Atheist Activist Group Seeks Removal of Christian Flag From Georgia Courthouse

FlagPEMBROKE, Ga. — A prominent professing atheist organization is seeking the removal of a Christian flag from a county courthouse in Georgia out of its assertion that its presence is unconstitutional.

The Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) sent a letter on July 6 to the clerk of courts at the Bryan County Courthouse to demand that the flag be ejected from the courtroom. The flag—a white and blue flag with a red cross first created in 1897 to honor the Christian faith—sits in the corner by the judge’s bench.

“It has been said that the white in the flag represents the biblical conceptions of purity, the blue in the flag represents the baptism in water, and the red color of the cross is symbolic of the sacrifice Jesus Christ made when He was crucified,” attorney Elizabeth Cavell wrote.

“The inherent religious significance of the Christian flag and Latin cross is undeniable and is not disguisable,” she said. “No secular purpose, no matter how sincere, will detract from the overall message that the flag stands for Christianity and the overall display promotes Christianity.”

Cavell asserted that the flag is therefore a violation of the Constitution’s Establishment Clause, which reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

“The display of these patently religious symbols on county property confers government endorsement of Christianity, a blatant violation of the Establishment Clause,” she wrote.

FFRF is consequently seeking the removal of the flag, as it believes that it sends a “theocratic message of intimidation to non-Christians” and “favoritism to Christians.”

  • Connect with Christian News

It is not yet known how Rebecca Crowe, the Byrant County clerk of courts, will respond.

As previously reported, the Georgia state Constitution, first formally written in 1777—just one year after the founding of America—acknowledged Christianity and required its leaders to be Christians.

“[W]e the people of Georgia, relying upon the protection and guidance of almighty God, do ordain and establish this Constitution,” it reads. “The representatives shall be chosen out of the residents in each county, who shall have resided at least twelve months in this state … and they shall be of the Protestant religion, and of the age of twenty-one years…”

“[L]et us not forget the religious character of our origin,” American statesman Daniel Webster also declared during his famous “Plymouth Oration” in 1820, less than 50 years after the nation’s founding. “Our fathers were brought hither for their high veneration for the Christian religion. They journeyed by its light and labored in its hope. They sought to incorporate its principles with the elements of society, and to diffuse its influence through all their institutions, civil, political or literary.”

However, as previously reported, a city council in Georgia voted last year to remove its Christian flag from outside city hall over fears of a legal challenge. The city had received a demand letter from Americans United for Separation of Church and State, but it is unknown how much influence the letter had on the decision.


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • Grace Kim Kwon

    America needs Christianity; it’s her only lifeline! Athiesm = nothingness filled with evil, despair, death, meaninglessness. Christianity = hope, truth, light, life.

    • Rookheight

      America needs decision-makers who recognize the real world and dispense with superstition.

      Atheism declines to adopt myths, instead confronting reality even when it is uncomfortable. Christianity may give many hope, but that doesn’t make it true, despite adherents’ attempt to claim the word “truth” as their own.

      Faith is believing what you know ain’t so, and we need better than that in our government. Outside the government, promote any comforting myth you want.

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        The West was founded and nourished by Christianity. Atheists only destroyed nations.

        • Frank Dorka

          That’s true, except when the Christian President of a Christian Nation had two Christian pilots drop bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Had nothing to do with atheism, I can tell you. It was a Christian that opened fire on a Planned Parenthood and killed three innocent people. It was a Christian that last week took the life of a transgender woman. So many killings in the name of your Christian god and you can say what you do? You little one, are a bigot, a hater and a liar.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            There are 2.3 billion Christians on earth today and all of Europeans and Americans and Canadians and Australians claimed to be Christian until 50-40 years ago. Your samples mean nothing. Imperial Japan slaughtered more people than two atomic bombs combined. Mankind does not need nukes to conduct massacre. Today’s USA is in a mess because today’s Americans disrespect their parents.

          • Frank Dorka

            Do you mean the parents that ignored the ecological warnings of the 1970’s, that held very little regard for countering pollution and held to their beloved carbon fuel quest to destroy the planet? The parents that sent their boys off to fight a war that had nothing to do with our own country’s security? The parents that told us to believe in the faith that they believed and their parents before them as well, that has given us the worst race relations since the 1960’s, hatred of homosexuals and others, a strict moral compass to hate people of other faiths, those parents? The parents that held marijuana in contempt only to find out now that if they had partaken, they would not be facing Alzheimers at this point in their lives?
            Maybe respect for the multitude of parents that neglect, their children, starve their children or let their children suffer and die because their faith in god is stronger than their belief in medicine?
            I am so glad that your parents were not like the majority and need to have respect for all the good they have done, right?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            They are still your parents, and those Americans were the best species of all and were respected by most people on Planet Earth, whatever their flows were. And they were not hellish blasphemers or selfish baby-killers or depraved Sodomites or sex addicts like today’s generation. Today’s secular people are the worst kind of humans in the entire human history. Happy is a man whose descendants are not today’s secular Westerners or the mimickers.

          • Frank Dorka

            “Make America Hate, Again”.
            You are so very “out-there” are you taking your medications?
            You cannot change the Constitution at this late date, and even though you are the majority, you are losing ground fast. Still with Christians numbering at about 72% you are still the majority, right. So what are YOU Christians doing wrong, to lose control? Must be YOUR fault.
            P.S. Get your politics from somewhere besides the pulpit…it’s refreshing.

          • Michael A. Todd

            Prophecy shows the decline of nations around the world before Christ returns. Our government that you like so much has been based on professional liars for a couple of decades. Simultaneously, as God was taken out of schools, abortions began, and other morals declined, our leaders went down hill also. But, you are also correct in that Christians should have done much more to slow the slide.

          • Jalapeno

            “abortions began”

            I think you mean “legalized abortions”.

            People have been desperately trying to end their own pregnancies for much longer.

          • MarkSebree

            Pretty much since prehistoric times.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            Are you inferring because of that fact, God sees it as acceptable?

          • Jalapeno

            No, I’m saying that acting like it’s a product of the country becoming more secular is inaccurate.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            Lexical ambiguity ! Plain-speak please.

          • Jalapeno

            Not sure how that’s unclear..but I’ll rephrase.

            There was an implication / statement made that women wanting abortions is a product of the country becoming less overtly Christian.

            It’s not true.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            See if this sounds closer to the “implication/statement” that we are discussing: “Because of more women rejecting God’s commandments concerning murder (the slaughter of innocent living beings),we are seeing more abortions in the country/ world.”
            I would say that is a very accurate statement! When the egotistical, sinfully fallible, and finite minds of humans, including mankind’s evolving standards of humanity and thought, begin to announce to the world that murder of infants in now acceptable, we are mocking God’s ultimate authority. Those people are making themselves as gods. This assuredly has its consequences in our world today for those who listen to the voice of “the father of lies”.

          • Jalapeno

            Did you forget that the abortion rate is going down?

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            What is it that you are trying to say?

          • Jalapeno

            I’m saying that trying to blame abortions on people not being as religious anymore is false.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            I am interested in your views on why you believe this is so.

          • Jalapeno

            People have been trying to get abortions for all of human history.

            That means that it can’t really be blamed on a lack of religion.

          • David Cromie

            What do ‘gods’ have to do with abortion?

          • MarkSebree

            It does not matter if you think that it is acceptable. What I was stating is a fact.

            Besides, what did you think that Numbers 5 actually was?

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            RE. “It does not matter if you think that it is acceptable”

            ~~~~~~ You are correct but it DOES matter what God thinks!

            RE. “Besides, what did you think that Numbers 5 actually was?”

            ~~~~~~ Please be more specific.

          • MarkSebree

            “You are correct but it DOES matter what God thinks!”

            Except for the fact that your deity NEVER has an opinion of something that is different from your personal opinion. That is because you are just wrapping your personal opinion on a subject into a package and claiming that it came from your deity in an ineffectual attempt to keep it from being questioned. The problem is that such a strategy does not work. You have not even provided any objective evidence that any deity even exists.

            This means that you basically contradicted yourself in the same sentence since what you said effectively means “You are correct in it does not matter what I think is acceptable, but it does matter what I think is acceptable.”

            Regarding Number 5:
            Numbers 5 details a recipe for causing a woman to abort a pregnancy “as a test of infidelity”. The “sweepings of the temple floor” would often contain a fungus called ergot, which is commonly found on grains, one of the chief sacrifices of the ancient Hebrews. This fungus produces a low level poison, one that can cause some people to become sick, and can often be fatal to a developing embryo or fetus. Most of that chapter is the recipe and the ritual that they surrounded it with.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “… you are just wrapping your personal opinion on a subject into a package and claiming that it came from your deity in an ineffectual attempt to keep it from being questioned.” (sic)

            ~~~~~~~ More accurately: “… you are just wrapping your BELIEF / FAITH…”

            My “opinion” counts for nothing concerning what God has written in the Bible.
            I know better than to think it will not be “questioned”.
            I am always willing to discuss dissimilarities.

          • MarkSebree

            “More accurately: “… you are just wrapping your BELIEF / FAITH…””

            No, I was correct in the first place since your “BELIEF/FAITH” is nothing more than your personal opinion. The fact that I reference your beliefs, your “faith”, your interpretation of your mythology, and your “attribution” to your deity as being actually references to your personal opinions, wrapped up in a manner that you wished would keep them from being questioned is perfectly accurate.

            “My “opinion” counts for nothing concerning what God has written in the Bible.
            I know better than to think it will not be “questioned”.
            I am always willing to discuss dissimilarities.”

            Correction: “what men wrote in the Bible.” You have never shown that your deity even exists. And an imaginary being cannot write anything.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            MarkSebree

            M.S. ——— Correction: “what men wrote in the Bible.”

            C.V.S. ———— CORRECTION:
            2 Peter 1:21
            For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

            2 Timothy 3:16
            All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

            The Bible’s claims of being from God should not be understood as arguing in a circle or by circular reasoning. The testimony of reliable witnesses – particularly of Jesus and His resurrection, but also of others such as Moses, Joshua, David, Daniel, and Nehemiah in the Old Testament, and John and Paul in the New Testament – affirm the authority and verbal inspiration of the Holy Scriptures. Consider the following passages: Exodus 14:1; 20:1; Leviticus 4:1; Numbers 4:1; Deuteronomy 4:2; 32:48; Isaiah 1:10, 24; Jeremiah 1:11; Jeremiah 11:1–3; Ezekiel 1:3; 1 Corinthians 14:37; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Peter 1:16–21; 1 John 4:6.

            NOTE: The evidence for the early existence of the New Testament writings is clear. The wealth of materials for the New Testament becomes even more significant when we compare it with other ancient documents which have been accepted without question.

            Also of interest are the writings of Josephus & Tacitus, historians who recorded much of the history of Israel during the first century. In this they record events which coincide with Scripture.

          • MarkSebree

            “The Bible’s claims of being from God should not be understood as arguing in a circle or by circular reasoning. ”

            Actually, that is EXACTLY what it is. It is a classic example of the logical fallacy of circular reasoning. You do not have any OBJECTIVE evidence that your deity even exists. All you have is your religious text that claims that the deity described therein is real, and you claim that your deity is real because that text claims that it is. By your “reasoning”, all deities are real for exactly the same reason, because a book of myths claim that they are.

            Your references are meaningless since they do nothing to objectively support your premise that your deity exists. Certainly none of those verses do. At best, they show that the person speaking thinks that nobody should question his pronouncements and decrees, which is more egotistical than anything.

            Pretty much all your verse have one thing in common, someone CLAIMS that a deity “spoke” to them. Anyone can claim that a deity spoke to them. That does not mean that one did. More likely, they are using that claim to keep their opinions or commands from being questioned.

            The simplest explanation is that your book of myths was written by men. There was no deity involved at all, and there is no reason to think that one was.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            This is an exercise in redundancy!

            I assert that there is no “circular reasoning” ! I am NOT saying that the Bible is reliable history because I think it is – it has proven itself to be as accurate as any other record of history but you just won’t accept that…. not my problem.

            RE. “… By your “reasoning”, all deities are real for exactly the same reason, because a book of myths claim that they are.” (sic)

            ~~~~~~ Again you have misrepresented what I wrote re. “all deities are real”.
            The only living person who claimed to be deity was Jesus who proved it by rising from the grave ….. and Jesus verified the Scriptures as God’s Word while present as that deity and true man, as one, while Jesus was in His state of humility to redeem mankind !

          • MarkSebree

            “This is an exercise in redundancy!”

            Well, if you had any real, objective sources, it might not be.

            “I assert that there is no “circular reasoning” ! ”

            The you need to provide objective references that do not rely on your religious texts or their primary authors, i.e. people who have a stake in perpetuating the myth. Otherwise, it is the very definition of circular reasoning.

            “! I am NOT saying that the Bible is reliable history because I think it is -”

            Yes, you are. That is exactly what you are claiming.

            ” it has proven itself to be as accurate as any other record of history”

            No, it has not. While there are some references to a few historical events and places, that does not make it reliable. There are too many tales which are plainly no based on any history, or even contradict history. Genesis and Exodus come to mind as a start. And Revelations is certainly not a history.

            ” but you just won’t accept that…. not my problem.”

            It is if you want to support your claims.

            “RE. “… All you have is your religious text that claims that the deity described therein is real, and you claim that your deity is real because that text claims that it is. By your “reasoning”, all deities are real for exactly the same reason, because a book of myths claim that they are.” (sic)
            ~~~~~~ Again you have misrepresented what I wrote re. “all deities are real”. ”

            Actually, I did not represent anything. You claim that your deity is real because your mythology claims that it is real. Well, all mythologies claim that their deities are real, so by your reasoning, that means that all deities are real.

            If you want to claim that your deity actually exists, then you have to provide objective evidence that it is real. Your mythology is not objective. Objective evidence must support your claim without presupposing the beliefs of the people examining it.

            “The only living person who claimed to be deity was Jesus who proved it by rising from the grave ….. and Jesus verified the Scriptures as God’s Word while present as that deity and true man, as one, while Jesus was in His state of humility to redeem mankind !”

            First, Jesus, if he existed, has been dead for 2000 years. Second, he was taken down early from the cross, and his legs were not broken as the others were. The reason that a centurion stuck him with the spear was that he appeared to die after such a short time. One possibility is that when he fell earlier while carrying the cross, his heart was bruised, which cause the area around his heart to fill with fluid, slowing its beat down. And yes, this would have caused him to lose consciousness. The spear released this fluid (remember that it was described as “watery”. (John 19:34)) and thus relieved the pressure on his heart, likely saving his life. Additionally, he was allowed to get something to drink from “a sponge soaked in vinegar” shortly before he appeared to die. Can you be sure that this was not a drug that would render him unconscious and apparently dead? Basically, Jesus and his closest allies not in his inner circle ran a scam on the Romans so that he could run, and not be followed.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            While historical revisionism is the re-examination of accepted secular history, with an eye towards updating it with newly discovered, more accurate, or less-biased information, “deniers” seek evidence to support a preconceived theory, omitting substantial facts.
            A very different process unfolds when someone proceeds from the premise that a major element of human history, such as Christ’s life on earth, His crucifixion and His resurrection is simply inaccurate, and ignores or routinely minimizes evidence that conflicts with that premise. History done in this way is not revisionism, but DENIAL.

            One theory suggests the apostles fabricated the resurrection. Two major problems: One, If the body of Jesus Christ was available, you’d better believe, the Roman authorities would have paraded His body for all to see. Christianity was spreading like a wild fire! And nothing could have quenched that flame quicker than the body of Jesus Christ!

            There are those who suggest that Jesus faked His death and resurrection.
            Do you know the problem with that — if the resurrection of Jesus Christ was not true — there were 11 men that knew it!

            Remember, friend — THESE MEN WERE EYEWITNESSES! They were there!

            “For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were EYEWITNESSES of His majesty.” 2 Peter 1:16

            And these men went so far as seal their testimony with their blood! They died a horrible and martyrs death! FOR A LIE. . . KNOWING IT WAS A LIE ??

            There is no way, these 12 men could have all been deceived.

            If the resurrection of Jesus Christ a lie — THEY KNEW IT!

            You can not find a group of 11 men in the history of this universe who forsook all, were beaten, were jailed and even went so far as die for a lie — KNOWING it was a lie! It is impossible!

            I know the resurrection is a fact, and Watergate proved it to me. How? Because 12 men testified they had seen Jesus raised from the dead, then they proclaimed that truth for 40 years, never once denying it. Every one was beaten, tortured, stoned and put in prison. They would not have endured that if it weren’t true. Watergate embroiled 12 of the most powerful men in the world-and they couldn’t keep a lie for three weeks. You’re telling me 12 apostles could keep a lie for 40 years? Absolutely impossible.

            According to biblical Christianity, true religion is measured by what it produces as much as by what it teaches.

            Christians do NOT have “blind faith” as some suppose. We have Christ’s resurrection to substantiate His words.

            God has left us with historical records. Christians recognize these records simply because people who did see these events have left writings that tell us about them.
            Using the best scholarly methods, and exhaustive, time-tested research, has resulted in irrefutable authority concerning biblical/historical facts.

            NOTE: A person who balks at authority in other things, as some people do in religion, would have to be content to know nothing at all in their life.

            Having presented this information, we have arrived at a juncture, but what takes place hereafter is in the hands of God the Holy Spirit.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            So… in your supposedly logical, scientific mind you are simply going to ignore offhandedly all of the history facts that are listed below? You will if you are unscrupulous enough !

            The Old Testament

            For both Old and New Testaments, the crucial question is: “Not having any original copies or scraps of the Bible, can we reconstruct them well enough from the oldest manuscript evidence we do have so they give us a true, undistorted view of actual people, places and events?”

            The Scribe

            The scribe was considered a professional person in antiquity. No printing presses existed, so people were trained to copy documents. The task was usually undertaken by a devout Jew. The Scribes believed they were dealing with the very Word of God and were therefore extremely careful in copying. They did not just hastily write things down. The earliest complete copy of the Hebrew Old Testament dates from c. 900 A.D.

            The Massoretic Text

            During the early part of the tenth century (916 A.D.), there was a group of Jews called the Massoretes. These Jews were meticulous in their copying. The texts they had were all in capital letters, and there was no punctuation or paragraphs. The Massoretes would copy Isaiah, for example, and when they were through, they would total up the number of letters. Then they would find the middle letter of the book. If it was not the same, they made a new copy. All of the present copies of the Hebrew text which come from this period are in remarkable agreement. Comparisons of the Massoretic text with earlier Latin and Greek versions have also revealed careful copying and little deviation during the thousand years from 100 B.C. to 900 A.D. But until this century, there was scant material written in Hebrew from antiquity which could be compared to the Masoretic texts of the tenth century A.D.

            The Dead Sea Scrolls

            In 1947, a young Bedouin goat herdsman found some strange clay jars in caves near the valley of the Dead Sea. Inside the jars were some leather scrolls. The discovery of these “Dead Sea Scrolls” at Qumran has been hailed as the outstanding archeological discovery of the twentieth century. The scrolls have revealed that a commune of monastic farmers flourished in the valley from 150 B.C. to 70 A.D. It is believed that when they saw the Romans invade the land they put their cherished leather scrolls in the jars and hid them in the caves on the cliffs northwest of the Dead Sea.
            The Dead Sea Scrolls include a complete copy of the Book of Isaiah, a fragmented copy of Isaiah, containing much of Isaiah 38-6, and fragments of almost every book in the Old Testament. The majority of the fragments are from Isaiah and the Pentateuch (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy). The books of Samuel, in a tattered copy, were also found and also two complete chapters of the book of Habakkuk. In addition, there were a number of nonbiblical scrolls related to the commune found.

            These materials are dated around 100 B.C. The significance of the find, and particularly the copy of Isaiah, was recognized by Merrill F. Unger when he said, “This complete document of Isaiah quite understandably created a sensation since it was the first major Biblical manuscript of great antiquity ever to be recovered. Interest in it was especially keen since it antedates by more than a thousand years the oldest Hebrew texts preserved in the Massoretic tradition.”{2}

            The supreme value of these Qumran documents lies in the ability of biblical scholars to compare them with the Massoretic Hebrew texts of the tenth century A.D. If, upon examination, there were little or no textual changes in those Massoretic texts where comparisons were possible, an assumption could then be made that the Massoretic Scribes had probably been just as faithful in their copying of the other biblical texts which could not be compared with the Qumran material.

            What was learned? A comparison of the Qumran manuscript of Isaiah with the Massoretic text revealed them to be extremely close in accuracy to each other: “A comparison of Isaiah 53 shows that only 17 letters differ from the Massoretic text. Ten of these are mere differences in spelling (like our “honor” and the English “honour”) and produce no change in the meaning at all. Four more are very minor differences, such as the presence of a conjunction (and) which are stylistic rather than substantive. The other three letters are the Hebrew word for “light.” This word was added to the text by someone after “they shall see” in verse 11. Out of 166 words in this chapter, only this one word is really in question, and it does not at all change the meaning of the passage. We are told by biblical scholars that this is typical of the whole manuscript of Isaiah.”{3}

            The Septuagint
            The Greek translation of the Old Testament, called the Septuagint, also confirms the accuracy of the copyists who ultimately gave us the Massoretic text. The Septuagint is often referred to as the LXX because it was reputedly done by seventy Jewish scholars in Alexandria around 200 B.C. The LXX appears to be a rather literal translation from the Hebrew, and the manuscripts we have are pretty good copies of the original translation.

            We can now be sure that copyists worked with great care and accuracy on the Old Testament, even back to 225 B.C. . . . indeed, it would be rash skepticism that would now deny that we have our Old Testament in a form very close to that used by Ezra when he taught the word of the Lord to those who had returned from the Babylonian captivity.”{4}

            The New Testament
            The Greek Manuscript Evidence
            There are more than 4,000 different ancient Greek manuscripts containing all or portions of the New Testament that have survived to our time. These are written on different materials.
            Papyrus and Parchment

            During the early Christian era, the writing material most commonly used was papyrus. This highly durable reed from the Nile Valley was glued together much like plywood and then allowed to dry in the sun. In the twentieth century many remains of documents (both biblical and non-biblical) on papyrus have been discovered, especially in the dry, arid lands of North Africa and the Middle East.

            Another material used was parchment. This was made from the skin of sheep or goats, and was in wide use until the late Middle Ages when paper began to replace it. It was scarce and more expensive; hence, it was used almost exclusively for important documents.

            Examples

            1. Codex Vaticanus and Codex Siniaticus

            These are two excellent parchment copies of the entire New Testament which date from the 4th century (325-450 A.D.).{5}

            2. Older Papyrii

            Earlier still, fragments and papyrus copies of portions of the New Testament date from 100 to 200 years (180-225 A.D.) before Vaticanus and Sinaticus. The outstanding ones are the Chester Beatty Papyrus (P45, P46, P47) and the Bodmer Papyrus II, XIV, XV (P46, P75).

