax if I wanted to stay married to my dear child bride (just 18). What I learned has kept me free from federal taxation for over 35 years.

    But the greatest thing I learned is that you never have knowledge if it is not confirmed by the Spirit. The letter killeth but the Spirit giveth life. Skepticism is indeed healthy.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    I don’t trust science based on ancient belief systems even if it has present day reported miracles and divine healings. Some people believe and some don’t.

  •' Christopher says:

    But you do. You said you KNOW because of science that Moses never lived. And that science you heard on documentary confirmed what you WANTED to believe and confirmed YOUR religious belief. You are being hypocritical.

    And if you have never had a miracle, like I have had repeatedly, then you are totally ignorant on the subject. Once again you believe that if it hasn’t been found or you haven’t experienced it, then it cannot be real.

    Get real Jim. That belief is beyond ridiculous. What is yet to be discovered makes life exciting. We must believe that many great discoveries await in most fields of science. Or doesn’t your religion allow for new knowledge and excitement? It seems that way with what you write.

  •' Christopher says:

    And yet science cannot confirm if there is not more than one universe any more than it can count the number of planets in this universe. And there is mathematic evidence that we are actually just a hologram.

    And religions confirmed that there was a universe. So science was just confirming what many religions knew.

    And then…

    21 I dwell in the midst of them all; I now, therefore, have come down unto thee to declare unto thee the works which my hands have made, wherein my wisdom excelleth them all, for I rule in the heavens above, and in the earth beneath, in all wisdom and prudence, over all the intelligences thine eyes have seen from the beginning; I came down in the beginning in the midst of all the intelligences thou hast seen.

    22 Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones;

    23 And God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born.

    You science worshipers think so little of yourselves.

  •' Christopher says:

    Yeah. That is a good trick, isn’t it.

    Hey Moses. Did you write this part about you dying cause I think it may be premature since you are….Moses? … Moses?

  •' Christopher says:

    So when God commands it then it can be added to or taken from. The same basic direction are at the end of Revelation and that was written before the the book of John.

    And since God showed Moses the beginning of the earth to the end of the earth he could have indeed seen his own death…if he died. I doubt that because of the Mount of Transfiguration.

  •' Christopher says:

    Was John McCain born in the United States or in Panama? or both? Or neither? Was he born in a hospital in Panama City or in a hospital in the Canal Zone that did not yet exist on the date he claims he was born? Is he a U.S. citizen or not? What was the law on citizenship when he was born? Did citizenship come through you mom or dad or depend on where you were actually born? Do you know? I didn’t until I researched it.

    And of course Michelle Obama said that the home country of her husband’s birth was in Kenya. Well it wasn’t the U.S. Why would she lie? So what is the difference between your home country and the land or city of your birth?

    I certainly was not born in the U.S. but I was born in the U.S.A.


    Alma 7:10 And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God.

    So there is a third one to add to your speculation.

    Of course Bethlehem and Nazareth are both in the LAND of Jerusalem. Right? What is the difference between the land of and the City of?

    Do you have a single scripture that claims Jesus was born in Nazareth or only that He was from Nazareth? VERY DIFFERENT THINGS.

    The home where I was brought to after my birth was not in the same city as the hospital where I was actually born which was not actually in a city but on county property within a city. But if asked where I was born I say it was the city where our home was located.

    I am FROM a different city than I was born in. Did He spend most of His childhood in Nazareth after being born in Bethlehem in the land of Jerusalem in the Roman province of Judea in the Arabic peninsula in the Near East? So was Christ a Jew or an Asian or a European since He was born in the lands of Rome? Paul was a citizen of Rome. Or was He just the Son of God so He didn’t need a nationality?

    Could that be what occurred with Jesus?

    Two reporters could certainly claim I was born in two different cities by the evidence they could find about me and both could be wrong if it was actually in the county. Then I was just born NEAR both cities but FROM where I grew up.

    The Las Vegas Strip is not located in Las Vegas. It is in Clark County.

    MGM is not in Las Vegas. It is in Clark County. Most of the major hotels are not in Las Vegas. Yet there is a sign when you enter the Strip just before the Luxor in unincorporated Clark County that says: “Welcome to Las Vegas.” Yet Ls VEgas is much farther down the road after most of the hotels.

    Don’t you use scientific method when dissecting your religious questions?

  •' lorasinger says:

    Revelation almost didn’t make it into the bible, so mad were its writings and passed by a matter of some three votes. It was a Jewish writing that was commandeered and heavily edited by Christian translators. Even Eusabius considered it to be spurious.

    holds no merit either having been written by an anonymous Christian writer, not John the apostle and certainly, 60-80 years later, not an eye witness. John is documenting hearsay that was common at the end of many years of a telephone game.

    Christopher, you must overcome your tendency to accept superstition and legend as fact.

  •' lorasinger says:

    Re: Michelle Obama said that the home country of her husband’s birth was in Kenya.

    I doubt that very much. This is a transcript of an interview with his grandmother in Kenya. The audio is available for download

    MCRAE: Could I ask her about his actual birthplace? I would like to see his birthplace when I come to Kenya in December. Was she present when he was born in Kenya?
    OGOMBE: Yes. She says, yes, she was, she was present when Obama was born.MCRAE: When I come in December. I would like to come by the place, the hospital, where he was born. Could you tell me where he was born? Was he born in Mombasa?
    OGOMBE: No, Obama was not born in Mombasa. He was born in America.MCRAE: Whereabouts was he born? I thought he was born in Kenya.
    OGOMBE: No, he was born in America, not in Mombasa.
    MCRAE: Do you know where he was born? I thought he was born in Kenya. I was going to go by and see where he was born.
    OGOMBE: Hawaii. Hawaii. Sir, she says he was born in Hawaii. In the state of Hawaii, where his father was also
    learning, there. The state of Hawaii.

  •' lorasinger says:

    Don’t you use scientific method when dissecting your religious questions?

    The scientific method doesn’t deal with superstition and legend, Christopher.

  •' Christopher says:

    I don’t recall stating that I believe the words in Revelation. I have, however, repeatedly stated that I doubt much found it the Bible.

