See all the hot summer screwball action here. But see the best of the best here.

From the Mailbag

We start with this forward from Brooks Trubee, which came originally from a guy whose email I blocked for lack of substance. Can you guess why?


You,of all people have contributed more to my de-conversion than you will ever know.I have never seen anyone as unprofessional as you as far as apologist go.You say things that I quit saying at the age of five.What is wrong with you? Is this the way an apologist acts? How the [deleted] do you expect anyone to take you seriously? No,I don't expect an answer,and if I got one it would probably go,"Nana Nana boo boo stick your head in dodo".

Dude,you are one pathetic apologist.

Awright! We're gettin' closer to the 2 year mark with the name thing. I do wonder how anyone can stick their head into an extinct bird though.

This then, from the Too Little Too Late Department:

Hello there,

you should probably watch "zeitgeist - the movie". Or just start comparing Horus (and many others) and Jesus. Maybe this will help you to begin to live in the real world. Good luck!

When I linked this goof up to my linked replies to Zeitgeist, and my replies re Horus, etc., he said:

The first thing is: Thanks for your answer. I appreciate that. And I read most of the text you sent me links to.

The second: While viewing zeitgeist, believe it or not, I too found a couple of points that I couldnīt find evidence for elsewhere. The point is, itīs not only about "main beliefs", but about similar stories that have been told long before Jesus was said to be born. And you truly canīt doubt that, especially in the case of Horus. Virgin birth wasnīt new. Resurrection wasnīt new. The names for Jesus werenīt new, even the crucifying wasnīt new. In fact, early forms ot the cross have been dated to the stone age - itīs a sybol of the southern cross and of the ancient astrological calendar. The Bible is a story that combined many old symbols and stories with the intention to draw as many people as possible to it. Similar things happen in Africa for example right now, where priests allow the natives to practise a mix of christianity and their own ancient beliefs. Why? Ask yourself!

I donīt know what you believe and of course itīs solely up to you - but you canīt say the stories in the bible were new.

Furthermore, I donīt know if you watched the movie to the point where it turns political - probably not - but there are statements of presidents of the USA confirming what is being said in the movie. And if you take a look at the sliced through piers of the wtc you might ask yourself how a fire could have done that. Or just ignore it and believe what youīre supposed to believe. Why did GWB refuse to declare under oath? Why are the videos of the hit of the pentagon are not being shown to us - if they can resolve all doubt?

If you think all thatīs stupid - I canīt change that. Itīs not your fault anyway.

Then this from People Who Require No Coherence:

Having no reputation to protect, no funds to raise, no state or government submission of beliefs, no side-line doctrine To uphold, no cash flow, no career to flourish, no flock in a building made with hands - where God, 'is not', no followers To guide - other than who God has 'show up' - as in Philip over the sand dune, no 'nothing to argue to support to further to Defend to uphold.

Despite Ray's teaching on aion or aionian or aions or aionis your response if full of nugatory, opinionated, scholarly like analysis rather than the truth in application within the Sum of Gods word which is true. That effort would call for more Than you have time to give being busy with the maintenance of your org. demands, obligations, needs and support for It's maintenance. Your, initial, cursory view, which self-admitted was not as thorough as you inquisitors desired - so, you Believed after a few more inquisitions of your beliefs..which are what they are more than 'questions'. See, the human Dynamic, the character of questions is not for what appears on the surface, partly recognizing you as superior, as one with Greater knowledge, as the 'solution man', but more as a result of a mental/spiritual/heart review of what Ray had to say

On the part of some people who know you who have found good reason to question your beliefs. They want to see How well you stand up to defend your beliefs against something they have found that brings you and your beliefs into question....for what they have discovered as 'more' than good cause.....they are thoroughly impressed to have Brought it to you = much more impressed than you have the ability, willingness or readiness to have, do, experience or Find! J You can be assure they gave Ray's work much more credibility and consideration than, again, you did or are Able, willing nor ready to give it - they did, - you did not...and you know this....and that's understandable, obvious,Too .... J, reasonable and clear.....but, that is where God has you now, if, in fact, you have a truly sovereign God, that knows all of your thoughts, has blinded you and guided you, in time, to come out of your pride, die while you are yet in your body, and live...unless a seed fall and die, many are called few are chosen, one must die in order to live.