            From these five manuscripts alone, we can construct all of Luke, John, Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, Hebrews, and portions of Matthew, Mark, Acts, and Revelation. Only the Pastoral Epistles (Titus, 1 and 2 Timothy) and the General Epistles (James, 1 and 2 Peter, and 1, 2, and 3 John) and Philemon are excluded.{6}

            3. Oldest Fragment

            Perhaps the earliest piece of Scripture surviving is a fragment of a papyrus codex containing John 18:31-33 and 37. It is called the Rylands Papyrus (P52) and dates from 130 A.D., having been found in Egypt. The Rylands Papyrus has forced the critics to place the fourth gospel back into the first century, abandoning their earlier assertion that it could not have been written then by the Apostle John.{7}

            4. This manuscript evidence creates a bridge of extant papyrus and parchment fragments and copies of the New Testament stretching back to almost the end of the first century.

            Versions (Translations)
            In addition to the actual Greek manuscripts, there are more than 1,000 copies and fragments of the New Testament in Syria, Coptic, Armenian, Gothic, and Ethiopic, as well as 8,000 copies of the Latin Vulgate, some of which date back almost to Jerome’s original translation in 384 400 A.D.

            Church Fathers
            A further witness to the New Testament text is sourced in the thousands of quotations found throughout the writings of the Church Fathers (the early Christian clergy [100-450 A.D.] who followed the Apostles and gave leadership to the fledgling church, beginning with Clement of Rome (96 A.D.).
            It has been observed that if all of the New Testament manuscripts and Versions mentioned above were to disappear overnight, it would still be possible to reconstruct the entire New Testament with quotes from the Church Fathers, with the exception of fifteen to twenty verses!

            A Comparison
            The evidence for the early existence of the New Testament writings is clear. The wealth of materials for the New Testament becomes even more significant when we compare it with other ancient documents which have been accepted without question.

            **New Testament manuscripts are fragmentary. Earliest complete manuscript is from ca. 350; lapse of event to complete manuscript is about 325 years.

            None of us could “prove” our faith in God’s Word by pure logic as you prove a thing in math. We believe simply because people who did see them have left writings that tell us about them; in fact, on irrefutable authority.

            A man, who balks at authority in other things, as some people do concerning the Bible, would have to be content to know nothing at all in his life.

          • Rookheight

            And yet all the other times when nations around the world have declined over the past 2000 years, Christ never shows up. Funny, huh?

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            Christ was promised and showed up once to complete His mission and that is enough to sustain the faiths and assurances for a myriad.

            John 16:33 Jesus: “I have told you these things, so that in Me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.”

          • Rookheight

            Besides that you’re quoting the bible to try to refute an argument against the bible’s validity, you’re missing the original poster’s point entirely. He was saying that the “decline of nations” is knock-down proof that Jesus would be returning any day now. And he apparently has no answer to the fact that nations have declined many times in the past 2,000 years, and Jesus still hasn’t shown up.

            If Jesus made a promise (which he didn’t, because “He” doesn’t exist any more than the Christian god does), it has gone unfulfilled.

            Also, you’re misusing the word myriad. The noun-form is always used with a preposition. Maybe you meant “a myriad of years”? Otherwise it’s an adjective, as in “myriad Christians have poor grammar.”

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            R. ——— “decline of nations” is knock-down proof that Jesus would be returning any day now. And he apparently has no answer to the fact that nations have declined many times in the past 2,000 years, and Jesus still hasn’t shown up.

            C.V.S. ———- I am not basing anything on what someone wrote concerning the “decline of nations”.
            Jesus never said anything about “any day now” but He did give us referents regarding the supernatural unconventional occurrences in earthly courses that will precede His return to judge mankind.

            LUKE 12;40 Jesus: “You also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect Him.”

            R. ——- Also, you’re misusing the word myriad. The noun-form is always used with a preposition. Maybe you meant “a myriad of years”? Otherwise it’s an adjective, as in “myriad Christians have poor grammar.”

            C.V.S. ——— RE. ” assurances for a myriad.”
            MYRIAD (noun) 1. a countless or extremely great number.
            I prefaced myriad with the letter “a” which does not need a prepositional phrase for the reason that the referent in context was “people” re. “Christ was promised and showed up once to complete His mission and that is enough to sustain the faiths and assurances for a myriad.” (sic)

            Also, 10,000 is indicative of an “extremely great number”.
            Myriad – 10,000 (from greek ‘murioi’)
            Therefore: 10,000 = a myriad.

            There is no need to become frustrated and nasty.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            Excellent ! Nothing to refute here!

            MATTHEW 24:10 Jesus: “At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.”

            Everyone has the ability to comprehend the rapid and exponential decline of world conditions by this truth.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            You should be ashamed of your blatant misrepresentation of Kim’s statement: “USA needs Christianity for the truth and honor like all others do.”
            It is obvious you are a sophists and twist words to make yourself seem infallible with your deplorable insinuation and referent to: “You cannot change the Constitution at this late date”.

            Kim simply stated that she feels that the ” USA needs Christianity for the truth and honor like all others do.” She never came close to inferring that the Constitution should be changed to accomodate Christians.

          • awareoftruth

            I’ve always found it interesting that the commandment to “honor your mother and father” is the only one that includes “so it will go well for you” (paraphrasing). Obviously it’s an important point. Deuteronomy 5:16, Ephesians 6:3, Exodus 20:12.

          • Michael A. Todd

            Um, much of the data for global warming, especially from England, was found to be heavily doctored to support their cause.

            Corporations around the world do the polluting, especially China, not to mention their atheistic child slave labor that is used by companies like Apple.

            Natural homeopathic medicines have always been far safer than unnatural allopathic medicines since the 20th century. The AMA’s first big issue to tackle was how to put Homeopathic healers out of business so they could make big money off of patented “cures” if you can call them that.

            I’ve had 4 people in my family die during chemotherapy, not a good track record for modern medicine. One of them was my wife, I’m sure she would have lived longer without the chemo. At least had a better quality of life. So, if you’re believing what your doctor feeds you, I feel sorry for you.

          • Jalapeno

            You’re joking..right? Homeopathy?

            There is actual science to back up actual medicine, you know. Let me guess, all that stuff is a lie?

          • Uselessbastard

            Michael… You may need to look up published research on the validity of homeopathic remedies. If you’re somehow stating that before the advent of modern medicine, humanity was in greater health, I challenge your statistic source. Please provide.

          • This style ten and six

            Homeopathic medicine can never be put out of business; just drink a glass of water from your kitchen tap.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            You are using specious reasoning — a Red Herring”.

            I believe Kim was referring to the many people today who do not raise their children in a God-pleasing way, e.g.; ignoring setting examples of morality and respect for other people and instilling the concept of virtue over vice …. overcoming evil with good, etc.

          • Jolanda Tiellemans

            and all of Europeans and Americans and Canadians and Australians claimed to be Christian until 50-40 years ago.

            Nope, not all.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Yes, at least they respected Christianity. They knew what is good and bad. Something terrible must have happened in the 1970’s. You never got a lesson from the two great wars. Sad.

          • Michael A. Todd

            40 – 50 million babies killed through abortion, what about their lives and what they could have done for America versus the 3 adults killed???

          • Rookheight

            “babies”

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            When does murder stop becoming murder where there is a life to take?

          • Rookheight

            A blastocyst is not a human life. Crushing a bug is far closer to murder than a first-trimester abortion. It’s not a baby, even though it is on track to become one.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            You are referring to a non-viable fetus which would be a dead fetus if removed from the womb. The fetus is about as “non-viable” outside of the womb as an adult that is underwater without breathing apparatus.
            All life needs the proper environment in which to survive
            So, are you saying that because it cannot survive without the womb it is perfectly ethical to kill it? This is the thrust of this discussion, isn’t it? It’s not about semantics.

            If you cannot compose and initiate every internal aspect of an entity that matrixes without any assistance whatsoever and extends itself (GROWS/HAS LIFE) such as a sperm fertilizing an egg to become a zygote (GROWTH/LIFE) which undergoes (GROWTH/LIFE) many cleavages to develop (GROWTH/LIFE) into a ball of cells called a morula until the blastocoele is formed (GROWTH/LIFE) until the early embryo becomes (GROWTH/LIFE) a blastula, which continues on in stages until death. Those (GROWTH/LIFE) cells subsequently die during the (GROWTH/LIFE) progress but are replaced by new (GROWTH/LIFE) cells in an ongoing process.

            You advocate killing that “viability”(GROWTH/LIFE), as it sustains itself, at some point in it’s (GROWTH/LIFE). It matters not when – you would deliberately and brutally stop its progress.

            It is people with a defective moral compass that MAKE life NOT VIABLE by homicidal interference.

            Anything concocted to kill life inside of a womb is pure sophistry to ease the conscience and justify murder intended to satisfy a selfish and immoral disposition.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            “Christian” is a title that is regularly abused but God reads the heart.

            JOHN 10:14 Jesus: “I am the good shepherd; I know My sheep and My sheep know Me— just as the Father knows Me and I know the Father.

            As an example of “title abuse” ::

            Hitler was baptized and confirmed in the Roman Catholic Church, but he ceased to participate in the sacraments after childhood. In his book Mein Kampf and in public speeches he often made statements that affirmed a belief in Christianity.
            Hitler claimed that he continued to believe in an active Deity, and to hold Jesus in high esteem as an “Aryan fighter” who struggled against Jewry. While a few scholars accept these views as genuine, most believe that Hitler was skeptical of religion generally, but recognized that he could not be elected if he expressed his true opinions.

        • Meepestos

          “Atheists only destroyed nations.” Not so, as atheists that were leaders in post WWII Europe (and to this day) that have rejected the belief in the existence of deities, improved the lives of millions by creating social safety nets, advancing civil liberties, and promoting democracy yet they haven’t destroyed any nations doing so. The Prime Minister of Great Britain comes to mind that got in power in 1945, noted for creating the NHS and opposing Stalin in the Cold War also Denmark’s Prime Minister that started the rescue of Danish Jews during WWII to name a few, not to mention other countries outside of Europe like Australia.
          Then you have good citizens that were atheists that saved multitudes like Norman Borloug that saved a billion lives by fixing the world food supply; Alan Turing and his code breaking that enabled the Allies to defeat Germany in many crucial engagements; Jonas Salk discovering and donating the polio vaccine; and Donald A. Henderson saving countless with the eradication of smallpox.
          You have quite a few atheists to be grateful for.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You are wrong. The Europeans and Americans have their being because of the Judeo-Christian values. Only the communists were crazy enough to claim atheism, and the atheists only ravaged te entire region everywhere the communists reigned. The West became seriously puffed up sometime in the 1970’s, and the planet started becoming corrosive about the same time. Atheism corrupted both the youth and the planet. The Western Christian missionaries are the true contributors for all mankind. The Western world including USA has no conscience apart from Christianity. The Western atheists have been some toxic parasites in a Christendom, but they are finally starting to kill the main body this century. A tragedy to a once-great civilization. The Lord God judges the world with justice.

          • Meepestos

            No, I am not wrong. You haven’t refuted the fact of the contributions of the specific good atheists that I have mentioned and how it positively benefited humanity and nations. I just gave you the tip of the iceberg for an example of good atheists.

            I see anthroplogy and history are not your forte; your partial knowledge is noted.

            You seem to conveniently fail to recognize the nations and cultures that theists have destroyed and even the extinction of peoples caused by theists.

            You and other non Christian religious folk also have an agnostic to thank for the secular rights you have.

      • Slidellman4life

        What exactly is the myth?

        • uninvitedguest

          the existence of god

          • Slidellman4life

            Glad you think so. Will you be sure to tell Him He doesn’t exist when you stand before Him?

          • uninvitedguest

            hard to stand before that which doesnt exist

          • Slidellman4life

            You hope.

          • Rookheight

            Would you say that you merely “hope” that Voldemort doesn’t exist, or would it be more accurate to say your confidence that he doesn’t exist is strong and reasonable because he is just a villain from a man-made story?

          • Slidellman4life

            Non-sequitur. Nice try.

        • Rookheight

          The myth starts with: “Once upon a time, God created the heavens and the earth…” and rambles on for quite a while.

          • Slidellman4life

            Again: What is the myth?

      • Michael A. Todd

        Atheists only have secular humanism at their side, and based on where humanity has been heading lately, that can’t be much of a comfort for their future.

        • Rookheight

          I find the impending exodus of religion from first-world countries very comforting, actually. If we have a shot at turning things around for the better, ditching religion is a very good start.

        • Claus von Stauffenberg

          One of the best comments to date for sober contemplation !!!!

      • Claus von Stauffenberg

        YOU WROTE: “Atheism declines to adopt myths.” [sic]

        ~~~~~~ So you believe that “something came from nothing” is not a myth??

        The big bangers believe that once there was nothing, then suddenly, poof, the universe was created from a big bang. If I have nothing in the palm of my hand, close my fingers, speak the word bang, then open my fingers again, still I find there is nothing there. I ask you to explain to us how it is that something as enormous as the universes came from nothing?

        • Rookheight

          First of all, atheists don’t necessarily believe that “something came from nothing.” Atheism is just the lack of belief in supernatural gods, which are indeed myths.

          However, you also clearly don’t understand modern cosmology. I’d recommend reading Lawrence Krauss’s book, “A Universe From Nothing,” which addresses your reasonable concern head-on and answers it thoroughly. If you just stick with your version of it, you are assigning a belief to what you call “big bangers” that they simply don’t have.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            R. —– First of all, atheists don’t necessarily believe that “something came from nothing.” Atheism is just the lack of belief in supernatural gods
            C.V.S. —— Then tell us what atheists believe concerning the origin of life. You know that it is parallel to something as silly as the “something came from nothing” theory.

            R. ——- I’d recommend reading Lawrence Krauss’s book, “A Universe From Nothing,”
            C.V.S. —– I know all about that. Krauss and Dawkins do not have the final word on the origin of life. They can present their theories of what God does not reveal in His Word about the cosmos in all of it’s complexities without venturing into areas and contradict what God has clearly revealed.

            It all comes down to what the Bible tells us about what God knows is important for mankind:

            CORINTHIANS 2:10 “The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. 11 For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12 What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us. 13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words. 14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit. 15 The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments

            Every faithful Christian may humbly adopt Christ’s words. His doctrine is not his own finding, but is from God’s word, through the teaching of His Spirit. And among the disputes which disturb the world, if any man, of any nation, seeks to do the will of God, he will know whether the doctrine is of God, or whether men speak of themselves.

          • Rookheight

            You are plainly pre-supposing that the bible is true. You refer to scientists as theorizing on “what God does not reveal in his Word about the cosmos,” and say “It all comes down to what the Bible tells us about what God knows is important for mankind.”

            How do you expect to convince anyone when you start by assuming you’re right? Just because something doesn’t fit in line with what you already think is true, does not make it false. When those disagreements mount, as is the case between science and the bible, you either have to question your initial assumption or admit that you’re just lying to yourself.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “…you either have to question your initial assumption or admit that you’re just lying to yourself.”

            ~~~~~~ Boy, you got that one wrong!!

            I do not have any “assumptions” about what God has to say. If anything that comes out of the fickle mind of humans runs counter to what Almighty God has said, then I will “admit” that those fickle minds are lying and following the “father of lies”. God’s word is absolute !

          • Rookheight

            You’re still doing it; your assumption that the bible is actually written by a god is so ingrained in your thought process that you can’t even recognize it when it’s called out.

            You were taught a lie, probably a long time ago, and believed it (as most children do). But to remain in denial that you are basing your world-view on the assumption of the bible’s accuracy is a travesty. There’s a big, interesting universe here in the real world and you are cheapening your experience of it tremendously by hanging onto an ancient superstition. Just try tossing out the whole “word of God” and “father of lies” nonsense for a while and take a fresh look at the world. You won’t want to go back to that sad fantasy land.

    • Frank Dorka

      I resent your remark, in fact I started to lose my faith because of the doom and gloom of religion. Atheists = proof, logic, reason, believability.

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        God created everything except for the creatures’ sins. Nothingness creates nothing, and the atheists’ godlessness is evil. Atheism has no logic or reason. Judeo-Christian values alone do.

        • Frank Dorka

          I am sure that your proof and evidence will be forthcoming?
          That’s the problem with discussions with Christians, they have no basis for standing. Sorry, I am sure that you are a sweet girl, but when it comes to debate, you will need a little more backing up your argument..

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            “Honor your father and your mother.” (Exodus ch.20)

          • Frank Dorka

            Are you related to the Duggars?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Who are Duggars?

          • Frank Dorka

            Grace Kim Kwon = moral chaos and nothing meaningful or worthy.

          • Michael A. Todd

            You will need to provide your proof as well.

          • Uselessbastard

            Proof for what?

          • MarkSebree

            I see that you are trying to engage in a logical fallacy. You are trying to shift the burden of proof. The fact of the matter is that Mr. Dorka does not have to prove anything since his is the default position. You cannot generally prove the nonexistence of something. Rather, you are required to objectively prove that something exists. You see, the person or group that is making the affirmative claim, in this case that a deity exists, is the one responsible for supporting that claim. All Frank has to do is to state that there is no objective evidence to support the claim that any deity exists, and he is done.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “Christians, they have no basis for standing..”

            ~~~~~ I will ask you as well : “Proof of what?”

            I will assume you are referring to God and His creation.

            Let’s look at this in a purely secular frame of mind and worldview.

            Your theory of “something out of nothing” and creationism are institutionally viewed as “unprovable”, hence theories.

            To demand proof of one or the other would result in an Ad Hominem at best, so forget about your “burden of proof.”

            Also to be logically considered is the problematic assessment of atheists that does not address the obscurity of theory alternatives.

            “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
            than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” ~ Shakespeare (Hamlet 1.5.166-7)

            “It is not certain that everything is uncertain.” ~ Pascal

          • MarkSebree

            Actually, I did not write that. I was pointing out that Micheal Todd was engaging in a logical fallacy, explaining what that fallacy was, and showing that Frank Dorka only had to make a simple, factual statement that there was no positive, objective evidence that any deity existed for him to support his claim.

            I was stating if you are claiming that your deity exists, you need to support that assertion with objective evidence.

            It is a fact that we do not know what the physical laws of the universe were prior to the Big Bang. We do not even know exactly what the Big Bang actually was. Stating “we do not yet know” is an honest answer, and one that does not require either proof, since it is an admission of ignorance, nor does it require a deity to fill in the holes. In fact, trying to insert a deity into the argument to explain what is not yet known is a logically fallacy known as an appeal to ignorance.

            A demand of proof should not result in ad hominems at all. It should result in a presentation of that proof, as well as questioning and possible refutation of the proof offered. Name Calling is a sign that the other person has nothing substantive to offer.

            Your claim that a deity exists, however, is a positive assertion that does require objective evidence to support.

            Atheists are perfectly willing to consider theoretic alternatives. However, you are required to support those alternatives with reasoned, logical, objective arguments, and it is reasonable for others to challenge those arguments and claims, as well as to examine closely anything that you present as “proof”. The problem with the religious is that they cannot accept that anything that they assert can and will be questioned, and that nobody is required to accept their beliefs as valid just on their say-so.

            Neither of those quotes suggests in any way that any deity exists.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            M.S. —— Atheists are perfectly willing to consider theoretic alternatives.
            C.V.S.—– Not if the authority of Almighty God is brought into it !!

            M.S. —– However, you are required to support those alternatives with reasoned, logical, objective arguments, and it is reasonable for others to challenge those arguments and claims, as well as to examine closely anything that you present as “proof”.

            C.V.S. —— Correspondingly, I will ask you to support your cockamamie theory of “The big Bang” where some people actually believe that once there was nothing, then suddenly, “poof”, the universe was the result of a big bang.
            If I have nothing in the palm of my hand, close my fingers, speak the word bang, then open my fingers again, still I find there is nothing there. I ask you to explain to us in layman’s terms (not in the many false claims that are couched in evolutionist jargon that supports their own theories) how it is that something as enormous at the universes came from nothing?

            M.S. ——- The problem with the religious is that they cannot accept that anything that they assert can and will be questioned, and that nobody is required to accept their beliefs as valid just on their say-so.

            C.V.S. ——- It should not be a “problem”, per se, with Christians but it does cause sadness – not because of personal rejection, but with regard to the rebuff of God’s truths in lieu of leaning toward the “father of lies”.

          • MarkSebree

            “M.S. —— Atheists are perfectly willing to consider theoretic alternatives.
            C.V.S.—– Not if the authority of Almighty God is brought into it !!”

            That is because “the authority of Almighty God” is nonexistent, especially when you have not yet proven that any deity exists, much less your “Almighty God”. It is a cop-out, a dodge, a logical fallacy called an appeal to ignorance, among others. It does not explain anything. It is lazy thinking. It is subjective rather than objective. If a person does not believe in your deity, then any explanation that requires the existence and belief in that deity as a starting point fails from the get-go.

            “M.S. —– However, you are required to support those alternatives with reasoned, logical, objective arguments, and it is reasonable for others to challenge those arguments and claims, as well as to examine closely anything that you present as “proof”.

            C.V.S. —— Correspondingly, I will ask you to support your cockamamie theory of “The big Bang” where some people actually believe that once there was nothing, then suddenly, “poof”, the universe was the result of a big bang.

            If I have nothing in the palm of my hand, close my fingers, speak the word bang, then open my fingers again, still I find there is nothing there. I ask you to explain to us in layman’s terms (not in the many false claims that are couched in evolutionist jargon that supports their own theories) how it is that something as enormous at the universes came from nothing?”

            You really should have read the beginning of my post. You do not have the scientific background to understand any sort of proof that cosmologists would present, and neither do I. However, I do understand enough of the explanation to follow it.

            For starters, evolution is biology, not astrophysics and cosmology. You are not even referencing the correct major branch of science. Second, I said in my post, if you actually tried to read it, that the physical laws and conditions which existed prior to the beginning of our universe are unknown, and currently unknowable. Keep in mind that you are asking for a simplification of top end, Ph.D level physics in a specialized field. Even a “simple” explanation requires a good grounding in science and mathematics.

            One theory, which is based on how our universe is expected to die in something like 10 to the power of 100 years from now, is that the area that would become our universe was at an extremely flat energy level. entropy has bottomed out. There is no time, no matter, no local energy maxima. In such an environment, it is thought that random energy spikes can occur, some quite large. Keep in mind that the time scale we are talking about now would likely make the entire history of our universe, 14.5 billion years, seem like something between the blink of an eye and a couple seconds. Some of these spikes might have even created universes who’s laws did not allow for an extended existence, i.e. they were not stable and self-sufficient. Eventually, one formed with enough energy and the correct mix of physical laws to allow our universe to form.

            Is this the only scientific explanation? No. Are they more complex ones? Yes, and some are very complex. Do we known what really happened? No, not yet. But that does not mean that we will always be ignorant of that fact.

            “M.S. ——- The problem with the religious is that they cannot accept that anything that they assert can and will be questioned, and that nobody is required to accept their beliefs as valid just on their say-so.

            C.V.S. ——- It should not be a “problem”, per se, with Christians but it does cause sadness – not because of personal rejection, but with regard to the rebuff of God’s truths in lieu of leaning toward the “father of lies”.”