    But I do have a second witness to Revelation. I don’t need to believe on the words of corrupt Catholics with no authority and no Spirit of revelation themselves that had a political agenda. and were deciding on Spiritual scripture using the limited abilities of men.

    But I have this from Nephi:

    24 And behold, the things which this apostle of the Lamb shall write are many things which thou hast seen; and behold, the remainder shalt thou see.

    25 But the things which thou shalt see hereafter thou shalt not write; for the Lord God hath ordained the apostle of the Lamb of God that he should write them.

    26 And also others who have been, to them hath he shown all things, and they have written them; and they are sealed up to come forth in their purity, according to the truth which is in the Lamb, in the own due time of the Lord, unto the house of Israel.

    27 And I, Nephi, heard and bear record, that the name of the apostle of the Lamb was John, according to the word of the angel.

    28 And behold, I, Nephi, am forbidden that I should write the remainder of the things which I saw and heard; wherefore the things which I have written sufficeth me; and I have written but a small part of the things which I saw.

    Was it true? I have had great difficulty in proving that the Book of Mormon was not what it claims to be. But then once again if Nephi was a man why shouldI trust him?

  •' Christopher says:

    You doubt that? So did I. But…

    That sure looks tike she said it to me. But it could have been faked. What can’t be faked today?

    She did not say that he was born in Kenya. She said his homeland was Kenya. That was what I was pointing out concerning Jesus’ birth.

    I cannot even testify as to where I was born. I was too young at the time to remember today. That is a fun thing to say in court while under oath by the way.

    “Where you were born, Christopher?”

    “I cannot testify to that as I was too young at the time to remember today.” That drive’s judges and opposing attorneys nuts.

  •' Christopher says:

    Sure it does. Science is used to try to prove and disprove just about anything. Yesterday’s superstition is today’s cell phone and jet plane and laser beam.

    Do you want an unproved superstition. It is called the Big Bang theory? Is it true. Could be but the proof is nothing more than speculation using math the same as: Is The Universe A Hologram? Physicists Say It’s Possible

    Is Huffington Post a religious front group?

    Here is an unproved legend for you. It is called Neo-Darwinism. It is mathematically impossible without divine help.

    One man’s legend is another maps treasure map.

    Today legends are made flesh with El Mirador and the temples of Tikal and the un-duplicatable stonework of Machu Picchu and the mines of the Minoans in Michigan and the Red Headed giants of the Lovelock Caves in Nevada and the giant heads of the Olmec. The Neanderthals decedents are walking among us and being us with the new DNA evidence.

    Machu Picchu was JUST a legend and remained a legend until circa 1960 AD. t isn’t a legend anymore.

    Here is a legend made flesh in 1938 AD: The coelacanths, which are related to lungfishes and tetrapods, were believed to have been extinct since the end of the Cretaceous period. …The first Latimeria specimen was found off the east coast of South Africa, off the Chalumna River (now Tyolomnqa) in 1938.

    When will they find a living pterodactyl from the same Cretaceous period?

    Dragons a myths and yet nations from all over the earth have those legends of four legged winged fire breathing creatures? how is that possible?

    Scientists look for Bigfoot and the giant Thunderbird of the legends of the North West Indians. The Lockness Monster has been researched by many scientists. Atlantis is still searched for even though it was probably just the Minoans that were mostly wiped out by a volcano and accompanying Tsunami.

    Did the Great Chinese mariners come to America? Is it a superstition or a scientific theory? What is the difference?

    Thousands of scientists work hand in hand with the Bible in archeological work in Israel because legends becomes flesh all the time.

    You science Nazis should possibly learn what science really does and how it works and the difference between a theory and superstition and facts and where legends begin and how often they are proved to be founded in truth.

    Paiute Princess Sarah Winnemucca knew about the giant redheaded cannibals of the Lovelock Caves and it was just a myth until they were discovered there. Some scientists still claim it could be false but then we need more science to be sure one way or the other about this so-called legend.

    What about the legend of the three days of darkness by the Paiutes that claim when they could stand and see after the three days of darkness and shaking that all that was left of their inland sea was Pyramid, Honey Washoe and several other small lakes? How would they know that all were once a part of the massive Lake Lahontan if living Paiutes did not witness this supposedly ancient lake?

  •' lorasinger says:

    Context. Context. Context.

    Quote: The clip comes from a June 2008 campaign speech she delivered to the Gay & Lesbian Leadership Council of the Democratic National Committee in New York City, as reported by Reuters.

    Many who circulated a link to the video clip concluded the first lady was acknowledging her husband was born in Kenya and, therefore, not eligible for the Oval Office under the requirement of Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution that the president be a “natural born citizen.”

    In the speech, Michelle Obama attempted to draw a moral equivalence between the civil rights movement’s push to obtain equal rights under U.S. law for blacks and the agenda of homosexual-rights activists.

    Echoing leftist Saul Alinsky’s 1971 book “Rules for Radicals,” Michelle Obama said, “And [Barack] says, ‘That in the world as it should be – what does that look like? Now, in the world as it should be we can work together to repeal laws like DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) and ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ and we can (applause) … we can oppose divisive constitutional amendments that would strip civil rights and benefits away from LGBT Americans because discrimination has no place in a nation founded on the promise of equality.’”

    The Obamas’ 2006 trip to Kenya was documented in a DVD, “Senator Obama Goes to Africa,” produced by Bob Hercules and Keith Walker. The two filmmakers also collaborated to produce an earlier documentary on Alinsky, “The Democratic Promise: Saul Alinsky and His Legacy.”

    The documentary shows the Obamas taking an AIDS test at the Kenya Medical Research Institute in Kisian to demonstrate to the local people in a public forum that the test was safe.

    The documentary noted 1.3 million Kenyans, or 6.7 percent of the population, were living with HIV/AIDS. Another 1 million children were orphaned due to AIDS.

    Barack Obama told the crowd in Kisan, “One of the reasons we are here today is because HIV/AIDS have ravaged the community. Too many people, too many children have gotten sick. So one of the things we’re going to do here in front of this van today is that my wife and I are going to get tested for HIV/AIDS, because if you know your status, you can prevent illness.”