That would certainly mean that a wrong doctrine that has led to 'another' division amongst the now, 30,000 plus or 38 plus that you can now find on Google search 0- yours is just another Apollos, or jim or tom, or ,,,,

If the love of money is the root of all evil one might reconsider having money be a part of one's work with God, directly or indirectly...people can give to you freely to get what you got freely from God - yet you paid some others who have organizations in business such as your own....they would just help take care of your needs as you served them spiritually -

Anyway, some day you will see...more, you know it, in know it God knows it for both of us - suggestion - listen to people who love God and spend an incredible amount of time in God's word who believe something different than orthodoxy, tradition - which will make my word of no effect - profess the belief that God owns all of their money but wants none of it but wants your mind and heart in every moment with every thought - listen to people closer to that truth...

Here is something, most likely, beyond your ability, willingness - certainly readiness to view - this is a gift - no charge - send nothing and if you believe it send no money - ever - but let it love you as god does

J - be brave - send this to your inquisitors and ask them to send you a secret private message so that you do not know who said it so they will not fall in your eyes.

This one came about my Sargon vs Moses article:

Just read your analysis. I'm not surprised to find it convoluted, biased and total BS. You should be ashamed.

This one starts by quoting me from

'But what makes this especially telling is that a physical resurrection was completely unnecessary for merely starting a religion. It would have been enough to say that Jesus' body had been taken up to heaven, like Moses' or like Elijah's. Indeed this would have fit (see here) what was expected, and would have been much easier to "sell" to the Greeks and Romans'

Then says:

Having just seen this alleged god just get crucified and die on the cross, the Romans and all the rest are hardly likely to change their minds when told "oh yes he's gone- he's been taken upto heaven, so he must be a god"

They would have to have put on a bit of a show, maybe even used another stand-in look-a-like!

Try and use some uncommon sense, Re: Religion , gods , frightened peasants needing something to believe in - about 11,000 religions across the world - why is this one - THE ONE!

Wow. Talk about someone whose cord doesn't quite make it to the outlet....

Stephen van Eck is still out there -- way out there....

I am not wrong about Mithraism. I merely repeat what historians indicate, that it was a Persian offshoot founded in TARSUS (ever hear of that town??), it was popular among Roman soldiers, it featured a a god-man born on December 25th who died on a tree and rose from the dead, a "washed in the blood" ritual, a bread and wine sacramental meal-- all reminiscent of Christianity, and, because it verifiably predated Christianity, there is no question as to who copied what.

I already know YOUR notion of winning against atheists: Merely gainsaying them, offering zero proof, and relying on immature insults. No thanks.

Then this email apparently responding to

I totally disagree with you concerning nudity. I have been a nudist for many years, I go to church on Sunday and consider myself a good Christian. I do consider nudity natural and wholesome.

So.....this answers all my points how?

Finally, another one of those amusing computer-generated solicitiations:

Dear Webmaster,

My name is David Stern, and I am contacting you on behalf of our client

More about Boiler Breakdowns

Boiler Breakdowns is UK's leading plumbing and central heating specialist and pride themselves on offering an excellent and quick service to their customers at all times from the initial call to telephone operative to diagnosing the fault and providing a solution.

Link Request

On visiting your website, we find that it is relevant to our domain and would like to request you for a link to our site

What will you get in return?

In lieu of this link, we will provide a link back from one of our human edited directories that have built good credibility with search engines. Further providing a link to a authority website such as will give your site credit in the eyes of the search engines as Boiler Breakdowns is a strong website and it will be useful resource for your website visitors.

How to set up the link on your website

Please add the following details to your website


Title : London Plumbers

Description : Boiler Breakdowns - Call us at [number removed] for all your plumbing maintenance requirements from a leaky tap to the annual gas safety inspection for landlords.

I'll look forward to your positive response. In the mean time, should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.

Thank you very much for your time.


David Stern

P.S. Although I hate unsolicited email as much as the next person, I felt a link exchange between our sites would be mutually beneficial. Nevertheless, please let me know if you are not interested in a link exchange with our site and I will personally remove you from any mailing lists. Thanks again.

You heard it here. We minister to broken boilers.

The June 2009 John Loftus Collection

John's crew was pretty stale this past month; in fact, we found only one item worth posting, by Loftus himself -- a review he wrote for the Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology, from William Lane Craig an James Porter Moreland. It's a textbook for philosophy of religion, defending arguments for the existence of God (and one chapter deals with the problem of evil). Loftus' review:

While I know that the authors in this book cannot cover everything, it seems odd they never speak about how they came to believe in the first place and they never discuss the origins of those beliefs in the ancient world either. I don't think Victor Reppert came to believe because of the AFR, nor did Bill Craig come to believe because of the Kalam argument. What they have done is to defend what they were led to believe because of an initial commitment, usually in their youth, which controls how they approach these arguments. Now they find themselves defending an Anselmian conception of God arrived at by a long process of theological gerrymandering. What is completely lacking in this book is a defense of the veracity of the Bible from the assault of Biblical criticism, since reading it uncritically was what led them to believe in the first place. While we must evaluate the merits of their arguments separately, historical criticism of the Bible destroys the source of their beliefs on many fronts.