            Actually, it is a problem with Christians as you constantly demonstrate, or rather, with all the overly religious, no matter what religion they are. The “sadness” that you speak of is from the rejection and demonizing and ostracization by Christians like you. Your “God’s truths” have often been found to contradict reality, and preach hatred, intolerance, ignorance, blind obedience, misogyny, and other negative traits, which makes your deity in many eyes the real “father of lies”, since that is all that it seem to have. Even assuming that your deity exists.

            Your own religious texts state that “by your fruits will you be known”, meaning that you are known by your actions and their results. In general, your religious texts and the history of actions based on your religion, continuing on to today, do not speak well of you.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “…the bible so often contradicts itself?”

            If we read the Bible at face value, without a preconceived bias for finding errors, (as most atheists are unscrupulous enough to do) we will find it to be a coherent, consistent, and relatively easy-to-understand book. Yes, there are difficult passages. Yes, there are verses that appear to contradict each other. We must remember that the Bible was written by approximately 40 different authors over a period of around 1500 years. Each writer wrote with a different style, from a different perspective, to a different audience, for a different purpose. We should expect some minor differences. However, a difference is NOT a contradiction. It is only an error if there is absolutely no conceivable way the verses or passages can be reconciled. Even if an answer is not available right now, that does not mean an answer does not exist. Many have found a supposed error in the Bible in relation to history or geography only to find out that the Bible is correct once further archaeological evidence is discovered.

            There are books and websites available that list “all the errors in the Bible.” Most antagonists simply get their ammunition from these places; they do not find supposed errors on their own. There are also books and websites available that refute every one of these supposed errors. The saddest thing is that most people who attack the Bible are not truly interested in an answer. Many “Bible attackers” are even aware of these answers, but they continue to use the same old shallow attacks again and again.

            The Bible interprets itself !

          • David Cromie

            What are these ‘different’ purposes for which the legends, myths, and folklore contained in the so-called bible’ were written?

            If it is a “…relatively easy-to-understand book”, why are there so many versions of christianity and christer sects, if it ‘interprets’ itself ?

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “If it is a “…relatively easy-to-understand book”, why are there so many versions of christianity and christer sects, if it ‘interprets’ itself ?”

            ~~~~~~ I believe you meant “denominations” rather than “versions”.

            We must first differentiate between denominations within the body of Christ and non-Christian cults and false religions.
            Christians teach the Law & Gospel of Jesus Christ for forgivness of sins and redemption according to orthodox Scripture.
            Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses are examples of cults (groups claiming to be Christian but denying one or more of the essentials of the Christian faith). Islam and Buddhism are entirely separate religions.

            The point of these divisions is never Christ as Lord and Savior, but rather honest differences of opinion by godly, albeit flawed, people seeking to honor God and retain doctrinal purity according to their consciences and their understanding of His Word.

            Some denominations emphasize different styles of worship to fit the differing tastes and preferences of Christians. But make no mistake: as believers, we must be of one mind on the essentials of the faith, but beyond that there is latitude in how Christians should worship in a corporate setting. This latitude is what causes so many different “flavors” of Christianity.

            Diversity in worship is acceptable, but disunity is not. If two churches disagree doctrinally, debate and dialogue over the Word may be called for. This type of “iron sharpening iron” (Proverbs 27:17) is beneficial to all. If they disagree on style and form, however, it is fine for them to remain separate. This separation, though, does not lift the responsibility Christians have to love one another (1 John 4:11-12) and ultimately be united as one in Christ (John 17:21-22).

            History tells us that denominationalism is the result of, or caused by, conflict and confrontation which leads to division and separation. Jesus told us that a house divided against itself cannot stand. This general principle can and should be applied to the church. We find an example of this in the early Corinthian church which was struggling with issues of division and separation.

            Where God has spoken, there can be NO neutrality or compromise.
            We who have the Word must stand on it, and neither the ignorance nor intransigence of others offers any excuse for unclarity.
            Differences of doctrine or opinion among Christians are not evidence that the truth cannot be known, but proof that some don’t know or have rejected the truth.

            Denominations are used by man out of self-interest. There are denominations today that are in a state of self-destruction as they are being led into apostasy by those who are promoting their personal agendas.

            The value of unity is found in the ability to pool our gifts and resources to promote the Kingdom to a lost world. This runs contrary to divisions caused by denominationalism.

            What is a believer to do? Should we ignore denominations, should we just not go to church and worship on our own at home? The answer to both questions is no.

            What we should be seeking is a body of believers where the Gospel of Christ is preached, where you as an individual can have a personal relationship with the Lord, where you can join in biblical ministries that are spreading the Gospel and glorifying God.

            Church is important and all believers need to belong to a body that fits the above criteria. We need relationships that can only be found in the body of believers, we need the support that only the church can offer, and we need to serve God in the community as well as individually.

            Pick a church on the basis of its relationship to Christ and how well it is serving the community. Pick a church where the pastor is preaching the Gospel without fear and is encouraged to do so.

            As believers, there are certain basic doctrines that we must believe, but beyond that there is latitude on how we can serve and worship; it is this latitude that is the only acceptable reason for denominations. This is diversity and not disunity. The first allows us to be individuals in Christ, the latter divides and destroys.

          • David Cromie

            In what way would the substitution of ‘denominations’ for ‘versions’ alter the meaning of my question? Reverting to the ‘No true christian’ fallacy does not provide an answer either.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            ..

          • George T

            Prove that a God does not or cannot exist.

          • David Cromie

            It is logically impossible to prove a negative. If you assert that supernatural entities exist, then the onus of proof for your assertion lies with you! In other words, it is not the job of anyone to prove you wrong, but it is up to you the prove that you are right.

          • George T

            Come on! Grow a pair. Prove that God or Jesus Christ do not exist. Hell, prove that Alexander The Great existed as well.

          • David Cromie

            There is simply no evidence that any supposed supernatural entities exist outside the heads of ‘believers’, nor is there any evidence, testamentary or archaelogically, that a man-god named JC ever walked the earth either. So what compelling logic would point to the opposite view about either of the two?

          • MarkSebree

            Logical Fallacy: Shifting the Burden of Proof.

            If you are asserting that something exists (positive assertion), then you are the one responsible for supporting that assertion.

            The only thing that a person needs to say when told to “prove that a deity does not exist” is to state that there is no objective evidence to suggest that one does, and there is no logical reason to suspect that one does.

          • George T

            Don’t be a puzzy. Prove that a God does not or cannot exist.

          • MarkSebree

            There is no objective evidence that any deity exists, thus there is no reason to think that one exists. Also, there is no logical, objective, or scientific reason to think that one exists. Your attempts at committing the logical fallacy of shifting the burden of proof do not work. Since I am not making the positive assertion that something exists, I do not have to support my position because it is the default logical position. You, however, who appear to be claiming that your deity exists, have the burden of supporting your claim.

            Here is an unrelated example. It is my contention that extraterrestrial life exists. This is an example of a positive assertion, thus I am the one responsible for supporting it. Can I prove it directly? No. We have only been able to seriously look for extraterrestrial life for a few decades, and we have not yet found any on the other planets on the solar system, not have we found any sign of them in radio signals (SETI) or by analysis of the extra-solar plants that we have found.

            However, there are things that we do know which make it likely that such life exists. First, we know that the simplest forms of life emerged soon after the planet cooled enough in its formation for liquid water to exist on the surface in significant amounts, possibly as soon as within a century. This implies that, if the elements are there, particularly carbon, then some form of life is likely to develop.

            Second, we know that life can exist is some of the harshest environments, so long as some liquid water is available. These examples of life are known as “extremophiles”, and they have been found in places like the scalding hot, extremely acidic pools at Yellowstone, around undersea volcanic vents, buried deep in rock, and many other places. This means that living organisms can adapt to almost any conditions.

            Third, astronomers have found hundreds of extra-solar planets in the last few years. By analyzing their stars, their spectral signature, and orbits, they have found a few dozen which appear to be rocky world like Earth, and which exist in the “Goldilocks” zone in which liquid water can exist. This makes it likely that these planets either have living organisms on them, or had some in the past.

            And these are only the nearby stars that we have been able to analyze. When the entire Milky Way is taken into account, much less the all the galaxies that exist in the universe, that means that not only is it a statistical certainty that life exists on other planets, by some few of them have, has had, or will have intelligent life.

            This is an example of a logical argument to support a premise. I started from the basic question about life existing on other planets, and made the argument using independently verifiable, objective data to support my conclusion that it is a near certainty that life does exist on other planets. I included keywords that you can use to look up information on these subjects yourself, and I did not limit it to one source, or even one field of science. I do not ask you to believe anything that I say, nor am I asking you to take anything I say on “faith”, which is why I gave things that you can look up yourself on the internet.

            If you want to try to prove that your deity exists, then you must engage in a similar exercise. You need to either provide objective evidence for multiple objective, non-religious sources to support your claim, or you must provide a logical argument to support your conclusion.

          • George T

            Hell, Richard Dawkins even admits that Jesus Christ existed and I know you are gayer and dumber then he is.

          • MarkSebree

            “Hell, Richard Dawkins even admits that Jesus Christ existed ”

            Care to provide a source to support that claim? You have shown that you make up stuff or use unreliable sources at best for most of what you claim.

            ” I know you are gayer and dumber then he is.”

            Which only shows that you know nothing at all about me. You have not supported your assertions before now, and I know that you cannot support that one. In any case, I have shown that I am far smarter and with a wider knowledge base than you. And even though I know that you will not believe the truth, I am quite “straight”, i.e. heterosexual.

          • George T

            Richard Dawkins has said in many of his speaking engagements that he cannot prove that God does not or did not exist. You should pay to go and see him.

      • Slidellman4life

        Sit down and shut up. You were never anything but an atheist, and that’s not the only thing you are lying about.

        Can you name a single nation that has embraced atheism and prospered, not merely economically, but also morally?

        • Frank Dorka

          ICELAND.

          • Frank Dorka

            In fact they imprisoned their banking criminals.

          • Slidellman4life

            Prove it. With links.

          • Frank Dorka

            See Meepestos, above.

          • Slidellman4life

            See “Prove it. With links.” Or you’re a liar.

          • Meepestos

            I don’t think links are permitted, as the links I posted are on hold: “Hold on, this is waiting to be approved by Christian News Network.”

            There are many news sources available on the internet about those imprisoned.

          • Slidellman4life

            What are you talking about?

          • Meepestos

            I replied to you and posted links, but it is on hold. So you can’t view them until the Christian News Network approves it.

          • Slidellman4life

            By the way: I didn’t ask you and you don’t speak for Frank.

          • Meepestos

            Yet you felt the need to reply, which I find questioning.

          • Slidellman4life

            To simply tell you to shut up and stay out of it.

            I’m tired of people thinking they are free to participate in things that have nothing to do with them whatsoever.

          • Meepestos

            “To simply tell you to shut up and stay out of it” Understood, yet your still replying ; )

            “I’m tired of people thinking they are free to participate” That’s odd for someone that is on a forum.

            “in things that have nothing to do with them whatsoever.” A leap of logic on your part.

            You get the last word…

          • Meepestos

            Unfortunately a few got out earlier after barely serving a quarter of their sentences.

          • Meepestos

            Interesting place. Many fundamentalist in the US would be shocked visiting there. The reception they would get if they went on about their beliefs would be the same as someone going on about Hera and Zeus. Many folk that call themselves Christians in Iceland see the Christ story as a meaningful myth and god as allegory. There are even members, of the country’s officially established church, that are agnostics and atheists; cultural and socializing thing.

          • MarkSebree

            Sounds very civilized.

          • Meepestos

            Makes a great stopover on your way to Europe.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            Maybe this is where Al Sharpton will go after the election!

      • Claus von Stauffenberg

        When you said, “I started to lose my faith…” , may I ask what what your faith was IN ?? Was it in yourself? Something else?

        If there is only doom & gloom for you, you have not been getting the true & full message of the Gospel (Good News) of Jesus Christ !

        “For by observing and keeping the LAW, NO ONE can be justified or declared righteous in God’s sight; but through the LAW we only become CONSCIOUS of SIN.” (Romans 3:20). In fact, it is IMPOSSIBLE for ANYONE to be GOOD according to the LAWS of Moses! The Mosaic Law makes EVERY one of us a sinner, because not one of us can keep it! “There is none righteous, no, not one! For ALL have sinned and come short!” (Romans 3:10,23)
        The Law was only our TEACHER, our INSTRUCTOR or “SCHOOLMASTER”, as the Bible says, to SHOW us that we’re SINNERS, to make us REALISE that we need to come to GOD for MERCY and forgiveness, and to show us HIS absolute perfection and perfect righteousness which is IMPOSSIBLE for US to attain!: “The Law was our SCHOOLMASTER, to bring us unto CHRIST, that we might be justified by FAITH.” (Galatians 3:24)

        Enter Jesus, the God-Man ! He comes not, in the first instance, to judge but to save: He lives a perfect life in our behalf, takes upon Himself the punishment for all of mankind’s sins to satisfy God‘s perfect justice, dies the death of His people, rises from the grave and, in returning to His heavenly Father, bequeaths the Holy Spirit as the down payment and guarantee of the ultimate and free gift He has secured for them—an eternity of sinless bliss and perfection in the presence of God himself, in a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness.

        Jesus still stands and knocks at the door of everyone’s heart as His love is unconditional.

    • http://www.CouponBug.com NoMoreBadTown

      If atheism = nothingness, then how can it be filled with anything, much less evil, despair, death, meaninglessness? Nothing is just that, nothing, no thing, no evil, no despair, no death, etc.

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        Atheists kill believers and unwanted children in wombs and encourage suicide everywhere they reign. Americans are naive because they never suffered atheism’s reign.

        • http://www.CouponBug.com NoMoreBadTown

          Wow, you are so utterly wrong… Please provide some sort of citation if you’re going to make insane claims like that.
          I’m an atheist, and I’ve never killed anyone. Neither have any of my atheist friends and family.
          And we don’t encourage suicide. In fact, many of us (myself included) volunteer with the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention.
          Your accusations are disgustingly wrong.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You are wrong. You do not oppose abortion, so it’s an indirect support of the abortion-murder. Your family and friends who do not oppose the abortion-murder are in the same boat. Atheists push euthanasia(suicide). Atheism has only nothingness, depair, and death. You need Christianity for salvation, morality, light, and life.

          • http://www.nomorebadtown.com NoMoreBadTown

            “You do not oppose abortion”
            No, I don’t oppose abortion, for reasons too varied and complex to get into here or for you to even begin to comprehend.

            “so it’s an indirect support of the abortion-murder”
            No, it’s direct support of the right to choose rather than be forced into parenthood. And murder? Please, show me the statute that defines it as murder. Spoiler: you can’t, because it doesn’t exist. But hey, your bible has plenty of baby-murders and even supports it, so you appear to be on the wrong side of that issue.

            “Atheists push euthanasia”
            Physician assisted suicide, in extreme cases of already terminally ill patients only. People who are going to die anyway, but giving them a less painful way to decide their own fate. It’s called compassion, something you clearly lack.

            “Atheism has only nothingness, depair, and death.”
            In your opinion, and you’re certainly entitled to be wrong. Try spending some time around atheists, maybe join a local meetup group, and you’ll see we’re not nearly as bitter as you clearly are or as you think we are.

            “You need Christianity for salvation, morality, light, and life.”
            No, I don’t. Christianity only serves to subjugate, profiting from pain, suffering, and despair.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            RE. “No, I don’t oppose abortion, for reasons too varied and complex to get into here or for you to even begin to comprehend.”

            ~~~~~ No better statement could emblematize the hubris of
            an egotistal, arrogant, jackass !

          • http://www.nomorebadtown.com NoMoreBadTown

            Valkyrie, do you seriously think Grace is capable of understanding a nuanced argument in favor of anything she so rabidly opposes? She speaks in absolutes, sees no shades of grey nor colors of the rainbow, everything has to be binary for her. In that light, is it really hubris, egotistical, or arrogant to not want to waste my time explaining why I disagree with her? I think not. Clearly, I’m also wasting my time on you, since you feel the need to immediately resort to petulantly childish name-calling, rather than acting your age and having a civil discussion. By your chosen handle, I would’ve thought you would know better, but maybe I gave you too much credit initially and now realize that you just like stupid Tom Cruise films. Be well, Maverick.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “do you seriously think Grace is capable of understanding a nuanced argument in favor of anything she so rabidly opposes?”

            ~~~~~~ Yes. From what she wrote, I believe she can detect any “subtle difference” that contradicts the Bible because she obviously studies it without prejudice.

            I can pose the same question to you re. your “rabidly opposition” to the Word of God.

            Call this discussion a “theory” if you will but in doing so, you have violated one of the greatest criterion of secular polemics …..
            you have refused to address the obscurity of theory alternatives.

            “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
            than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” ~ Shakespeare (Hamlet 1.5.166-7)

          • http://www.nomorebadtown.com NoMoreBadTown

            “From what she wrote, I believe she can detect any “subtle difference” that contradicts the Bible because she obviously studies it without prejudice.”

            And you’re wrong in your belief. How can one detect any subtle difference that contradicts the bible when the bible so often contradicts itself? And studying it without prejudice? Ha! There’s nothing but prejudice in Grace’s words, and in the bible itself.

            “I can pose the same question to you re. your “rabidly opposition” to the Word of God.”
            Then go ahead, which question specifically?

            Regarding the rest of your babbling, I’m not sure what you’re getting at, so maybe clean that up and make a valid/cogent point and we’ll continue.

            “Faith is believing what you know ain’t so.” — Mark Twain

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “…the bible so often contradicts itself?”

            ~~~~~ Previously I wrote: “… she (Grace) obviously studies it without prejudice.”

            If we read the Bible at face value, without a preconceived BIAS for finding errors, (as most atheists are unscrupulous enough to do) we will find it to be a coherent, consistent, and relatively easy-to-understand book. Yes, there are difficult passages. Yes, there are verses that appear to contradict each other. We must remember that the Bible was written by approximately 40 different authors over a period of around 1500 years. Each writer wrote with a different style, from a different perspective, to a different audience, for a different purpose. We should expect some minor differences. However, a difference is NOT a contradiction. It is only an error if there is absolutely no conceivable way the verses or passages can be reconciled. Even if an answer is not available right now, that does not mean an answer does not exist. Many have found a supposed error in the Bible in relation to history or geography only to find out that the Bible is correct once further archaeological evidence is discovered.

            There are books and websites available that list “all the errors in the Bible.” Most antagonists simply get their ammunition from these places; they do not find supposed errors on their own. There are also books and websites available that refute every one of these supposed errors. The saddest thing is that most people who attack the Bible are not truly interested in an answer. Many “Bible attackers” are even aware of these answers, but they continue to use the same old shallow attacks again and again.

            The Bible interprets itself !

            ———————————————————–
            RE, “Faith is believing what you know ain’t so.” — Mark Twain

            ~~~~~~ Twain was an atheist.

          • http://www.nomorebadtown.com NoMoreBadTown

            “If we read the Bible at face value, without a preconceived BIAS for finding errors, (as most atheists are unscrupulous enough to do) we will find it to be a coherent, consistent, and relatively easy-to-understand book.”
            You’re ignoring the fact that actually reading the bible is what turns many of us atheist. I didn’t read it looking for errors. I read it looking for answers, and I found the errors on my own, brought them to the clergy for clarification, and found their hand-waving nonsense to fall short of anything real.

            “Yes, there are verses that appear to contradict each other.”
            No, they don’t appear to contradict, they flat out do contradict.

            “We must remember that the Bible was written by approximately 40 different authors over a period of around 1500 years.”
            Exactly, it was written by Bronze Age desert dwellers, superstitious and ignorant, looking for answers and/or to control people.

            “Each writer wrote with a different style, from a different perspective, to a different audience, for a different purpose. We should expect some minor differences.”
            I expect better from a work supposedly inspired by an omnipotent, omniscient being. Especially since so many of you believers insist that it’s the inerrant, infallible work of such a being.

            “However, a difference is NOT a contradiction.”
            Oh, it very clearly is. An inerrant work full of errors…

            “It is only an error if there is absolutely no conceivable way the verses or passages can be reconciled.”
            And it has been found wanting.

            “Even if an answer is not available right now, that does not mean an answer does not exist.”
            Actually, in this case, it does. That’s the thing about religion, it doesn’t allow for change. It fights change and progress at every step. What you’re thinking of is science. We use science to look for the answers, and are always ready for the changes it brings based on the evidence we discover. In religion, change is blasphemy and heretical.

            “Many have found a supposed error in the Bible in relation to history or geography only to find out that the Bible is correct once further archaeological evidence is discovered.”
            Citation?

            “There are books and websites available that list “all the errors in the Bible.””
            Yes, I know. I helped write/build some of them.

            “Most antagonists simply get their ammunition from these places; they do not find supposed errors on their own.”
            I found them on my own, before these sites existed, then contributed to building these sites to expose this garbage for what it is.

            “There are also books and websites available that refute every one of these supposed errors.”
            All hand-waving nonsense, full of deflection… “Who are we to question God? We are not meant to know. All will be revealed after death.” blah blah blah…

            “The Bible interprets itself !”
            And is still found to be so very wrong… Sad, but true. Sorrynotsorry.

            “Twain was an atheist.”
            I know, sweety. 🙂

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: ” I read it (Bible) looking for answers,” (sic)

            ~~~~~ I believe that this is the crux of why you are frustrated and discontented with the Scriptures.

            If you can genuinely pinpoint what kind of “answers” that you were looking for, you will be on your way to understanding why you feel the way you do.

            Care to share?

          • http://www.nomorebadtown.com NoMoreBadTown

            “I believe that this is the crux of why you are frustrated and discontented with the Scriptures.”

            Wow, the more you reveal what you believe, the more wrong you show yourself to be.

            “If you can genuinely pinpoint what kind of “answers” that you were looking for, you will be on your way to understanding why you feel the way you do.”

            I already understand why I feel the way I do, and I’ve found what I’m looking for in a scientific understanding of the world, instead of superstitiously nonsensical sky-daddy worship.

            “Care to share?”
            With you? No, thanks. You wouldn’t get it anyway. Try brushing up on your understanding of science first, critical thinking, logical fallacies, etc. Then, you will be well on your way to having no more bad town.

          • C_Alan_Nault

            We can’t really prove that God isn’t real. We just always ask Christians to prove he is.

          • MarkSebree

            “No better statement could emblematize the hubris of an egotistical, arrogant, jackass !”

            Really? I would have thought that the demands of anti-choice advocates demanding that a woman be forced to continue an unwanted or deadly pregnancy against her will to be more egotistical, arrogant, and typical of a jackass. I would have thought the lies told by the anti-LBGT crowd to deny them equal rights to be arrogant, egotistical, and jackassy. I would have thought that those people who think that they can determine whether or not a particular Christian denomination or church are “real Christians”, to be more arrogant, egotistical, and jackassy. I would have thought that those who think that they know what an “all powerful, all knowing deity” thinks on a subject to be arrogant, egotistical, and jackassy.