    The Centers for Disease Control in the U.S. suggested that as many as 500,000 Kenyans would take the HIV/AIDS test after they saw Obama and his wife safely take it.

  •' lorasinger says:

    None of the examples you give were ever “superstition”. Star Trek had a “communicator” – that was never a superstition, was it? Do you know the difference?

    The big bang theory belongs to astrophysics and has nothing to do with evolution if that’s what you’re getting at. Astrophysics is yet another division of science that has nothing to do with religion and I doubt that it’s a “superstition”.

    Darwin put forth a theory of natural selection and that has been proven just by the presence of antibiotic resistant microorganisms. How is that a superstition?

    There are a number of nonsensical questions between that indicate a serious lack of knowledge. Christopher, I’m really shocked that you seem to lack even the rudiments of any basic scientific knowledge to a point where you can’t differentiate where the natural ends and mythology begins.

    Re: giant redheaded cannibals of the Lovelock Caves and it was just a myth until they were discovered there.” If they were discovered, where are they?

    What happens after the eruption of a volcano, Christopher? The ash and soot in the air would certainly darken the sky. All natural. No magic involved except in the minds of primitive people. Certainly if earthquakes were also involved, land could go back under the sea and other lands would rise.

    No archeologists certainly don’t work hand in hand with the bible. The time when the bible was an authority on the past is long gone. There is now so much contrary evidence against the historical accuracy of the Bible that the term “biblical archaeology” has now been discarded in professional archeology! The whole paradigm of archaeology in the Near East has shifted away from thinking of the Bible as a reliable archaeological field guide to that of a collection of ancient fairy tales and legends.

  •' lorasinger says:

    Christopher, which in the Harry Potter series is more valid? The first or the second? Do you believe that the stories are authentic or just stories? Do they represent reality or myth? Does quoting the second disprove the first or is the second built on the first?

  •' Christopher says:

    You seem to think I care where Obamination was or was not from. The U.S. deserves the wretched socialist. So I don’t care. I don’t care where Hitler was born or Stalin or Bush or Obama or Reagan or Wilson or Eisenhower. I despise such international criminal socialists no matter where they were born.

    I was just pointing out how Christ could be from Nazareth, the Land of Jerusalem and Bethlehem. Just as Obama could be said to have a homeland of Kenya while being born in Hawaii and also be from Indonesia and a U.S. citizen. Truth has nothing to do with this. It is strictly about perception and how people tell you where other people are “from”.

  •' Christopher says:

    You do realize that Harry Potter’s author did not claim it was true. Right?
    Do you know of anyone that believes Harry Potter is anything but a fantasy?
    Do you realize that billions of people believe there is a God?
    You do realize that atheists are a human anomaly? Right?
    Do you realize that millions of people believe the Bible to be true and the authors claim it is true.
    You do realize that Joseph Smith claims the Book of Mormon is what it claims to be?
    YOu do realize that time and again people like you have said some section of the Bible is proved to be untrue and then the city or ancient text proves men like you to be…how shall I put it…premature in your evaluation.

    Which myth was not a myth according to scientists in 1950?

    1. Columbus was not the first European to discover America.

    2. The Pre-Classic Maya had large complex cities.

    3. Clovis man could have had another origin than Asia.

    4. Israelites, prior to 1950, did use metal plates to write historical information.

    5. Ancient Minoans did have a mine in Michigan.

  •' lorasinger says:

    The “scientific” ancient Jewish maps are a thing to behold too. The world is pictured as a dinner plate with only the known world on it. The plate stands on four pillars that disappear in space or the entire plate floats on water. There is a glasslike dome over the plate so it has the appearance of a cake saver. Very much ‘ahead” of it time 🙂

  •' Jim Reed says:

    And above the dome is the 7 layers of heaven, and at the very top is God on the throne.

  •' Christopher says:

    Machu Picchu was specifically called a legend.

    What was discovered at El Mirador was impossible according to scientists in 1960 AD.

    Coelacanths were long extinct until one was caught in the 20th century.

    Darwin also stated that his theory was wrong if life did not get significantly less complex as it got smaller. It does not. Now I have no problem with Darwinism if it is directed by intelligence beyond ours because that makes sense.

    Would you call believing that the world you live on is just a hologram a superstition? What would you call it if Tom Cruise had announced it as a theory instead of a respected scientist?

    It is obvious that you have no clue about what is and what is not science. Shocking. Your Harry Potter analogy demonstrated that you do not even understand the difference of a book that claims to be non-finctionand a book that is claimed to be a work of fiction.

    Do you understand the difference?

  •' Christopher says:

    Why should I? Is he a scientist? Does he have an agenda? What are his political leanings? If he a prophet? Is he religious? Why should I even consider anything he has to say?

  •' Christopher says:

    Matthew never used the term B.C. Luke didn’t use AD.

    Joseph’s genealogy is essentially Mary’s genealogy, because they were cousins; Jesus, therefore, inherited from his mother, Mary, the blood of David.

    But who cares for that lower level garbage?

    God is the REAL king of the Israelites, Christ’s claim to the throne was even higher than that of just being a descendant of David. He was the son of the King of kings and inherited the right from His actual Father’s right to rule not only Israel but the earth.

    Princess Diana’s blood was bluer than her husband’s and yet her son will inherit through her husband because he has the greater claim. God has the highest claim to every throne of this earth. End of argument.

  •' Christopher says:

    Joseph’s genealogy is essentially Mary’s genealogy, because they were cousins; Jesus, therefore, inherited from his mother, Mary, the blood of David.

  •' Christopher says:

    So what kingship rights did Jesus get from His Dad?

    Did Jewish inheritance rights and rules apply to God? Is He under that law? Or is He above such law?

    Was David king of the Jews or of Israel?

    Who had the authority to make or reject the kings of Israel?

    Who called Saul as king and then dethroned him?

    Who called David to replace Saul?

    If you have the authority to decide who will be king are you not above the king in authority?