Uh, how to put this?

It's a textbook, about the philosophy of religion, John.

The June 2009 Random Atheist and Heretic Collection

Yo lunch is heading for a sweep of Platinum categories, so much so that he may earn his own category -- for statements like this:

Shoulda woulda coulda! Fact is, the KJV was ok for centuries until skeptics began picking it apart!

No, Brainstem, I want to see the ACTUAL TEXT FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE! You have just shown me HEARSAY! Where is the document that the translators were looking at?!!!

thank you for the info. No, it's all Greek to me. I just studied a coupla Romance Languages such as French and Spanish. Never thought i would need Greek, since I never had a desire to visit Greece. However, I doubt you speak it either! I can look up words just as you can!

The salient point here is that the KJV, mistaken or not, does say the entire earth! This is the "inspired WORD OF GOD!" Now, I have just as much right to use that version in Luke as you have to use yours! THAT, my Dear Christian, is why you needed midrash, exegesis, revised versions,new editions, commentary, and all of that other jazz in order to cover up the blunders in the "infallible Word of God!

As I just told JP, show me the actual text that was used to translate from and then we can talk further! Until then, you leave me unimpressed!

jimbo (Brooks Trubee) tries to get there himself with the Irony Method:

There is just something terribly hypocritical about people who parade around lecturing other people about morality when they cannot recognize clear moral problems within their own belief system.

Hellboy is starting his own House o' Screwiness:

Your emotionalism (once again) turns your argument into ad absurdum. Tell me, do you eat meat? Is that not murder? No? Why not? Because you believe the Bible when it intimates that mankind is made in the image of GOD and animals are not - correct?

You cannot say that your view on abortion is not religious. If you are a pro-life evolutionary atheist who believes that mankind is another more highly evolved animal (as I do) then if I were pro-life and ate meat, I would be a hypocrite, as I could not defend fighting for the life of a human animal, while sponsoring the murder of non-human animals. In order for me to be true, I would have to become a vegetarian.

You are right about NASA. It is largely a political institution, which directs it's research towards funding (as most research is). It is my hope - now that we do not have an evangelical in office that more funding will be released for alternative research.

A fellow ministry person sent me this reply to one of his YT videos, in which he challenged critics to pony up with evidence for the Christ myth:

no u sound like ur afraid to use ur brain and research but u want me 2 do it for u ...[deleted] that....i have lots of books went on trips etc. but if u want the the truth u got 2 seek it for urself but if u want 2 live a lie do it i dont [deleted] kno u so i'm not going 2 waste my time the info is there its not hidden u can google have the evidence u u homie but u will die believing a lie

edsaps7 wins for his insightful post, "Why does God hate Africans?" on the Reasonable Faith forums, containing this fatal argument for Christianity:

So here is my beef, why don't Christians catch up to reality and realize that God allows horrible deaths everyday. I want to hear songs about how God allowed children to die of starvation in Africa.

An online atheist comics site wins for this:

Apparently upset by the unanimous 5 star reviews, a Christ myther. Steven Stiles, posted a review of Shattering the Christ Myth on Amazon that wins much for incoherence, and addresses no arguments from the book save one, as a tangent. Select portions:

One can not approach the writings of James Patrick Holding with any sort of neutrality; either you think he is a force for Good, a defender of the Truth, or you think he is a mean spirited partisan hatchet man who throws out an Encyclopedia of antiquated arguments in defense of Biblical Inerrancy. Shattering the Christ Myth: Did Jesus Not Exist? is no exception. Once again Holding and company troop out the same tired arguments, which had been throw at people, who don't believe the Bible is Infallible, for decades. To this are added ad hominem attacks and a smugness that has them declaring themselves the winners aporia. In fact one get the impression that the reason they feel comfortable wheel out the same old arguments is that they know their audience doesn't really want to read a defense of Christianity, what their audience wants is to know that there is a defense of the faith available, so that they can continue to believe everything they were taught in Sunday School.

....lets assume for a second that Josephus did say something about Jesus, would this really provide proof positive that Jesus was Historical? Not really because we don't know what sources Josephus, who was born after Jesus was supposedly crucified, thus could not be an eyewitness, used. This means that even if Josephus did say something about Jesus, we have no way of knowing if his sources were creditable. Further assuming that there were Christian, who believed in the incarnation of Christ, in Josephus' time, we can't rule out that Josephus, if he said anything about Jesus, wasn't just repeating the story these Christians would have been telling anyone who would have listened. Thus even if authentic it proves nothing.