            Claus, NoMoreBadTown was taking the attitudes of the forum and the person that he was replying to into account with his reply. Grace is not interested in what anyone else thinks or believes. She wants the USA and the world to be ruled by her beliefs, and she wants everyone else’s opinions and beliefs quashed. This is evident in her vast posting history. She is a far right evangelical dominionist (look up “Seven Mountains Dominionism” to find out what that is) who want to live in a theocracy ruled by her beliefs.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            I hope you realize that I was responding to Cromie’s comment of: “No religion has a longer history of murder, rape, and mayhem than the Judaeo Christian varieties.” [sic]

            Re abortion: There is no law that prevents this kind of murder but if it forces taxpayers to pay for it, that is against the Constitution re. Religious Freedom.

            Because I agree with a single statement that Grace made, does not mean I am in agreement with all of her philosophies.

            Please indicate where I have “resorted to petulantly childish name-calling, “

          • MarkSebree

            Sorry, Christian News Net removed the post I was replying to, so I cannot review the reply chain.

            The problem for you is that abortion is not murder and never has been. And taxpayers do not pay for abortions in the USA. Additionally, even if they did, it would not violate the Religious Freedom clause because you are not being required to get an abortion (assuming that you are female).

            Almost everything that the government does is against someone’s religious beliefs. The Quakers and some other Christian denominations are against war, but the defense budget is a huge chuck of the federal budget. Christian Scientists are against health care, but the federal budget provides health care to all federal employees, and 100% health care to the military and military retirees. Some Christian denominations like the Amish and Mennonites are against scientific advancement, yet a fair amount of the federal budget directly and indirectly supports scientific and engineering advances.

            Religious freedom and religious liberty refers to the individual, but does not allow the individual to impose their beliefs onto someone else, no matter what that individual’s beliefs are. Your rights to follow your beliefs stop at the end of your nose. As such, you cannot prevent women from getting an abortion that they desire by referencing your beliefs since her beliefs trump yours when dealing with her life and her body. Claiming that women should be forced to follow your beliefs to their detriment no matter what their individual beliefs are only shows that you have no respect for women, for their intelligence, or for their lives. They know what they are doing, and they are doing what is best for them given the totality of their current situation and their beliefs.

            “Please indicate where I have “resorted to petulantly childish name-calling”

            I gave that quote at the start of my post.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “.. taxpayers do not pay for abortions in the USA. Additionally, even if they did, it would not violate the Religious Freedom clause because you are not being required to get an abortion.” (sic)

            ~~~~~ You missed the entire point. No one can force a person to “get an abortion” – that’s ridiculous. It’s like this: If Christians WERE forced to pay for all abortions through taxes (the humanists are still striving for that) that would clearly be a breach of the Religious Freedom clause.

            Your logical fallacy of a moral equivalence is noted in your comparisons of those denominations/sects who are against “war, health care, and scientific advancement.”
            Concepts such as these are not specifically addressed in the Scriptures as sinful and cannot be implied as Christian doctrine.

            War falls into its own category. Everyone is allowed to DEFEND & PROTECT themselves – individually and as a nation but the taking of LIFE for convenience and for selfish reasons are abominations before God. That is Scripturally sound.

            When does murder stop becoming murder where there is a life to take?

          • MarkSebree

            “It’s like this: If Christians WERE forced to pay for all abortions through taxes (the humanists are still striving for that) that would clearly be a breach of the Religious Freedom clause.”

            No, it is not. I gave an explanation as to why it is not in my original post.

            “Your logical fallacy of a moral equivalence is noted in your comparisons of those denominations/sects who are against “war, health care, and scientific advancement.”

            Concepts such as these are not specifically addressed in the Scriptures as sinful and cannot be implied as Christian doctrine.”

            They think these concepts are. And their opinions in this case matter just as much as yours.

            “War falls into its own category. Everyone is allowed to DEFEND & PROTECT themselves – individually and as a nation but the taking of LIFE for convenience and for selfish reasons are abominations before God. That is Scripturally sound.
            When does murder stop becoming murder where there is a life to take?”

            For starters, your religious beliefs do not apply to anyone except yourself. Nobody is required to be bound by your deity, your interpretations of your mythology, or anything else related to your religion. Why should any woman, especially one that is of a different Christian denomination, a different religion altogether, or is an atheist or agnostic, be forced to continue an unwanted or dangerous pregnancy against her will, and suffer for your, not her, beliefs?

            Secondly, pregnancies cause real, physical harm to women. That is why many women have physical scars. It causes economic harm in the fact that, in today’s world, pregnancies are expensive, and the woman might not be able to afford the costs. They can interfere with her work, her education, her ability to feed her other children, and so on.

            Third, pregnancies can be deadly. The rate at which women die from pregnancy and delivery related causes is about 13 times the right at which women die from legal abortion, and the serious complication rate for pregnancy and delivery is far, far higher than for legal abortions.

            Fourth, the woman is DEFENDING and PROTECTING HER LIFE and HER FUTURE from an unwanted parasitic entity, because medically that is what an embryo or fetus is. You first claim that everyone is allowed to defend and protect themselves, and then you claim that women who are pregnancy cannot do so.

            Murder is defined by law. And those laws state that abortion is not murder. Your opinion does not change this objective fact.

            Another of those laws are related to self-defense, particularly when the person is being harmed, reasonable thinks that they are about to be harmed, or someone else is being harmed. That means that those laws could reasonable be applied to pregnant women when they do not want to be pregnant, or when they are experiencing a dangerous pregnancy such as an etopic pregnancy. The pregnancy harms the woman, and she does not give continuing content to that harm. Therefore, she should be allowed to protect herself from that harm, and to end that harm before it gets worse. She cannot run away and leave the pregnancy behind. Therefore, she much treat it as a medical condition, and see a licensed specialist (i.e. an OB/GYN board certified, licensed physician).

            Unlike you, I do not have the arrogance and chutzpah to demand that women should be forced to follow my beliefs to their detriment. Especially in medical decisions and decisions that will have a profound and last impact on their lives, which pregnancy counts as both, I prefer that they make their own decisions without unasked for and unneeded “advice” from me.

          • http://www.nomorebadtown.com NoMoreBadTown

            “Please indicate where I have “resorted to petulantly childish name-calling””

            He’s referring to your comment that the moderators rightly deleted, where you called me a slang synonym for donkey.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            I did not notice any deletions.

          • http://www.nomorebadtown.com NoMoreBadTown

            Check again, maricón. That’s why it shows MarkSebree replying to “Guest”.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            Not important.

          • http://www.nomorebadtown.com NoMoreBadTown

            If you say so, hun.

            Important enough for you to note that you did not notice any deletions, though.

            😉

        • David Cromie

          What arrant nonsense! How do you get children, wanted or otherwise, into a womb?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You are wrong. The Judeo-Christian values alone rescued billions of humans. Atheists in China even kill wanted children in wombs. Atheism means death. Atheists kill more people than any groups combined in all of history in mere decades. The Westerners are naive because they were never ruled under atheism. The secular West is very bad to attack Christianity this century; it’s like a mad man who attacks his own good conscience. God punishes all villains in His time. The secular West must repent of blasphemies, infanticide, and push of Sodomy. People have rights to live out God’s truth and morality.

          • David Cromie

            Can you corroborate your claims? The one child per couple law is well known. But how do the Chinese manage to insert children into wombs (is it like putting a ship in a bottle)? Surely they would suffocate.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            The saddest thing is that the secular West which used to be a Christendom before sees crimes and atrocities as a culture. Secular West cannot do what is right in the world. People need Christianity for proper functioning of conscience.

          • David Cromie

            Perhaps it is just the fact that the ci-devant ‘Christendom’ you mourn for, has finally woken up to the fact that religion is a cynical scam, perpetrated by religiot control freaks, for the sole benefit of the latter.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            The West has no moral standard apart from the Christian religion. You always need Christianity to do what is right. Post-christian West is disrespectful and it blasphemes against God and promotes infanticide and suicide and abnormal sexual immorality. The West needs Christianity for salvation and sanity.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            You run off at the mouth with no understanding of the God of Israel and His purposes.

            Only one small example:

            Prior to Israel’s bondage in Egypt, God tells Abraham,
            “Know for certain that your offspring will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs and will be servants there, and they will be afflicted for four hundred years. . . . And they shall come back here in the fourth generation, for the iniquity of the Amorites [one of the Canaanite clans] is not yet complete” (Gen. 15. 13, 16).

            Think of it! God stays His judgment of the Canaanite clans 400 years because their wickedness had not reached the point of intolerability! This is the long-suffering God we know in the Hebrew Scriptures. He even allows his own chosen people to languish in slavery for four centuries before determining that the Canaanite peoples are ripe for judgment and calling His people forth from Egypt. This is His same attitude toward unbelievers but their time of Grace ends when they die at God’s hand …. as we all will. Then Jesus will judge them according to whom they put their faith in …. themselves or Jesus.

            The principle of divine forbearance operates in every era of God’s dealings with people. God awaits till the measure of iniquity is full, whether in the case of the Amorite (Gen. 15:16) or the antediluvians consumed by the Deluge (Gen. 6) or the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 19). But God always gives a way to repent and avoid the judgment (consider God’s words in Ezekiel 33, as an example — “As I live, says the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death [eternal separation from God in perpetual suffering] of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live [eternally with God in perfection and bliss]” .

            By the time of their destruction, Canaanite culture was, in fact, debauched and cruel, embracing such practices as ritual prostitution and even child sacrifice. The Canaanites are to be destroyed “that they may not teach you to do according to all their abominable practices that they have done for their gods, and so you sin against the Lord your God” (Deut. 20.18). God had morally sufficient reasons for His judgment upon Canaan, and Israel was merely the instrument of His justice, just as centuries later God would use the pagan nations of Assyria and Babylon to judge Israel.

            I have no right to take an innocent life. For me to do so would be murder. But God has no such prohibition. He can give and take life as He chooses. We all recognize this when we accuse someone who presumes to take life as “playing God.” Humans arrogate to themselves rights which belong only to God. God is under no obligation whatsoever to extend my life for another second. If He wanted to strike me dead right now, that’s His prerogative

          • David Cromie

            If you can provide any irrefutable evidence for the real existence of any supposed supernatural entity, I would love to hear it!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            I have given to you what God has revealed to everyone. The “evidence” you speak of can never satisfy the soul that does not have the spirit of Christ, as given through the Word of God. Jesus explained this in a parable………….

            LUKE 16:19-31 v.27 “He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’

            29 “Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’

            30 “‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’

            31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”

            ~~~~~ I will graciously discontinue my dialogs with you.
            . I can do so in good conscience following Jesus’s instructions to His apostles in Matthew 7:6 Jesus: “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.”
            We are not to judge others, for we are guilty of the same things they are. Reserving judgment, however, does not prevent us from discerning those who would accept, or at least respect, the gospel from those who would ridicule, mock, and trample it, and then turn on us and abuse us.
            Balancing judgment with discernment is the wisdom of serpents Jesus refers to in Matthew 10:16.

            Jesus: “If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town” (Matthew 10:14).

          • http://www.nomorebadtown.com NoMoreBadTown

            “Prior to Israel’s bondage in Egypt”

            There’s no evidence of this.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            You are out of touch.

            — British Museum & Evidence of Israelite Slavery in Egypt —

            Firstly, the Bible is a more reliable historical account than other sources that reject everything out of hand that is found in the Scriptures.

            Archaeological discoveries through the years have dispelled this prejudice as more scientific evidence and information comes to light and will perpetually do so in the future.

            Many digs are predicated on Biblical history with findings that correspond with the history of those locations. This same scenario plays out in Egypt.

            The name Rameses actually comes from a later period than the Israelite Sojourn. It was the name given to a city built by Rameses the Great (Rameses II) in the eastern Nile Delta in the 13th century BC. This more familiar name was then used retrospectively by later scribes when copying the Biblical texts. Although the location of Rameses was in dispute for some years, that dispute has now been settled. We not only know where Rameses was located, but we know much about the history of the ancient site. Since 1966, extensive excavations have been undertaken there under the direction of Manfred Bietak of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, Cairo (for previous reports, see Shea 1990: 100-103; Wood 1991: 104-106; Aling 1996: 20-21). It appears that Prof. Bietak has, for the first time, found physical evidence for the presence of the Israelites in Egypt.

            — Passover proof lies in Egyptian hieroglyphs —

            Egyptologist Galit Dayan, who earned her Ph.D. in Egyptology from Hebrew University in Jerusalem, has found in Pharoah’s papyrus scrolls compelling evidence to support the Biblical historicity of the Jews in Egypt.

            Evidence reveals an ancient and deeply involved Jewish presence in Egypt that eventually disappears. To illustrate, she drew remarkable parallels between the language of Egyptian papyrus (hieroglyphs), the Haggadah and the Bible, all of which contain references to the Exodus story. In piecing together these manuscripts, Dayan framed an Exodus narrative based on facts of Egyptian history and language to prove her theory that a mass Exodus did occur and that it happened during the reign of Ramses II.

            In each of the Egyptian manuscripts Dayan discussed, the same familiar characters are mentioned: Moses (“an Egyptian name”), Pharoah, the Red Sea/Sea of Reeds (“Yam Suf” in Hebrew), Hebrews, Israelites and the presence of slaves in Egypt.

            In one manuscript, known as the Ipuwer papyrus, there is an eerie description of chaos in Egypt: “Plague is throughout the land,” Dayan’s translation reads, “blood is everywhere — the river is blood … and the hail smote every herd of the field … the land is without light and there is a thick darkness throughout the land … the Lord smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt — from the firstborn of Pharoah that sat on his throne to the firstborn of the captive who was in the prison. …”

            Time will produce more and more evidence for the historical accuracy of the Bible.
            Yet, for Christians, it means little as the conviction of God’s truth comes from the Holy Spirit directly to the heart.

          • http://www.nomorebadtown.com NoMoreBadTown

            “Firstly, the Bible is a more reliable historical account”

            HAHAHAHAH … no.

            The archaeological data do not accord with what could be expected from the Bible’s exodus story: there is no evidence that the Israelites ever lived in Ancient Egypt, the Sinai Peninsula shows almost no sign of any occupation at all for the entire 2nd millennium BCE, and even Kadesh-Barnea, where the Israelites are said to have spent 38 years, was uninhabited prior to the establishment of the Israelite monarchy. Scholars generally agree that while the exodus narrative contains late 2nd millennium elements, it has not been demonstrated that these elements could not belong to any other period and they are consistent with “knowledge that a 1st millennium BCE writer trying to set an old story in Egypt could have known. “A few scholars, notably Kenneth Kitchen and James K. Hoffmeier, continue to discuss the historicity, or at least plausibility, of the story, although historians of ancient Israel rarely respond. They advance a range of arguments to explain the lack of evidence: possibly the Egyptian records of the presence of the Israelites and their escape have been lost or suppressed; possibly (or probably) the fleeing Israelites left no archaeological trace in the desert; possibly the huge numbers reported in the story are mistranslated.

            According to Exodus 12:37–38, the Israelites numbered “about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children,” plus many non-Israelites and livestock. Numbers 1:46 gives a more precise total of 603,550 men aged 20 and up. It is difficult to reconcile the idea of 600,000 Israelite fighting men with the information that the Israelites were afraid of the Philistines and Egyptians. The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the “mixed multitude” of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people. Marching ten abreast, and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a line 150 miles long. The entire Egyptian population in 1250 BCE is estimated to have been around 3 to 3.5 million, and no evidence has been found that Egypt ever suffered the demographic and economic catastrophe such a loss of population would represent, nor that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds.

            Some have rationalised the numbers into smaller figures, for example reading the Hebrew as “600 families” rather than 600,000 men, but all such solutions have their own set of problems. The most probable explanation is that 600,000 symbolises the total destruction of the generation of Israel which left Egypt, none of whom lived to see the Promised Land, while the 603,550 is a gematria (a code in which numbers represent letters or words) for bnei yisra’el kol rosh, “the children of Israel, every individual”.

            A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness, and archaeologists generally agree that the Israelites had Canaanite origins. The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains are in the Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite. Almost the sole marker distinguishing the “Israelite” villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones, although whether even this is an ethnic marker or is due to other factors remains a matter of dispute.

            Despite the Bible’s internal dating of the Exodus to the 2nd millennium BCE, details point to a 1st millennium date for the composition of the Book of Exodus: Ezion-Geber, (one of the Stations of the Exodus), for example, dates to a period between the 8th and 6th centuries BCE with possible further occupation into the 4th century BCE, and those place-names on the Exodus route which have been identified – Goshen, Pithom, Succoth, Ramesses and Kadesh Barnea – point to the geography of the 1st millennium rather than the 2nd. Similarly, the Pharaoh’s fear that the Israelites might ally themselves with foreign invaders seems unlikely in the context of the late 2nd millennium, when Canaan was part of an Egyptian empire and Egypt faced no enemies in that direction, but does make sense in a 1st millennium context, when Egypt was considerably weaker and faced invasion first from the Achaemenid Empire and later from the Seleucid Empire. The mention of the dromedary in Exodus 9:3 also suggests a later date of composition – the widespread domestication of the camel as a herd animal is thought not to have taken place before the late 2nd millennium, after the Israelites had already emerged in Canaan, and they did not become widespread in Egypt until c.200–100 BCE.

            The chronology of the Exodus story likewise underlines its essentially religious rather than historical nature. The number seven was sacred to God in Judaism, and so the Israelites arrive at the Sinai Peninsula, where they will meet God, at the beginning of the seventh week after their departure from Egypt, while the erection of the Tabernacle, God’s dwelling-place among his people, occurs in the year 2666 after God creates the world, two-thirds of the way through a four thousand year era which culminates in or around the re-dedication of the Second Temple in 164 BCE.

            The Torah lists the places where the Israelites rested. A few of the names at the start of the itinerary, including Ra’amses, Pithom and Succoth, are reasonably well identified with archaeological sites on the eastern edge of the Nile Delta, as is Kadesh-Barnea, where the Israelites spend 38 years after turning back from Canaan, but other than that very little is certain. The crossing of the Red Sea has been variously placed at the Pelusic branch of the Nile, anywhere along the network of Bitter Lakes and smaller canals that formed a barrier toward eastward escape, the Gulf of Suez (SSE of Succoth) and the Gulf of Aqaba (S of Ezion-Geber), or even on a lagoon on the Mediterranean coast. The Biblical Mount Sinai is identified in Christian tradition with Jebel Musa in the south of the Sinai Peninsula, but this association dates only from the 3rd century CE and no evidence of the Exodus has been found there.

            Attempts to date the Exodus to a specific century have been inconclusive. 1 Kings 6:1 places the event 480 years before the construction of Solomon’s Temple, implying an Exodus at c.1446 BCE, but it is widely recognised that the number in 1 Kings merely represents twelve generations of forty years each. There are major archaeological obstacles to an earlier date: Canaan was part of the Egyptian empire, so that the Israelites would in effect be escaping from Egypt to Egypt, and its cities were unwalled and do not show destruction layers consistent with the Bible’s account of the occupation of the land (e.g., Jericho was “small and poor, almost insignificant, and unfortified (and) [t]here was also no sign of a destruction”. (Finkelstein and Silberman, 2002). William F. Albright, the leading biblical archaeologist of the mid-20th century, proposed a date of around 1250–1200 BCE, but his so-called “Israelite” evidence (house-type, the collar-rimmed jars, etc) are continuations of Canaanite culture. The lack of evidence has led scholars to conclude that it is difficult or even impossible to link the exodus story to any specific point in history.

            Conclusion: It very probably did not ever really happen, it’s just an old story.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “… there is no evidence that the Israelites ever lived in Ancient Egypt.”

            ~~~~~ I will reply in the sophomoric vein that you are used to and can understand:
            “HAHAHAHAH … no.”

            I have given you verifiable information concerning CURRENT archeological discoveries with new information, whereas, you have only parroted the uncorroborated blather of some Biblical antagonists that are obviously far out of touch with the latest archeological explorations and expositions or they contrived this claptrap decades ago.

            In view of the intransigence, I see NO reason to continue a dialog. Ciao.

          • http://www.nomorebadtown.com NoMoreBadTown

            No, all you’ve given me is hopeless grasping at straws and cherry-picking from biblical apologists. You demean anyone who goes with what the evidence actually shows as an antagonist, rather than just accepting that they’re actually following the evidence to where it leads, regardless of whether they like the final answer… instead of starting with a conclusion and cherry-picking only what supports the biblical narrative. It’s intellectual dishonesty at its worst. You fail.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            Please allow me to be a bit more comprehensive concerning our differences to aid a mutual understanding.

            Is logic a common ground between the believer and the unbeliever?

            Some state that there is no common ground between the believer and the unbeliever, and that the unbeliever’s initial presuppositions against the Christian God do not allow him to accurately reason concerning God, the world, truth, or himself. Therefore, some Christian theologians conclude there can be no ultimate common ground because the unsaved are unregenerate, and their presuppositions are opposed to true rationality.

            “Logic is true–not because it is logical but because it is a reflection of God’s nature, which is order and truth.”
            I believe that logic is indeed a type of common ground. But I do not believe that it possesses some innate quality that renders it above human capacity or limitations, nor does it possess any ethereal, mystic qualities that somehow transcends the blinding influence of sin. I think that logic, used properly, always vindicates the truths found in the Bible and points to God–whether or not an unbeliever acknowledges it.

            Logic belongs to God. This is so because God has invented the universe, the physical laws, mathematics, and all other natural and true phenomenon in it. Existence has an order because God gave it order. Logic is true–not because it is logical but because it is a reflection of God’s nature, which is order and truth that can be seen in everything around us. Therefore, logic ultimately belongs only to God and can only properly be used by Him and in matters pertaining to God by the Christian.

            This is not to say that an unbeliever cannot master the logic, say of mathematics, better than a believer. There are areas of knowledge common to both, and God has given some people abilities not possessed by others. However, this not an assertion that all Christians, when speaking of God, do so flawlessly.
            The fact is that no one can claim to have ultimately mastered logic. In a perfect world with unfallen people, reasoning would be a marvelous adventure that would lead us to more of God’s revelation and truth. But we don’t live in a perfect world. We live in a fallen world where sin has influenced not only our bodies, emotions, and wills but also our minds.

            Is logic enough for the Christian? No, it isn’t. Logic has two major flaws: First, it is only as good as the one who is using it (though that really isn’t a flaw in logic). Second, logic doesn’t save. Jesus does. We cannot reason someone into the kingdom of God. It is the Holy Spirit who convicts of sin and righteousness and who opens the heart to understand the truth (John 16:8).

          • http://www.nomorebadtown.com NoMoreBadTown

            “logic doesn’t save. Jesus does.”

            Except he doesn’t, since he never existed and neither does your god. Wanting it to be true doesn’t make it true, sorrynotsorry. You still fail.

            Anyway, your whole diatribe there is meaningless. I don’t care what fantasy you choose to believe, and that was never even the topic of discussion here.