  •' Jim Reed says:

    He is not a scientist, he is a historian. Probably has an agenda, political leanings are liberal, not a prophet or religious. You shouldn’t consider what he has to say. It would clash with your world view in many ways.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    One of many contradictions in the gospels. There are quite a few contradictions, considering they were copying from one to the next.

  •' Christopher says:

    Do you believe I come here because I fear a clash with my world-view with voluntary slaves like yourself?

    I’ve studied Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Hitler, Tolstoy, Keynes, St.Thomas Aquinas, many Popes, The Dali Lama, Dr. King, Malcolm X, David Farnham, Daniel Webster, Martin Luther, John Wesley, Calvin, Noah Webster, Alexis de Tocqueville, Shakespeare, Haile Selassie, Joseph Smith. Jean Jacques Rousseau, Locke, Heinrich Himmler, Darwin, Frederic Bastiat, about every Founding Father, a multitude of documents from FDR;s presidential library, many American Presidents and a list of Supreme Court and lower court rulings as long as my arm. And that is a very short list.

    RUTGERS JOURNAL OF LAW & RELIGION wrote the following about my legal arguments concerning the Civic Religion of Marxism:

    “The plaintiffs’ presentation of Socialism and Marxism is consistent with the Supreme Court’s understanding of religion in Seeger and Welsh, in which it declared that religion is more than a belief in a Supreme Being, but rather a set of beliefs running parallel to traditional religion. The plaintiffs’ characterization of the nation as God, and Marx and Lenin as prophets is consistent with religion under Seeger and Welsh.”

    That case did not advance ONLY because of a lack of promised funding.

    I won two unanimous Nevada Supreme Court rulings on political issues using only my arguments after the government challenged us, won in district and then we had to appeal and got 7-0 rulings in our favor.

    In Hobby Lobby SCOTUS ruled the the RFRA applied to the IRS as I said would eventually happen back in 1998 AD as RFRA worked its way through the courts. I based whole legal theories on the belief that SCOTUS would rule EXACTLY as they did in Hobby Lobby. Their ruling could not have been better for me to advance RFRA defense/claim while you liberals weep at the loss of your religion of positive rights.

    Have you ever sued the government and collected damages? Changed law? Worked directly with the ACLU leadership in your State to fight against the Feds? Run for office? Managed a political campaign? Run a successful petition drive? Placed a question on the ballot? Got a client off of felony Tax Evasion charges by jury verdict? Been the lead article concerning your religious and political life on the front page of a large news paper? etc.

    I have the guts to live what I preach agains the waves of voluntary slaves that cannot accept anyone being a fee man.

    So you self righteous bigoted little self-aggrandizing, elitist, voluntary slave, missionary of socialism; your liberals our better than non-democrat’s because non-Democrats must inherently be unread ignorant buffoons coupled with your better than thou attitude toward me is without merit.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    On second thought maybe you should read the book It would get your thinking.. It shows there was no actual Jesus from a historical perspective because all the books of the new testament were about inventing this person, and not talking about an actual person.

  •' crash2parties says:

    Bit of a stretch, don’t you think? I mean that’s trying way too hard to make the facts match the prophesy.

  •' lorasinger says:

    He said: ( I have not yet arisen to ) my father and your father, my God and your God. The answer would be “none”.
    God wasn’t of the line of David and is outside of the loop altogether The man-god concept comes from paganism, not from the Jews.
    Christopher, don’t minge. God made the rule that the messiah was to be a descendent of the house of David, through Solomon to start with.

  •' lorasinger says:

    Neither geneology applies because Jesus had no human father.

  •' lorasinger says:

    It doesn’t matter really but if you want to pick straws – Harry Potter is entirely fictional in content and the bible in its supernatural events.

    What has science got to do with a comparison between the bible and Harry potter and whether or not there is a difference between them? You tell me that I don’t have a clue about what is and what isn’t science and in the next sentence start talking about the two books. Are you having trouble with concentration?

    What I DO understand entirely, Christopher, is that you are desperately trying to make a case for superstition by making it sound plausible, even though nothing about it is.

  •' lorasinger says:

    Right! It sounds pretty scientific to me. 🙂

  •' Christopher says:

    The problem is right there in your description, because he bases his conclusions on the New Testament. I do not hang my testimony of Christ on the New Testament. You seem to not understand that fact. It is a single history book of limited size and scope. If it was proved to be wrong, and from what I have studied intensively, that is not possible although there are large parts that are questionable at best, it would not make me believe that Jesus Christ is not the God of this world. That is one arm of the octopus. Lose one arm and it does not mean that there is no octopus.

    To simply base your world view the wrongness or rightness of the stories of one family tree, Israel/Jacob, seems limiting to the possibilities of an all powerful god.

    “See there… modern weapons like the flintlock will never be as good as a good crossbow so we must believe that modern weapons research is a waste of time and money.”

    Perhaps you should expand your world view by reading He Walked the Americas, that records the oral traditions of a white bearded god that came to the tribes of North and South America and the Polynesians. This white ‘god ‘spoke a thousand languages, healed the sick and raised the dead. The book contains Indian legends, gathered during twenty-five years of research by L. Taylor Hansen, archeologist and writer, from many different tribes all over the Americas.

    Who was this person? An Apostle? Christ Himself? Some other being that did what Christ could do?

    Here, below, is a new possible world view for you. God didn’t just talk to the Jews. He loves all of the people on the earth and He talks/talked to them.

    12 For behold, I shall speak unto the Jews and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto the Nephites and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto the other tribes of the house of Israel, which I have led away, and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto all nations of the earth and they shall write it.

    13 And it shall come to pass that the Jews shall have the words of the Nephites, and the Nephites shall have the words of the Jews; and the Nephites and the Jews shall have the words of the lost tribes of Israel; and the lost tribes of Israel shall have the words of the Nephites and the Jews.

    Would you consider a different belief system if these book are discovered? I know I would have to read them and consider their origins as my faith is not founded on one stinking Jewish and Catholic contrived book.

    I don’t believe the Bible is all we’ve got. I totally reject that so how can anyone prove to a Hopi Indian, using just the Bible, that a white bearded god that preached love and forgiveness was not real?