The same can be said for all of the non-Christian witness to Jesus that Holding and company like trooping out to prove that Jesus existed. Since they are not eye witnesses to Jesus they can't be used as Historical evidence for Jesus, at best they tell us what others believed about Jesus, at worse they are flagrant forgeries writing by Christians, who like the author of the Acts of Pilate, couldn't let stand that there was no Roman records about Jesus. Since no one is arguing that there was no Early Christians that believed Jesus existed, these "witnesses" prove nothing.

The rest of the book is filled with "critique" of various representatives of the Christ Myth position, which are really a mixture of ad hominem attacks and straw man characterizations of arguments. As such there not really anything I can say. I will leave it to the people liable in this book to choice whether or not they wish to dignify Holding with correcting his misrepresentation of themselves and their arguments.

Turning from this I would like to mention the "scholar consensus" this book keeps touting. Yes the Christ Myth theory is currently a fringe view ignored by the academic mainstream. That being said the same academic mainstream, especially the secular disciplines of History and Religious Studies, also marginalize the like of Holding and the Inerranist which keep him in business. This in itself proves nothing, but it should be noted that the Historical Jesus the academic scholars so believe in is not the same as the person that Holding is promoting. The current academic orthodoxy is that there was a Historical Jesus but that he was merely a man who after being crucified came to be associated with various mythical archetypes. There also is a school of thought within the mainstream scholarship that says that all that can be said about Jesus is that he existed, that we can know nothing else about him; not exactly the Jesus Holding is looking so desperately for proof of.

Want to see the whole thing? You can easily -- turns out Stevie just stole it from

showmeproof goes for Gold:

Once again show me where it is not child abuse to teach a child that god wants them to be a martyr, show me how it is not child abuse to tell a child who is incapable of knowing or understanding theology that if they don't listen to you they will burn in hell forever, something they can understand and fear. Show me how it is not child abuse to teach your kid the earth is 6ky old, tell me how it is not child abuse to deny a child modern medical attention because God is the one and only provider and his will be done. Its not child abuse because he disagrees with them, its child abuse because it is physically, mentally, and emotionally abusive. No it shows what a poor christian you are.

Here's a collection of comments from dumb YouTube atheists:

In response to a study on oral tradition from African oral cultures, NotWhollySane: A

nywho africa and biblecountry from 2000 years ago are different things. And I'm sure those aftricans have ghosts and goblins as part of their oral tradition. So ghosts and goblins must really exist! It's now historical! lol.

ijaju refutes arguments for the authorship of Matthew:

maybe Pontius Pilate wrote bible

Jaxuber demonstrates his knowledge of what a syllogism is:

All of your evidence for there being a Jesus is from biblical references. If that's not syllogism i do not know what is. Is ignorance bliss? I was hoping you could tell me.

nyarltep offers the Best Arguments in the Universe for the Christ myth:

there are no contemporary historical accounts of your mythical god-man

if your creator of the universe was writing a book dont you think it would make things more clear? refute that

do you comb your hair with a porkchop?




hackenbollox the history student says:

WHy don't you pray to your preposterous magic man? Maybe your prayers will be answered. As it happens, the response was there. Hearsay does not constitute critically robust evidence. All your drivel is hearsay, and does not stand up to scrutiny. Do you actually have any critically robust evidence for your magic man. Tacitus only talked about what people believed.

robtul12 clears the way for us:

Craig, Evans, and Wright are much more soldiers of the faith than they are disinterested scholars. The same can be said of you. You have too much invested in your mythology to do the sensible thing which is to abrogate it along with all other religiuos myths. No, no, no, you think your faith alone is true and special and your miracles are the only real miracles and your god is the real deal. Where have I heard this before. Your like talking to a fundie muslim except your a Christian. Implacable.

crunkjizzle demands:

of course contemporary historians are required. what is an example of an excepted period/event that didnt have them? there very well could be many, but not that i know of.

After our reader listed Hillel and Hori, he said:

any that someone who hasnt extensively studied those fields would have heard of??

Back on TWeb, Tassman has this to say:

My point with the 'tooth fairy' reference was that to say that science does not disprove god or anything else. It is similar to the "prove that god doesn't exist" approach which is not acceptable. Normally one is not expected to prove a negative.

There is NO evidence for god apart from philosophical arguments and they are speculations, not evidence.

ENeGMA also helped out with Logic 101:

just because it's fallacious doesn't make it false.