    • Meepestos

      America needs secularism. It needs secular agnostics, atheists, and other secular religious folk especially those that have bursted out of their out of their boxed in positions on scholarly biblical interpretations or it will end up being like some Western Nations that lack secularism like El Salvador and Greece.

      Due to religion creeping into the mechanism of the state society, the government in El Salvador created a law, that the hierarchy in the Catholic Church played a key role in, that prohibited abortion under any circumstance to the point that poor women were and still are being imprisoned for having miscarriages. Usually the poor uneducated and disenfranchised women who miscarry are liable to find themselves jailed (some already have been jailed) for murder even though there’s no way to tell a miscarriage from a medically induced abortion. Another extreme is a woman that almost died because of her pregnancy. She had a fetus without a brain and wasn’t allowed to abort by law until the last minute.

      In Greece, (Christian nation) due to the lack of secularism we see the affects of a constitution that prohibits proselytism of religions that are not Christian Orthodox due to government allowing the influence of only one church for the sake of “culture”. Nowadays kids in primary and secondary school in Greece attend Christian Orthodox instruction. Though there is an exemption, it must be requested by their parents. Those kids are put in an awkward position in that it creates the stigma that they are “not fully Greek”. Up until 2000 religious affiliation was on a Greek ID and because of this it limited many people’s opportunities career wise and even getting something simple as a passport due to discrimination. To this day blasphemy laws exist in Greece and people have been arrested with the help of Christian conservatives and fascists like those in the Golden Dawn Party.

  • The Skeptical Chymist

    This is an obvious and blatant violation of the Constitution. How anyone could think otherwise escapes me. Only a Christian theocrat could support the placement of such a blatant religious symbol in a courtroom!

    • Michael A. Todd

      Even though the basis of all modern western law is Biblical. So, discounting that fact, it will make progressives much happier to remove that “terrible” flag.

      • The Skeptical Chymist

        The Federalist papers cited the sources they used to develop the Constitution. They were based on Roman law and the Enlightenment, but I do not believe they cited the Bible even once. The idea that all modern law is based on the Bible is a myth propagated by pseudohistorians, like David Barton.

        • Meepestos

          Hermit’s assertion is interesting,

          “The US Constitution and US law was modelled after Roman law (which is why we have three branches of government with the executive corresponding to consuls, and legislative with the senate being similar to the Roman, and the House of Representatives paralleling the Centuriate and Tribal Assemblies and a Judicial branch equivalent to the Praetors), right down to our citizenship laws. Our Bill of Rights is similar to the original “Twelve Tables”, and as shown by the prevalence of Latin phraseology, most of the common law underlying the preponderance of US law, as well as civil law, and the significance of precedent is drawn directly from the Roman tradition. Meanwhile, the Roman Virtues, public and private, set the expectations for the founders, and Plato’s Republic and neoplatonic thought drove the French Revolution, where the US developed its liberal perspective including the significance of liberty, fraternity and equality.”

        • Theophile

          The idea that all modern law is based on the Bible is a myth propagated by pseudohistorians alright… Otherwise you would find perjurers & the prosecution team enjoying the full penalty the accused was standing trial in jeopardy of!
          Deuteronomy:19:15
          “One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.

          If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong; Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the LORD,
          before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days; And the judges shall make diligent
          inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother;
          …Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from
          among you.
          And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you.
          And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot. “

          • David Cromie

            Mere christer BS!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE the following to Claus von Stauffenberg and then blocked his reply :
            “Just more deluded christer BS, with no basis in reality! If you cannot provide any irrefutable, testable, evidence for the reality of your favourite supposed sky fairy, there is no point in throwing chunks of the so-called ‘bible’ at me. So don’t waste my time and yours, by neglecting to provide the evidence needed to corroborate your beliefs!” (sic)

            ~~~~~ It has become very clear what kind of a person you are when you block any responses that chafe your conscience.
            This will be my final statement to you as I see you as a gutless phony.

            MATTHEW 7:6 Jesus: “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.

            YOU WROTE: “So don’t waste my time and yours, by neglecting to provide the evidence needed to corroborate your beliefs!”

            ~~~~~ I will graciously abide by your wishes. I can do so in good conscience following Jesus’s instructions to His apostles in Matthew 7:6 when He told them, “If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town” (Matthew 10:14).
            We are not to judge others, for we are guilty of the same things they are. Reserving judgment, however, does not prevent us from discerning those who would accept, or at least respect, the gospel from those who would ridicule, mock, and trample it, and then turn on us and abuse us. Balancing judgment with discernment is the wisdom of serpents Jesus refers to in Matthew 10:16.

            ~~~~~ I have given to you what God has revealed to everyone. The “evidence” you speak of can never satisfy the soul that does not have the spirit of Christ, as given through the Word of God. Jesus explained this in a parable………….

            LUKE 16:19-31 v.27 “He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’

            29 “Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’

            30 “‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’

            31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.”

            Jesus is still standing at your door knocking as His love is not conditional !

            ~ Claus von Stauffenberg

          • David Cromie

            I have not blocked any replies to my posts!

          • TheKingOfRhye

            I didn’t even think that was possible.

          • David Cromie

            Still the same tired christer BS! Repetition does not make nonsense any the more true with the repeating, much less intelligible. If you wish others to take your ‘bible’ bashing seriously. then you have to provide the testable evidence for the real existence of your favourite supposed sky fairy. This would be a fundamental (no pun intended) requirement, don’t you think?

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            So says the atheist.

          • MarkSebree

            So says reality.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            Like the atheist’s “reality” of the “big bang” theory where people are expected to believe that once there was nothing, then suddenly, poof, the universe resulted from a big bang.
            If I have nothing in the palm of my hand, close my fingers, speak the word bang, then open my fingers again, still I find there is nothing there. I ask you to explain to us in layman’s terms how it is that something as enormous at the universes came from nothing?

            Atheists only have secular humanism at their side, and based on where humanity has been heading lately, that can’t be much of a comfort for their future.

          • MarkSebree

            “Like the atheist’s “reality” of the “big bang” theory where people are expected to believe that once there was nothing, then suddenly, poof, the universe resulted from a big bang. ”

            Actually, that is from cosmologists, i.e. physicists, not atheists. Not all scientists are atheists, just as not all of the ones that are religious are Christian. Also, we do not know it was “nothing” since we do not know what the conditions were before the “Big Bang”. It is, however, a more honest position than “God did it”. That is nothing more than an appeal to ignorance, and a cop-out.

            “Atheists only have secular humanism at their side, and based on where humanity has been heading lately, that can’t be much of a comfort for their future.”

            A lot more comfort that the hatred, intolerance, misogyny, irrationality, ignorance that people like you espouse. Your position refuses to understand the world as it actually is, and thus cannot even start to consider real world, workable solutions to the real-world problems that exist.

            At a guess, you know little to nothing about the philosophy of secular humanism, and you do not want to find out. Additionally, atheists follow many philosophies besides secular humanism, many of which are unique to the person. The ONLY way in which all, or even most, atheists are alike is that they all do not believe in any deity.

          • George T

            Prove the bbt.

          • MarkSebree

            Right after you prove that your deity exists.

            The Big Bang Theory is just one of several very high level Ph.D. theories about the start of the universe 14.5 Billion years ago. The mathematics of that proof are easily available on the internet if you want to view it, but I doubt that you have the level of mathematic or physics knowledge necessary to follow it. I know that I do not, and I have a life long love of science.

            I also gave an explanation of the Big Bang Theory in another post in this thread in reply to Claus.

          • George T

            Did you say “theory”? You are a tool. Prove something big boi. Prove that Jesus Christ did not exist.

          • MarkSebree

            “Did you say “theory”?”

            Yes, and unlike you, I was using it in the precise manner and definition of scientists, since I was talking about a scientific theory.

            ” You are a tool.”

            As usual, all you have are logical fallacies. Since you have nothing intelligent to say, and you cannot support your position, you try insults, showing that you are lacking in the means to support your position.

            “Prove that Jesus Christ did not exist.”

            There is no objective evidence that shows that he existed, therefore there is no reason to believe that he existed, much less performed the supernatural feats attributed to him. This is the default position in a logical argument, so I have nothing to prove.

            The negative position is the default one, as I have explained to you before. It is simple to look up this fact, and you can pretty much choose your own website. I have even given you the common name of the logical fallacy your are engaging in, i.e. shifting the burden of proof. If you want to claim that your deity exists, or your prophet existed, then it is up to your to support your position.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “There is no objective evidence that shows that He (JESUS) existed,”

            ~~~~~~ That is a flagrant lie that Satan would love everyone to believe!

            Firstly, the Scriptures can stand on their own concerning the accuracy and the testimonies of history. It has a myriad of witnesses of events and has a proven record of inviolable accuracy kept intact down through the ages exceeding that of secular history.

            The evidence for the early existence of the Scripture writings is clear. The wealth of materials for the New Testament becomes even more significant when we compare it with other ancient documents which have been accepted without question.
            I know you have not bothered to investigate that fact from the way you write.

            In fact, Biblical history has provided insight, direction, and given support to many secular writings concerning ancient records.

            Archaeological discoveries through the years have dispelled the prejudice that the Bible does not contain accurate historical records. More scientific evidence and information will come to light and will perpetually do so in the future.

            Many digs are predicated on Biblical history with findings that correspond with the history of those locations.

            Time will produce more and more evidence for the historical accuracy of the Bible.
            Yet, for Christians, it means little as the conviction of God’s truth comes from the Holy Spirit directly to the heart.

            You have been shown numerous times that ancient secular history bears out the fact that Jesus in recorded in it. And that is remarkable considering that Israel, in a little corner of the world, was not considered a big sensation warranting historical transcriptions, yet here is what Tacitus, a Roman historian who lived through the reign of over a half-dozen Roman emperors wrote [stating the conception of Nero’s plight]:

            “But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the price could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence, to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with the most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the perniciousness was repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated but through the city of Rome also.” (Annals XV, 44)1.

            I do not believe any further discussion on this topic will be of any value if you choose to disregard the historic facts presented above.

          • David Cromie

            “Many digs are predicated on Biblical history with findings that correspond with the history of those locations”. Again you assume the outcome before the exploration has even taken place. Another fallacious modus operandi, and mainly confined to christers. Not very scientific, is it? So much for christer ‘archaeology’!

            As for the supposed life and works for a man-god named JC, there is no contemporary evidence (neither written nor archaeological), dating from the 1st cent. C.E. that anyone can point to in support of their claims for the existence of JC, not even you.

            When, and by whom, was this secular history written? Repeating folklore, and anecdote, years after the supposed event, is not evidence of the accuracy, much less the truth of the story. The title ‘Annals’ rather gives the game away!

          • George T

            Tyson says the BBT is a hoax.

          • MarkSebree

            Which Tyson? Mike? And where, when, and in what forum did he say it?

          • C_Alan_Nault

            Neil and I just simply called him.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “Additionally, atheists follow many philosophies besides secular humanism, many of which are unique to the person.”

            ~~~~~~ You summed that one up well ! “Atheists follow many philosophies that are unique to the person“ …. namely themselves! He is a self-made man and worships his creator.

            One thing common to all of those “philosophies” is that they are based on the fallible human mind of another person or their own.

            “Atheism, a religion dedicated to its own sense of smug superiority.” ~ Stephen Colbert

            I think we have all learned what total reliance on the “wisdom” coming from the minds of mere, fallible, and finite humans, with evolving standards of humanity and solutions have contributed to the morality and peace in the world or, as you stated, “ workable solutions to the real-world problems that exist.” They have contributed NOTHING !

            JAMES 4 “What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don’t they come from your desires that battle within you? 2 You desire but do not have, so you kill. You covet but you cannot get what you want, so you quarrel and fight. You do not have because you do not ask God. 3 When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures.”

            What changes the heart, changes the man. Only Jesus can supply that.

          • MarkSebree

            “YOU WROTE: “Additionally, atheists follow many philosophies besides secular humanism, many of which are unique to the person.”

            ~~~~~~ You summed that one up well ! “Atheists follow many philosophies that are unique to the person“ …. namely themselves! He is a self-made man and worships his creator.”

            You continue to prove that you know nothing about atheists, secular humanism, or much of anything else for that matter. “namely themselves” does not even make any sense in context. A “self-made man” is a person who started poor or otherwise disadvantaged, and then made themselves a success through their hard work and efforts. Being called a “self-made man” is a complement.

            And last I checked, very few people, including atheists, worship their parents.

            “One thing common to all of those “philosophies” is that they are based on the fallible human mind of another person or their own.”

            Which means that they have a lot in common with religion, without the delusion that the philosophy comes from a supernatural source.

            ““Atheism, a religion dedicated to its own sense of smug superiority.” ~ Stephen Colbert”

            First, atheism by definition is not a religion. Second, that definition fits Christianity far better, as you and others continue to demonstrate.

            “I think we have all learned what total reliance on the “wisdom” coming from the minds of mere, fallible, and finite humans, with evolving standards of humanity and solutions have contributed to the morality and peace in the world or, as you stated, “ workable solutions to the real-world problems that exist.” They have contributed NOTHING !”

            You have a total reliance on “wisdom” that comes “from the minds of mere, fallible, and finite humans”. And it is your reliance on such “wisdom” which is making the world worse by promoting hatred, discrimination, intolerance, and rejection of reality. Yet you claim that your philosophy is somehow better than mine because it is older. That is a logical fallacy called an appeal to antiquity.

            [irrelevant reference to a book of mythology ignored]

            “What changes the heart, changes the man.”

            I can actually agree with that statement. Hopefully, one day, you will have a change of heart, and become more accepting, tolerance, understanding, and knowledgeable. But I am not holding my breath.

            “Only Jesus can supply that.”

            Demonstrably false. Mythological beings cannot really change anything. And people have changes of heart for all sorts of reasons, whether they follow your mythology or not. Besides, why would I want to become ignorant, irrational, intolerant, hateful, misogynistic, homophobic, lacking in the capacity to learn, lacking in the capacity for critical and independent thought, xenophobic, willfully blind, or any of the other numerous negative traits that are so often displayed by Great Commission Christians, fundamentalists, and dominionists.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            As usual, you used red herrings and dodges to evade a lot of my assertions.

            I was hoping that we, at least, agree on the my statement that you avoided replying to:

            “One thing common to all of those “philosophies” is that they are based on the fallible human mind of another person or their own.”

            I truly hope the following will clear up any misconceptions that you may have about those who trust in Christ as their Savior……

            It is natural for all humans to seek proof for the things that are significant to them in their lives.

            Proof can be a result of inductive and deductive “reasoning” of the human mind and in a secular world may satisfy logic and then shown to be effective in its application to serve mankind in various ways.

            It is altogether a different matter in the spiritual world of the supernatural. Proof here is purely a subjective matter that cannot be compared with the secular world of only “head knowledge”. The proof or conviction is found within the heart, the soul, the psyche, of mankind put there by God the Holy Spirit through His mercy and grace bringing faith in Jesus Christ.

            God did not leave us uninformed about all of the what Jesus taught, all of the miracles that he performed (even bringing the dead back to life), and the greatest feat of all -rising from death Himself that was proof of His completing His mission successfully of redeeming a world of sinners by His payment for all sins and living a perfect life in our behalf which God now accepts as if we had done so ourselves by relying on Jesus’ meritorious sacrifice in our place. We contribute nothing !

            Believing the facts about Jesus is only part of the equation. Biblical faith/belief is far more than believing certain things to be true. Biblical saving faith is also trusting/relying on those facts.

            Initially, the “head knowledge” of the Gospel of Jesus Christ must be perceived but the proof that it is real is in the heart that is imbued by the Holy Spirit that relies on forgiveness and God’s love through Jesus’ sacrifice for our sins and our final redemption.

            This is the “proof” that believing Christians cannot put on a blackboard as a mathematical equation or in a chemistry lab. Nevertheless, it is their undeniable proof from God.

            1 JOHN 3:19 This is how we know that we belong to the truth and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence: 20 If our hearts condemn us, we know that God is greater than our hearts, and He knows everything. 21 Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God 22 and receive from Him anything we ask, because we keep His commands and do what pleases Him. 23 And this is His command: to believe in the name of His Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as He commanded us. 24 The one who keeps God’s commands lives in Him, and He in them. And this is how we know that He lives in us: We know it by the Spirit He gave us.

            To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary.
            To one without faith, no explanation is possible”.
            ~Thomas Aquinas

          • David Cromie

            “One thing common to all of those “philosophies” is that they are based on the fallible human mind of another person or their own”. What deep and significant insight into humans do you suppose this tautology illustrates?

            When you can adduce a testable, and falsifiable, proof for the existence of any supposed supernatural entity, you might have a leg to stand on. As it is, you have nothing but superstitious delusions to base your ‘philosophy’ on.

            Worse still, your ‘philosophy’ is centred on a so-called ‘bible’, which is a syncretically concocted mix of myths, legends and folklore, mostly based on Paganism, and this tells me all I need to know about your ignorance of the history of this so-called ‘bible’, and your crass gullibility.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            SYNCRETISM

            YOU INCORRECTLY WROTE: “The so-called ‘bible’ is a syncretic creation, drawing mainly on Pagan myths and legends.

            ~~~~~~ This is a flagrant misrepresentation of what the Scriptures are !!! You are up to your usual hateful antagonism of Christians, however, I will address your erroneous application of syncretic to the Scriptures.

            Syncretism, as defined by the American Heritage Dictionary, is “the reconciliation or fusion of differing systems of belief.” This is most evident in the areas of philosophy and religion, and usually results in a NEW TEACHING or belief system. Obviously, this cannot be reconciled to biblical Christianity.

            False teachings were around as long as the Scriptures, predominantly those of Gnosticism and Paganism.

            The Bible was given by inspiration of God and did NOT “draw” ANYTHING from false teachings or reconcile with them or the fusing of differing systems of belief at any point in time.
            If anything, these aberrant false teachings drew concepts from the original Scriptures – Gnosticism for example, as do many anti-biblical teachings down through history that were devised by unscrupulous enemies of God.

            More recently, religious syncretism can be seen in such religious systems as the New Age, Hinduism, Unitarianism, and Christian Science. These religions are a blending of multiple different belief systems, and are continually evolving as the philosophies of mankind rise and fall in popularity.

            Therein lies the problem, for syncretism relies on the whim of man, not the standard of Scripture. The Bible makes it very clear what true religion is.

            Think on just a few things stated in Scripture: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind” (Deuteronomy 6:5; Matthew 22:37); “Jesus replied, ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me'” (John 14:6); “Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31-32); and “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).

            Religious syncretism is simply not compatible with true Christianity. In fact, any modification to biblical law and principle for the sake of a “better” religion is heresy (Revelation 22:18-19).

          • David Cromie

            Why not provide compelling, testable, evidence for the real existence of your supposed supernatural entity, and thereby settle the argument! Without that mere assertions are worthless.

          • MarkSebree

            Your long dialog can be summed up rather simply. When dealing with the real world, assertions can be proven and objective evidence can be presented to support those assertions. However, when dealing with the imaginary, there is nothing that exists which can support the existence of something that does not exist.

            The “Holy Spirit” only exists in your imagination. It is not real. “Biblical facts” are not really facts, they are stories made up by ignorant nomads to explain what they did not know or did not understand. They borrowed stories from other civilizations in the area, and changed them enough to make them “resonate” with their own people. That does not make them real, it only aids in the retelling and spreading of those stories.

            You can have your fantasies. I can tell fantasy from reality, and I prefer reality.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            I am not trying to convince you of anything since it is only God that can accomplisht that. Yet, it hurts to see how Satan can so effectively blind souls.
            It does not have to be that way – your time of grace on this earth had not yet ended and with God nothing is impossible.
            I will focus on that.

          • David Cromie

            “I am not trying to convince you of anything since it is only God that can accomplish that”. How many people that have never heard of your ‘god’, have been spontaneously convinced that it exists, and without a christer anywhere in sight? Now focus on that!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            RE. “How many people that have never heard of your ‘god’, have been spontaneously convinced that it exists, and without a christer anywhere in sight?”

            ~~~~~ You would have to take a comprehensive survey to get that answer.

            I remember a prominent case of “spontaneously” convinced………..

            ACTS 9:9 Meanwhile, Saul was still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord’s disciples. He went to the high priest 2 and asked him for letters to the synagogues in Damascus, so that if he found any there who belonged to the Way, whether men or women, he might take them as prisoners to Jerusalem. 3 As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”

            5 “Who are you, Lord?” Saul asked.

            “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” he replied. 6 “Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”

            7 The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone. 8 Saul got up from the ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see nothing. So they led him by the hand into Damascus. 9 For three days he was blind, and did not eat or drink anything.

            7 The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone. 8 Saul got up from the ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see nothing. So they led him by the hand into Damascus. 9 For three days he was blind, and did not eat or drink anything.

            10 In Damascus there was a disciple named Ananias. The Lord called to him in a vision, “Ananias!”
            “Yes, Lord,” he answered.
            11 The Lord told him, “Go to the house of Judas on Straight Street and ask for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying. 12 In a vision he has seen a man named Ananias to come and place his hands on him to restore his sight.”

            13 “Lord,” Ananias answered, “I have heard many reports about this man and all the harm he has done to Your holy people in Jerusalem. 14 And he has come here with authority from the chief priests to arrest all who call on Your name.”

            15 But the Lord said to Ananias, “Go! This man is My chosen instrument to proclaim My name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel. 16 I will show him how much he must suffer for My name.”

            17 Then Ananias went to the house and entered it. Placing his hands on Saul, he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord—Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you were coming here—has sent me so that you may see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” 18 Immediately, something like scales fell from Saul’s eyes, and he could see again. He got up and was baptized, 19 and after taking some food, he regained his strength.

          • David Cromie

            Again, you rely on fallacious circular argument! Null points!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            Satan could not have said it better !

          • MarkSebree

            “I am not trying to convince you of anything since it is only God that can accomplisht that. ”

            However since your deity only exists in your imagination, that means that you are in fact trying to convince me of something. An imaginary being cannot accomplish anything or convince anyone of anything.

            “Yet, it hurts to see how Satan can so effectively blind souls.”

            That deity also exists only in your imagination. And I am not blind, since I can see right through the god con that you have bought hook, line, and sinker.

            “It does not have to be that way – your time of grace on this earth had not yet ended and with God nothing is impossible.”

            With imaginary beings, nothing is possible. And in fairy stories and myths, nothing is impossible. That is why those stories are called “fiction”, because they are true and not reality.

            “I will focus on that.”

            You can focus on your delusions all you want, they do not change reality.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            If I were an atheist, God forbid, I would not waste my time trying to refute something that I did NOT believe in, unless I was trying to convince myself there was not a God that I was accountable to, even though I would not have anything to explain how the world, the solar system in all of its order, and all life with its marvelous complexities, began.

          • MarkSebree

            Just because you do not have the explanations and you refuse to understand science does not constrain the minds of other people.

            This world began from the gravitational condensation of a second generation nebula first into a disc, and eventually into a star and a series of planetoids, which further condensed into the planets. Check the May 2016 cover story in Scientific American for an article of this process.