    How can you use the Bible alone to prove to me that Christ did not personally visit my little daughter and comfort her and sit her on His knee? What do I care about what Paul MAY have written when I have the testimony of my darling daughter?

    How could you prove to me using only the Bible errors that an angel did not save me when I heard her speak to me a felt her hold me when she did it in that terrible accident? How can you convince me, using just the Catholic created scripture, that we did not raise my son from the dead or heal my eldest son’s broken neck? How could a totally incorrect New Testament prove those things did not occur to me and mine? I was there. I am a personal eye witness. What do I care about whether or not the Bible got it wrong?

    Try proving, with just the Bible, that Quetzalcoatl never came to Southern Mexico.

    Was there more than one Noah? How many widely diverse people believe in the destruction by water. Oh Noah os the Muslim and Jew hero sure. But what of the Maya calendar, which certainly speaks of such a destruction. From the Maya to the Finish to Africa to India to China to Australia to the Hopi they have flood stories and heroes that survived. Even my Norse have a flood myth that tells of the death of almost all giants?

    Right or wrong how can the Bible account PROVE that these other beliefs are wrong?

    I do not hang my testimony of Christ on the New Testament. So how can such a book prove to me that Christ did not hold my daughter on His knee?

  •' lorasinger says:

    Certainly I know Harry Potter is a fairy tale but then so are Greco-Roman man-god stories, your being one of them.
    So what if “billions of people” believe in God, any more than ten people believe in God. An old lady I knew believed in Tarzan being real. Millions of kids believe Santa Claus is real but they grow out of it.
    Atheists are an anomaly??? Are you totally out of it. Everybody is an atheist before they become indoctrinated into the mumbo jumbo. Some people just don’t believe the stuff for the simple reason that it is unbelievable and impossible. Give me the anomaly any day.
    Joseph Smith can claim he is an oyster if he wants. It doesn’t make it so.
    Turns up or is invented, Christopher, as in the Mormon bible and the superstitious man-god stories of the NT?. By the same token, some of the stories in the bible have been proved untrue by history/
    The five examples you’ve listed fall into the line of discoveries and new information that comes in to put a new slant on old accepted ideas. Your nebulous men-gods and gods fall into a category of religion, not science or archeology that deals with artifacts, not religion.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    Those are just Mormon beliefs.

  •' Christopher says:

    You don’t seem to understand that my testimony does not live and die with the Jewish distorted/Catholic maligned Bible. I understand it is a mess. I base my testimony on personal experience and revelation. The letter killeth. Scribes are untrustworthy. Scriptures were INTENTIONALLY destroyed and mistranslated to obtain an agenda goal.

    Perhaps the Jews did not like the part about them that they would betray and kill their God and King so they changed the prophesies or just totally removed them claiming they were obviously wrong.

    The Book of Mormon claims the Jews removed at least two prophets that wrote about Christ.

    15 For it is not written that Zenos alone spake of these things, but Zenock also spake of these things—
    16 For behold, he said: Thou art angry, O Lord, with this people, because they will not understand thy mercies which thou hast bestowed upon them because of thy Son.
    17 And now, my brethren, ye see that a second prophet of old has testified of the Son of God, and because the people would not understand his words they stoned him to death.
    18 But behold, this is not all; these are not the only ones who have spoken concerning the Son of God.

    If they would stone a prophet for what he said would they not also remove his prophesies from their scriptures?

    Perhaps the REAL line of Mary had a stronger claim to the throne of David than Joseph and since the Catholics are known women haters they removed the gospel of Mary or Thomas or Judas or Philip that may have contained such a genealogy that would allow for women to claim any authority. Couldn’t have that now, could we?

    Here is my genealogy of Christ and why He was King of the Jews.

    And El begat Jehovah.

    And since El was/is master of the universe, creator and dethroner of kings lie Saul and David, He placed the royal crown upon His Son’s head and may have said: “This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased and He shall reign personally upon this earth for all time.”

    I long ago found that personal revelation was far more important than any book. Those personal revelations led me to a biblical verse that confirmed my long held belief and I am shocked that so few people even try it.

    James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

    Go to the source. God is your Spiritual Father, Christ is you brother. Sit down, have lunch and talk. Ask for what you need. He’s your Dad for Christ’s sake. He will not give you a scorpion when you ask for Eggs Benedict. But you’ve gotta ask.

    10 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
    11 If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?
    12 Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
    13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

  •' lorasinger says:

    Jesus is written to have been born in Bethlehem because the writer wanted to convince readers that Jesus was the messiah that fulfilled an earlier prophecy about a messiah coming from Bethlehem, ignoring the fact that the prophecy says that Beth’lechem is a clan, not a place. He likely wasn’t a Jew or didn’t know his own religion.

    He could not have been from Nazareth because Nazareth didn’t exist in the first century. The trouble with fairy tales is that they don’t have to be accurate so they can say anything.

    To return to your point, Nazareth, Bethlehem and Jerusalem are all cities, Christopher. None of them can be considered to be a “land”.

  •' Christopher says:

    That’s your answer from a Book I don’t believe is trustworthy.

    The Jews killed the prophets they did not like.

    The Catholics killed the people that did not agree with them.

    And you think I should care about what they put together to discount Christ or to cause doubt?

    And Christ was of the House of David through His mother and His father was the creator of the House of Israel and and Judah and David.

    What did the Israelite prophets before 600 BC, Zenos and Zenock, say about it?

    If you have any faith in the Bible it is pretty clear that the Jews murdered the prophets God sent to them. Why would I trust the books written by murderers about a God they would reject and kill?

    Luke 11:47 Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and your fathers killed them.

    1 Thessalonians 2:15 (the Jews:) Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men:

    Matthew 23:34 ¶Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
    35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

    Helaman 13:32 And in the days of your poverty ye shall cry unto the Lord; and in vain shall ye cry, for your desolation is already come upon you, and your destruction is made sure; and then shall ye weep and howl in that day, saith the Lord of Hosts. And then shall ye lament, and say:
    33 O that I had repented, and had not killed the prophets, and stoned them, and cast them out.