Cuttingedgecomix made a speech for us in close:

You live in a world of deception. Someday even you will see that keeping the status quo was the exact opposite of what you should have been doing all along. Look at your world-take a little responsibility and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. And as far as Zeitgeist goes, no matter WHAT you WANT to believe, the truth is that the formulaic religion you are so zombified and committed to IS just a carbon copy of egyptian beliefs and countless other religions each vying for the otherwise intelligent individual's failure to see through the veil of manipulation and control due to your own weaknesses.

So easily do the sheep continue to walk off the cliff, blind and deaf to the screams of the fallen-led only by the stench of the opinionated [jerk] in front of them. So you keep believing what others write and tell you-while I continue to observe the failures and fall of man who believe as you do. Look at the world and where it's beliefs and politics are taking it. Chances are you will have your "Holy War"-because prophecy isn't fulfilled by some mysterious supernatural force-but by the idiots that believe in it.

The June 2009 Christian and Miscellany Collection

UrbanMonk on honestly researching Christianity:

The way to research is honestly. One must be extremely honest to approach what is entirely true...what is "the Truth". Understand that covering up the truth are rhetoric, lies, fibs, prevarications, illusions, delusions, misdirections, irrational logic, impeccable yet insane logic, general confusion, general resistance...fear. There is also fear of GOD. This, believe it or not is the fear of love, truth and life. This fear can overrule an intelligent, logical, mind. A mind can also be fooled by what it "loves" which is not true. It will seek to rationalize and justify it's existence. Also, don't expect the devil to teach you how to escape from hell. And even as it teaches you how to escape, it's teachings will keep you chained down. So to approach this study you may need some backbone (principles). Consider the idea that all fear is illegitamate and illegitamizes its perveyors. Beware of love substitutes...what is called love but really isn't. Love must never be limited. Take responsibility, and think in terms of equality. God is perfectly capable of creating equals. So the concept of heirarchy is questionable and you want to beware the various ways heirarchy is taught. It will keep you in hell. That is another thing. This is hell. That is the way to approach salvation. Don't fool yourself about what you think the world is or what other's say it is. It is not the truth, and where there is no truth it is hell. The truth will also be logical. There is an internal consistency to it's argument. It may sound insane to the insanely logical. But it's logic is sane. That is what salvation comes down to. Is GOD sane or insane? Hell would prove GOD is insane. And hell is insane to those who love the truth. nominates Christian Platinum:

In the Bible, God has promised that he will protect his people from the "noisome pestilence." This description certainly applies to this new disease. If you believe in God and the Bible, you don't have to be afraid that you will get the Swine Flu. God has assigned his angels to protect you from it.

Ty Rockwell tries hard for Gold:

The dichotomy is really "facts/Truth." Facts are temporal, temporary. Truth is eternal, and the Truth will change the facts. Some things of the Spirit can only be understood as the Spirit teaches it to our spirits.

You can't use your own floating, changing, moving definition of heresy. Yours is your OPINION. I posted from a real Biblical Greek Dictionary.

It shows that hersy is being like Hank, devisive and sectarian. I've shown it. BY BIBLICAL GREEK, HANK IS A HERETIC! YOU LOSE.

Here, he defends one of Benny Hinn's false prophecies:

I didn't say anything about "guessing." He knew, but he was wrong. It wasn't a 'guess.'

IncRus aids with the scholarship:

No, I do'n't support my assumption with lexicon evidence because this is what a natural man does.

But I support my assumption by "comparing spiritual things with spiritual as the Holy Spirit teaches" (1 Cor. 2:13).

EphremHagos wins for this prime bit of insanity:

It is a matter of greatest concern when there are few or no reported cases of visions of God during an extended season, such as our time, for such open visions promised and fulfilled long ago in Scriptures.

"This is what I will do in the last days, God says: I will pour out my Spirit on everyone. Your sons and daughters will proclaim my message; your young men will see visions, and your old men will have dreams. Yes, even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will proclaim my message. I will perform miracles in the sky above and wonders on the earth below. There will be blood, fire and thick smoke; the sun will be darkened, and the moon will turn red as blood, before the great and glorious day of the Lord comes. And whoever calls out to the Lord for help will be saved." Acts 2: 17-21 quoting Joel 2: 28-32

The terms of reference, defining clearly the promise as well as the factors and scope of open vision of self-revelation of God, are all given. Specifically, Scriptures highlight again and again the independence of God's life-giving Spirit in face-to-face confrontation with the worthlessness of matter or man's power, i.e., the flesh (John 6: 62-63) beginning from the standard of a self-sufficient flame (complete with the name, "I Am Who I Am") coming from the middle of the unconsumed bush (Ex. 3: 1-15) to the climax of self-sufficient life (with the identical name of "I Am Who I Am") in the death of Jesus Christ on the cross (John 8: 21-28; 19: 30-37) as final evidence of the self-revelation of the one true God in terms of his absolute power over death and life! This is also the context which defines the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, not as an off-the-cuff set of separate events, but premeditated and simultaneous, strictly "according to the Scriptures", and subject to personal verification without which even the majority of the twelve disciples ran and hid for their lives (Luke 24: 25-27)!

Therefore, the Christian practice of acceptance of Jesus Christ on the strength of hearsay and "by faith" is not defensible! It should be noted that there are no less than two references made by Jesus Christ, on the first days of Introduction to Discipleship Training, to the significance and nature of specific visions as a basis for faith (John 1: 35-42 especially verse 39; verses 43-51).

Ben Sinai is weird today:

The so called NT does not start until the book of Acts because.........

Heb 9:16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

.........We also do not accept any of the epistles as scripture but rather what they are, letters written to people. Whether it be an individual or a group. What we do except as scripture is those works which have "Thus saith Yah" or as the KJV would say "Thus saith the Lord/God". The only work in the so called NT that has such is the only work in the so called NT that we accept as scripture and that is the book of Revelation. Now this isn't to take away from anything else that is written because those letters are written by those that followed and observed the Torah and the faith of Yahshua until their deaths. What they had to say helps us understand more of that day and what they knew and followed as was taught by Yahshua himself. As far as any other works outside of that which we find in the authorized KJV we do not observe. Most do not understand what we have much less adding thereto.

Happy Riches is, too:

Abraham partook of the bread and the wine, was taught by a priest (the messenger of God), tithed. layed his life down for his brother (was his brother's keeper), tithed, gave God the glory publicly, obeyed God's voice, kept God's charge (or mandate), kept God's commandments, kept God's statutes, kept God's laws, and was declared as righteous because he believed God would do as he promised, yet was never baptized.

In saying that Abraham was never baptized: he was never baptized in water. But this does not preclude the fact that he might have been baptized into Jesus death (water baptism being symbolic of this).

Of Abraham, Jesus said, "If you are God's children, you will do what Abraham did." Naturally, I assume you are doing all that Abraham did, because you understand what all ths means.

Franktalk has a monumental analysis for us:

In 2peter we have a verse that a thousand years are as one day. In prophesy we are dealing with inspired writing directly from God. Because of this we have timeframes that may apply to God or to man. So any mention of a short time is relative to who is waiting. If it is God who is outside of time on earth then a short time can be thousands of years. I happen to believe that :

2Pe 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Refers to His second coming. I use the pattern of three days as a guide for His appearing. In the third day.

32 AD death of Christ

2000 x 360 days = 720,000 days

720,000 / 365 days = 1967 years

1967 + 32 = 1999 approx without counting leap year days.

So if He comes in the third day it can be anytime in the next thousand years or so. Again I don't get too wrapped up with words dealing with how shortly something will happen. So if this is a correct interpretation of these verses then it has happened in the sense that we are in the third day. It is no longer a limitation. But it does change the immediate sense of other verses. I see these verses as justification to rely on events and not on a timeframe that may be God's clock which we know nothing about.

Moving outside known Christendom, we have a reader who says: A screwball to all Muslim apologists. They have truly bizarre arguments against the crucifixion. I'm in my first argument with a Muslim ever, and it is easier than dealing with pagan-parallel skeptics. A few choice samples."

Why Mary Magdalene considered Jesus to be gardener? Do resurrected bodies look like gardeners? No! Because he was disguised in the form of a gardener, he was hiding from the Jews so that they shouldnt recognize him, otherwise they will crucify him again. Why a spirit will be afraid of anyone to be put back to death, according to bible you die once, spirits dont die. He had not DIED and was not RESURRECTED. If he had DIED and if he was RESURRECTED he would not have any reason to be AFRAID, because the resurrected body can't DIE twice.

Note in John 20:15, she is searching for HIM and not IT - a dead body. Further, she wants to know as to where they had LAID him, not to as where they had BURIED him? So that I might take HIM away. She is not thinking of a dead, rotting corpse. She is looking for the L-I-V-E Jesus. She is not a "super-woman" of the American comics, who could with ease carry a corpse of at least a hundred and sixty pounds, wrapped with another 'hundred pounds weight of aloes and myrrh' (John 19:39) making a neat bundle of 260 pounds. She was looking for a Jesus who was very much alive, a Jesus she could hold by the hand and take him home for rest, relaxation and recuperation, so that, I might take him away.

Jesus told her not to touch him but why? Because he was in his physical form he had the wounds while nailed on the cross, if she touched him he would have feel pain, so he was not in a spirit form. Cleary Christ said I am not yet ascended to my Father proving that he was not crucified. What Jesus is telling Mary in so many different words is that 'HE IS NOT RESURRECTED FROM THE DEAD. That he is alive.

Acts 1:3(To whom also he showed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:)

The greek word used there is ZEM which means alive, never the word resurrected is used it is talking about alive Jesus.

Here's one related to The Aryan Jesus: Christian Theologians and the Bible in Nazi Germany by Susannah Heschel, which looks to be a well-researched look at a very dark stain on European Christianity. But the Screwball is down in the reviews, of which there are two, one a 5-star and one a 2-star rating. It's the 2-star reviewer named "Oni Hanzo" that gets the award:

This is a fundamentally dishonest work, in that it creates the illusion that somehow the "Nazis" invented the concept of an "Aryan Jesus" who was at odds with Judaism and the Old Testament itself. But, any casual look at the past of Christianity will demonstrate that these beliefs were quite common in its past. Pre-Christian (BC) religious communities like the Mandeans and Hellenistic Gnostics already considered the practice of the Hebrews (and their god) to be the works of the Devil himself, while early Christians in the likes of Valentinians, Manicheans, and Cathars viewed Jesus as the antithesis of the Hebrew god of Genesis and as its enemy. In fact, modern research (and most honest study of the historical reality of Judea at the time) has come to the conclusion that it is indeed very difficult to know if Jesus was a Hebrew, although they can CLEARLY affirm that he was NOT a Judean but a Galilean (which were actually descendants of Roman Gauls). In fact, if you read both Greek sources for the New Testament, the term "Jew" never appears (it would be impossible since this is a "modern" term), instead, the term Judeans and Hebrews is utilized (Judean was the same as saying 'New Yorker').

Laura Stanton wins for this comment:

Apparently a transcript from early Christian bible exists translated from scripts by a man named Nan Hamadi. Elaine Pagel discusses in her book "The Gnostic Gospels". Sorry not seen her book yet, so don't have the publisher or year as yet. Reincarnation is in Gospels of Thomas, Mary Magdalen, Judas etc.etc. Therefore must also have been part of Jesus's teachings if these teachings where then removed by early Christian authorities.

Gatsby offers her New Age take on a book (Genesis) that requires a grammatical-historical take, with the nuttiest comments being:

The image is what God has in His Divine Mind.

You could call it the idea or plan or blueprint, all would be correct. The female is the Intellegence which outcrops the image or idea in the Divine Mind and the 2 coming together, give birth to the Divine Son, which we call the Christ/ Atman or whatever name the particular religion uses.

This creative ablitity that we all posses is what 'the made in our image' means. We have the ability to create our reality and to become co-creators with God. The Holy Spirit of course is the Christ within. He is also called the Comforter in the Bible.

To say that we were all angels when God created the world would be correct. We all have angelic birth long before we had human birth. We as souls, have gone where angels fear to tred.

You see you are trying to fit a litteral interpetation into the Bible which is not there. This is why Chistians are getting all het up about your God and my God, they names of what one religion call's them verses another religion that calls God by another name. It doesn't matter for all unconsciously know the name of God, but regardless of that for the moment there is only ONE God and One Life..

I dont support a Trinitarian approach, I have no position to defend. That is the work of the ego. But the trinity is a fact and again God is NOT a person ie a human being taking to another 2 human beings. All is energy and vibration and when you come to see that is the case it brings with it a new understanding of what the Bible is actually saying.

if you remain with the beleif that God is a person who has a body, head, arms, legs, torso etc then you will not come to know God the Real Self which is within you and is within all of us because God becomes the thing He Makes.

God has NO wife, God is NOT a person nor is the passive Intelligence a woman. You misunderstand. Once you let go of the idea that God is like us, ie having form of Itself, which is doesn;t have, It is Light and Music, the music and sound being paramount in the scheme of things, and I dont mean rock and roll bands of today, LOL First there was the Word, the word was sound, not actually speaking English or French or Herbrew for that matter. Wrong understand generally negates the Bible because it is read with mortal eyes and it is a great spiritual book when it is read with the Spiritual eye, or third eye as it often is called.

Of course we are angels and it is in the Bible. And, no it doesn't complicate things at all.


This btw does not mean we are bad in any way, we are doing God's bidding and going where the other angels fear to tred.

Hence is goes without saying that we had angelic birth

An unnamed person at wins for this:

Yeah. But the fact is, the Sermon on the Mount, which is a beautiful thing, does not appear in Mark, which was the first written gospel. And these views are not attributed to Jesus in the letters of Paul, which are the earliest post-crucifixion documents we have. You see Paul develop a doctrine of universal love, but he's not, by and large, attributing this stuff to Jesus. So, too, with "love your enemies." Paul says something like love your enemies, but he doesn't say Jesus said it. It's only in later gospels that this stuff gets attributed to Jesus. This will seem dispiriting to some people to hear that Jesus wasn't the great guy we thought he was.

Karen DeandradeOuellette goes for Gold:

How can you pit such general remark about salt and sugar on somthing obvious so serious are you kidding me I do agree what the man did was totally appauling. Tell me did you react this way to Bill Clintons indiscretions? Or how about because your obvious against republicans it is so obvious. How about Obama and his discusting dealings with Illinois already aborted babys that are still living. A group of woman and man tried to pass in that state the right to save those babys he not only voted against but spoke and the only person to speak up against it is that a morally correct look thier is sin and that is all it is but thankfully we are forgiven for that how thw heck can you be judge and jury.Do you do evreything right dont convince me you think about it believe it not no sin is greater than the other but the only unforgiveable one is denial of God and your savior. And I know to non believers think this is a nother holly roler but if thats what you want to call it so be it I want eternal life so with that forgive and I will pray for all my tresspasses.K

Finally, Eeset drivels on:

In those days marriages were arranged by the parents. In the case of Mary who had no father and who had been given as a child to the service of those who prepared for the coming of the messiah Joseph was selected by the leaders or holy ones o the Essene sect. Joseph originally rejected the idea because he was older and had children by a previous marriage. Joseph experienced or received a visit by an angel and was then obedient. The marriage ceremony took place at Carmel. The life together developed over the years and James, the daughter and Jude were born to them about 10 years after the Master was born. The various documents and positions of the Catholic church do not properly reflect much about Mary and certainly not about her life after Jesus was born. They also do not tell of her being one of 12 virgins set aside, trained, educated and brought up by the holy men of the Essenes. They do not tell of her selection or designation as the one by an angel on the temple steps when she was 12 years old. This took place at sunrise as the 12 were ascending the steps of the temple for their morning devotionals. That particular day it was Mary's turn to be first in the line for it was done each in their turn in a 12 day cycle.

I have confidence this information will receive scoffs. Nonetheless the questions have been asked and I am providing that which I know. Do with it as your heart directs.

When questioned by about her source for this, she admitted "You will not find that information on the web nor in any library or collection of writings that is open to the public. Those who are guardians of it have not yet released it and I do not know when they will though I suspect the time is approaching." (here).

Screwball to a pastor mentioned in Time that allows the congregation to post messages on Twitter on the screen behind him during the service. He said he did it so the service (and I quote) "doesn't suck so much". Yes, because that's what important. The entertainment value of church should take precedence over doctrine and the respect one should have in the assembly of God.

Screwball to over 100 pastors in DC who rallied in support of gay marriage:

A diverse coalition of more than 100 clergy gathered in a Southeast Washington church yesterday to show their support for same-sex marriages in the District.

"We declare that our faith calls us to affirm marriage equality for loving, same-sex couples," said the Rev. Dennis Wiley, pastor of the Covenant Baptist Church, as he stood in the pulpit of his church before religious leaders from all eight wards of the city.

Tulsa, Oklahoma goes for Gold:

Evangelical Group Banned From Tulsa Housing Projects, Chapter Leader Says

A Christian evangelical group that works to improve the lives of underprivileged children says it has been prohibited from conducting Bible study classes in public housing projects in Tulsa, Okla., potentially violating a Supreme Court ruling that upheld religious groups' right to the use of public institutions.

...And for more than two decades, the fellowship has hosted a religious-themed summer program in Tulsa's tough housing projects, designed to keep children from falling victim to the temptations of drugs and crime.

But recently, the fellowship was told that it was in violation of a long-standing policy prohibiting religious instruction on public housing property, said Larry Koehn, who heads the organization's chapter in the city.

A "long-standing policy" that hasn't been cited in "more than two decades" that this organisation has been giving these classes? Riiiiiiiiiiiight. and this comment:

Ever watch Brian Fleming's "The God Who Wasn't There"? He covered this in greater detail. -- why do they have an outreach program if they're pluralistic?

Britain Opening First Atheist Summer Camp for Children

The five-day retreat is being subsidized by Richard Dawkins, the evolutionary biologist and author of "The God Delusion," and is intended to provide an alternative to faith-based summer camps normally run by the Scouts and Christian groups.

Crispian Jago, an IT consultant, is hoping the experience will enrich his two children.

"I'm very keen on not indoctrinating them with religion or creeds," he said earlier this month. "I would rather equip them with the tools to learn how to think, not what to think."