            All life began simple, and grew more complex over time. The first self-replicating organic molecules, likely predecessors of our RNA, are believed to have formed less than a century after the planet cooled enough for water to remain in a liquid state on our planet’s surface. Storms, lightning, tides, and solar radiation would have provided the energy to fuel the chemical reactions, and early clays may have provided the catalyst for the reaction to take place. The complexity came from gradual adaptations which made each stage of life better able to survive and thrive.

            The reason that people counter the “god” argument is because of the hubris, misconceptions, and out right lies told so often by “holy rollers”. They seem to think that their beliefs are the only ones that are valid, and they they seem to think that their beliefs should be made into law and everyone forced to follow those beliefs. They claim that anyone who does not subscribe to those beliefs are “evil” and “bad people”, even when there is nothing to support those claims. They harass and denigrate anyone to actually thinks for themselves, and does not want to be subjected to their religious beliefs. Basically, people counter the mindless claims of god-botherers because they as sick and tired of being bullied by them.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            Okay, I will help you……………

            RE. “He is a self-made man and worships his creator.”

            ~~~~~~ He is someone who created himself (self-made) and worships himself (his own creator.)

            Scheeesh !!

          • MarkSebree

            Nobody “creates themselves”. People are born after the mating of two individuals, the successful fertilization of an egg gamete by a sperm gamete, and then sufficient germination and successful birth. In a real sense, everybody was “created” by their respective parents.

            Also, most people do not worship themselves, and that includes atheists most especially. And most people do not worship their parents. About the only people that worship themselves are narcissists.

            You really should try to help yourself. Start by educating yourself.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: ” Hopefully, one day, you will have a change of heart, and become more accepting, tolerant, understanding, and knowledgeable.”

            ~~~~~~~ What you are saying is, you want me to reject Jesus Christ and “accept, tolerate, understand, and believe” YOUR worldview that we live in a messed up world, filled with sin and its ensuring hate, sorrow, pain….. and if we try real hard, we sinful humans (who perpetrate all of the misery) can make it all go away. Satan is working very hard to deceive souls to achieve this very goal of his.

            You do not understand the concept that all practicing Christians hold dear, like that of the Apostle Paul:

            “Yes, and I will continue to rejoice, 19 for I know that through your prayers and God’s provision of the Spirit of Jesus Christ what has happened to me will turn out for my deliverance.[d] 20 I eagerly expect and hope that I will in no way be ashamed, but will have sufficient courage so that now as always Christ will be exalted in my body, whether by life or by death. 21 For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain. 22 If I am to go on living in the body, this will mean fruitful labor for me. Yet what shall I choose? I do not know! 23 I am torn between the two: I desire to depart and be with Christ, which is better by far; 24 but it is more necessary for you that I remain in the body. 25 Convinced of this, I know that I will remain, and I will continue with all of you for your progress and joy in the faith, 26 so that through my being with you again your boasting in Christ Jesus will abound on account of me.” – Philippians 1:18

          • David Cromie

            This ‘messed up’ world is exactly as your supposed, omniscient, ‘creator of all things’ designed it to be! So much for ‘perfection’ from a ‘perfect creator’ (and ‘god’ saw that it was good, so it put its feet up and rested on the seventh day)!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            We know you are portraying yourself as being astonishingly ignorant in order to continue with your antagonisms.

            Anyone who has read the book of Genesis knows that God created a perfect world…. free of sin. Satan (an angel who also rebelled against God) then lied and tempted man to sin (rebelling against God – attempting to be like God) thus bringing sin into the world.

            Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned—

            Through Adam, the inherent inclination to sin entered the human race, and human beings became sinners by nature.

            When Adam sinned, his inner nature was transformed by his sin of rebellion, bringing to him spiritual death and depravity which would be passed on to all who came after him. We are sinners not because we sin; rather, we sin because we are sinners. This passed-on depravity is known as inherited sin. Just as we inherit physical characteristics from our parents, we inherit our sinful natures from Adam. King David lamented this condition of fallen human nature in Psalm 51:5: “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.”

            God used the principle of imputation to benefit mankind when He imputed the sin of believers to the account of Jesus Christ, who paid the penalty for that sin—death—on the cross. Imputing our sin to Jesus, God treated Him as if He were a sinner, though He was not, and had Him die for the sins of the entire world (1 John 2:2)…… “He (Jesus) is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.”

          • David Cromie

            ‘Tis you that is wilfully ignorant, and oblivious to reality concerning the so-called ‘bible’s’ historical beginnings and contradictions. When given the chance to look into the tortured history of this book of fables, legends, and folklore, which you have a fondness for quoting, you ignore the references supplied, and carry on in superstitious blindness. That is what is truly astonishing!

            With reference to the supposed supernatural entity, ‘satan’, and ‘original sin’, had these not been part of a perfect, omniscient, ‘creator’s’ plan for mankind, then they could not exist, unless you deem ‘satan’ to be more powerful than a claimed ‘all powerful’ creator, which would be silly in the context! So much for a reading of Genesis, minus the delusional, superstitious spectacles.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “….’satan’, and ‘original sin’, had these not been part of a perfect, omniscient, ‘creator’s’ plan for mankind, then they could not exist,…”

            ~~~~~ This is a reasonable question.

            God did not create robots that are unable to show their love for God.
            God did give us a “free will”, insofar as “free will” allows us the liberty and power to perform the outward works of the Law, yet we do not ascribe to free will what relates to spiritual matters, namely, truly to venerate
            God, truly to believe God, truly to be confident and hold that God regards us, hears us, forgives us, etc. These are the true works which the heart cannot render without the
            Holy Ghost, as Paul says, 1 Cor. 2, 14: “The natural man, i.e., man using only natural strength, does not receive the things of the Spirit of God.”

            Jesus identified the problem of some unbelievers when He told them, “You refuse to come to me to have life” (John 5:40). Clearly, they did not come because they chose not to. and those who are outside of salvation are “without excuse”.
            (Romans 1:20-21)
            “For His (God) invisible attributes, namely, His eternal power and divine nature,
            have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world,7 in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks to Him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.”

            But how can man, limited by a sin nature, ever choose what is good? It is only through the grace and power of God that “free will” truly becomes “free” in the sense of being able to trust in Christ for the forgiveness of sins and salvation.
            (John 15:16) JESUS: “You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in My name, He may give it to you.”

            Through the message of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, it is the Holy Spirit who works in and through a person’s will to regenerate that person
            (John 1:12-13) JESUS: “But to all who did receive Him, who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.”

            Salvation is God’s work. At the same time, our motives, desires, and actions are voluntary, and we are rightly held responsible for them. The big difference is that true, believing Christians, through repentance, have their sins forgiven through Christ’s merits and those sins are not counted against them.

            Faith alone justifies but justified faith is never alone.

          • David Cromie

            That quote from my last post is not a question, rather it is a statement! Perhaps it was a Freudian slip, in which case we should take all your protestations of belief as really being you, deep down, questioning your own outwardly professed christer faith

            I am still waiting for your proof that your supposed ‘god’ actually exists. Until then, your garbled superstitious BS can be dismissed as utterly meaningless.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “Perhaps it was a Freudian slip….”
            ~~~~~~ I don’t wear a slip but I suspect that YOU do! (jocularity).
            So now you think you are a psychologist, eh?
            Only because of God’s amazing grace and His Holy Spirit I trust in Christ for everything.

            YOU WROTE: “I am still waiting for YOUR proof that your supposed ‘god’ actually exists.”
            ~~~~~~ Now it is YOUR turn to prove to us why and how YOU came to exist !!
            NOTE: “Parents” is not an answer. I mean ORIGIN !

        • Gary Metzger

          Much of it was based on English Common Law, and all students of history know that.

          • The Skeptical Chymist

            Correct

          • David Cromie

            With Magna Carta thrown in for good measure

        • Claus von Stauffenberg

          YOU WROTE: ” The idea that all modern law is based on the Bible…”

          It looks like you enjoy sophistry!

          I opine that the concept of “vice & virtue”, such as in the Ten Commandments, is closer to the conventional perception concerning what we base our laws upon.

          If you are talking about modern law practices…. that is another matter.
          It is rediculous to even intimate that the laws that God provided for His people, the Jews, that was governed by a Theocracy, can be compared with modern law practices and guidelines.

      • Meepestos

        Google: “Roman Greek influence on the US founders” as will Richard, Carl J., The Founders and the Classics: Greece, Rome, and the American Enlightenment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1995. This article seems very much on point, Garrett Lysford; 2013; Cicero and Adams: Architects of the Founding; Sunoikisis Undergraduate Research Journal. You might also find Aatif Rashid ;In What Ways Did Baron de Montesquieu Influence the Constitution of the United States?”; Demand Media helpful in connecting the French influence to their Greek and Roman roots.

        You will notice that the US ended up as a Republic established on Roman lines.

    • Gary Metzger

      Was George Washington wrong to include this in his first inaugural adress?…..”Such being the impressions under which I have, in obedience to the public summons, repaired to the present station; it would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official Act, my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the Universe, who presides in the Councils of Nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that his benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the People of the United States, a Government instituted by themselves for these essential purposes: and may enable every instrument employed in its administration to execute with success, the functions allotted to his charge. In tendering this homage to the Great Author of every public and private good I assure myself that it expresses your sentiments not less than my own; nor those of my fellow-citizens at large, less than either. No People can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand, which conducts the Affairs of men more than the People of the United States. Every step, by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation, seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency.”

      • The Skeptical Chymist

        Yes

      • David Cromie

        Washington’s beliefs were not incorporated into the Constitution, and are thus irelevant.

  • james blue

    The only flags that should be displayed on government buildings/land are the flag of the United States of America, the state flag, if it has one the city flag and in cases where a foreign dignitary is making an official visit the flag of his nation as a diplomatic display.

    No political flags, no religious flags, no rainbow flags

    • Michael A. Todd

      Good point. To be fair…

      • Theophile

        To be fair, honoring a foreign dignitary by flying their flag, is by default a political flag… making the point more “feel good” than fair.

    • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

      Jesus Christ is not a foreign dignitary. To treat him as an enemy is an insult.

      • MarkSebree

        Jesus Christ was also not physically present. Therefore, there is no reason to fly a demonstrably Christian flag in an American courtroom.

        Flying a religious flag in an American courtroom is an insult to all Americans because it is a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the US Constitution. The Conscious Clause is not applicable since we are talking about the government, which has a restriction on it, rather than individuals.

      • David Cromie

        There is no proof that JC ever existed.

        • Gary Metzger

          Wrong. He’s mentioned by Roman historians Tacitus and Pliny. Second of all, there’s a date known as 2016 which bears witness that He indeed was a very actual and real historical figure, not to mention God in the flesh.

          • David Cromie

            No historian can attest to the life and works of JC at first hand!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            If you based all of history on “first hand” experience you would have to be content not to know any history at all. How silly can you get?

        • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

          There is no proof that Josephus existed.

          • David Cromie

            If so, then no one ever has existed!

          • emanuel galdes

            How your mind is swollen in pride and cannot see anything but itself.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            You just made a positive point for the historical records of Jesus.

        • lizk

          there are many proofs you just don’t want to see it

          • David Cromie

            Just provide a few of the ones you deem to be the most impressive.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            ALL of them that contribute to knowledge.

          • MarkSebree

            “All” of nothing is still nothing. You need to provide references to these so-called “proof”. And we need references that are NOT from religious “authorities”. That would be about as reliable as the tobacco companies’ published “research” into the dangers of smoking in the 1960’s and 1970’s, and for the same reasons.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            The references that I have amply provided for you are from archeologist…. not religious authorities. It seems you are now resorting to cherry picking to assist in misrepresenting me.

            Why don’t you just admit that you don’t believe in the Bible, Jesus, His resurrection, and just leave it at that?

            By attempting to justify your atheism you show that you are unsure about your not addressing the “obscurity of theory alternatives” that we talked about and are only interested in antagonizing Christians in your hate for them.

          • David Cromie

            Please point me to any peer-reviewed archaeological paper, published in a serious archaeological journal, that supports your assertions. Would that be ‘cherry-picking’?

            I do not ‘hate’ christers, I only ask them to back up their stated beliefs with testable evidence. If that antagonises them that is not my fault!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            ..

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            D.C. ———– I do not ‘hate’ christers,
            C.V.S. ———– Why do I doubt that when your entire personality if rife with vitriol and aspersions?

            _________________________________________

            D.C. ——- I only ask them to back up their stated beliefs with testable evidence.
            C.V.S. ——– When they back them up with evidence that is no more or no less as valid as yours concerning God and the origin of everything, you simply ridicule it, call it lies, and blaspheme Almighty God. Do you believe that is NOT “antagonism”? Not only atagonism – also malignant hate.

          • MarkSebree

            If there are all these objective proofs and evidence, then feel free to provide them to us so that we can look them over.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            The Scriptures are all that you need. They have proven to be just as valid as any document of history. Check it out if you dare.

          • David Cromie

            Nonsense, with knobs on! The so-called ‘bible’ cannot be prayed in aid of the verification/truth of itself, that would be fallacious, as in a circular argument ploy.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            Because you reject God and His words does not mean you are a higher authority than God or have superior wisdom above God’s or that you will not stand before Him when you die to give an account of yourself.
            Sleep on it.

          • David Cromie

            I cannot reject that for which there is no falsifiable evidence, much less irrefutable proof. Can you supply these deficiencies? If not, then you are spouting mere make-believe mumbo-jumbo!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “… there is no falsifiable evidence, much less irrefutable proof. Can you supply these deficiencies?”

            ~~~~~~ You will always choose to omit the DEFINITIVE aspect of any polemic…. the
            OBSCURITY OF THEORY ALTERNATIVES. That is not even close to being logical or “scientific” in any sense of the word.

            It looks like a gridlock to me since YOU are unable to present any evidence and irrefutable proof, using your hollow sense of a humanistic, ungodly assessment, of what is unknown to man.

            Atheists only have secular humanism at their side, and based on where humanity has been heading lately, that can’t be much of a comfort for their future

          • David Cromie

            What on earth could the ‘OBSCURITY OF THEORY ALTERNATIVES’ be, with respect to providing the evidence for any supposed supernatural entity? It is deism that is ‘hollow’, since the required proof for your ‘god’ is missing!

            Are you asking me to provide falsifiable evidence, and/or irrefutable proof, for the unknown? To achieve that really would be magic!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            ..

          • David Cromie

            Nothing intelligent to say, then?

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            ..

          • MarkSebree

            “Atheists only have secular humanism at their side, and based on where humanity has been heading lately, that can’t be much of a comfort for their future”

            Given that it is mostly the very religious, such as far right Christians and Muslims, who are driving the direction that humanity is taking, why are you trying to blame atheists for your religion’s failings? If anything, atheists and liberals are trying to change the direction so that we do not head off the cliff that people like you seem to want to drive us over.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “…why are you trying to blame atheists for your religion’s failings?”

            ~~~~~~ Attheist/Humanists hold the belief that mankind can eventually make themselves perfect, or nearly so, if the proper environment, conditioning, governance, and laws are in place. That has proven to be an exercise in failure. And there is a reason for that.

            Christians believe, as the Scriptures teach, that mankind’s sinful nature is that principle in man that makes him rebellious against God. When we speak of the sin nature, we refer to the fact that we have a natural inclination to sin; given the choice to do God’s will or our own, we will naturally choose to do our own thing.

            Proof of the sin nature abounds. No one has to teach a child to lie or be selfish.
            “As the salt flavors every drop in the Atlantic, so does sin affect every atom of our nature. It is so sadly there, so abundantly there, that if you cannot detect it, you are deceived.”

            The Bible explains the reason for the trouble. Humanity is sinful, not just in theory or in practice but by nature. Sin is part of the very fiber of our being; the stain runs deep.

            Romans 6:6 speaks of “the body ruled by sin.” The flesh-and-blood existence we lead on this earth is shaped by our sinful, corrupt nature.

            The sin nature is universal in humanity. All of us have a sinful nature, and it affects every part of us. This is the doctrine of total depravity, and it is biblical. All of us have gone astray (Isaiah 53:6). Paul admits that “the trouble is with me, for I am all too human, a slave to sin” (Romans 7:14).

            Paul was in his “sinful nature a slave to the law of sin” (Romans 7:25). Solomon concurs: “Indeed, there is no one on earth who is righteous, / no one who does what is right and never sins” (Ecclesiastes 7:20). The apostle John perhaps puts it most bluntly: “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us” (1 John 1:7).

            David rues the fact that he was born with the principle of sin already at work within him: “Surely I was sinful at birth, / sinful from the time my mother conceived me” (Psalm 51:5). Elsewhere, David states, “Even from birth the wicked go astray; / from the womb they are wayward, spreading lies” (Psalm 58:3).

            Other consequences of the sin nature are hostility toward God and ignorance of His truth. Paul says, “The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God” (Romans 8:7–8). Also, “the person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit” (1 Corinthians 2:14).

            There is only one Person in the history of the world who did not have a sin nature: Jesus Christ (God in the flesh). Jesus then lived a sinless life of absolute perfection. He was “the Holy and Righteous One” (Acts 3:14) who “had no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21). This allowed Jesus to be sacrificed on the cross as our perfect substitute, “a lamb without blemish or defect” (1 Peter 1:19

            It is through Christ that we are born again. “That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit” (John 3:6,) “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here!” (2 Corinthians 5:17).

            The Bible says that sin remains in us and that a struggle with that old nature will continue as long as we are in this world. Paul bemoaned his own personal struggle in Romans 7:15–20. But we have help in the battle—divine help. The Spirit of God takes up residence in each believer and supplies the power we need to overcome the pull of the sin nature within us and gives Christians the power, through the Spirit, to resist sin and Satan.

            “No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God” (1 John 3:9). God’s ultimate plan for us is total sanctification when we see Christ (1 Thessalonians 3:13; 1 John 3:2).

            I believe it is facile assumption that more practicing Christians would be better for our world than the religion of Humanist.

          • MarkSebree

            I have checked the Bible out. I actually read it. That is what lead me to becoming an agnostic. And before you even start, my parents are still religious, as are my brother and sister and their families. I was chaplain’s aide in the Boy Scouts. I went to Vacation Bible School during the summers as a kid. I went to a parochial high school. I even have a first cousin who is a minister.

            There are many, many historical documents that are far more valid than they Bible. The Bible is a primarily a collection of myths, not history. There are many stories that follow the classic myth structure, including and especially the stories about Jesus.

            Most of the Bible cannot be collaborated except superficially with other documents from other cultures, even those in the region. Many of the myths resemble other myths from most established or older cultures in the region, especially Babylonian myths, which suggests that the myths from other cultures were adapted to the Hebrew culture.

            Perhaps you should dare to check out reality, and not rely on your mythology for all your answers. Are YOU brave enough to dare to question your own beliefs?

          • David Cromie

            The so-called ‘bible’ is not a primary source for any alleged facts!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            In some cases it is.

            The evidence for the early existence of the Scripture writings is clear. The wealth of materials for the New Testament becomes even more significant when we compare it with other ancient documents which have been accepted without question. I know you have not bothered to investigate that fact from the way you write.
            In fact, Biblical history has provided evidence, direction, and given support to many secular writings concerning ancient records.

            Archaeological discoveries through the years have dispelled the prejudice that the Bible does not contain accurate historical records. More scientific evidence and information will come to light and will perpetually do so in the future.

            Many digs are predicated on Biblical history with findings that correspond with the history of those locations, whereas without the Scriptures, these discoveries would never have taken place.

            Time will produce more and more evidence for the historical accuracy of the Bible.
            Yet, for Christians, it means little as the conviction of God’s truth comes from the Holy Spirit directly to the heart.

          • David Cromie

            The so-called ‘bible’ is a syncretic creation, drawing mainly on Pagan myths and legends. The earliest ‘christian’ papyri (now rather fragmentary) became the basis for the Codex Sinaiticus, the earliest known ‘bible’, which dates from the 4th cent. C.E.

            This Codex was then used by the NT scribes, directed by the ‘early church fathers’, to concoct a canon of writing to bolster its own ascendency under Constantine, as his political aid to establishing monotheism in the dying days of the Roman empire. This was further helped by Justinian’s attempt to spread monotheism to the whole of Europe by indulging in much church building throughout the empire.

            Eventually, the Roman church would end up controlling the empire, now termed the ‘Holy Roman Empire’, introducing its own coercive methods, and skullduggery, for contending with any opposition, or quelling resistance. Of course, there is much, much more to the history of the RC church, but I will leave you to do your own research.

          • MarkSebree

            And people wonder why so many non-Christians do not trust the church, whether it is Catholic or Protestant.

          • George T

            All of this is totally incorrect for anyone who is bored enough to be reading this drivel.

          • David Cromie

            The history of religion is not boring! What is boring, is the number of religiots who are unaware of it, and, stupidly, not willing to check it out for themselves, so engrossed are they in their superstitious delusions.

          • George T

            Are you gay? You sound gay.

          • MarkSebree

            First, what does him being gay, if he is, have to do with anything? It certainly does not change whether or not what he said was relevant or valid.

            Second, what does a gay person “sound like” in their writing?

            Third, to you have anything else in your “tool box” besides logical fallacies. Your posts are pretty much nothing but logical fallacies, in this case a “red herring” and a very weak ad hominem.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            RE. “logical fallacies” , “red herring” , ad hominem.

            ~~~~~~ Stop plagiarizing my phrases!

          • David Cromie

            I was not aware that anyone had copyright on these phrases!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            Are you MarkSebree ?? He knows what I am talking about….move along!!

          • MarkSebree

            No, I do not. I have been pointing out the logical fallacies of the overly religious for years. There are plenty of websites that explain what logical fallacies are, what they are not, and what their proper names are. Perhaps you should study up on what “circular logic” and “circular reasoning” are, as well as “appeal to fear”, which you just tried to use with success in the last 24 hours.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: ” Hopefully, one day, you will have a change of heart, and become more accepting, tolerant, understanding, and knowledgeable.”

            ~~~~~~~ What you are saying is, you want me to reject Jesus Christ and “accept, tolerate, understand, and believe” YOUR worldview that we live in a messed up world, filled with sin and its ensuring hate, sorrow, pain….. and if we try real hard, we sinful humans (who perpetrate all of the misery) can make it all go away. Satan is working very hard to deceive souls to achieve this very goal of his.

            You do not understand the concept that all practicing Christians hold dear, like that of the Apostle Paul:
            “Yes, and I will continue to rejoice, 19 for I know that through your prayers and God’s provision of the Spirit of Jesus Christ what has happened to me will turn out for my deliverance.[d] 20 I eagerly expect and hope that I will in no way be ashamed, but will have sufficient courage so that now as always Christ will be exalted in my body, whether by life or by death. 21 For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain. 22 If I am to go on living in the body, this will mean fruitful labor for me. Yet what shall I choose? I do not know! 23 I am torn between the two: I desire to depart and be with Christ, which is better by far; 24 but it is more necessary for you that I remain in the body. 25 Convinced of this, I know that I will remain, and I will continue with all of you for your progress and joy in the faith, 26 so that through my being with you again your boasting in Christ Jesus will abound on account of me.” – Philippians 1:18

            If I were an atheist, God forbid, I would not waste my time trying to refute something that I did NOT believe in, unless I was trying to convince myself there was not a God, even though I would not have anything to explain how the world, the solar system in all of its order, and all life with its marvelous complexities, began.