    Matthew 18:16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

  •' Christopher says:

    So He was the Son of the master of the universe that gave and took away the kingship of Saul and then gave it to David and had to power to take it away lie He did from Saul.

    Here is the Genealogy that matters: And El begat Jehovah, the King of kings.

    I don’t care about the Genealogy written down by murderers and deceivers like the Catholics that killed the Gnostics and the Jews that killed Christ and their own prophets.It is like trusting what George Bush claimed about 9/11. Why would I do such a thing?

  •' lorasinger says:

    You may not feel it’s trustworthy and yet Mormons have hijacked its NT central figure, haven’t they? And woven a whole different scenario around it. Be consistent.

    What does it matter if they killed their prophets. Judaism has nothing to do with you or man-god believers. As far as Catholics go, it’s just a game of my daddy is bigger than your daddy – all mumbo jumbo – with the same nonsensical value.

    Christopher, Jews have nothing to do with the man-god. He is strictly the Christian/Mormon god. If there was such a person, he was only a man-not a god. Christians built the man-god all on their own.
    You wrote: And Christ was of the House of David through His mother and His father was the creator of the House of Israel and and Judah and David.

    That is what you folk like to believe but then, it’s your story. But you forget the fully human Jewish Jesus was a man, and that didn’t work in his world.
    Luke is simply documenting hearsay, Christopher. He freely admitted not being an eye witness.
    The early (or any)Jewish prophets said absolutely nothing about Jesus or a man-god with a virgin mother because that concept didn’t exist in Judaism.

  •' lorasinger says:

    El begat Jehovah? Torah says:: I am the FIRST, I am the last and besides me there is no other god.

    The Jews didn’t kill Jesus – The Romans executed him for sedition.

    The genealogy wasn’t written by Catholics, Christopher and it was written several hundred years before Catholicism even became a legal religion in 325AD. Both genealogies were written several generations after the death of Jesus while early Christianity was being woven, based on Paul’s idea of a pagan man-god. You are terribly ignorant of history.

  •' JamesMMartin says:

    Tom Flynn the secularist once wrote in an essay that one is disarmed in any argument involving dogma. Fighting dogma is like ramming your head against the wall. Cognitive dissonance greets you every time. Franz Fanon pointed out that such people simply dig in their heels and regard you as some sort of eccentric. Or fool. Or mad person.

  •' Christopher says:

    Hijacked? So when God deposed Saul did God hijack the kingdom for David? Was the Book of Mormon written by its original authors before or after the New Testament’s authors wrote their sections that were later scrutinized by the Catholics? So who hijacked whose religion?

    What does it matter what kind of Revolution we have? The French Revolution is the same as the American Revolution. Right?

    So let’s say that the Jews came along and they chased the majority of the Israelites (10 tribes) out through excessive taxes and split God’s kingdom that He had turned over to earthly king at the wicked request of Jews.

    Let’s say they did this because they rejected their God/king and demanded an earthly king they could see. And let’s say they killed the prophets that God sent that said they were going to kill their God/King when He came in the flesh? So what kind of scriptures would we get from these Jews?

    One you can’t really trust just like we have.

    I hope you are never my attorney because you would only read the cover page of the WHOLE law and think that was enough. It isn’t. It never will be.

  •' Christopher says:

    I am the FIRST jury/family/corporation/group/etc., I am the last and besides me there is no other god. God is a purl word. That is obvious. Everyone knows that. It is common knowledge. (Of course God (the authorized spokesman for God) said this ONLY to people here on this earth (maybe only to a single man) as far as we know/guess so there could be other Gods for other earths.)

    If I hire a hit man then he was just a tool. I was the REAL murderer. The Jews hired the Romans to kill Christ.

    You cannot prove who wrote a single word. You can speculate and guess. I was told that the Jews never used metal plates to write important document on. Was I lied to or was the information about the Copper scroll just not yet discovered?

    I have seen what has been done to the words of the Founding Fathers in less than 300 years. Don’t tell me what can and cannot happen when an agenda, set by wicked men, is at work.

    I am less ignorant of history than you are. But then that is obvious. Everyone knows that. It is common knowledge that you don’t know history very well. I hear even your father thought you were slow and your mother wrote that you needed extra help in school.

    Are we done with the personal attacks yet because if we are not I am very well aware of how to use them after 45 years on the political hot seat front line.

    Educated people can disagree. Look at the recent Hobby Lobby ruling? 5/4. Are the 4 or the 5 ignorant of history and/or law?

    Get over yourself.

  •' Christopher says:

    So you are one of those CONSPIRACY NUTS?

    “the writer wanted to convince readers that Jesus was the messiah”

    Now that is a conspiracy theory if I ever heard one. Want to hear another one? The Jews didn’t like what their prophets said about them so they killed their prophets and discarded the things they wrote so they wouldn’t look like they killed their God when they really did. God didn’t like the cover-up so He gave the world a second witness of Jesus Christ that the Jews and Catholic collaborators couldn’t touch.

    That way people could have a choice to believe or not believe and then be judged for their choices.

    A “land” is a term used repeatedly in the Book of Mormon so you will need to interpret it by using it as the original author would have defined the word. Have you attempted to do so? Of course you have not.

  •' lorasinger says:

    You, Christopher are the proud possessor of Joseph’s frog. It’s hopeless talking with someone who has so many sectors of missing data. You need defragmentation, my boy.

  •' lorasinger says:

    The Jews hired the Romans to kill Christ.
    No, the Romans killed Jesus (not the Christ) because if he actually proved himself to be a true messiah as the Jews were hoping for, he would be instrumental in driving them out. By killing him, he would no longer be a threat to them.
    I don’t know WHAT you were told but there was a copper scroll among the dead sea scrolls so that, although it wasn’t the common writing material, it was obviously done, if only once. Its presence is evidence of that.
    Actually I graduated in the top fifth, Christopher with an IQ of 127 – top 15%.
    You’re taking what I say as an insult – it isn’t. I just find you lacking in basic knowledge that makes it very difficult and takes too much time to try to explain than it’s worth.