            Just more of your characteristic aspersions lacking any substance.

            YOU WROTE: “appeal to fear”.

            ~~~~~~ This is NOT the Gospel of Jesus Christ. There is no such thing as “scaring the hell out of people” in the Scriptures nor did Jesus teach it.

            1 JOHN 4:13 This is how we know that we live in Him and He in us: He has given us of His Spirit. 14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent His Son to be the Savior of the world. 15 If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in them and they in God. 16 And so we know and rely on the love God has for us.

            God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them. 17 This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment: In this world we are like Jesus. 18 There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.

            19 We love because He first loved us.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “appeal to fear”.

            ~~~~~~ This is NOT the Gospel of Jesus Christ. There is no such thing as “scaring the hell out of people” in the Scriptures nor did Jesus teach it.

            1 JOHN 4:13 This is how we know that we live in Him and He in us: He has given us of His Spirit. 14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent His Son to be the Savior of the world. 15 If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in them and they in God. 16 And so we know and rely on the love God has for us.

            God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them. 17 This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment: In this world we are like Jesus. 18 There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.

            19 We love because He first loved us.

          • David Cromie

            Give me a kiss, and I will tell you! Does that sound gay enough for you?

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            Right on target! Those antagonists with the least amount of research and study are always compelled to blather-out with half-truths, and collosal exclusions (in Cromie’s case the Reformation was totally ignored).

            Since the historical-critical method and presuppositions are founded upon the judgment of the scholar and are simply in line with the original temptation of Eve who wanted to be like God, again it is unloving for it turns people from the Lord to themselves, rather than to the Lord.

            We are not free to do as we please. We cannot simply work, teach, preach, or anything else to suit our own desires or the readings of society. We are completely and totally bound by love, commitment, and awe to the LORD and his Word and must speak as God directs, even when what is said will not be popular or “politically correct.”

            “Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.” – 1 Corinthians 2:12

            “A fool has no delight in understanding, but in expressing his own heart.” – Proverbs 18:2

          • David Cromie

            Another load of BS, but to be expected. I have never ignored the Reformation, nor even the Counter Reformation! You are the one ignorant of the history of the so-called ‘bible’, as is plain to be seen.

            Have you ever studied the history, or were you even aware of either the Codex Sinaiticus, or the Codex Vaticanus? It seems not. An argument from ignorance is not worth the paper it is written on.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            “A fool has no delight in understanding, but in expressing his own heart.” – Proverbs 18:2

          • MarkSebree

            You, you are admitting that you are a fool?

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            RE. “You, you are admitting that you are a fool?”

            ~~~~~~ The Bible passage (“A fool has no delight in understanding, but in expressing his own heart.” – Proverbs 18:2) was referring to the worst fools of all !

            PSALM 14:1 The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, there is none who does good.

            ISAIAH 32:6 For the fool speaks folly,
            and his heart is busy with iniquity,
            to practice ungodliness,
            to utter error concerning the Lord,
            to leave the craving of the hungry unsatisfied,
            and to deprive the thirsty of drink.

            Proverbs 26:11 Like a dog that returns to his vomit is a fool who repeats his folly.

            Proverbs 18:7 A fool’s mouth is his ruin,
            and his lips are a snare to his soul.

            Proverbs 10:23 Doing wrong is like a joke to a fool, but wisdom is pleasure to a man of understanding.

            Proverbs 14:7 Leave the presence of a fool,
            for there you do not meet words of knowledge.

            * Please bear in mind that we are all fools concerning the knowledge of God and Christ until the Holy Spirit brings faith and trust in Jesus to the heart.

            Revelation 3:20 JESUS: “Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, and they with Me.

          • David Cromie

            “Like a dog that returns to his vomit is a fool who repeats his folly”. Very true.

            Thanks for reinforcing your love for folly, as you display your propensity for employing fallacious circular arguments yet again!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            Insignificant. No substance.

          • David Cromie

            At last you are beginning to understand the christer modus operandi! Perhaps there is hope for you yet.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            The Bible passage that I sent (“A fool has no delight in understanding, but in expressing his own heart.” – Proverbs 18:2) was referring to the worst fools of all !

            PSALM 14:1 The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, there is none who does good.

            ISAIAH 32:6 For the fool speaks folly,
            and his heart is busy with iniquity,
            to practice ungodliness,
            to utter error concerning the Lord,
            to leave the craving of the hungry unsatisfied,
            and to deprive the thirsty of drink.

            Proverbs 26:11 Like a dog that returns to his vomit is a fool who repeats his folly.

            Proverbs 18:7 A fool’s mouth is his ruin,
            and his lips are a snare to his soul.

            Proverbs 10:23 Doing wrong is like a joke to a fool, but wisdom is pleasure to a man of understanding.

            Proverbs 14:7 Leave the presence of a fool,
            for there you do not meet words of knowledge.

            * Please bear in mind that we are all fools concerning the knowledge of God and Christ until the Holy Spirit brings faith and trust in Jesus to the heart.

            Revelation 3:20 JESUS: “Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, and they with Me.

          • David Cromie

            Your advice ‘Leave the presence of a fool, for there you do not meet words of knowledge’ prompts me to do just that. Goodbye, fool!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOUR WROTE: “Goodbye,….”

            Is that a promice?? I sure hope so!!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            I only wish that YOU had hope for eternity.

          • David Cromie

            What difference would that make to you, other than the fact we will both be dead one day, and that will be that, finite? Et in arcadia ego, no chance of that for either of us!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “What difference would that make to you, other than the fact we will both be dead one day, and that will be that, finite?”

            ~~~~~~ Our earthly bodies might “die” but the soul lives forever.

            JOHN 11:21 “Lord,” Martha said to Jesus, “if You had been here, my brother would not have died. 22But I know that even now God will give You whatever you ask.”
            23Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.”
            24Martha answered, “I know he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.”
            25Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in Me will live, even though they die; 26and whoever lives by believing in Me will never die. Do you believe this?”

            The Bible refers to the soul as being created but there are no references in scripture to our spirit being created. The spirit is given and shaped by God but not created. Just as the soul was created it can be destroyed and can have a destination of either Heaven or Hell after death. This cannot be said of the spirit. There is not one reference to spiritual death in all of Scripture. There is not even one reference to the spirit being made alive as though it could have been dead. There is also no reference to the spirit after death. After death one is referred to as a soul with no mention of a spirit.

            The spirits function is life itself. This is probably why there is no mention in scripture of it actually dying. How can life itself die? The spirit seems to have been given at the beginning by the breath of God. After that man is referred to as a living soul. After death the spirit leaves the body and returns back to where it came from, which is God Himself. After death the soul arrives at its appointed destination. If one trusted in Christ and the righteousness that comes through faith then the soul ends up with the Lord. If one rejected the only Way that God made to himself, their soul would end up in Hell. At the resurrection the soul is then united with its spiritual body.

            HEBREWS 9:28 But He (JESUS) has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and He will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for Him.

            (Rom 8:10-11 KJV) And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. {11} But if the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

            MATTHEW 10:28 (JESUS) Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

          • David Cromie

            There is no such ‘thing’ as a soul. Why do you insist on supplying BS quotes from a book of fables, legends and folklore, fit only for fantasists, the gullible, and the terminally deluded?

            It is noted that you are incapable of answering questions, Why is that? It seems that your posts are merely desperate attempts to convince yourself of the value of your beliefs, and christer world view.

            Do you not realise that your belief system, based on the supposition that there exists various supposed supernatural entities in the real world, is just a figment of your own imagination, however ardent those beliefs might be? Imagining something to be true, without evidence, and then attempting to reify your conceptions is doomed to failure in the absence of any testable evidence for their truth.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            I hope you do not expect me to reply to this drivel when I know the source of you blindness! Again, that would be “Throwing pearls to swine” as Jesus stated. He also stated: “My words will NEVER pass away.”

            Last eve I passed beside a blacksmith’s door
            And heard the anvil ring the vesper chime;
            When looking in, I saw upon the floor,
            Old hammers worn with beating years of time.

            “How many anvils have you had,” said I,
            “To wear and batter these hammers so?”
            “Just one,” said he; then with a twinkling eye,
            “The anvil wears the hammers out, you know.”

            And so, I thought, the anvil of God’s Word,
            For ages, skeptics blows have beat upon;
            Yet, though the noise of falling blows was heard,
            The anvil is unharmed – the hammers gone.

            – by John Clifford

          • David Cromie

            More superstitious christer BS, and not a hint of any convincing, or irrefutable, evidence that your favourite supposed ‘god’ actually exists!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            Now it is YOUR turn to prove to us why and how YOU came to exist !!
            NOTE: “Parents” is not an answer. I mean ORIGIN !

          • David Cromie

            This you have ignored , for some reason, yet it is fundamental to the discussion of anything to do with religion; where is the evidence required to provide any reason to believe in the real existence of your favourite ‘god’, or whatever you term it?

            As for where animals, including the human species, came from, try studying the survival of the fittest and evolution!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “As for where animals, including the human species, came from, try studying the survival of the fittest and evolution!”

            ~~~~~ Evolution is only a THEORY! True scientists will not touch it as it is outside the realm of honest science because it has no basis for proof. Religion is treated the same.

            Evolution is not a demonstrated fact.
            If it cannot be replicated (reproduce exactly an organism, genetic material, or a cell) in the labs of science to demonstrate “evolution”, it is theory, for that is the criterion of TRUE SCIENCE. The alternative to this is applying the S.W.A.G. System (Scientific Wild Ass Guessing).

            Argued by analogy, evolution and religion have one or more things in common, e.g.; evolution is a theory; it does not meet the requirements of pure science. Because modern science tries to rely on the minimization of material existing in the mind prior to and independent of experience or being non-analytic, of error, and subjectivity — as well as on avoidance of — it remains neutral on subjective subjects such as religion.

            Evolutionists (NOT true scientists) teach that the ORIGIN of species is based on a random cosmic accident, a big bang, which equates to a “something from nothing” chimera

            Here is where the crusaders against religion step into quicksand. They will stop at nothing plying on the minds of atheists/humanist.

          • David Cromie

            “Evolution is only a THEORY!”. So is gravity, thus no true christian ‘scientist’ should have anything to do with it!

            Once again, you reinforce your astounding ignorance of science, and scientific method. The next time you travel by car, I hope you realise that it is the application of the theory of internal combustion that keeps your car’s engine running, and gets you to your destination.

          • MarkSebree

            “Evolution is only a THEORY! ”

            And yet, you do not understand what a scientific theory is. It is falsifiable (i.e. can be proven false), provides a mechanism to make predictions about future discoveries, and has been repeatedly tested using real world evidence. Evolution is one of the strongest scientific theories currently known because people like you keep trying to prove it false, and failing. It is accepted as fact by true scientists.

            “True scientists will not touch it as it is outside the realm of honest science because it has no basis for proof. ”

            No, true scientists accept Evolution as a fact because it has been proven time and again, and nobody has been able to provide any significant evidence to refute it. In fact, for a scientific theory to be a scientific theory, it must have been proven to be the best fit for some data set, and to make reasonably accurate predictions about future discoveries in the field.

            “Religion is treated the same [as evolution].”

            No, it is not. Religion is subjective, while science is objective. Religion relies on unsupported belief and faith, and is precepts are not true for anyone that does not follow that religion. Science is based on objective, observable facts and evidence, and remains true regardless of religious belief. Science contains rigorous standards, is repeatable, does not rely on personal beliefs, and is peer reviewed to find flaws and to allow testing using other data and methodologies.

            “Evolutionists (NOT true scientists) teach that the ORIGIN of species is based on a random cosmic accident, a big bang, which equates to a “something from nothing” chimera”

            No. Evolution is biology. The Big Bang is cosmology, a branch of physics. What’s more, evolution only deals with life that already exists. The initial formation of life is outside the purview of evolution.

            Additionally, religion also expects you to accept the claim that something came from nothing, and then to not even question the claim. Also, the Big Bang theory does not claim that “something came from nothing” since it does not state what the conditions of the universe were prior to its start. Rather, it starts at the femtosecond that the universe formed.

            Just because you refuse to understand the theory of evolution and the big bang theory for yourself, and you refuse to learn that a scientific theory really is does not constrain others from learning this information. You can remain ignorant if you want. Others will venture ahead and learn what he world is really like while you remain in the dark and claim that you are seeing light.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU INCORRECTLY WROTE: “The so-called ‘bible’ is a syncretic creation, drawing mainly on Pagan myths and legends.

            ~~~~~~ This is a flagrant misrepresentation of what the Scriptures are !!! Just more or your antagonistic lies that are in league with Satan.

            Syncretism, as defined by the American Heritage Dictionary, is “the reconciliation or fusion of differing systems of belief.” This is most evident in the areas of philosophy and religion, and usually results in a NEW TEACHING or belief system. Obviously, this cannot be reconciled to biblical Christianity.

            False teachings were around as long as the Scriptures…. predominantly those of Gnosticism and Paganism.

            The Bible was given by inspiration of God and did NOT “draw” ANYTHING from false teachings or reconcile with them or were the fusing of differing systems of belief at any point in time.
            If anything, these aberrant false teachings drew concepts from the original Scriptures – Gnosticism for example, as do many anti-biblical teachings down through history that were devised by unscrupulous enemies of God.

            More recently, religious syncretism can be seen in such religious systems as the New Age, Hinduism, Unitarianism, and Christian Science. These religions are a blending of multiple different belief systems, and are continually evolving as the philosophies of mankind rise and fall in popularity.

            Therein lies the problem, for syncretism relies on the whim of man, not the standard of Scripture. The Bible makes it very clear what true religion is.

            Think on just a few things stated in Scripture: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind” (Deuteronomy 6:5; Matthew 22:37); “Jesus replied, ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me'” (John 14:6); “Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31-32); and “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).

            Religious syncretism is simply not compatible with true Christianity. In fact, any modification to biblical law and principle for the sake of a “better” religion is heresy (Revelation 22:18-19).

          • David Cromie

            If so, then the so-called ‘church fathers’ were true heretics!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            Antagonism only. No substance.

          • David Cromie

            You provided the heretical substance yourself in your last post, since the so-called ‘bible’ had been altered, added to, and otherwise edited over the centuries by the so-called ‘church fathers! Just compare any modern text with the earliest known ‘bibles’, i.e. either the Codex Sinaiticus, dating from the 4th cent C.E., or the Codex Vaticanus, dating from the 5th cent. C.E. and enlighten yourself!

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            The problem here is that you do not understand what INSPIRATION of the Holy Spirit from God through the spirit of the men who wrote the Bible is all about.

            Orthodox Christianity recognizes the Scriptures as a plenary, verbal inspiration recorded by the Apostles [New Testament} and Prophets [Old Testament].
            The word plenary means “complete or full,” and verbal means “the very words of Scripture.” So plenary, verbal inspiration means that every single word in the Bible is the very word of God.

            The passage (2 Timothy 3:16-17) uses a unique Greek word, “theopneustos“, which literally means “God-breathed.” Scripture is literally “breathed out” of the mouth of God. Furthermore, in another biblical passage, we see that “no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:21).

            This passage gives us a clue as to how God inspired the human authors. We see that men spoke (or wrote) “as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” The verb “carried along” is used to speak of a sail being filled by a wind and carrying a boat along the water, which is fitting since the Greek word for “spirit” is also used for “wind.” When the human authors were putting pen to paper, the Holy Spirit “carried them along” so that what they wrote were the “breathed-out” words of God.

            NOTE WELL: This means that while the actual writings retain the personality of the individual authors (and that is obvious if you read the works of Paul compared to James or John or Peter), they contain the actual words of God. The same holds true for all of the Gospel writers. Some contain more information than others but all are given by God.

          • David Cromie

            “…every single word in the Bible is the very word of God”. If so, then how do you account for the inconsistencies? Did the supposed ‘holy spirit’ have off days, delivering more, and conflicting. ‘information’ on some days than others?

            Have you made the comparison I recommended (it seems not!)?

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “… how do you account for the inconsistencies?” and “conflicting. ‘information’ (sic)

            ~~~~~~ Since you think you know so much about “inconsistencies”, please provide as many as you like. No diving for cover, please!

            I already explained that the writers of the Gospel and the Epistles wrote retaining the personality of the individual authors (and that is obvious if you read the works of Paul compared to James or John or Peter), they contain the actual words of God revealing what God wanted us to know. Have you done the comparison?

            I really do not expect a logical answer as you are hard-wired into unbelief by Satan and will support him. So let’s call it quits like you suggested.

          • George T

            Says who? Prove that there are not any facts in the Bible.

            btw…don’t come back with some “you prove it is” BS. Grow a pair and prove it.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            I ended dialogs with Cromie. I have relayed the Gospel and provided historical evidence that substantiates that Jesus Christ is part of world history that is deemed as valid as
            any other ancient records… in fact, more.

            Cromie rejects God and relies on fallible human logic in spiritual matters. Christians know that logic doesn’t save. Jesus does. We cannot reason someone into the kingdom of God. It is the Holy Spirit who convicts of sin and righteousness and who opens the heart to understand the truth (John 16:8).

            We are commanded by God to give an answer to unbelievers (1 Pet. 3:15) and to reason (Isaiah 1:18).
            God , in His sovereignty, uses our witness of the Gospel and reasoning to bring someone into the Kingdom through the Holy Spirit. He is not limited by our inadequacies.

            After having followed God’s instructions, Christians are not to allow God’s Word to be ridiculed, mocked, and trampled upon.
            We can do so in good conscience following Jesus’ instructions to His apostles when He told them: “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces. – MATTHEW 7:6

            We are not to judge others, for we are guilty of the same things they are. Reserving judgment, however, does not prevent us from discerning those who would accept, or at least respect, the gospel from those who would ridicule, mock, and trample it, and then turn on us and abuse us. Balancing judgment with discernment is the wisdom of serpents Jesus refers to in Matthew 10:16 JESUS: “I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.

            JESUS: “If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town” (Matthew 10:14).

            Answers that are in agreement with God’s word and lovingly given to unbelievers, even if they are rejected, are still true answers. The unbeliever will be held accountable on judgment day for rejecting those truths.

            “… so is My word that goes out from My mouth:
            It will not return to Me empty,
            but will accomplish what I desire
            and achieve the purpose for which I sent it. – ISAIAH 55:11

          • David Cromie

            There is no 1st Cent. C.E. evidence for any man-god named JC, neither written nor archaeological, etc. If you know of any, please produce it, remembering that the so-called ‘bible’ is not a validation of itself, since that would be the fallacy of circular reasoning. Also, the extra-biblical ‘sources’ usually relied upon were written long after the 1st. Cent., and not by anyone who had firsthand knowledge of the events as told in the biblical narrative.

          • George T

            Grow a pair. Prove that JC never existed.

          • MarkSebree

            I do not need to. You are the one making the positive assertion, so you are the one that is required to support your claims. You need to grow a brain and prove that he did, using sources other than the Bible. You are not allowed to shift the burden of proof.

            The ancient Romans were well known for keeping extensive records, and there is no reliable mention of him existing. The events that supposedly surrounded his birth cannot be verified either, and these were government actions that would have required quite a bit of “parchment-work”. What’s more, his life according to your mythology follows the classic pattern of a mythic hero, which also suggests that it was embellished as a minimum, and likely mostly fictitious.

          • George T

            Reach up there and see if you can find those little balls and just give some proof that Jesus Christ never existed.
            I’m sure you’ll come back with some gay b_ullshit

          • MarkSebree

            “Reach up there and see if you can find those little balls and just give some proof that Jesus Christ never existed.”

            So, all you have are ad hominems and shifting the burden of proof. You cannot support your assertion that Jesus Christ ever existed. Ergo, by default, you have lost. You really should have read what I posted.

            “I’m sure you’ll come back with some gay b_ullshit”

            No, I leave the BS to you and people like you. After all, you cannot support your claims, and all you have are insults and logical fallacies. You have no facts whatsoever, and your ignorance of basic debating principles is appalling. Did you even pay attention in High School?

      • Bob267

        Religion Needs to Stay Out of Government, That’s The Law, Our Constitution!!

    • Bob267

      A. What the hell is a Christian Flag doing hanging outside of an American court house anyway???????????? This is so UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!! REPUBLICONS are violating our CONSTITUTION in so many ways!! A Prayer before each session of Congress is ILLEGAL!!!!! We need a law to make sure Religion is private, NOT PUBLIC!!! I believe in my own beliefs and everyone has that right!!! Don’t make it a public affair, it’s UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!!! Much luck to the Atheist’s group, they are correct!!!

  • Dan Jones

    How to shut up an atheist…

    Draw a big circle…

    Tell the atheist the circle is all the knowledge that has ever existed in the past and all the knowledge that will ever exist

    Tell the atheist to shade in the circle to show how much knowledge he has

    Now point to all the space left over inside the circle and ask this; how then can you say there is no God with all that space left in the circle that you have NO knowledge of..

    The fool has said in his heart there is no God…

    Always be a light that is shininginthedark.c

    • Mellow Fellow

      Which god?

      • Dan Jones

        You will know whats real the minute your last breath leaves your body, unfortunately at that time it is too late to repent… Today is the day of Salvation… and you are not promised tomorrow…

        • Jalapeno

          Yeah, what a wonderful way to side-step a lack of response.

          “What? You want to ask me questions about a silly statement I made? Well, you’ll regret it! You’re going to know I’m write eventually!”

          • Dan Jones

            Jesus loves you so I hope you ask for forgiveness before its too late…

          • Jalapeno

            Yup, way to stand up for your beliefs. Very believable.

        • Mellow Fellow

          Well, that’s not very helpful information. Should I repent to Oden? He has a beard and an eyepatch, which makes him superior to all other gods.

          • Dan Jones

            Jesus loves you and he is who we will all stand before…

    • Rookheight

      So you’re saying your god must exist because those who don’t believe in him don’t know 100% of “all the knowledge that will ever exist”? Try that on yourself with “unicorns” in place of “God” and perhaps you’ll realize what an imbecilic argument it is.

      Your approach amounts to nothing more than telling atheists that they can’t prove that a god doesn’t exist, so therefore god must exist. But in any other area, I’m sure that you would agree that we shouldn’t believe in something unless there is evidence that it does exist. Funny that you make an exception for your invisible, all-powerful imaginary friend.

      • Dan Jones

        You will know whats real the minute your last breath leaves your body, unfortunately at that time it is too late to repent… Today is the day of Salvation…

        • Rookheight

          Maybe you’ll realize the minute your last breath leaves your body that you can only get to heaven if you use your “god-given” powers of reason to reject the dogma you’ve been taught your whole life. Why would a god give humans the power to understand logic if we weren’t supposed to use it? You’d better make the smart bet and reject Christianity while you still can.

        • http://www.nomorebadtown.com NoMoreBadTown

          Is that all you got? Rook just destroyed your argument, and all you got is “yeah, but still!” That’s so weak, Danny boy!

          • Dan Jones

            Doesn’t matter since I do not argue… as I said wait till your death… if you are right and I am wrong I still live a life full of PEACE, JOY, and REAL LOVE… but if I am right, there are no do-overs… think about that for awhile… No more comments need to be made…

          • MarkSebree

            What makes you think that you are following the correct deity, or the corrected interpretations of that deity? Pascal’s Wager is a logical fallacy of the excluded middle. There are far more possibilities than just the two.

          • http://www.nomorebadtown.com NoMoreBadTown

            But it does matter, as the book that you claim to follow doesn’t have peace, joy, or real love in it. Instead, the work of fiction you claim to be inspired by an omnipotent being is full of stories advocating suicide, incest, bestialiality, sadomasochism, sexual activity in a violent context, murder, morbid violence, use of drugs and alcohol, homosexuality, voyeurism, revenge, undermining of authoritative figures, lawlessness, human rights violations and atrocities. Your religion promotes and facilitates delusions, decreased cognitive and objective reasoning abilities, pathological disorders, hatred, bigotry, and violence including, but not limited to fanaticism, murder, and genocide.

            Think about that for a while. And if you don’t believe me, try actually reading the bible, instead of just listening to your pastor/priest recite selected verses at you. Then, no more comments need to be made. No more bad town…

            Remember that true morality is doing what is right regardless of what you are told. Religion is doing what you are told, regardless of what is right. Religion is bad town stuff. No more bad town.

    • james blue

      So the flying spaghetti monster is real? There really are invisible fairies living on your shoulder?

      • Dan Jones

        You will know whats real the minute your last breath leaves your body, unfortunately at that time it is too late to repent…

        • james blue

          Just applying your logic. You cannot deny they exist….right?

          • Dan Jones

            Jesus loves you so I hope you ask for forgiveness before its too late…

            I will see you on the other side…

          • Rookheight

            When you keep repeating the same thing to yourself, does it start to seem reasonable to you?

  • awareoftruth

    I guess, every sneer and every lawsuit against God is a form of persecution. Even so, it’s utterly amazing how stories such as this only deepen my faith! The evidence of the eternal Trinity, the Savior, the power of grace, and the unconditional love of the Father resonates in my heart. My soul is untouchable. His love was made for everyone- come as you are!

    • Tangent002

      Lack of preferential treatment is not persecution.

      • awareoftruth

        What do you think persecution is?

        • MarkSebree

          According to dictionary dot com:

          a program or campaign to exterminate, drive away, or subjugate people based on their membership in a religious, ethnic, social, or racial group

          Christians, Jews, and some Muslims are persecuted by ISIL.

          Fundamentalist Christians support the persecution of homosexuals, atheists, wiccans, and others.

          Many countries persecute homosexuals in their laws.

          Christians are not persecuted in the USA. Christians are the largest religious group, and the far right wing Christians effectively control one of the two major political parties, and thus the legislatures, judiciary, and executive branches of a significant number of states.

          Being told to play by the same rules as everyone else is not persecution. It is simply a denial of a previously privileged position.

          • awareoftruth

            I’m speaking of a much bigger picture in America- I think I will politely agree to disagree.

          • MarkSebree

            Too bad you cannot show any real, systemic persecution against Christians in the USA. Being treated the same as everyone else is not persecution, it is equality. There is no valid reason why Christianity should have a privileged position in the USA.

          • quinyus

            thanks to TRUMP they now control NO party hehe

          • MarkSebree

            Don’t count on it. Pence is a very far right Christian, and a darling of the dominionistic/evangelical factions that control the Republican party. And there are still all the Senators, Representatives. Governors, state and local legislators, mayors, judges, and other elected and appointed officials that control things on an often more local and personal level.

          • quinyus

            So basically it’s either a welfare state or a religious state huh we need to try 3rd party candidates

        • Tangent002

          An assumption of inferiority, lack of inherent equality, or the infliction of material harm based on membership within a particular demographic.

          Not being placed on a pedestal does not qualify.

          • awareoftruth

            We don’t have the same information- so I think I will politely agree to disagree.

  • Stephen W.

    This is Bryan County, not Bryant County. I worked in this courtroom at least once a month for almost two years until I went to another circuit. This is the only courtroom I have ever worked in that displayed the “Christian” Nationalist flag. I would like to have complained about it, but this county is heavily populated by “Christian” nationalists and the retaliation from them would have been severe and swift. Very encouraging that this behavior is finally being challenged.

    • Tangent002

      That you feared retaliation if you expressed your discomfort is the precise reason why there should be a bright red line between church and state. Even these sorts of ‘soft’ nods to religion are not without consequence.

    • Michael A. Todd

      Couldn’t find any flags on Google that were specific to Christian Nationalism.

      • MarkSebree

        But you can find specific Christian flags, i.e. flags that denote the Christian religion. The only places likely to display a explicitly Christian flag prominently in a government office or courtroom is one where the people in power mistakenly believe that the USA is a “Christian Nation”, and that Christians “deserve” to have a privileged position and voice. A place where non-Christians and more intelligent, educated, and/or liberal Christians are cautious or fearful about speaking out against the violation of the US Constitution and case law because of the probably consequences.

        • Drewski!

          Have you read George Washington’s inaugural address? Are you aware of the actions he and congress took after his address? If not, I encourage you to do so.

        • Claus von Stauffenberg

          Closer to the truth would be the assessment that YOU are attempting to influence others based upon your Phantasia and a mind predisposed to the hate, the ridicule, and the antagonizing of Christians when you produce this kind of feculence………..
          “The only places likely to display a explicitly Christian flag prominently in a government office or courtroom is one where the people in power mistakenly believe that the USA is a “Christian Nation”, and that Christians “deserve” to have a privileged position and voice. A place where non-Christians and more intelligent, educated, and/or liberal Christians are cautious or fearful about speaking out against the violation of the US Constitution and case law because of the probable consequences.” (sic)

          • MarkSebree

            “Closer to the truth would be the assessment that YOU are attempting to influence others based upon your Phantasia and a mind predisposed to the hate, the ridicule, and the antagonizing of Christians when you produce this kind of feculence………..”

            The “Phantasia” that you speak of exists only in your imagination. I speak of reality. You see, unlike you, I have paid attention to news articles related to religious freedom and religious liberty for quite a number of years. Whenever someone challenges “Christian privilege” by calling out explicitly sectarian prayers in public schools or government institutions, religious monuments on public lands, or using government or military positions to proselytize to subordinates for example, the person that is calling attention to the problem is subjected to a tone of hatred, lies, death threats, ostracization, vandalism, and a host of other things intended to, as a minimum, bully the person into rescinding their complaint. That is why the courts usually allow such complaints to be made anonymously, and why several organizations exist to argue the case for these anonymous clients. People are afraid to come forward with complaints about these kinds of violations of Constitutional Law because of what “good Christians” have done to others who have come forward before them with similar violations.

            My assessment of the places that are likely to display a Christian flag in government offices and courtrooms is accurate. Nobody is really surprised that this happened in a rural, Georgia country. On the other hand, they would be surprised if it happened in the NorthEast or the West Coast, as well as a number of large cities between them.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “… Whenever someone challenges “Christian privilege” by calling out explicitly sectarian prayers in public schools or government institutions, religious monuments on public lands,”

            ~~ ~~~~ We noticed that you categorically singled out Christians for your attack.

            Why have you excluded the Muslims when they have been allowed the same privileges …. even to a greater extent?

          • MarkSebree

            “YOU WROTE: “… Whenever someone challenges “Christian privilege” by calling out explicitly sectarian prayers in public schools or government institutions, religious monuments on public lands, [or using government or military positions to proselytize to subordinates for example, the person that is calling attention to the problem is subjected to a ton of hatred, lies, death threats, ostracization, vandalism, and a host of other things intended to, as a minimum, bully the person into rescinding their complaint. ]”
            ~~ ~~~~We noticed that you categorically singled out Christians for your attack.”

            That is because, in the USA, they are by far the worst offenders.

            “Why have you excluded the Muslims when they have been allowed the same privileges …. even to a greater extent?”

            Because, in the USA, Muslims are generally NOT allowed the same privileges as Christians. They do not feel entitled to try to use the legislatures, mayors, and governors to pass laws to force everyone to follow some version of their beliefs. In fact, they often have to fight the local government just to be able to do the same things that Christians get without question and take for granted, like build a house of worship on land that they own in accordance with property codes, and get variances for those structures. (reference Murfreesboro, TN)

            The truth of the matter is that Muslims are an actual persecuted minority in the USA. When Muslims and other religions are “allowed the same privileges” as Christians, then they are not privileges, they are rights. And all religions are supposed to have the same rights.

          • Claus von Stauffenberg

            YOU WROTE: “…. When Muslims and other religions….” (sic)

            ~~~~~~ I am not sure if you meant to include Muslims with “other religions” but it must be understood what Islam is all about.

            Islam is NOT a true religion that can be ascertained by the institutional definition of a “religion”. Neither is Islam a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life with the psuedo- theocratic sociopolitical belief system that, through edits of the Qur’an and proclamations by its Imam leaders, advocates and sanctions physical aggression, deception, and subterfuge to achieve its stated goal of a worldwide Caliphate.

            Islam has legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The “religious” component is a COVER-UP for all of the other components. They conventionally practice genocide focusing on Al-Kafirun (infidels), honor killings, female suppression and mutilation, demonic brutality, vandalism, and sweeping hate. How many “religions” of the world hold to those tenets?

            Islam is not interested in peace. Islam is not interested in tolerance. Islam is not interested in coexistence. It wants only to subjugate or eliminate ALL competing belief systems.
            These are not my words. These are the stated goals of the Qur’an and its Imams.
            Read the Qur’an. Google the proclamations of its Imams.
            They seek to take advantage of the West’s religious tolerance.

      • Rookheight

        The “Appeal to Heaven” flag is specific to Christian nationalism, if you look at its history. FFRF has also had that flag removed from multiple government offices.

        • Drewski!

          Yeah part of that history was the “Appeal to Heaven” flag was flown on our nations first warships.

        • George T

          It’s easy to bring flags to Government offices. Just retire the flag and have an individual bring it with them when they come. We do it all the time at school board meetings.
          It’s catching on across the Nation.

          • MarkSebree

            That, however, is not the same thing as the government endorsing a religion. You are a private individual, not a government official representing the government at the time. Therefore, you cannot be legally or logically construed as speaking for the government. As such, the prohibitions about the government endorsing or disparaging a religion or non-belief do not apply to you at the time you are attending the school board meetings.

            Basically, you are free to make a fool and an @$$ of yourself on your own time all you want.

    • Slidellman4life

      You should be afraid. It guarantees respect. In fact, if most people would react to this bullying and bigotry by forgetting they are Christians long enough to break the bully’s jaw, we’d be seeing a whole lot less of this crap.

  • RyGuy18

    “The representatives shall be chosen out of the residents in each county, who shall have resided at least twelve months in this state … and they shall be of the Protestant religion, and of the age of twenty-one years…”

    This is religious discrimination. If you are Buddhist or a follower of another religion, you are being discriminated against, and prohibited from holding office, which is a violation of the 1st amendment. Where’s the Buddhist flag? Where’s the Hindu flag? That is why NO flag representing religion should be flown in any government building, because you would have to fly one for every religion and lack thereof.

  • Theophile

    A-prominent Affirmative Action Assisted Arrogant Atheist Association/ The Cowardly Fools Fearing Religious Facts(FFRF) only target grade schools & small townships, because they are TOO Cowardly to take on ACTUAL establishments of religion by CONGRESS… Maybe their fearful intermeddlers didn’t catch the words “congress” in the first amendments prohibition of the establishment of religion at the federal level?

    ..Or
    perhaps these lawyers were indoctrinated by congressionally established
    Darwinism & “free from thought” dirt worship in their public “science(wink wink)” education, before they decided to go with “opinions of man” as a career?

    & what of those “other” religious symbols & things on public land?
    Like the giant graven goddess ISIS renamed liberty in NY’s harbor … Or The national obelisk(a phallic religious symbol from antiquity) overlooking the temple to fallen Abraham, the freer of the slaves in DC..

    I wonder if the Fools Fearing Religious Facts considered the staff of Aesculapius(the god of medicine & healing) just like a cross on a church, is a religious symbol? … Adorning all the temples where ONLY the congressionally established government religion approved Priestly Hierarchy Document(PHD) holders are allowed to practice his rites.. & now “mandated by congress” to pay annual veneration/alms to, via Obama-Nation-Care.

    Why does the mere presence of a Christian cross cause the atheist to squirm so? Is their self control, sound reasoning, & logic directed rational thought too feeble to stop them from believing.. by the mere sight of the cross? … They do seem
    strangely silent about the national phallic obelisk, the National Cathedral, & Mr Evolving Morally in the “not-white-house” promoting this “establishment of religion”.

    … NewsFlash! Fact challenged & fearful:
    # Most the religions of antiquity were sex/fertility/licentiousness centric..

    One simple question for the myopically offended: Do you have sexual confusion tendencies?
    … I am serious, thus far 100% of the militant internet atheists have been
    pro-sexually confused, even to the point of denying the science they supposedly
    appeal to by claiming “sex” is not “reproductive oriented”, even though Mr.
    Science(their supposed god) claims “sex” IS reproductive oriented & simple logic proves that either homosexuality is a choice, or Darwinism’s survival of the fittest/selective breeding/hereditary traits & his theory of evolution is BUNK… which one is it?

  • Drewski!

    Interesting comments here…to be honest I too questioned if there was a God. I grew up as a Baptist and became disgusted at the things that the “leaders of the church” were doing, have done and are doing. These people and these organizations that are not doing God’s work are not of God. There are bad people in this world from every nation, religion, race and gender. I have learned a lot about the history of our nation and we were founded as a Christian Nation. Sadly there are many things that our forefathers did that are not right…thankfully we have corrected a lot of them but there is still work to do.

    I started reading the Bible and asked God to open my eyes and ears so that I may understand his word. The Bible is not just a mystical story, it is about real people that lived on our earth thousand of years before us. I came to realize that there is a GOD and my savior is Jesus Christ.

    I also learned that not everyone will see nor understand the truth. Regardless of who you are or what you believe I ask if you have read the Bible. If you have not I encourage you to before you start saying if it is real or not. I pray for all whether you believe in your heart that Jesus is the Messiah or not. Jesus taught us to love one another.

  • Stephen W.

    Apparently the flag in question has now been removed from Bryan County Courthouse. A big thank you to Freedom From Religion Foundation and the courageous Bryan County citizen who risked so much by coming forward to report this serious infraction. We must remain ever vigilant in order to preserve freedom.

    • George T

      Private citizens can bring the flag with them daily to court. We do it all of the time. Plenty of retired people who enjoy doing this kind of service. I’ll contact your county and get the ball rolling. Thx for the info:)

      • MarkSebree

        “Private citizens can bring the flag with them daily to court. ”

        Which is not the same thing as the court posting the flag in the courtroom. For the court to do so means that the court, and thus the government, endorses the positions that the flag stands for.

        Apparently, you have trouble separating the prohibitions that the government is bound to from the freedoms you have as an individual. You are not the government, and you do to work for the government, thus you are not bound by the prohibitions that the government and those that represent the government are bound by.

        • George T

          Court+room+flag= pissed off libs

          • MarkSebree

            “Court+room+flag= pissed off libs”

            No, that is not true. Apparently, you cannot deal with the real world. Have you ever heard of anyone demanding that other flags, like the state flag or the US flag be removed from the courtroom? No? Well, that shows that it is not flags in general that “piss off libs”, which is what you probably consider anyone with intelligence and a good education to be.

            Liberals and conservatives who value our Constitution do see problems with inappropriate flags and actions by government officials in government settings. These include explicit or implicit favoritism shown towards any religion by such governmental actors, as well as similar discrimination against any religion. Such is a violation of the US Constitution First Amendment’s Establishment Clause.

            If you, as a private citizen, want to bring a flag into the courtroom and wave it around as long as the judge will let you, go ahead. Until the judge or a court official tells you to stop, that is your right. However, by the same token, you are doing so as a private citizen. You have no governmental power, and you do not represent the government at any time or in any capacity. As such, you are not bound by the same restrictions as the government is with respect to religion.

            Given your posting history, I suspect that this simple explanation is too complex for you to understand. Which means that in your reply, you are likely to make a fool of yourself again.

  • Gary Metzger

    “Cavell asserted that the flag is therefore a violation of the
    Constitution’s Establishment Clause, which reads, “Congress shall make
    no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free
    exercise thereof.” lt’s ironic that she only wants to focus on the first part, while totally ignoring the second. I think it’s up to the GA court to decide what flag it wants to fly. That is supported by the fact that our Supreme Court has the words of the Ten Commandments on its walls, so once again, the FFRF is way off base in its charge of “this is Unconstitutional.”

    • MarkSebree

      Gary,

      I do not find it ironic at all. The first part applies to the government, not to individuals. It is a limitation on government action in order to protect the rights of the individuals that come after it. The GA court is part of the government. It is not an individual person. As such, it has not actual rights, only obligations and responsibilities.

      And the US Supreme Court does NOT have the words of the Ten Commandments on its walls, not in toto anyway. Only Commandments 6 – 10 are represented (i.e the more secular ones), and he is there with 17 other prominent law givers, including Muhammad, Confucius, Hammurabi, and Menes. As such, Moses has no special prominence or importance in the frieze.

      The FRFF is exactly on target by calling this courtroom’s sectarian display of the Christian flag “unconstitutional”. The US Supreme Court has ruled any number of times that it is so, and it is certainly a violation of the First Amendment as expanded by the 14th. The GA court does not have the right to promote one religion as favored over all over, either in actuality or in perception.

      • George T

        We just retire the flag and then private citizens bring it with them to the function. Toodles;)

        • MarkSebree

          So what? You are not the government and you do not represent the government. Therefore, you are not bound by the responsibilities and prohibitions that the government and that those who represent it are bound by.

          The GOVERNMENT and its representatives are bound by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Individual citizens are not. Your actions do not result in a government endorsement of religion because you are not in a position to represent the government. Sitting behind the bar in a courtroom means nothing, except that you might be annoying the judge and the court officers.

          • George T

            The courtroom stills has the flag! Bam!!

          • MarkSebree

            More like damp fizzle.

            But only as long as you are present. And everyone realized that the government is not promoting religion, you are. The flag in general remains towards the back of the room with you, not up front where it appears that the government is endorsing it. And if the judge finds that you are making a nuisance of yourself, he can have you removed from his courtroom, and your flag goes with you.

            Apparently, you have trouble understanding the difference between a government and its agents, and a private citizen.

          • George T

            Hey, I’m agnostic. Can you prove that a God or even Jesus Christ does not exist?

          • MarkSebree

            I am also agnostic. And nobody can prove a negative such as something does not exist. That is why it is the default assumption. That is also why demands to provide that something does not exist is an example of the logical fallacy of “shifting the burden of proof.” On the other hand, it is relatively simple to prove that something does exist. All you have to do is produce it, produce objective evidence that it does exist or did exist, or provide a logical argument for why it is likely that it does or should exist based off of objective supporting evidence.

          • C_Alan_Nault

            So you cannot prove that God does not exist? If you can prove it that would help me out a lot.

          • David Cromie

            Did you not understand what MS said? It is logically impossible to prove that some supposed entity does not exist. Therefore, the onus of proof, beyond reasonable doubt. lies with the person alleging that such a supposed entity does exist. I might as well ask you to prove that unicorns don’t exist!

          • C_Alan_Nault

            Actually new science data proves that an animal that we refer to as a unicorn cannot exist. You can Google it. I studied it last year at a conference at UCLA.
            Now , can you prove that Jesus Christ never existed?

          • David Cromie

            Just read my previous post!

          • C_Alan_Nault

            I did. Just tell me how God cannot exist. Just lay it out.

          • C_Alan_Nault

            Just lay it out. Prove with words, science, pictures, how a God cannot exist. Do not defer.

  • Bob267

    What the hell is a Christian Flag doing hanging outside of an American court house anyway???????????? This is so UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!! REPUBLICONS are violating our CONSTITUTION in so many ways!! A Prayer before each session of Congress is ILLEGAL!!!!! We need a law to make sure Religion is private, NOT PUBLIC!!! I believe in my own beliefs and everyone has that right!!! Don’t make it a public affair, it’s UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!!! Much luck to the Atheist’s group, they are correct!!!

  • lizk

    it’s like a judge had the 10 commandments on display people did for not want to be reminded of what is good. for it pointed out their sins and they love their sins more

    • MarkSebree

      Your statement is nonsensical. What makes you think that is pointed out their “sins”? What makes you think that the everyone in the courthouse was even Christian? And which version of the 10 Commandments are you even using? There are several. And given that “sins” do not exist except in a subjective religious framework, how can someone like an atheist, who is not religious by definition, even “sin” according to his beliefs and philosophy?

      As it has been ruled before, Including religious texts on prominent display in a courthouse creates the impression of favoritism towards that particular religion. This in turn raises the question about how impartial the judge will be towards the parties in the cases her or she hears, particularly if one of the parties does not follow that religion. This means an almost automatic appeals for cause, and thus more money spent on the case by the government.

      The First Amendment forbids the federal government from showing any favoritism towards any religion or religious beliefs. The 14th Amendment extends that prohibition down through all levels of the government. That means that the judge cannot have the 10 Commandments on on display in his courtroom or courthouse. And given that the judge is supposed to know the laws, it also calls into question whether the judge is even fit to be a judge.

  • irish1919

    How these atheists and non believers have mis represented the separation of church and state and shame on our Supreme Court justices who have distorted its reason for existing. Our forefathers were protecting religious freedom from a all powerful government. There was only one church recognized I’m England and it was the Church of England. The state had control. Our forefathers in their infinite wisdom(unlike our presidents and leaders of today ) gave us the first Anmendment. There is nothing in there that says God must not be a part of America. It was the most important amendment of the constitution. Its sole purpose was to protect the church from an over reaching government (state) not to protect the state from the church. How twisted are those who take liberty to twist the constitution into something it is not . As long as we have left wing justices interpreting the constitution to their liking instead of strict constitutionalists are freedoms will gradually erode. Our country was founded on Judeo Christian principles and Thomas Jefferson himself( most likely an agnostic ) supported these principles . Atheists have no standing on this issue . Just because they get a godless judge to rule against religion does not make it right. God bless America and everyone in it(even though a who would take away our freedoms.

    • David Cromie

      It seems that it is christers, such as you, who would have the Constitution misrepresented in a way that suits you! Someone’s religion, or lack of, is neither here nor there when interpreting the Constitution.

  • Crystal

    Just give the flag to a citizen and allow them to bring it to court. We do the same thing at school board meetings. No laws are broken.