  •' lorasinger says:

    Hardly a conspiracy, Christopher. Christianity and Judaism are diametrically opposite. Christianity was something entirely new and the writer of the NT was creating a metamorphosis of a very human male into a man god. Old prophecies were nipped and tucked into a format that supported this new personality in order to sell it to the gentiles. The Jews who were familiar with their old scriptures weren’t buying it, so Christianity was largely a gentile movement. The people who wrote the NT were setting the stage for Catholicism, Christopher and the gentile Christianity they created became known as Catholicism. Opposing schools of Christian thought were simply killed off and Catholicism became the state religion in 385 under Theodosius in Rome.

    The book of Mormon has its own lingo that originated in around 1820 with Joseph Smith. The JWs, another late comer too, has its own lingo and beliefs. Neither one is more or less correct or better or worse than the other but both are simply the newest tier on the already present standard Christianity in no different a way than Protestantism is to Catholicism.

    I don’t believe any of them. I just study and analyse them no differently than I would in any comparative religion study.

  •' CitizenWhy says:

    If you want to get rich, found a religious cult. Or just become a televangelist. Figure out how to fake miracles, that’s important,

  •' CitizenWhy says:

    Demanding a king was really demanding a type of government that could organize military defense and offense more efficiently than could happen under the rule of multiple judges. Reread the Bible, and this motivation is clear. As today, people were willing to surrender many freedoms to a more powerful government in order to feel safer.

  •' Christopher says:

    I am sorry that you believe your sources of information are better than mine but once again you are in error. But you are probably used to being wrong.

  •' Christopher says:

    God didn’t want them to have a king except for Him. That is clear. They rejected their God. The Jews did it again circa 30 A.D. and many other times. They still do. Most people do.

    I have reread it multiple times. Several different translations and I often cross reference. The Jews reject their God repeatedly.

    Men can trust in men or trust in God. They chose man. I chose God long ago. I understand the choices. So did Benjamin Franklin who said, “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

    The Israelites and the Jews ended up with neither.

  •' Christopher says:

    And again you are in error. Jesus was and is the Christ and the Jews had HIm killed. The Romans were just the tools used by them.

    He proved He was the Messiah to people around the world. The Jews were not worthy of that proof so He did not give it to them. Why would He give them more than He already had? Christ does not force Himself on people that reject truth. You just refuse to accept the many additional memos He left. But you enjoy being in error so you will remain in error. That is the choice you have made.

    The copper scroll was indeed found with the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls. In the days Joseph Smith (circa 1830 AD) there were no such discoveries that had been made. Yet he claimed the Book of Mormon came from metal plates. He was ridiculed for such a claim as everyone knew that no one wrote on metal plates. The Copper scroll was just one of many such discoveries AFTER Smith made his claim about the Gold Plates. How/why did he know or guess or…?

    My son has a 165 IQ. I have a 140. My youngest son had the lowest of our family at 122, but has an incredible memory. So what? Who cares?

    I didn’t graduate. I quit and became a successful businessman and political leader. The teachers were not as smart as me. Why would I stay? Schools puts your thinking in a box. Their box.

    And I believe you are lacking basic knowledge while I am not. Justice Alito believed Justice Ginsberg was very wrong in Hobby Lobby and they had the SAME info. We cannot even agree on the what is and what is not trustworthy information. Because of that we can never agree. I don’t trust ANYTHING from the Bible unless I can cross reference it with other information or the Spirit has testified of the truth of it to me.

    The Bible was written and translated by liars and murderers with an agenda. I don’t trust the Bible any more than I trust an American politician.

  •' Christopher says:

    And your beliefs are just…Lacking in proof. Non-scientific. Atheistic. Bigoted. Prejudiced? All of the above.

    The evidence points to…All of the Above.

    My beliefs are founded on personal eye witness to miracles, study, debate and prayer with accompanying answers.

    And your proof comes from?

  •' Christopher says:

    First I will address your crack about Joseph Smith by stating: You can claim you are intelligent but it does not make it so.

    Your claims and Joseph’s claims are in the same category but I have researched Joseph’s claims for decades and found them very difficult to dispute. I find your claims easy to dispute. You don’t even know what science is.

    If you believe that science has nothing to do with religion then you have no clue about religion or science. You obviously need a dictionary so that you can know what the word ‘science’ means.

    SCIENCE 1: the state of knowing: knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding

    When Joseph Smith met face to face with Christ it was science because he was in a state of knowing. You can say it didn’t occur but I can claim you have no knowledge about this so you are ignorant and therefore without science.

    When the miracles in my life occurred those were acts of science as they granted me knowledge and I escaped ignorance or misunderstanding concerning that occurrence or power. They were “perceived with MY senses.” Classic science.

    Ernst Mach advocated a version of Occam’s razor which he called the Principle of Economy, stating that “Scientists must use the simplest means of arriving at their results and exclude everything not perceived by the senses.”

    When metal plates are discovered so we can NOW KNOW that metal books were made and written anciently then that is an act of science/knowledge concerning what was once ONLY based on ignorance or more properly stated, a lack of knowledge.

    ig·no·rance noun ˈig-n(ə-)rən(t)s
    : a lack of knowledge, understanding, or education : the state of being ignorant

    When you escape ignorance it is an act of science.

    I personally used “scientific method” to establish my religious beliefs.

    Definition of SCIENTIFIC METHOD: principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.

    My wife uses the scientific method when cooking to make better meals by researching recipes and testing them for taste using that which is perceived by the senses.”

    I sought knowledge. I used systamatic procedures in the pursuit of that knowledge. I had a recognition that I wanted knowledge and used a formulation for a problem. That problem was whether or not to believe specific claims of many different religions including Marxism. Many of my experiences were “perceived by the senses.”

    I collected data from
    1. Archeological evidence
    2. Historical documents, reports, eye witness testimony, history written by recognized historians and peer reviewed.
    3. Information from books and articles written by recognized experts in their fields and peer reviewed.
    4. Law on mathematical probability
    5. Other laws of science.
    6. Personal observation especially of miracles personally observed or by people I have a personal relationship with that testified to me what they saw or felt.
    7. Discoveries concerning language, ancient language, dead languages, ancient forms of poetry, that confirm or dispute claims and/or beliefs.
    8. Experiments with prayer, blessings, healing, being healed, prophecy, revelation, visions, and recording the findings.

    I tested the hypotheses and found it worked REPEATEDLY. A young man TAUGHT by his parents to be atheist, lived with us when his parents abandoned, After months of living with us he said that he could no longer be an atheist as he had witnessed time and again how prayer worked in our family and he could not just ignore what he had heard with his ears and witnessed with hie eyes. He “perceived by the senses.” He never joined my faith but he is no longer an atheist because of what he SAW!

    My religious belief is based on scientific method. You may disagree but then Justice Roberts disagreed with Justice Scalia on ObamaCare and Justice Alito disagreed with Justice Ginsberg on Hobby Lobby. Even educated people can disagree completely with their beliefs founded on science/knowledge as they perceive it.

    There is currently a scientific debate over Clovis Man. The outcome WILL affect my religious beliefs.

    The difference between 10 people believing and the VAST majority believing, even throughout recorded history, is that when the majority believe in God then the SMALL minority that do not believe are not the norm. They are queer, odd, unusual, suspicious, questionable.

    Definition of QUEER
    1b : questionable, suspicious
    2a : differing in some odd way from what is usual or normal

    Please provide evidence “scientific method” that a child has the mental capacity to decide he/she believes in the “ultimate reality” of the religion atheism. Atheism is an “ultimate reality.” That is what religion is as presently defined in the U.S. courts system. Atheist have faith in an “ultimate reality.” Agnostics do not have a “ultimate reality.” Christians do. Buddhist do. Atheist so. Etc. A belief in an “ultimate reality” is a religion.

    If ALL children are born as atheist and have to be indoctrinated then why has God worship been so historically prevalent in ancient pre-historic people? Where did it start with no one to teach them and with ALL people believing there was no God?

    The Mormon Bible is the King James Version.

    I have no problem with stories in the Bible being proved to be untrue. Why would I care if a Book I believe was created by the Great and Abominable Church of the Devil, was to have false teaching or incorrect facts? I expect it.

    Your religious beliefs dictate that the Man/god theory didn’t exist in YOUR intentionally distorted agenda driven Judaism. So what? It does turn up in the religion of the Israelites. Don’t you know the difference? Jews rejected their God. We of the lost tribes, did not.

    Since the Catholics believe that God the Father is also his own Son then Joseph Smith took NOTHING from the Catholic Paul although the real Paul did teach Joseph Smith personally along with being taught by Peter, James, John, John the Baptist, Christ, God the Father, Moroni and many other past prophets? And I have his “perceived by the senses” testimony of those men and teachings. You have no one to testify that he was there and what Smith said he saw was not true. So you have ONLY faith that Smith lied. No “perceived by the senses” evidence at all.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    A book on the historicity of Jesus.

  •' Christopher says:

    Is eye witness testimony considered to be evidence, Jim? You know…in court?

    Would a scientist consider eye witness testimony if he was researching, let’s say, what happened in an earth quake or a plane disaster or a lightning strike or a meteor strike or a sudden loss of domestic animals in an area?

    How about if the scientist was an anthropologist researching tribal beliefs in New Guinea? Would eye witness testimony be more valuable than a set of test tubes or DNA evidence concerning how the tribal members married or had commerce?

    If you were a detective would you want eye witness testimony to a crime? If you had none and had to rely on circumstantial evidence would you review all you could gather and then consider the mathematical probabilities of guilt or innocence on what you discovered?

    If you discovered DNA evidence, footprints, fingerprints and ballistic evidence that pointed to a suspect but there were 12 eye witnesses that the guy you believed was your bat suspect was in France on the day of the crime which would you believe?

    Who do you think the jury would believe?

  •' Jim Reed says:

    When the eye witness starts talking about miracles from Jesus, they might be discredited.

  •' Christopher says:

    And DNA evidence might be discredited to. And testimony by Cops is regularly discredited. But you have to bring forth the evidence to discredit it. You must have a preponderance of evidence. And all you have been able to do is to tell me you couldn’t find any evidence. Lack of evidence is NOT proof. Especially when you have eye witness testimony.

  •' Jim Reed says:

    There was no actual Jesus because Paul was talking about a mythical Jesus in heaven, and the gospels were making up their own myths about Jesus.

  •' lorasinger says:

    “In the abundance of words there does not fail to be transgression”
    Proverbs 10:17

  •' Christopher says:

    And Paul was a fabrication of your fantasy and your god is the gray matter in your head. “Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries. I fart in your general direction.”

  •' Christopher says:

    Thou fool, that shall say: A Bible, we have got a Bible, and we need no more Bible. 2 Nephi 29:6

  •' Matthew46 says:

    The inspiration of the Bible depends upon the ignorance of the gentleman who reads it.
    Author: Robert G. Ingersoll

  •' Christopher says:

    How true.

  •' Ryne says:

    I’ve often wondered about the implications of finding life outside of our little planet for Christianity. I don’t agree with Ken Hamm but I do think if we make contact with alien life it will fundamentally alter the way we relate to our religious traditions, among other things.

    Presumably intelligent life would contact us before we contact them (our technology can only allow us to really explore our closest neighbors in the solar system and so far we have no reason to suspect any of them are currently harboring intelligent life) and presumably they would have far superior technology (which is why they’d find us first) so perhaps the major religions of earth would go the way of the various indigenous faiths of the Americas in light of the overwhelming force of the Christian conquerers

    I’m not convinced that will happen (or that we will make contact with alien life at all, even if it is or at least has been out there) but it’s interesting to think about

  •' Jeremy C says:

    I remember a comment attributed to C.S. Lewis that the distance between the stars was “God’s quarantine’ and the idea around this was set out in his ‘Out of the Silent Planet’ series where the creatures on other planets hadn’t suffered the fall. He certainly wasn’t worried about the idea of life on other planets

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *