Atheist Mocks Bible, Praises ‘Trinity of Science’ in Invocation Before Iowa Legislature

DES MOINES – A professing atheist recently delivered an opening invocation before the Iowa House of Representatives, in which he promoted atheistic ideals and converted a well-known Old Testament passage into a secular “prayer.”

The Iowa House has a longstanding tradition of opening its meetings with prayers, which are typically offered by local pastors. However, on Wednesday, Justin Scott of the Eastern Iowa Atheists organization delivered what was reportedly the first ever atheistic invocation before the House.

“Instead of closing your eyes and bowing your heads today, please keep your heads up and your eyes open to be fully alert in this moment,” Scott began.

“As you convene here in the people’s House, let me implore this body to invoke the holy trinity of science,” he continued. “Made up of reason, observation, and experience, this trinity has allowed humanity to explore the deep reaches of space, develop life-saving medicines, and vastly improve the human experience.”

“This body should be able to tackle the many difficult issues facing the great people of the state of Iowa without allowing confirmation bias, cognitive dissonance, or intellectual dishonesty to blindly guide positions and votes,” he added.

Scott, who is a self-employed Iowa native, went on to contrast the “trinity of science” with religious dogma and claimed that truth propels evolution forward.

“The trinity I invoke today isn’t rooted in any kind of doctrine or dogma,” he stated. “In its pursuit of truth, it doesn’t care what our feelings are or what our deeply held beliefs are on a particular issue. Truth can sometimes be uncomfortable, but it plays a large part in the ongoing evolution of our species.”

  • Connect with Christian News

“There’s only one catch with this kind of trinity, though,” Scott said. “It only works if you’re willing to change your opinions on issues if it delivers an outcome that doesn’t align with your deeply held beliefs. This is especially worth remembering as all of you are entrusted to uphold and maintain the dignity and bodily autonomy of all Iowans, regardless of their worldview, sexual orientation, gender identity, or even political ideology.”

He then urged the legislators to embrace the secular trinity.

“Refusing to accept what the evidence says has real world implications for all Iowans,” he said. “Incorporating this trinity today, tomorrow, and every day, you do the work of the people, which will allow you to do the most good for the most Iowans.”

At the end of his invocation, Scott mimicked the prayer God gave to Moses in Numbers 6, replacing biblical terms with secular ones.

“In closing, let this trinity guide you and protect you,” he said. “May this trinity inspire you and be honest to you. May this trinity lift up the truth upon you and give you peace. Thank you.”

Immediately following the invocation, Scott abstained from participating in the Pledge of Allegiance, reportedly to show support for atheists who do not participate in saying the pledge.

On their Facebook page, Eastern Iowa Atheists described the invocation as “historic” and said the message was “dedicated to the atheists whose voices were never heard due to fear of rejection, harassment, retaliation and discrimination.”


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, because of your generous support, we have received enough funds to send many audio Bibles to Iraqi and Syrian refugees displaced by ISIS in the Middle East. Many have been distributed and received with gladness. While we provide for the physical needs of the people, we seek to provide the eternal hope only found in Jesus Christ through the word of God. Would you join us by making a donation today to this important work? Please click here to send an audio Bible to a refugee family >>

Print Friendly
  • https://disqus.com/home/channel/atheismftw/ Ian Cooper

    In what way did he “mock the Bible”? Refraining from quoting it is not “mocking” it.

  • Shane Egan

    This website can’t even admit that atheists actually don’t believe in gods – hence their ‘professing’ before every person described as atheist. Their book says everyone knows that god exists so to them it must be true. This is actually one of the worst insults to me and an instant red flag.

    I know I don’t believe in the supernatural. These ‘professing’ statements are essentially calling me a liar – and you can trust me, that if I actually really believed in a god then I would be far more rigourous in my adherence to the rules I believed they proscribed than most christians today. How would christians like it if every article about them said, “…, a person who claims they believe in Jesus…”, making their described belief as much a question as a statement?

    Strangely enough, many of the people who followed Moses abandoned their belief in Jehovah in a few weeks when he temporarily left even though they had been personally witness to all manner of miracles. Why did those people, with undeniable evidence became atheists to Jehovah if the evidence was so apparent?

  • plankbob

    Dear Mr. Haley: Churches are for praying. Legislatures are for making laws. Kudos to Mr. Scott and others who are fed up with tyranny of the majority and are demanding equal time. There would be no need for secular invocations if the Christians would stop theirs. Until such time . . .

    • Jason Todd

      …you are perfectly welcome to go to a country that does not allow religious speech, like China. Here in the USA, we have something called the First Amendment, which says if you have a problem with religious speech, you need to build a bridge and get over it.

      • https://disqus.com/home/channel/atheismftw/ Ian Cooper

        Actually, in the US, the Establishment Clause of the US Constitution places restrictions in public spaces and on government officials in terms of religious speech. The US Constitution does not allow lawmakers to favor any one religion, or any groups of religions, over any others, or over none. In allowing an atheist to give the invocation, lawmakers are merely ensuring that they are following the law.

        Ironically, this site itself places restrictions on non-religious speech: a number of posts have been deleted. This is often the case on religious sites like this. It’s funny that religious folks only seem to want freedom of speech when it’s their speech that’s being restricted. They seem to have no problem censoring speech when it’s critical of their views.

      • Ambulance Chaser

        Lawmakers are free to engage in any religious speech they desire on their own time. Not in their capacity as agents of the government.

        Yes, I’m aware that this comes from Supreme Court rulings and yes, I’m aware you don’t acknowledge the Supreme Court (or me). However, this is how the country functions. If you don’t want to accept legal precedent, you are perfectly welcome to go to a country that does not use it, like France. Here in the USA, we have something called case law, which says if you have a problem with atheists making an invocation before a legislature, you need to build a bridge and get over it.

      • faithlocke

        You’re not following the issue here. In the USA, the government is not supposed to be promoting any religion, and it is illegal for them to do so on government time. There is no amendment that allows government officials to utilize their positions to promote religious beliefs. If you don’t like this, you are perfectly welcome to try and move to a Muslim country that does governs their people with religion.

        • Jason Todd

          The First Amendment says Congress can neither create its own religion nor keep people from practicing theirs.

          You seem to think when someone is elected to political office, they need to jettison their faith.

          No.

      • Liz

        And you are perfectly welcome to move to Iran or to Russia, where Theocracy reigns.

        • Jason Todd

          What are you talking about?

          • Liz

            Gosh, if you don’t know what I’m talking about… then THAT’S a big problem. You need to retake government and civics 101.

    • Adagio Cantabile

      Pobrecita

  • Jason Todd

    Of course, atheists can never be content unless they are attacking Christianity. Notice they never say anything about Islam (granted, Islam is an ideology, not a religion), even as people are being slaughtered.

    • faithlocke

      Where in this article did Justin Scott attack or even mention Christianity? Preachers instill so much irrational fear and paranoia on their congregations they can’t even think straight. As for your next comment, anyone who supports the separation of church and state will cite the evils of Sharia (Islamic) law as a top argument against it. Try a google search – there are an endless amount of threads and memes and videos where the non-religious speak out against Islam.

    • InTheChurch

      Notice that he said nothing at all.

    • james blue

      Other than all the times they do speak out against Islam you are right, they never do.

    • This style 10/6

      Atheists generally rejects all religions, including Islam, which for your information is the world’s second largest religion. If the demographics continue the way they are it will one day be the largest

      • Jason Todd

        Atheists generally rejects all religions, including Islam, which for your information is the world’s second largest religion.

        Islam, if it is a religion, is being ignored by atheists.

        • bfw314159

          No, it isn’t.

          • Jason Todd

            What isn’t?

          • Mark Bender

            Pay attention to your own statement, sport.

            “Islam, if it is a religion, is being ignored by atheists.”

          • Jason Todd

            Sport, I’ve made multiple statements. If you are going to dispute something, you need to refer to the statement you are referring to.

          • Mark Bender

            Champ, if you can’t even follow your own conversations, you should redirect your anger somewhere else. You are one of the most angry, hate-filled Christians I’ve seen here yet. What happened to make you this way?

          • Jason Todd

            This is not about me.

          • Mark Bender

            You’ve made it about you. But hey, at least you’re getting your feelings out. Hope it helps.

          • Jason Todd

            Nice troll.

          • Mark Bender

            Nope. Not trolling. This is my real name, my real profile, with real info about me — and my real comments about your angry rhetoric. You attacked me, brother. Not the other way around.

          • Jason Todd

            No, I said you need to be specific. You are the one who tried to turn the subject into me and I don’t play that game.

            Do you have anything to say that actually relates to the topic at hand?

          • Mark Bender

            Yeah. I’ve highlighted with little —->>> arrows <<>> Islam, if it is a religion, is being ignored by atheists. <<>> No, it isn’t. <<>> What isn’t? <<<—-
            • Reply•Share ›
            Avatar
            bfw314159 Jason Todd • an hour ago
            Islam isn't being ignored by atheists.
            1 • Reply•Share ›
            Avatar
            Jason Todd bfw314159 • an hour ago
            Sure it is. I can provide multiple examples of this.
            • Reply•Share ›
            Avatar
            bfw314159 Jason Todd • an hour ago
            Sam Harris has written quite a lot on Islam. He isn't ignoring it.
            Same with Dawkins (though not at much as Harris).

            All I need are examples of atheists not ignoring Islam to make your statement false. So there you are.
            • Reply•Share ›
            Avatar
            Mark Bender Jason Todd • an hour ago
            Pay attention to your own statement, sport.

            "Islam, if it is a religion, is being ignored by atheists."

          • Jason Todd

            Sounds like you are determined to make this about me. Am I right or wrong?

          • Mark Bender

            Nah. Just simply replying to your question. It’s really just that.

          • Jason Todd

            And the question is do you have anything to say about the actual topic?

          • Mark Bender

            A simple ‘thank you’ would have sufficed, but I guess this will do. You’re welcome brother Todd.

          • Jason Todd

            Troll. Blocked.

          • Mark Bender

            Sure. That’s fine if that’s what you want to do. Go in peace.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Yeah, he’s in a perpetual state of rage, literally ALL the time. He’s already had one account banned from this site for being perpetually hostile and in attack mode constantly.

          • bfw314159

            Islam isn’t being ignored by atheists.

          • Jason Todd

            Sure it is. I can provide multiple examples of this.

          • bfw314159

            Sam Harris has written quite a lot on Islam. He isn’t ignoring it.
            Same with Dawkins (though not at much as Harris).

            All I need are examples of atheists not ignoring Islam to make your statement false. So there you are.

        • Mark Bender

          Nope. It’s right up there with it’s sister, Christianity.

    • Liz

      Of course, Christians can never be content unless they are imposing Christianity… just like the Muslims. Exactly just like the Muslims. They are no better, really. And neither can prove themselves right, either. Just have to make all of us Christians against our wills… no matter that we are all equal opportunity constituents. To them, it’s just government for the Christians — not for ‘we, the people.’

      • Jason Todd

        Of course, Christians can never be content unless they are imposing Christianity… just like the Muslims. Exactly just like the Muslims. They are no better, really.

        Christians are guilty only of evoking the idea morality is not subjective.

        Islam believes in murder and misogyny.

        If you do not know the difference, you have a problem.

        • Liz

          You need a new mirror. Your blind spot is huge.

          • Jason Todd

            Tell you what: The day Christians hijack planes and fly them into buildings, you will have an argument. Until then, you shut your pie hole.

            Blocked.

          • Shane Egan

            So, Christians who kill ‘witches’ in Africa in the name of their sincerely held beliefs are OK with you? Surely they are more literally followers of the Bible than you, since you do not kill all the ‘mediums’, ‘psychics’ and astrologers in your home town as instructed clearly by the Bible.

            Or is it that you follow secular laws and pick and choose which bits of the Bible you actually follow?

            Would you like a list of other Bible commands you also don’t follow – I’m sure their are hundreds? What kind of poor excuse for a Christian are you? Are you a, shock – horror, a ‘moral relativist’?

          • Jason Todd

            Please provide evidence of this. And then explain what this has to do with Christianity, the Bible (which I know you have not read), and me.

          • Charles

            Ooooooooooooooooor.. Maybe you just don’t know the Bible? Because clearly you don’t. New Testament says no such thing.

          • Shane Egan

            So, we ignore the old testament? No Ten Commandments for you then! Or just the bits you don’t like?

          • Charles

            Again. You don’t know the Bible.. Study it some more, because you missed it.

          • Jason Todd

            Clearly Shane has never read the Bible.

          • getstryker

            Actually, in Christianity today, the Old Testament laws have been fulfilled with Jesus Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. Why do you hold modern-day Christians to laws that applied ONLY to Hebrews several thousand years ago?

            Nine of the 10 Commandments were brought forward and referred to in the New Testament, however the Old Testament dietary and social laws are no longer in effect within the ‘Christian’ faith. Orthodox Jews still follow the Old Testament mandates.

            There’s much more but I wouldn’t what to strain your already quite sparse biblical discernment and knowledge.

          • Liz

            You always love quoting the first part of that passage — but never the rest. The law has not YET been fulfilled.

            And I quote…

            “17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19 Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” –Matthew 5:17-20

            Until heaven and earth pass away… That means until Jesus comes back. Not until YOU read into, and the other little wishful thinkers in your church, think it is fulfilled.

            As you can see… you don’t need to feed me your dogmas on salvation, mister. I know them well. I do not agree with any of your beliefs. But I know all of them quite well.

          • getstryker

            As you wish, however, you are in error. You may read the ‘words’ but you certainly do not understand the ‘message’ they convey. You apparently, in your own mind, have all the answers and I have no intention of arguing the matter with you as you are certainly free to believe and act as you will.

          • Liz

            Right… you and your kind are the ‘only ones’ with your secret Ovaltine decoder for the scriptures. How typical.

          • getstryker

            Yep, you got it. That Ovaltine decoder does come in handy 😉
            Your vitriol changes nothing . . . nor will I argue with you. Time will tell who is right and who is wrong. Just remember, if I’m wrong, I lose nothing . . . if you’re wrong – you lose everything!

          • Liz

            It’s not a 50/50 choice, mister. It’s not just YOUR religion making claims upon the world. It is your religion, vs. the millions of other religions we’ve had through history. Just remember — if every Bible were destroyed, 500 years from now, no one would be able to recreate an iota of it. But every single science book would come back, and be recreated perfectly. Because science is NO mystery, and it doesn’t FAIL. It’s no big ‘secret’ from some narcissistic deity, picking and choosing ‘special’ people to favor over others.

          • getstryker

            Seems to me that destroying the basis of the entire Bible, Jesus Christ, was attempted some 2,000 years ago and it failed to wipe out the ‘Word of God’.

            He has arisen.

            Your so-called ‘science’ changes constantly (I am referring to evolution theory) as the absolute ridiculousness to believe that ALL we see in creation could exist without a ‘Creator’ is exposed as a lie.

            And yet, the Truth of the Word of God, recorded and preserved in the original texts, has remained unchanged for centuries on end.

            Yes, other ‘religions’ exist and you are free to accept anyone that suits your fancy. You may reject mine or all and yet, there is ‘a truth’ – we will see, in the end, who has embraced that truth!

          • Liz

            Wow. You couldn’t be more wrong than if a stack of our most oldest, earliest copies of the New Testament hit you in the face. You have CLEARLY not studied any of this to any depth than to hear the pandering ot he people who already agree with your own ignorance. Wow. Just wow. How foolish!

          • getstryker

            As I said . . . believe as you will. Time will tell.

          • Liz

            Luckily, my position doesn’t require the dishonesty of waiting until we’re both dead to prove you wrong — you just have to go study the actual textural criticism of Biblical scholars (not theologians), from accredited universities which aren’t diploma mills. But you won’t. Because you’re afraid of the truth, and cover it up with mythology and stories of boogeymen.

          • getstryker

            I’m sorry you are so bitter, angry, so disillusioned. Whatever the cause, He is still there for you if you ask. His Word, the Bible, the ‘mythology and stories of boogeymen’ that you scoff at Him with, does not stop Him from loving you and offering you eternal life. Do you really believe that you live a little while, all because of some ‘accident’ and then you’re just ‘worm bait?’ If you’re anything, you’re much smarter than that. There is much more NOW, All you have to do is ask him!

          • Liz

            Ummm. I am sorry, but you might be projecting again, here. I am not angry, bitter, or disillusioned. I just see no reason for believing in deities to justify my worth in life, like you do. You do not believe in the gods of other religions either, and aren’t bitter about them. I just happen to go ‘one more,’ and believe in one god less than you. Look — people who do NOT believe what you do, aren’t automatically hurting, and bitter.

            And no — I don’t believe in things, in the way you have characterized them. But religious people put things in such light, so that they can better attack ‘the argument’ (which is not really the argument), and feel better about their own beliefs. It’s called a ‘straw man.’

            My life is so much better now that I’m an atheist than it ever was in my 30 years that I was a born again believer. 😉 There is much more freedom in evidence, and truth — and in not needing to defend the logically indefensible. But hey, nice try. 😉

            I’ve studied YOUR side of the argument more than you have, or any other believer on here. But I bet you everything you will NEVER study MY current side of the matter. 😉 You’re too afraid of what you’ll find out.

          • getstryker

            Now, you know what’s coming: Me projecting – really ??? 😉

            Truth is NEVER a ‘straw man’ argument – for you to deny it is the truth does not change it to something else – it is truth!

            As far as you being formally ‘born-again’ . . . perhaps?!

            As I said previously – there are ‘real Christians and those who sport ‘the title only’ . . . it’s easy to mimic a Christian – just act humble and address each other as ‘Hey Brother & Hey Sister’ . . . sit in the pew and sing your heart out. There are admittedly, many, many supposed Christians like that. And then, there is the ‘real thing’ – real ‘born-again’ Christian . . . are they perfect, certainly NOT, but, they don’t play games, they strive to be ‘Christ followers’ and to share His Word with everyone.

            Are they all as knowledgeable as you, of course not . . . you say you’ve studied – that’s nice – except that ‘faith is all about the heart’ – If you were truly ‘born-again’ – you would know that!

            Whether you were a ‘Christian’ by ‘title or by the new birth’ – that is up to God to Judge and He will in His timing. That is NOT for me to say. God’s council was that ‘we would know them by their ‘fruit’ (their ‘words & actions’) We are NOT to judge but He did give us the ability to use discernment and good common sense to distinguish one from the other.

            Live your ‘better life as an atheist’
            and if or when it becomes hollow, remember that He is still there, waiting for you to call out to Him.

            You’re an interesting person Liz, thank you for the exchange.

          • Liz

            I’m not interested in your fallacies, your projecting, and your claims of what I really was, or wasn’t. I know exactly who I am, and who I was and what I deeply believed and felt. But I am also humble enough to seek knowledge and truth — and not to be afraid to admit that I am wrong. And I was wrong about deities, and religion. And if you had any ounce of intellectual courage in you, you’d look it up, and you would know that. 🙂 Religion is smoke and mirrors. It’s all it is. All you guys have is ‘if you lost your faith, you weren’t really a believer’ kind of attacks. It’s oh so convenient that the religion itself doesn’t want you to doubt, and question — oh, but they claim they do — except the penalty for actually changing your mind, is supposedly hell if you weren’t really saved. lol It’s like an election with only one candidate on the ballot. An exploration of ‘the information’ in which you’re only allowed ONE outcome, is no exploration at all… And what kind of reasonable being NEEDS you to *believe* in them (like Peter Pan or something), rather than just give ACTUAL irrefutable evidence of their existence, or else you’ll be punished in hell for not believing? It’s an outlandish concept to have anyone believe. Along with other simple minded, primitive concepts like sacrificing one’s first born to appease an angry god… straight out of the playbook of pagan religions. They are the stories of primitive people from long ago… and it’s time we let them go. I cannot unlearn what I know. I will always be a non-believer. Sorry, but I cannot keep my mind compartmentalized, in ignorance of the truth that church people never want you to go research on your own, simply to keep a childish story alive, like Santa Claus. Time to grow up, and put childish things aside.

          • getstryker

            Very well said and a quite compelling statement of ‘lost faith’ replaced with supposed ‘intellectual certainty’ that upon study of ‘other men’s opinions’ – you have come to the conclusion that faith in the Triune God of the Bible (Father, Son and Holy Spirit), who, as Christians believe, created the entire universe AND ‘you’ – is unwarranted simply because you didn’t receive ‘an engraved invitation to His creation party, a personal tour of the universe or a ‘show’ put on in your honor to prove that He is who He says He is. Hummm – really???.

            And yet, the faith of untold millions of ‘born-again’ believers lives on without the ‘proof’ you demand. Interesting that there are scientists, doctors, lawyers, executives, housewives, working stiffs all over the world that have faith in the ‘outlandish concept’ that you reject. Do you seriously believe that all these folks are so stupid, so brain-washed, so intellectually dishonest that they are all wrong and only you and the ‘opinions’ of the men you studied are correct?

            I mentioned before that ‘faith is a matter of the heart – not the intellect’ – but, believe as you will.

            You have every right to be a non-believer if that is what you choose and there are certainly millions who believe in other gods (religions) and millions that believe in no gods at all . . . Surely you know that I, and every other person who claims to be a ‘born-again Christian,’ started from a point of ‘unbelief’. We were all sceptics and mockers, scoffers and prone to ridicule ‘believers’ for their silly ‘blind faith’ in some God no one could see. And yet, the God you deny moves by His Holy Spirit and thousands are brought to faith and become ‘born-again’ Christians everyday because they cried out to that Almighty God who created and loves them to save them. He was there for all of them! By the way you tell your story, YOU rejected Him.

            Is there a Hell? – you betcha. Hey, whether ya like it or not, ‘we’ believe that God (Father, Son & Holy Spirit) created everything, God created everyone who every lived or will live and it’s His rules. God wrote a book thru men that we call the Bible . . . believe it or not – He lays it all out – Heaven, Hell and all that’s in-between – as I said, you can believe it or not. The choice is certainly yours.

          • Liz

            Actually…

            — You take your religion on the word of men. Men who wrote a book long ago. This is all you have. The word of ancient men.
            — The consequence for believing something (without an iota of proof) is quite steep. Most of us wouldn’t even let someone paint a fence for us, without references or evidence. We wouldn’t take it on their word. Why would we commit ourselves to a religion claiming there’s a certain god, and he will condemn us, if we don’t just take it on some men’s word, and all of what that entails in terms of life commitment?
            — And yet, the faith of untold billions of Muslims lives on, without the ‘proof’ that you say we don’t need. Interesting that there are scientists, doctors, lawyers, executives, housewives, working stiffs all over the world that have faith in the ‘outlandish concept’ that you reject. Do you seriously believe that all these folks are so stupid, so brain-washed, so intellectually dishonest that they are all wrong and only you and the ‘opinions’ of the men you studied are correct?
            — If faith is what validates any religion, then faith CANNOT be what validates ANY religion.
            — And the rest of the stuff you say is just your claim, not evidence. Just stuff ancient men wrote. You’re going to hell, in some other religion, too. And to them, it’s also a very real hell. And their faith proves it, so I guess, apparently, according to your faith standard, it must be true, too. It’s not like you can disprove them… unless you use science, and logic. The same science and logic that would also disprove yours.

            But nice try, mister. 😉 Enjoy your Easter weekend.

          • getstryker

            You are absolutely partially correct – I do take my ‘religion’ on the ‘word of men’ written in a book called ‘the Bible’ – I have yet to see any part of it proven to be wrong and I will point out in a moment, the reason that I believe it to be absolutely true and inspired by the God of the Bible.
            I would assume that every religion has there own version of a book that lays out the precepts of what they believe.
            However, it’s not the ‘writings’ that make Christianity a reality . . it’s the ‘knowing’ – the spiritual result of being ‘born-again’. I have also mentioned several times that ‘faith is a matter of the heart – not the intellect’ – when someone becomes ‘born-again’ there is simply a ‘knowing in their heart of hearts’ (whatever you want to call that place on the inside that just knows that something is absolutely true) Every ‘real’ Christian KNOWS they are saved. It is the ‘something’ in your spirit that confirms!
            Whether they fully understand it or not, they are now a son or daughter of the Almighty God. We ‘commit’ because ‘in that moment’ – we absolutely KNOW that God is real.
            ‘Faith’ initially bypasses the intellectual confirmation you seem to require. As the new Christian grows in their faith, they are challenged to defend their faith and they usually begin to study what they already know in their heart.
            Maturing in the Lord is a process, both of growing faith and of intellect. Are Christians perfect, do they know everything, can they explain from a biblical perspective, everything that is a truth they believe in the Christian faith? – of course not. Those that are ‘real born-again Christians’ persist in their faith – those that only wear the ‘title of Christian’ seem to fall away. (Parable of the Sower)
            Thank you for the well wishes for an enjoyable Easter.

          • Liz

            Wow. You just don’t get any of it. Your thinking is so superficial, it’s hard to help you realize anything at all. Your mind is completely gone. Wow. Just wow.

            All religious people have that feeling about their own religion. That means you CANNOT use that to determine it’s true. It’s really quite simple. But you are much too indoctrinated to think clearly about anything. At all. Too bad,

          • getstryker

            I appreciate your opinion . . . personally, I’m quite happy with where I am, what I believe and where I will end up in the end.

            Let me close our exchange with my own well wishes – please, have all the life you expect and be happy with what you know!

          • USborderpatrol In God We Trust

            Liz try to understand this without you the dishonesty of waiting until we’re both dead to prove you wrong Her are the cold facts whether or not you believe in God.

            Everyone has a mortal body that will die and it will go back to the earth. Everyone has a soul, you can call it a spirit if you like but it will live forever in all of eternity. Your choice of faith in Jesus Christ or nothing will determine where you will spend eternity.

            This testing place not a resting place. You get no do-overs. Chose wisely. This is the only truth you will ever find. No mythology and stories of boogeymen. God is real and He loves you. Christ hung on the cross that you and I can have everlasting life. Your choice.

          • Chris

            I’d like to join the discussion if I may.

            “Here are the cold facts whether or not you believe in God.”

            Ok.

            Everyone has a mortal body that will die and it will go back to the earth.”

            Well some will be cremated but that’s a quibble. Go on.

            “Everyone has a soul, …”

            That’s not a fact, that’s a belief. It may be a correct belief but that doesn’t make it a fact. A fact is something which can be independently verified. We can’t do that with souls.

            “…you can call it a spirit if you like but it will live forever in all of eternity.”

            Even if a soul exists there’s no evidence that it will survive death or in what state it will do so. For example Aristotle argued for the existence of the soul but also argued that it died with the body.

            “Your choice of faith in Jesus Christ or nothing will determine where you will spend eternity.”

            This is not even close to a fact. This is merely a belief. Buddhists would argue that it’s karma which decides where you end up. And even then you will be reborn in their belief. Other faiths have other beliefs. All of them are just that – beliefs, not facts!

          • Liz

            Also, you are projecting. Big time.

          • getstryker

            Of course . . . you’re free be believe that.

          • Liz

            Right — right wing Christians are constantly killing people in America, including innocent black people in churches… but I get to shut my pie hole, somehow, because they weren’t using planes! Oh, you!

          • Charles

            I guess if you’re murdering people you wouldn’t be a Christian now would you… Hint. It’s in the 10 Commandments.

          • Liz

            Right… like when Yahweh got mad people were ‘sinning’ and then he drowned all of them. Newborns, pregnant mamas, infants, and innocent animals included. 🙂 But I guess it’s not ‘murder’ when god does it.

          • Charles

            I’m afraid not. It’s called Justice. It’s his creation. He can do anything he wants with it. You think his eternal wisdom, and righteousness is concerned with what you think about his judgments? Apparently it was pretty bad at the time. If the Lord thought there was hope for that group, he would have spared them. This kind of statement comes from someone who doesn’t know God.

          • This style 10/6

            Liz knows god alright for the arrogant killer he is.

          • This style 10/6

            If Todd continues to block people at this rate he will soon be talking to himself, which will be a relief to all.

          • getstryker

            You said: ‘Right-wing Christians are constantly killing people in America???’ – Really?
            I recognize that many folks that went to Sunday School once or twice when they were a kid, or to church on Easter Sunday once a year may be called by the ‘TITLE’ of Christian . . . however, they are hardly REAL ‘born-again’ Christian followers of the Risen Christ. I think you’d be hard-pressed to find an incident of a ‘true bible-believing Christ-follower’ who has flown a plane into a building, exploded a bomb or killed folks of any color in a church. But, you might be right, let’s see . . .
            I could certainly be wrong but here’s your opportunity to set me straight – remember, your example has to be a real ‘born-again’ Christian . . . NOT just someone using the TITLE!
            Oh, one other thing . . . how do we determine the REAL Christian from the ‘TITLE ONLY’ Christian? . . . by which actually did what the New Testament of the Holy Bible tells them to do! Bible says to act in love, NOT hate . . . Your turn – show me.

          • Liz

            Right… so, by your logic, we can only tell if a Christian is a REAL Christian, if they obey the Bible. Right? So… every time a Christian sins they are not a real Christian? I mean, if they sin, they aren’t obeying the Bible… And… every time a Christian loses their cool, and acts out of hate, they are not a real Christian? Like when you lose your cool with your kids or your spouse. I guess you are not a real Christian, either. And… actually, a Pastor killed his ex wife, and a young boy yesterday… But I suppose that whole bit about ‘all sin is the same’ is only convenient when we’re asking God to forgive it, but not when we’re determining who the ‘real’ Christians are in debates with people to whom we don’t want to admit that Christians actually murder, maim, and kill people, too — and at what ‘sin-level’ you can judge them to not be ‘real’ Christians. But I suppose, on the same side of that coin, HIS congregation will say he IS a real Christian who got tempted by Satan. Because you know, at the end of the day, you guys get to always pass the buck around… and never admit to anything, or own up to anything. Nice try.

          • getstryker

            Gee, I’m sorry . . . let me reiterate:

            You said: ” ‘Right-wing Christians are constantly killing people in America???’ . . .
            I addressed your comment – please respond and provide your examples
            As far as your additional comments – you are surely correct – Yep, you betcha, ALL Bible-believing Christians sin too – just like ALL non-Christians do – that is absolutely a fact of life. No one on this green Earth is perfect! – NONE!
            As far a I know, there are NO ‘degrees of sin’ (some sins bigger that others – no, ALL sin is sin – period) However, the question is NOT ‘how big is the sin committed’ but has the individual who has committed that sin repented, asked for forgiveness of a loving God and received it? That’s NOT a personal act that is exclusive to ‘born-again Christians’ only – it’s most certainly available to ALL non-believers as it concerns their initial prayer of salvation and asking forgiveness of previous sins. When someone sincerely asks God to ‘save them’ – He does so and He forgives ALL their previous sins. They are now a REAL ‘born-again Christian’. I would also point out that ‘salvation’ is NOT a ‘get out of jail free card’ . . . if you have committed sin that broke man’s law – you will pay the consequences for your crimes in man’s jail even though God has forgiven those sins. Whether you accept that, understand that or believe that makes no difference – it IS the way it is. You can be locked up in man’s prison for life and still have ‘eternal life in Heaven’ with God who has forgiven you thru the sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Christ.
            There are many who surely call themselves ‘Christian’ that, in reality, are not. There are phony pastors, businessmen, folks that sing in the choir and many who sit in the pews of churches all over the country – and there are millions more that attempt everyday to be good followers of Jesus Christ who stumble and fall and get up and try again. And then there are those that have never asked God for anything, they willfully sin and scoff and don’t believe . . . They have ‘free will’ to choose to do what they will do . . . In the final analysis . . . God Himself will judge!

          • Liz

            Also… I can see the immense circular logic of your thinking just went right over your head. You poor, poor man. Spare me the evangelizing. This is a no-true scotsman fallacy, and you conveniently claim all sin is sin — until it’s time to claim someone isn’t ‘saved’ cus their sin was too uncomfortable for you. Hypocrite. You take anyone’s word that they got saved, unless they committed a sin you dislike.

          • getstryker

            Sad!

        • This style 10/6

          Morality is subjective. Just think what has changed in the last 200 years.

          • Jason Todd

            Morality is subjective.

            Then you would have no problem with someone walking up to you, pulling out a gun and blowing your brains out because they believe that is the moral thing to do.

          • bfw314159

            You don’t understand what “Morality is subjective” means.

          • Jason Todd

            I know what “Morality is not defined by individual choice” means.

            Apparently someone needs to explain that to you.

          • bfw314159

            I know what “Morality is not defined by individual choice” means.

            Well, you responded to “Morality is subjective.” And you got it totally wrong.

          • Jason Todd

            What did I get wrong? Look at what I said to This Style 10/6. Then look at what I said to you.

            What did I get wrong?

          • bfw314159

            What did I get wrong?

            Subjective morality does not mean “Then you would have no problem with someone walking up to you, pulling out a gun and blowing your brains out because they believe that is the moral thing to do.”

            It means people disagree on what is and isn’t moral. Your response is a ridiculous straw man, which implies you aren’t even interested in discussing morality, you just want to impose what you think your god wants. And if you think your god wants to blow his brains out, you’d have no problem carrying out your god’s wishes, right?

          • Jason Todd

            Bollocks.

            To have a subjective morality is to assume you decide what is right and wrong based on your personal feelings.

            Your argument is invalid.

          • bfw314159

            To have a subjective morality is to assume you decide what is right and wrong based on your personal feelings.

            This does NOT extend to your hilarious straw man.

            Like I said, people disagree. Some Christians sincerely believe gays should be executed.

            Your argument is invalid.

            Wrong. Your straw man argument isn’t even addressing the issue.

          • Jason Todd

            You call it a strawman without explaining how it’s a strawman. A conclusion in search of an argument.

            FAIL

          • bfw314159

            You call it a strawman without explaining how it’s a strawman.

            I have, but you apparently didn’t understand.

            Nobody who says “morality is subjective” implies that it’s OK to be murdered by someone who thinks murder is OK. Your example wasn’t just wrong, it was ridiculously wrong.

          • Jason Todd

            Can you explain why last year police officers were shot at close range while doing something as random as pumping gas?

            I rest my case.

          • bfw314159

            You rest your non-sequitur.

            You implicitly admit defeat.

          • Jason Todd

            A non-sequitur?

            THAT is your argument?

            Dude, I don’t have to admit defeat to someone who refuses to engage in logic. You don’t defeat people by being dumb.

            Say the secret word and win $100. Don’t know the word?

            Hint: It rhymes with “shocked.”

          • bfw314159

            THAT is your argument?

            No, I’m pointing out that your statement was not relevant.

          • This style 10/6

            How does this show anythjng about morality in general?

          • Jason Todd

            You know the answer already.

          • This style 10/6

            If I did I would not have asked. Do you know?

          • Jason Todd

            Please don’t play stupid with me. You know exactly what I am talking about.

          • This style 10/6

            I know that you are a person with no real interest in rational dicussion.

          • This style 10/6

            Morality is decided by collective choice usually. Same sex marriage is not considered immoral by the majority. Most folk don’t think about it.

          • Jason Todd

            Which means what, other than a red herring?

          • This style 10/6

            You are confusing morality and crime. Murder is a crime and will remain so. Slavery in the USA was once moral but is no longer considered so.

            Of course in Canada the liklehood of someone shooting me is remote.

          • Jason Todd

            1) Are you suggesting morality and crime are mutually exclusive?

            2) What makes so sure?

          • This style 10/6

            In Saudi a woman going uncovered is a crime and immoral, here it is neither. Once homosexual relations was a crime and immoral, now it is not a crime and opinion on its morality is divided.

            Morality is not black and white and changes with time and place.

          • Jason Todd

            Answer my question.

          • This style 10/6

            Cool it dude, I don’t jump to your command.

            However, sometimes what is a crime is immoral, sometimes not. I gave some examples.

            It would help if you indicated what you are trying to get at.

          • Jason Todd

            Again: Are you arguing crime and morality are mutually exclusive?

            It’s a simple yes or no.

          • This style 10/6

            I am merely trying to unravel your convoluted argument (if you actually have one).

          • Jason Todd

            You are refusing to answer a direct and simple question. That says a lot about you and quite frankly it’s unsettling.

            Please seek professional help before you hurt someone.

            Blocked.

          • This style 10/6

            Another who tosses out insults and runs away.

          • Johndoe

            Always.

        • Copyleft

          Morality is not objective; neither is it arbitrary.

          Some very, very simple minds have trouble with that concept; they seem to need Lawgivers proclaiming Absolute and Eternal Truth(TM), which is never and has never been available. Fortunately, there are grownups around to take care of them.

          • Jason Todd

            Morality is not objective; neither is it arbitrary.

            That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If morality is not subjective or objective, where does it even come from?

            Seriously, that is one of the dumbest things I have ever read.

          • Copyleft

            To you, sure. That’s why the rest of the post exists–for the benefit of our slower citizens.

          • MarkSebree

            Jason,

            You lack the ability to reason, to think critically, or to read for comprehension. That is why you cannot understand the clear statements of other people.

            CopyLeft stated that morality is not objective or arbitrary. He never stated that it was not subjective, because it is subjective. Morality is the collective opinion of a society or societal group about what is right and wrong regarding how people act and inter-relate in a wide variety of circumstances. It is variable over time, across social strata, geographically, across different religious beliefs, careers, and situations. What is why what is and is not considered to be “moral” is different depending on whether you are from the USA, or from Canada, France, Japan, or Afghanistan, as well as whether you are rich, poor or middle class, whether you are from a large city or very rural farmland, whether you are a cop, a member of the armed forces, or a civilian, or innumerable other factors.

            Our laws can be shaped by our collective morality, but they do not necessarily define our morality nor represent the changes that morals undergo over time. Interracial dating and marriage is a prime example. 70 years ago, it was considered “very immoral” in most of the country for couples of different races, especially white and anyone else, to date or to get married. The laws of the time reflected that opinion. At the time of Loving vs. Virginia, something like 90% of the country thought interracial dating and marriage was immoral and should be illegal. After Loving vs. Virginia struck down those laws as unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, people still head those opinions. However, the morals of the country changed with each generation, and now most people do not care about such things, and do not consider interracial dating or marriage to be immoral, or even a big deal.

            Same Sex Marriage and homosexuality are following much the same path, only quicker since a much higher proportion of the country had no problem with either one of them by the time the Supreme Court rightly decided that issue. And in 20 or 30 years, nobody will care about it any more either except a few hardcore bigots that nobody will listen to.

          • Copyleft

            Correct, Mark. To the simplistic mind, the only options are ‘black’ or ‘white.’ They get angry when confronted with gray.

      • Robert

        Wrong we could not even make ourselves christian but we do know Muslims can easly make you choose islam.Be you want to not.

      • C R Lord

        Christians don’t impose Christianity. Your statement that they do is a farce.

        All genuine Christians understand that God has given man a free will to choose between good and evil, repenting or not repenting, serving God or rebelling against him and etc. Christians present the gospel and than it is up to the unbeliever what he or she does with it. There is no imposition involved there any more than an atheist sharing their gospel (scientism).

        Christians are not exactly like Muslims in any respect. Show me a single account of a Christian cutting off the head of an infidel who refuses to turn to Christianity. You can’t. Show me anywhere in scripture where a man is considered twice the value of a woman. You can’t. Show me any verse in scripture that advocates the slaughter of your enemies or those who a Christian would deem to be an enemy. You can’t. As a matter of fact, Jesus Christ said; “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you.”

        Your arguments are farcical and have no bearing in reality. Genuine Christians are men and women of peace. Islam is a political ideology hiding behind a religious front. Christianity guarantees eternal life and peace to those who repent of their sins and put their faith in Jesus Christ for salvation. Islam makes no offer of eternal life except to those who die in jihad. The differences between Christianity and Islam are vast and cannot be crossed unless on converts to one or the other.

        Morality is based on God’s laws and commandments and is subjective in that all mankind is bound to obey God or deal with the consequences of their disobedience. God will not change his laws to suit anyone of any stature because he is sovereign in the universe. Because he is omniscient (possesses all knowledge available for from eternity past to eternity present and eternity future) he foreknows how we will respond to him but he doesn’t foreordain it for anyone.

        No true Christian seeks a Theocracy because it is obvious from the scriptures that it is an impossibility. Jesus said; “Straight is the gate and narrow is the way that leads to eternal life and few there be that find it. Broad is the road that leads to destruction and many go in thereat.” The Bible further states that if anyone loves the world he is an enemy of God. The world in this verse speaks of all mankind has to offer that keeps men, women and children from turning their lives to God in repentance and faith.

        • Liz

          1. Creationism being taught illegally in schools in many states, anti-Constitutional laws against abortion, teachers imposing prayer in some schools, or making kids pray before sport practices, complaining when believers of OTHER religions or none, give an invocation like this one, etc., etc., etc. It’s hilarious that you would use your OWN religion terminology to put down atheism — as having a gospel. I guess gospels are BAD enough to be insults. 🙂 Never mind that it’s shenanigans.
          2. God gave man free will. Right? Supposedly because he wanted people to CHOOSE to love him, and not robots? Yet they chose ‘bad things?’ Will there be free will in heaven, so that they can also sin in heaven? Or will people be robots who love him? And if there can be free will in heaven, without sin, why not skip all the useless pageantry and just make Earth like that from the very beginning? To show off?
          But the love of power is immoral… And if man had NO knowledge of evil, before the fall — even if he had free will — how could anyone ENVISION doing evil to begin with, if god himself had not made evil? We CANNOT envision things which we have never experienced. You cannot, for example, imagine more colors than what you see every day… even if they might exist. And the Bible says God made evil — Isaiah 45:7, “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.” Seems to me, God’s a diva in need of a lot of attention. Sounds like a very human story to me. What should anyone do with such a story? A reasonable anyone? Scoff at it, of course.
          3. Twice the value of a woman:
          — a woman is unclean for TWICE as long after having given birth to a girl, than if it were a boy. Leviticus 12
          — a woman is worth 1/2-2/3 less than a man, depending on her age… Leviticus 27
          4. Google “Tens of thousands of Muslims flee Christian militias in Central African Republic.”
          5. “Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.'” 1 Samuel 15:3 (among MANY like this) Not to mention that the whole concept of hell is a KILLING of your enemies. Not forgiving them.
          6. Oh yeah. So peaceful: “The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will weed out of His kingdom every cause of sin and all who practice lawlessness. 42 And they will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. ” — Matthew 13:42 He is sure merciful with his ‘enemies.’ That’s for sure. “Confess you love me now or I will kill you.” Great! lol Coerced love at the point of a sword and hell. Wonderful.
          7. Christianity is not a political ideology hiding behind a religious front?
          *looks at the Republican party.* You sure could’ve fooled me. And Islam does guarantee salvation to people. Paradise or Jannah, is a thing for all believers, in Islam. Google it.
          8. Claiming that morality is derived from the Bible is like trying to claim that language is derived from the dictionary. As language has evolved, with a social species, so has morality. Your idea of a god existing is merely regional — in that you were born into it. Some native populations don’t even have a concept of a deity, at all. Morality comes from social reciprocity and empathy. Evolution proves this, as animals also have morality and pillars of morality, and yes… even premeditated behaviors. What you say about god this and that, is merely your commentary on something you absolutely cannot possibly have any personal knowledge, no matter what any holy book says. It’s just people’s unfounded allegations of a thing they claim exists. And the ‘evidence’ is claimed will happen, oh so conveniently, after people die, no less.
          9. If God pre-knows, then we don’t have free will. Period. If he made everything, and he pre-knows, then he PRE-MADE it that way, which the Bible says he did. Anyone is how they are, because he MADE them that way — according to that logic. You cannot have it both ways, and then turn around and call it ‘a mystery.’ No. Either your deity made people with the sick joy of watching them burn in a hell, he himself created, to save them from his own wrath because of the evil and sin he himself made, then he’s a monster, or he doesn’t exist. No two ways around it.
          10. Again, people campaign on this, and they CONSTANTLY claim America is ‘Christian’ and FOR the Christians, and that ‘separation of church and state’ isn’t a thing, and there’s a need to impose Christianity on all. To claim this isn’t happening means you either sleep in a giant bubble, or you’re insincere to make your point seem better. But if this is your point, than LOTS of you here — especially complaining about other people’s rights, on this forum — are going to your so called hell.

          Also, in regards to many of the verses I shared, this ‘that was the Old Testament, and we have a new covenant now,’ does not apply. Jesus himself said all the law would stand until a new Heaven and Earth was in place… and also — isn’t god not supposed to change his mind? Yeah. If the same Jesus of the New Testament was the deity of the Old Testament, than SHAME ON HIM, and eww, gross. For that is NEVER acceptable, ever. To any reasonable person.

          These things are not acceptable to you — who obviously DON’T read your own Bible… so your god is obviously NOT a purveyor of morality. Not when he has instructions on how to sell your daughter, and how to keep slaves.

          Thanks, but no thanks. Go put on your critical reading hat, and read the Bible like you were NOT a believer. Read it impartially. It’s pretty gross. You can keep it I don’t have any need for superstition to feel better about my lot in life, and my morality.

  • David MacKenzie

    It would seem to me that this man protests too much. Any formal invocation that ends with an atheistic knock-off of the Aaronic blessing, is curiously beholden to the Judeo-Christian tradition it vociferously rejects. It reminds me of Julian the Apostate and his desire to make pagan Roman priests more moral and ethical so that they could better compete with the more pious Christian leadership. Unwittingly, he therefore applied Christian moral standards to the pagan priesthood.

    • Chris

      “Unwittingly, he therefore applied Christian moral standards to the pagan priesthood.”

      Nope. Julian thought philosophy a better guide to ethics than Christianity. Hence his attempt to make his priests MORE moral that the Christian clergy.

      • David MacKenzie

        But, without Christ, his attempt is vain. And, historically, it shows.

        • Chris

          I’m not getting into whether his attempt was futile or not. Merely that Julian didn’t borrow from Christian morality.

          • David MacKenzie

            Of course he did. He attempted to reform the ethics of the pagan priesthood, because he knew full well the successes that the Christian ministry represented. He may have been apostate, but he was also pragmatic.

          • Chris

            No he didn’t. What you are talking about is being inspired or spurred on by Christian morality. What I am talking about is BORROWING from Christian morality.

            If Julian was borrowing from Christian morality then he could hardly expect his priests to be better. If they were borrowing from the same source then at best they’d be as good as…

            But Julian was urging them to apply the teachings of the Greco-Roman philosophers. The adoption of such teaching would have been at more ethical and more rational. The only problem with his idea is that it undercut the very thing he was trying to achieve – the reestablishment of the old pagan ways. Pagan religions never incorporated ethics. They saw their job as offering a mercantile agreement between humans and the Gods. No ethics required.

  • BJ

    God will not be mocked, they will reap what they sow

    Galatians 6:7

    • Worf

      But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

      Matthew 6:6

      • BJ

        Wrong context, public or corporate prayers are Biblical

        • RegularJoe

          Of course they are….because corporations are people, just as Jesus commanded.
          (do you even hear yourself when you say such silly nonsense?)

        • Worf

          And exclusive christian prayer in a government setting is unconstitutional.

          • BJ

            As interpreted by anti-Christian judiciary

          • Ambulance Chaser

            You don’t have to like the rulings of the judiciary but you do have to accept that they exist.

          • Robert

            if we can elect only conservative acting christians you and your judicry can go and pee up the same rope as wolf.

          • bfw314159

            Good luck with that…

          • Robert

            ok you can hold the rope

          • BJ

            Yes, sign

          • Robert

            if we elect only conservative acting christians we can have what we want and you can go pee up a rope.

          • This style 10/6

            The Constitution will still be there. Why does it take a Canadian to teach you your civics?

          • MarkSebree

            Because many of our public schools refuse to, or cannot, teach our children properly about the subject.

          • Worf

            Your desire to live in a theocracy is disturbing. Luckily for everybody, that will never happen, and we will remain a country that allows and celebrates its people having opposing opinions.

    • Shane Egan

      Of course not, mockery deserves eternal torture as a punishment! Every child should be taught that! That is the kind of morality we should all live by. I personally plan to watch for any mockery and have prepared a torture chamber just in case!

      (Please don’t mock me, I am planning Bible-based morality!)

      • Mr Cleats

        Brainless troll

      • BJ

        Do you feet better after your irrational rant?

      • Lexical Cannibal

        Just ask those kids with the bears! They won’t be mocking anyone any time soon. Because God killed them. Righteously!

      • BJ

        Why do you continue to mock the Word of God with your insolent bantering? The Lord’s judgement is righteous!

        • Chris

          That’s right. God is portrayed as ordering the righteous murder of little children. God is portrayed as righteously commanding bears to rip little kids apart because they were making fun of a prophet.

          Or maybe, just maybe, those stories are wrong.

          • BJ

            Which little children are you referring to Chris? Nonetheless, just more childish excuses to defy and rebel against the Lord, and to teach others to rebel against the Him.

          • Chris

            Canaanite Toddlers were ordered killed. How can a toddler defy anything? They can barely walk.

          • BJ

            You really have no understanding about these things Chris?

          • Chris

            I have an understanding of ethics and so know right from wrong. In other words no one should kill little kids. Do you think murdering children is ok?

          • BJ

            Murder, of course not. God didn’t murder anyone.

          • Chris

            What I said “Canaanite Toddlers were ORDERED killed.”

            What you replied “God didn’t murder anyone.”

            I said He ORDERED the murders didn’t I?

            It was the Hebrews who were carrying out God’s orders who did the murders. At least that’s the way the bible portrays it.

          • BJ

            Why do you rebel against God Chris?

          • Chris

            Why do you seek to change the subject? Is it because you recognise ordering murder is wrong?

          • BJ

            Who but an arrogant fool would accuse God of wrongdoing?

          • Chris

            Who but an arrogant fool would declare that God has ordered us to murder little children?

          • BJ

            What little children are you claiming that God ordered to be killed?

          • Chris

            Canaanite Toddlers were ORDERED killed.

          • BJ

            What about them? The Canaanites were profoundly wicked, and wickedness permeates even to the seed. You need to possess spiritual understanding of these things which you and others obviously lack.

          • Chris

            “The Canaanites were profoundly wicked, and wickedness permeates even to the seed.”

            So then it would make sense to you that if someone committed a particularly brutal murder not only should the murderer be executed but their children as well?

            You need to possess ethical understanding of these things which you obviously lack.

          • BJ

            It doesn’t have the make sense to me or anyone else. Because we’re only human and we’re not supposed to understand everything. Only God knows everything, not man.

            So who are you to judge God you arrogant and prideful man? God does whatever He pleases whether you approve of it or not.

          • Chris

            So you see yourself as God’s murderer.

            Who are you to be prepared to kill little kids merely because someone else said God has ordered it? Are you that lost to fanaticism?

          • BJ

            Are you that lost to the hatred of God and rebellion against God?

          • Chris

            Are you that lost that you can claim that the murder of little kids is justified merely because your leader tells you its the will of God? That is scary.

          • BJ

            Are your h that lost when you can’t understand that godly leaders are lead by God.

            End of discussion.

          • Chris

            That’s why so many Godly leaders ended up ordering the deaths of others in US History. Remember the trail of tears? Or how many Godly leader supported slavery?
            End of discussion indeed.

          • BJ

            This is NOT fanaticism, it’s an expectation or directive

            Matthew 22:35-38 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment.

          • Chris

            “This is NOT fanaticism, it’s an expectation or directive”

            It’s not fanaticism? Tell that to the people you would kill.

          • BJ

            I’m not killing anyone

          • Chris

            But if your leader told you that God had told him to kill little kids you’d help? Right?

          • Chris

            “So who are you to judge God you arrogant and prideful man?”

            The prophets judged God all the time. They declared Him to be righteous. If they weren’t allowed to find Him unrighteous then their declaration was meaningless.

          • BJ

            God is NOT unrighteous! To say as you and others have done that God is unrighteous is blasphemy!

          • Chris

            “God is NOT unrighteous!”

            Because you classify EVERYTHING God does as righteous. If a human did those things they would be considered a criminal. What’s worse is you try and justify genocide. That is truly monstrous.

          • BJ

            The prophets judged correctly for it was and is the Truth. God is righteous, and His judgements are righteous! May His righteous judgements fall upon you and others who blaspheme God and judge as to condemn God!

          • Chris

            “God is righteous, and His judgements are righteous!”

            And when God deceives it’s righteous deception? You seem to be merely defining everything God does as good. In that case to say, as the prophets did many times, that God is good is merely to say God always does what God always does.

          • BJ

            You would teach God ethics? What arrogance!

          • Chris

            You would excuse of the murder of children? What fanaticism!

          • BJ

            You would accuse God of murder?! What pride and arrogance, just like your father Satan!

          • Chris

            That’s the third time you’ve twisted my words. Lie one more time and this discussion is over. Is that clear?

          • BJ

            End of discussion

          • Chris

            Bye.

          • BJ

            I won’t be bullied by you or anyone else. End of discussion.

          • Chris

            Just run that through my fundie translator “you’ll tell untruths if you want to.”

            You’re right. This discussion is ended. I won’t discuss anything with someone who reserves a right like that.

          • BJ

            God didn’t murder anyone, for God doesn’t commit murder. Since you judge God then may He visit, judge, and recompense you.

          • Chris

            I’ve told you twice now that the Hebrews are portrayed as murdering kids because of orders from God. Why do you twist my words?

          • Chris

            “You would teach God ethics?”

            I wasn’t aware that you are God. What arrogance!

          • BJ

            May the Lord rebuke you Chris! I never said that I was God!

          • Chris

            But you claimed I was judging God when, in fact i was judging YOU! It would seem you can’t tell the difference.

          • http://www.biblewordstudy.org Adam: Sword of the Spirit

            Who were the Amalekites?

          • Chris

            To quote the Jewish encyclopedia, the Amalekites were “a nomadic nation south of Palestine.”

          • http://www.biblewordstudy.org Adam: Sword of the Spirit

            What does the Bible testify about them, though?

            (In particular, Numbers 13?)

          • Chris

            Numbers 13? You mean “29 aThe Amalekites dwell in the land of the Negeb. The Hittites, the Jebusites, and the Amorites dwell in the hill country. bAnd the Canaanites dwell by the sea, and along the Jordan.”

          • http://www.biblewordstudy.org Adam: Sword of the Spirit

            You’ve got the right chapter, but let me quote it with more context:

            Numbers 13:25-33
            …(25)And they returned from searching of the land after forty days.

            (26)And they went and came to Moses, and to Aaron, and to all the congregation of the children of Israel, unto the wilderness of Paran, to Kadesh; and brought back word unto them, and unto all the congregation, and shewed them the fruit of the land.

            (27)And they told him, and said, We came unto the land whither thou sentest us, and surely it floweth with milk and honey; and this the fruit of it. (28)Nevertheless the people be strong that dwell in the land, and the cities are walled, and very great: and moreover we saw the children of Anak there. (29)The Amalekites dwell in the land of the south: and the Hittites, and the Jebusites, and the Amorites, dwell in the mountains: and the Canaanites dwell by the sea, and by the coast of Jordan.

            (30)And Caleb stilled the people before Moses, and said, Let us go up at once, and possess it; for we are well able to overcome it.

            (31)But the men that went up with him said, We be not able to go up against the people; for they are stronger than we. (32)And they brought up an evil report of the land which they had searched unto the children of Israel, saying, The land, through which we have gone to search it, is a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof; and all the people that we saw in it are men of a great stature.

            (33)And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight

            ^ Numbers 13 testifies that the Amalekites, etc. were tribes of giants.

          • Chris

            “Numbers 13 testifies that the Amalekites, etc. were tribes of giants.”

            Ok. Keep in mind that the Romans, when they first saw the Teutonic tribes described them as giants because the average size of the Teutones was six feet while the Romans were, on average a little under five and a half.

          • http://www.biblewordstudy.org Adam: Sword of the Spirit

            The Bible, though, gives vivid size descriptions of these giant tribes, also, in other places in Scripture.

            The Amorites, for instance (also identified in Numbers 13), are mentioned again in the book of Amos:

            Amos 2:6-11
            …(6)Thus saith the LORD; For three transgressions of Israel, and for four, I will not turn away thereof; because they sold the righteous for silver, and the poor for a pair of shoes; (7)That pant after the dust of the earth on the head of the poor, and turn aside the way of the meek: and a man and his father will go in unto the maid, to profane my holy name: (8)And they lay down upon clothes laid to pledge by every altar, and they drink the wine of the condemned the house of their god.

            (9)Yet destroyed I the Amorite before them, whose height like the height of the cedars, and he strong as the oaks; yet I destroyed his fruit from above, and his roots from beneath. (10)Also I brought you up from the land of Egypt, and led you forty years through the wilderness, to possess the land of the Amorite. (11)And I raised up of your sons for prophets, and of your young men for Nazarites. not even thus, O ye children of Israel? saith the LORD…

            ^ The Bible describes the Amorites, and Amalekites, etc. as literal giants (i.e. far taller than a human).

          • Chris

            You do know there are physiological limits to a human’s size right? That being the case literal giants can’t exist. They also seem to be giants who rode camels. How would that work? Were the camels giants too? Or did they just breed camels with steel instead of a backbone? Impossible right?

            So we now have two choices. The writers were exaggerating. The writers were using poetic metaphor.

            But even if all this were true, how does size justify ordering the murder of children and animals?

          • http://www.biblewordstudy.org Adam: Sword of the Spirit

            Now, who were the giants?

          • Chris

            Who were the literal giants? No one.

            Who were claimed to be giants by the writer who was trying to justify their murder? Amalekites.

            Any other questions?

          • http://www.biblewordstudy.org Adam: Sword of the Spirit

            Address the question, please.

            What does the Bible testify about the giants?

            (In particular, Genesis 6?)

          • Chris

            What has that to do with murdering children? Answer my question please.

          • http://www.biblewordstudy.org Adam: Sword of the Spirit

            Quote me Genesis 6:1-4, please. I want to see if you will be intellectually honest, here.

            What does the Bible testify about the giants?

          • Chris

            Will you answer my question after I do?

          • http://www.biblewordstudy.org Adam: Sword of the Spirit

            Your question will be answered, in what Genesis 6:1-4 testifies about the giants.

          • Chris

            It’s not.

          • http://www.biblewordstudy.org Adam: Sword of the Spirit

            I assure you that it is.

            Genesis 6:1-8
            …(1)And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, (2)That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. (3)And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he is also flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

            (4)There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which of old, men of renown…

            ^ The giants were not human.

            Therefore, the Amalekite, etc. giant tribes were not human, either.

            They were an evil, unredeemable creation.

          • Chris

            Two points:
            1) The verse doesn’t say they weren’t human. It fact it says that their children were MEN.

            2) It doesn’t say they were evil. You are adding to scripture and therefore are going to hell.

          • Chris

            Now let’s stop dealing in myth and deal in reality instead. There were no giants. The Hebrews committed genocide and claimed that God had ordered them too. They may well have justified this by claiming that the Amalekites were giants but the fact is they were just people who were murdered. No better or worse. Just people.

          • http://www.biblewordstudy.org Adam: Sword of the Spirit

            There were, Chris. The Bible’s testimony is true, and trustworthy.

            And…if the Lord permits you to live a little bit longer in the days ahead, you will see them walk the earth again (as well as the fallen angels).

            Anyhow, have a good evening, Chris. May the Lord draw you to Him, and grant your soul repentance.

          • Chris

            “There were, Chris.”

            No there weren’t. This isn’t opinion. Medical science can show that once humans grow beyond a certain height our heart can’t pump the blood to our arms and legs. Know what happens if fingers or toes don’t get any blood?

            “The Bible’s testimony is true, and trustworthy.”

            well if it is then YOUR interpretation is wrong. So which is it? Is the bible right but your interpretation wrong or is your interpretation right but the bible’s account pure garbage?

            “Anyhow, have a good evening, Chris. May the Lord draw you to Him, and grant your soul repentance.”

            And may you give up the worship of your ego and begin to learn about reality.

          • Chris

            Allow me to quote the interpreter’s one volume commentary.

            Genesis 6 emphasises the cosmic nature of the fall. The heavenly beings wantonluy married mortal women. The interpretation of vs. 4 is not entirely clear, but seems to imply that the gods married existing gigantic women and that these marriages produced the mighty men (heroes) of saga and legend i.e. demigods of gigantic size and superhuman strength. Verse 4 has also been interpreted to mean that the Nephalim (giants) on earth were the result of the divine-human marriages, but this interpretation seems less cogent in the light of other references to giants (cf. Num 13: 33, Ezek 32: 37; II Peter 2: 4; Jude 6)

            NONE of that excuses murder of kids.

          • Sharon_at_home

            Doesn’t this just mean that the giants, who were proportionally the same as the people but were larger. Doesn’t that mean their hearts would have been bigger and therefore able to pump the blood further than our hearts?

          • Chris

            I thought it would work that way too but it doesn’t. For example giraffe’s need two hearts to get the blood all the way up those long necks. Just having a bigger heart wouldn’t actually accomplish it. There’s some great vids on youtube about the impossibility of giants.

            However there’s several options for bible believers. 1) The term giant is a metaphor. For example we describe someone as being a giant in a particular field. 2) They were described that way because the Hebrews were small. When the Romans [who averaged about 5 and half foot] met the Teutones [who averaged a little over 6 feet] the Romans described them as giants.

          • Chris

            May I suggest you go to youtube and watch the videos

            “Giants of the Bible: Part 1 & Part 2”

          • Chris

            How does their location justify murder of little children?

          • BJ

            Okay, and your point is? So you think that you can judge God when you lack understanding especially of spiritual matters?

          • Chris

            But I’m not judging God. I’m judging a situation which the writer CLAIMS was ordered by God. See the difference?

          • BJ

            The Bible was written by Holy men of God as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. All Scripture (Bible) is/was inspired by/of God. Therefore, you don’t judge the writers, you judge the Author, Who is God!

            See the difference?

          • Chris

            “The Bible was written by Holy men of God as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.”

            Correction. It was written by men who CLAIMED that they were moved by God.

            “All Scripture (Bible) is/was inspired by/of God. Therefore, you don’t judge the writers, you judge the Author, Who is God!”

            Incorrect. I can judge the writers all I want. And I can follow the example of the prophets and judge God too.

          • BJ

            You believe wrongly, and you speak wrongly. They just don’t believe that they were moved or inspired by the Holy Spirit. They were moved or inspired by the Holy Spirit. End of discussion.

            2 Peter 1:21

          • Chris

            And you prove that the men weren’t merely claiming to speak for God by another quote. Circular argument anyone? Psst. You don’t prove the bible by quoting the bible. You prove the bible by producing evidence outside it.

          • Sharon_at_home

            You can’t prove they weren’t actually moved by the spirit to write the Word of God. I think that argument works both ways.

          • Chris

            I think that it’s certainly possible. If God exists [I believe God does] then God could have communicated with people. Who am I to say no? It remains a belief however. Then again that’s what faith is for.

            However you can’t ask for proof that something didn’t happen. That’s known as shifting the burden of proof.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Why wouldn’t we? If He ordered toddlers to be killed, He has done wrong.

          • BJ

            You exhibit astounding arrogance, ignorance, or both. Don’t you know that God’s judgement is righteous? Yet you unabashedly accuse and judge Almighty God of wrongdoing?!

          • Ambulance Chaser

            I know YOU believe that. Is there some reason I should?

          • BJ

            You’re free to believe whatever you want

          • BJ

            2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

          • BJ

            1 Timothy 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

          • Bob Johnson

            What about that flood He created?

          • Fur Hunter

            Touche!!!!!….Go Bob!!!!…Ha. Ha. Don’t ya just love it? Chicka Boom! Chicka Boom! Chicka Boom Boom Boom!!! Oh….and don’t forget Sodom and Gomorrah…..How about the parting of the Red Sea event?

          • BJ

            You need to have spiritual understanding of these things which you obviously lack Chris.

          • Chris

            You need to have ethical understanding you obviously lack.

    • Brian Asklund

      Your god is mocked thousands of times a day. And rightfully so, because religious dogma demands mockery.

      • BJ

        Those who mock God deserve to be mocked. God will not be mocked for you will reap what you’ve sown (GAL 6:7).

        • Brian Asklund

          Sorry, I don’t check my alerts very often, but here I am, mocking your slavery and rape condoning, baby killing, genocidal, racist fuck of a god. Your argument is invalid, mouth breather.

          • BJ

            1 Corinthians 16:22 If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.

  • Michael C

    Here in the United States, we’re all free to our own personal beliefs. Our government, being that it is made up of the people, represents and respects a diversity of beliefs.

    Isn’t our country neat? This is a very positive and uplifting article.

    • InTheChurch

      I will agree with you. But, what did he provide that was worth the listening?

      • james blue

        You can take from it whatever you wish, even if it is nothing, just as others will with anything you have to say

        • InTheChurch

          I am not the atheists on a christian forum. So why are you here?

          • Worf

            I won’t speak for others, but I look for articles that involve the separation of church and state, and comment accordingly. It just happens that a LOT of christian “news” sites come up in that search.

          • InTheChurch

            As a christian, I agree with separation of church and state. It only benefits the church. The line in the sand is clear and that helps the church.

          • james blue

            Where did I say you were an Atheist?

            I simply replied to the words in your comment.

          • InTheChurch

            You did not understand my phrase. That is ok.

          • james blue

            By all means enlighten me as to my misunderstanding.

            What I saw was someone who doesn’t agree with what the speaker said so pronounced it as being nothing.

          • InTheChurch

            are you?

      • Worf

        He said “This body should be able to tackle the many difficult issues facing the great people of the state of Iowa without allowing confirmation bias, cognitive dissonance, or intellectual dishonesty to blindly guide positions and votes,”

        I think this is a very clear and important statement. Like any invocation, his message was for those that will listen to it. This invocation had no less “worth” than any prayer. Both are appeals to what the speaker and audience feel is relevant.

      • Michael C

        He spoke of bettering the lives of all Iowans by using reason and knowledge to make educated decisions. He spoke of the value of a willingness to change one’s opinions on a subject if presented with compelling information.

        These seem like sentiments worth acknowledging. Do you disagree?

        Was there anything in his invocation that you disagree with?

        • InTheChurch

          I agree. If one is given enough info, one can change their view. but, there is also morality, principles and biblical standards to consider for those that believe. I don’t have a problem with the homosexual community, I am well educated/knowledge in the topic and have gay friends but I will not parade in support. I mean no offense but just trying to prove a point. I think you can agree that we both have a cool internet friendship to talk openly.
          The only thing I disagree with the invocation is that he had to copy biblical sayings and make fun, now looking at it from a distance. Could he have given the invocation without the biblical references?

          • Michael C

            Could he have given the invocation without the biblical references?

            You feel that he was mocking the bible. I don’t see that at all. He was taking an invocation that generally is Christian in nature and he delivered a secular invocation related to and within that format.

            You may feel that he was making fun of Christianity, but that doesn’t make it so.

            -edit- but you’re clearly making fun of him on this thread. “LOL, he did not have an original thought. Great job dude for providing nothing.”

          • InTheChurch

            I did. And I stand by my post. He took a prayer in the old testament and spun it to fit him. that was not original.

          • Chris

            “He took a prayer in the old testament and spun it to fit him. that was not original.”

            Which is what I have heard the vast majority of pastors do. Are they mocking the bible?

          • InTheChurch

            Hey Chris, how’s everything going with you?
            I have seen pastors take those prayers, explained them and keep honoring God with it. There is no mocking them or God with them.

          • Chris

            I injured my knee a while ago and may have to have an operation. I am NOT looking forward to it. On the plus side my friends have rallied round and are helping out. 🙂

            As to the what was done…How should the guy have responded?

          • InTheChurch

            I was asked that and I responded that he should have just did his own thing and not include the bible. No need to prove a point by mocking or making fun of the opposite view point. Be original and tell your side of the story from your own eyes. I hope you understood that. It makes sense in my little noggin.
            That is cool that your friends are helping out. I hope/pray for a speedy recovery and you get back to 100% soon.

          • Chris

            Thank you for the prayers and your good wishes.

          • InTheChurch

            I prayed for you last night as I was driving so I hope you get your health and healing/recovery.

          • Chris

            Why thank you. I am deeply touched. I’ll let you know if there’s any change.

          • InTheChurch

            Hey, I think you would do the same for me.

          • Chris

            Depend on it.

      • http://maxfurr.com HobbesianWorld

        How about making decisions based on facts rather than deeply held beliefs? That isn’t a worthwhile message? It’s called intellectual honesty and integrity.

        • InTheChurch

          Why not make decisions with both?

          • Worf

            Deeply held beliefs are personal. Decisions based on dogma ALWAYS alienate someone, and have no place in representing a diverse population.

          • InTheChurch

            Democrats and Republicans alienate people all the time.

          • http://maxfurr.com HobbesianWorld

            Anytime we get religion involved in decision making we run into a quagmire.

            In the first place, the Bible, contrary to what believers think, is not completely factual and contains a fair amount of internal inconsistencies.

            Not only that, many of the laws of the OT are extremely unjust and draconian. There is nothing kind, merciful or loving about them.

            Again, creationism cannot be recognized by a government entity as an “alternative” science, because it isn’t science and because it is a religious belief. There are many other creation stories just as implausible.

            All governmental decisions must consider all citizens no matter what their religious beliefs. One’s belief in matters of religion belong to that person and cannot be codified into law.

            Bottom line is that we cannot make a law based on one religion that applies to everyone except a law that sets up a wall of separation between government and ALL religions. And we already have that law. It’s called the Establishment Clause.

          • InTheChurch

            Can you share those biblical inconsistencies with me?
            You know that we don’t live under those OT laws now, right?
            Creation is not science? While evolution is based on a theory. So…..
            When you and I go to the booth to vote, you vote with reason and education. I do the same but I also add my spirituality. The booth is the one place we can never separate C/S.

          • http://maxfurr.com HobbesianWorld

            Inconsistencies:

            (I assume that you’ve read much of the Bible, so in order to not see the inconsistencies, you must have simply ignored them or passed them off as “we don’t know the mind of God,” or “It’s a metaphor, somehow.”

            The very first and foremost is the idea that the OT god was omniscient. How, then, can an omniscient god change Its mind? Why would it do something that It knew It would regret having done? Why, indeed, would it ever become angry if it knew those acts that angered It were going to happen?

            Next is the notion of a just and merciful god. Did you ever notice that in the story of Moses, Yahweh commanded him to go to the Pharaoh and ask him to let the Israelites leave the country, but then Yahweh said that It would “harden the heart of the Pharaoh” so that It could “show my signs.”

            First, it is clear in the text that Pharaoh was set up. He was given no choice. The game was rigged.

            Secondly, those “signs” entailed killing thousands of innocent men, women and children. Where do we get “justice” or “mercy” from killing not only the first born humans, but animals too. Could this “loving” god not think of a more “loving” way to show Its signs?

            And then there is the Jericho/land of Canaan story. Why would your god order Joshua to commit genocide in the “land of Canaan?” It called the the citizens of Jericho/Canaanites “the abominable thing.”

            If your argument is that they were wicked and didn’t follow Yahweh’s laws; 1. Why would Joshua be ordered not to negotiate (perhaps give them Yahweh’s laws, which they never had, so didn’t know what Yahweh wanted, and 2. Why, in the very first place, would any omnibenevolent god choose one group of people to be Its people?

            I seem to recall John 3:16 here, suggesting that Yahweh loved all the world. Curious, huh?

            There is more, of course, that the above is more than enough for debate.

          • InTheChurch

            Before I respond, I need to say that your understanding and knowledge of the Bible will be the reason you can not plead incompetent when you are standing before God on judgement day. I know you don’t believe in all that but, if you are wrong, you will not be excused. So just something to think about.
            I will not say anything about metaphors or anything like that. I will attempt to answer these as best I can.
            I have read that God has hardened the heart of Pharaoh. I can understand how someone can take that and say it was all set up. maybe God did hardened his heart or he thought “I will not allow my slaves to leave and so i will not lose my power.” But it was also a test for Moses to see if he would give in or stay the course. Haven’t you been through a difficult situation and you have been made stronger for it? Also the killing of people in the bible, do you why God had ordered many of those killings?
            God does know everything. He knew centuries from now that you and I would have this discussion. i have no issue with that. I’m going to guess you are referring to the Garden of Eden, right?
            What kind of life or life styles were the Canaanites living? You are looking at the fall of the walls as horrible but are you going to ignore the sin that was behind the wall? After you read Joshua 6:1, you might know that answer.
            I have asked myself that question about the Israelite as the chosen people. I come up with; it does not matter who he would have picked. We use them as examples of how and how not to have a relationship with God. We see how they turned to and from God. We can sit here and wonder but why not learn from how they treated or were treated. I think that would be a better thing to look at.
            God does love the world but have you read to the end of the chapter. You will get some answers.
            We can go through the whole bible and try to find stuff but we go back to the same question, how is your relationship with God? if you don’t have one, then you have read what will happen. If you do, then great, start your journey with God. It’s still about you.
            Separate discussion that I don’t seem to get far with atheists. Do you believe that you are made of three beings; physical, mental and spiritual?

          • http://maxfurr.com HobbesianWorld

            I note that you did not tackle the first and most significant questions about omniscience: How, then, can an omniscient god change Its mind? Why would it do something that It knew It would regret having done? Why, indeed, would it ever become angry if it knew those acts that angered It were going to happen?

            I will take it, then, that the reason could not be ascertained? The reason that it could not is because the concept is internally inconsistent.

            your understanding and knowledge of the Bible will be the reason you can not plead incompetent when you are standing before God on judgement day. I know you don’t believe in all that but, if you are wrong, you will not be excused. So just something to think about.

            Ah, Pascal’s Wager. It is fallacious on its face. The same argument applies to other religions as well. “But they are false religions,” you say? Well, that is precisely what they would say about yours.

            As well, any “loving” god would never sentence a soul to everlasting torture for the sin of having been taught from birth to believe in a different god or taught to use reason in all matters of life.

            The vast majority of believers in a particular religion believe it because it is what they were taught from tot-hood to believe. That is why there continues to be huge bodies of different religious belief and, in fact, denominations within each, all looking at each other as not following the “true” religious mandates.

            This is why I view religion from the widest possible perspective. Each believer in each religion views it from the narrowest prospective in terms of humanity in toto. Religion is not the uniter and promise of world peace as many think it to be. It is exclusive. By its very nature it excludes billions of others. My complete view on this matter is at my blog: The Benevolent Thou.

            Do you really believe that a devout Muslim, who’d been taught from childhood to follow Islam or go to Hell, that your Christian god would burn that person in Hell for not being a Christian?

            maybe God did hardened [Pharaoh’s] heart or he thought “I will not allow my slaves to leave and so i will not lose my power. But it was also a test for Moses to see if he would give in or stay the course.

            I’m quite sure you can see the setup. There is no way to get around it. The second clause in your first sentence is, at its core, a confirmation of the first clause. He was forced to think that way (time and time again). In other words, the “or” should have been an “and.”

            And killing thousands of innocent people (including babies) as a “test” for Moses? That’s “justice?” That’s “mercy?”

            Ultimately, would it not have been better had Yahweh wanted to show signs of his love and power by perhaps turning the desert sand to sugar for five minutes, then returning it to its previous state? How about a healing angel sent to cure all diseases? How about causing the desert to bloom?

            No, Yahweh needed blood and death instead. Yahweh was a warrior god devoid of justice and mercy. He was no “loving” god.

            What kind of life or life styles were the Canaanites living? You are looking at the fall of the walls as horrible but are you going to ignore the sin that was behind the wall? After you read Joshua 6:1, you might know that answer.

            Joshua 6:1 ¶Now Jericho was straitly shut up because of the children of Israel: none went out, and none came in.

            That was their sin? Closing their walls against an Israelite genocidal attack? If you knew a group of people were rampaging through your neighborhood, killing everyone, would you close your doors and take up some defensive measures?

            Again, (and the story actually happened) the Canaanites did not have Yahweh’s laws. They were of an Earth religion. Their lifestyle was what their parents taught them, and their parents, and their parents. Their god was what was taught them as was yours.

            Yes, I have read all of Joshua and most of the OT. I read it with an open mind and researched both its authenticity and questions that arose for highly questionable acts of injustice. None of it is indicative of an omnibenevolent god.

            Having said all of the above, my research into the authenticity of the story of Joshua found it to be unlikely to the extreme that it ever happened due to a lack of scientific evidence.

            And, “no” to your final question. All thoughts and memories in your head are stored as electrical impulses. The brain is, indeed, an amazing thing, but it is entirely physical. What you believe to be your soul is, I think, merely your strong sense of selfness. We all have that. It is certainly a comfort to millions to think that the selfness/consciousness will survive the death of the body.

          • InTheChurch

            I will start with the end. I have a psychology degree and work within the profession. After studying and work experience, I believe what you said about selfness and consciousness. But, I also believe we all have a spirit. John 4:24, I like how this verse says it. God is spirit and we are to worship him in spirit, with our spirit being. We will not see or feel God if we are not in spirit and only in physical. I hope you understand that.
            What kind of God do you want? it sounds like you want a god that allows you free will with no consequences. You want to live sin free. Richard Dawkins said exactly that in one of his debates. He wanted a loving God that does not have any consequences and allows him to do what he likes. That is why he is atheist. I’m not saying that is why you are. You have your reasons.
            I know I am getting off topic a bit but go with me. As a parent we let our kids do their thing but with rules and consequences. We follow through with the “punishment” when rules are broken. Why?
            Why can’t God be that with us?
            God did bless his people with manna, water from a stone and he provided shade during the day, light at night, no ones shoes were worn and he was with them, WHEN they obeyed him. When disobedient, he was not so happy with them. Right?
            Sorry for not addressing the topic specifically but I think I did in a different way.
            I have not done much research on Joshua specifically but I have found that many of the OT settings and men mentioned have been supported by researcher and archaeologists.
            Personal question; were you “born and raised” in church? If so, when did you walk away from the church. Can you give me a short history of your experience in church. I find people’s history interesting.

          • http://maxfurr.com HobbesianWorld

            I’m glad to see that we are on the same page with selfness/consciousness. As well, I see nothing wrong with believing that we have a spirit or even a soul.

            But then that innocuous belief becomes dark and serious once we say that the religion we were taught to believe is factual and true and that all of society must be bend to those beliefs. This it puts a chill on other religions, scientific exploration, stymies inquiry into wonderful new fields of medicine (e.g., stem cell research) and negatively interferes with educating our young.

            That is a total dismissal of science (that which is contrary to the belief), mercy and logic. It is a rejection of curiosity and free minds. It has real life consequences.

            You, as a psychologist, should understand more than most folks that there are no “abnormal” mental conditions that can be attributed to demons. It was science that brought us that understanding even while the Church fought fang and claw, torture racks and broadswords against every advance.

            The result is that we (well, most of us) know that demons do not cause mental disorders. In fact, with all of our knowledge gained after breaking the stranglehold of Church mythology, it is quite clear that there is no evidence of the existence of demons, or of Satan, or of Hell, or even of a Heaven for all that matters.

            These are concepts that we’ve been taught to believe and they have a very strong grip on the human mind for a number of reasons–not the least of which is that it is a wonderful comfort to those losing loved ones and it placates the troubled individual mind concerned that his selfness will not remain after the death of the body.

            But, unfortunately for the believer, the comfort gained by believing and the minds so placated are in no way evidence that the belief is true. I call it a psychological buffer that helps maintain balance.

            We will not see or feel God if we are not in spirit and only in physical. I hope you understand that.

            This strikes me as the old argument that one must believe before he will know that “Jesus” or “God” exists. Same, however, with all religions. If you believe them, then you will believe them. It’s rather circular, isn’t it?

            Certainly you know that if I had enough faith to believe that during the night unicorns romped about in the woods behind my house, then I would believe it to the extent that when I venture into those woods, I would see evidence of their existence (as opposed to evidence for their existence).

            What kind of God do you want? it sounds like you want a god that allows you free will with no consequences. Dawkins said . . .

            But again, what, exactly, is the reason for “sin.” I take that to mean disobedience to the Christian god. But that whole concept is fraught with philosophical conundrums. Not enough time or space here to go into them, although we’ve touched them.

            The boilerplate simple answer I often give is that I see no need at all for there to be sin. First, if I believe that your god doesn’t exist, then the biblical law of gathering sticks on Sunday has absolutely no relevance to me. Neither does having a beer, which many areas of the country have banned on THEIR holy day. I consider the banning a sin (based on my ethics).

            Ethics/moral values are a construct of society. Many of those we have today were formed over thousands of years by human beings. Societies virtually isolated from each other over those thousands of years naturally formed their own set of morals and created their gods to fit them, thereby giving focus and direction on the people.

            It was sort of like Cheney-Bush molding their Iraqi invasion desire around cherry-picked “intelligence” mainly gathered from tortured individuals.

            We follow through with the “punishment” when rules are broken. Why? Why can’t God be that with us?

            The human condition is exactly what it should look like if we are a product of biological evolution. We are still bound to certain predispositions and impulses that were at one time instincts, driving us to verious actions. These predispositions manifest according to one’s environment–how he is nurtured, what condition in which he lives in comparison to others, etc.

            Among these impulses, I think, are aggression, jealousy, possessiveness, self interest and xenophobia, each manifesting to different strengths through nurturing.

            Early aggression is tamped down by punishment (unreasonable punishment can lead to more aggression on other individuals). We teach our children to share their things and space. This softens possessiveness. One of the hardest to control (Religious society is against it) is tamping down xenophobia. Even today people are attacked because they “look” like a “terrorist” or they are beaten because of their religion, or sexual orientation and children are taught that Muslims in general are terrorists and to be feared.

            Then there is the atheist. Most children are taught that we are bad people just because we do not accept the existence of their god. We are strong in science, which, itself, becomes suspect and often rejected.

            Personal question; were you “born and raised” in church? If so, when did you walk away from the church. Can you give me a short history of your experience in church. I find people’s history interesting.

            Oh yes. However, my entire response has become far too lengthy. I’d love to sit down with you, sip wine or beer and debate. I do love civil debates. So, I’ll just refer you to the preface of my novel, which completely answers your question. You will find it at “MaxFurr dot com” and click on the “RationalWriter blog” tab over the main picture.

          • InTheChurch

            “But then that innocuous belief becomes dark and serious once we say that the religion we were taught to believe is factual and true and that all of society must be bend to those beliefs. This it puts a chill on other religions, scientific exploration, stymies inquiry into wonderful new fields of medicine (e.g., stem cell research) and negatively interferes with educating our young.
            That is a total dismissal of science (that which is contrary to the belief), mercy and logic. It is a rejection of curiosity and free minds. It has real life consequences.”
            How many Christians have done great work in science? How many Christians have won the noble price? How many Christians have had their research published? Christianity does not stifle science. I would say God created science and the beauty of science.

            “The result is that we (well, most of us) know that demons do not cause mental disorders. In fact, with all of our knowledge gained after breaking the stranglehold of Church mythology, it is quite clear that there is no evidence of the existence of demons, or of Satan, or of Hell, or even of a Heaven for all that matters.”
            As a person that believes in spirituality, I have to say these things do exist. I agree, schizophrenia and bi-polar can be directly linked to hormones and brain abnormalities. I am not disagreeing with that. But, I will say that evil spirits do exist like Angels and God. I have learned that the evil spirits are not allowed to enter the body unless invited. So, one can become “possessed” if they permit it. Mental health is a horse of a different color.

            “This strikes me as the old argument that one must believe before he will know that “Jesus” or “God” exists.”
            Faith? Do you have faith that your souse is loyal to you? do you have faith that the sun will come up tomorrow? do you have faith in your own understanding and knowledge? We all have faith. Some are directed in one area and others direct it in another. We all have some degree of faith.

            “But again, what, exactly, is the reason for “sin.” I take that to mean disobedience to the Christian god.”
            Sin is the disobedience of God’s law. Plain and simple. You are 100% correct. If you are not a bible follower, then you don’t sin under that standard. But again, if God does exist, then you have lived under that standard all your life but you refused to follow. And you know the law because you have great bible knowledge. I feel that our western culture society wants to redefine and even remove sin, but it’s embedded in our society

            “Most children are taught that we are bad people just because we do not accept the existence of their god. We are strong in science, which, itself, becomes suspect and often rejected.”
            I have taught my kids to love all and accept all but to defend their faith, if needed. I will consider you an internet friend. I would sit with you, drink some coffee and have a great talk. Our beliefs will not stop us from being friends. We can agree to disagree but still have a great white chocolate mocha. What I am saying, it’s the people we meet that make a difference. I could honestly say that you would listen to me because how we carry ourselves and visa versa. I can see you shut down with people who are condemning you to hell because they don’t know you. And that is a big mistake that church goers make. We are our biggest problem at times.

            I am on your site right now. I will read through it. Thanks.

          • http://maxfurr.com HobbesianWorld

            Interesting that my reply has disappeared. Well, I can do it again, but this time save a copy.

            Biblical inconsistencies:

            First and foremost there is a problem with the assumption that the god of the OT (Yahweh) is omniscient (and if not omniscient, then not omnipotent).

            Many times in the OT Yahweh is said to be angry or jealous, and even grieving in his heart that he had made man. So how is it that an omniscient god did not see what was coming? And if he did, then why be angry when it happens? Why, as well, would a god create creatures when he could see that he would change his mind that he had made them?

            Secondly, let’s look at the term often applied to Yahweh that he was “loving.” We all condemn Hitler for torturing and killing six million jews. We call him a monster, the worst of the worst (Stalin actually killed even more of his people).

            Yet, you have a god that will torture billions of souls through eternity without respect for, among other crimes, not believing it his existence, not “loving” him, or having committed the grave sin of having been taught from birth to believe in a different god or gods.

            And then, the problem of evil. Why would your god create evil in the first place? To give humans “free will?” Then why did it first create evil, and then frame a woman for bringing it into the world?

            Was it beyond the power of this god to create a world in which humans still had choices, but among ideas and philosophies? Why all the blood?

            Next, we have Mr. Moses and Yahweh’s problem with justice and mercy.

            Exodus 4:21 And the LORD said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go.

            So, why would Yahweh want to set up Pharaoh such that he and no will of his own? As Yahweh explained it, he wanted to show is “signs.” Those signs, of course, was the killing the firstborn of not only humans but of the animals as well.

            Could your god not find another, more “loving” solution besides setting up the Pharaoh and then killing thousands?

            That’s enough for now. I hope the moderator allows these questions. Yes, they are hard questions, but then, they are presented in a civil manner as was my last post.

          • http://maxfurr.com HobbesianWorld

            Seems that I’m being blocked from responding. I’ve posted twice a very civil response, but apparently this site has a problem with free speech.

          • InTheChurch

            I’m sorry. I have some issues to with my posts. I am actually enjoying our talk and you have my little mouse moving up in my noggin. I learn from everyone.

    • 0pus

      “Isn’t our country neat?”

      Are you in your 80s? Sheesh, “neat” went out with Leave It to Beaver.

      • MarkSebree

        Too bad most of these legislators did not follow it.

  • InTheChurch

    LOL, he did not have an original thought. Great job dude for providing nothing.

    • This style 10/6

      Anyone who thinks “LOL” is an argument is bereft of thought.

      • InTheChurch

        So I can’t laugh at this? why?

        • This style 10/6

          You can but people will put you down as empty. Ecclesiastes 7:6.

          • InTheChurch

            Great verse, but people need to lighten up and laugh

    • Liz

      How are the people who always quote the Bible, and the same age-old religious ideas, providing an original thought? Explain it to me, please. And how is someone who does not share your same beliefs, laughable? And would Jesus approve of you laughing at others who don’t share your beliefs?

      • InTheChurch

        Are you a christian? I want to know where to go with this. I will not ASSume.

        • Liz

          The answer should not change, regardless of what I believe. And… as you like swearing, and laughing at others who don’t share your beliefs, I can only ‘assume’ you don’t take yours very seriously.

          • InTheChurch

            I will not assume something that you are not and get into more hot water. That is all. If you don’t want to have an honest discussion, then, have a great and blessed day.

          • Liz

            So, saying mean and awful things to me if I were not a believer, would be okay and ‘not getting into hot water?’ Let’s be honest — I was being honest: the answer should NOT change based on anyone else’s beliefs, save yours. Otherwise, your beliefs are not very well rooted, or are trivial. Your disrespect and crassness show. But, good for you for running away, before you have to think more deeply about what it is you really believe.

  • Marie Schaub

    Awesome! Thank you, Mr. Scott!!!

    • Robert

      hate to bust your buble but the alternative to this being a christian country never will be Athism the alternitive is Islam. They will slap you silly for disrespecting their beliefs .

      • Worf

        This is not a christian nation, nor is it an atheist nation. It is a secular nation where a person’s religion or lack thereof is irrelevant, and all religions should be treated equally. The very idea that it will fall to islam is a paranoid delusion.

      • This style 10/6

        I see that 0.9% of Americans are Muslim. I think it will be a very long time before they take over.

        • Robert

          All it would take is open boarders.

          • Mark Bender

            Or maybe even open borders. But we do not have open borders in the way you may be suggesting.

          • This style 10/6

            And 300 million Muslims would come rushing across. You are paranoid.

          • Robert

            And you are mentaly damaged big time . So no use explaning to you.

      • Jason Todd

        I think what Marie wants is a country free of religion. This means, of course, she favors communism, a glorious sociopolitical philosophy that has killed tens of millions of people.

        • Shane Egan

          How very different than Jesus who taught his followers to kill unbelievers saying, “But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.”. (Actually, not so different.)

          • Jason Todd

            Only Jesus never said that.

    • 0pus

      Peroxide

      • Worf

        Hydrogen or sodium?

        • Lexical Cannibal

          Lithium could be useful if you happen to be short of breath.

  • http://maxfurr.com HobbesianWorld

    I second Marie’s “Awesome! Thank you Mr.Scott!!!” I did not see where he “mocked” the Bible and what he said should be adopted by all, especially where FACTS refute one’s own beliefs, one should accept the FACTS, not the beliefs.

  • Brian Asklund

    Wonderfully stated. Those that cannot appreciate what he said for what it was are the people he mentioned that can’t set aside their cognative biases and look at anything objectively. Sadly, they are also proud of that.

  • This style 10/6

    I saw no mocking of the bible in that invocation.

    • Mark Bender

      Agreed. Mixing atheists and hyperbole goes a long way in getting ratings and ad revenues.

  • Nidalap

    Sad…
    Another mile marker on the road to societal devolution…

    • bfw314159

      Equal treatment is devolution?

  • Robert

    This only happens because the united states constitution really sucks. And i imagime iowa costitution sucks to.

    • Liz

      Perhaps God should have intervened directly, himself, and stopped it… don’t you think? Or was he busy…?

      • 0pus

        Shouldn’t your name be “Lez”?

        • Liz

          Awww, yes… There’s that Christian love! 🙂 Just like what Jesus would say. Great job.

          • 0pus

            🙂

          • Liz

            Clearly, you don’t believe there’s a god… 🙂 Otherwise you wouldn’t be bold enough to say these things to me. But hey. Whatever floats your boat, man. Keep spreading that Christian love.

        • Shane Egan

          Breaking the commandment about ‘false witness’ to further a ‘Christian’ argument – way to go sir, madam or thing.

          • 0pus

            Little girl, saying something you don’t like is not “bearing false witness.” You need to get your Special Ed teacher to explain these things to you.

      • Robert

        God works even evil things out for the good of those who love him. So there no need for God to stop Any thing. yet that does not mean his people shouldnt do anything.

        • Liz

          Well, in America, people of ALL beliefs have equal rights. So, it is immoral to stop other people from their own rights — just because of your religion.

        • Shane Egan

          If God is all-powerful how come he does not just destroy Lucifer and the other rebellious angels? How could there ever be any sort of conflict against an omni-present, omni-powerful creature? The only possible reason would be that God wants the devil to exist to cause strife and problems – which makes him either not all powerful or a petty vindictive brat. One or the other.

          • Jason Todd

            Or you could read Revelation.

    • This style 10/6

      If it was written in a time when folk had more respect for god, why didn’t it create a theocracy?

  • William of Glynn

    I applaud Mr. Scott’s courageous stand for truth, justice, and the American way.

  • bowie1

    His dogma is science.

    • Liz

      Oh, please! lol If you have to put down science to lift up your own ‘reality,’ than you are one sorry individual.

      • bowie1

        He he. I know, I know. You are devoted to the pursuit of science and very dogmatically at that! Anything you put a high value on is worship from the word worth-ship. For you it is science, the book of nature.

        • Liz

          So, wanting to know the most correct and pragmatic information about our every day lives — things which are testable, makes a person dogmatic? Versus, you know, a religion which won’t admit when it’s wrong. How interesting. Good luck with that, mister.

          • bowie1

            We confess everyday our shortcomings or we should anyway. God is perfect but we are not. But you might disagree I suppose.

          • Liz

            If you admitted when you were wrong, there’d be NO religion at all. There’d be no belief, and no Christianity.

          • bowie1

            It’s not about the truth of the Bible that I say is wrong. It is about me not always living up to what is required and that is what I confess regularly.

        • Liz

          Also… when you have to use religious terminology to put down science, what you’re putting down is your religion, not science. Ironic, huh? And yeah, ‘relationship with Jesus’ is just more ‘I am ashamed I’m religious’ crap. lol

          • Copyleft

            Exactly, Liz. At least he’s admitting that “dogma” is a put-down, suggesting that blind faith really is inferior. Bit by bit, the superstitions are falling.

    • Shane Egan

      Ah yes, the ‘dogma’ of discarding ideas when they are wrong! How terribly unreasonable – completely unlike Christians who cling to ideas no matter how wrong they are – rabbits chewing their cud anyone? Romans never requiring people to return to place of birth for a census but still claimed as historical ‘fact’ by Christians and so many other mistakes.

      • bowie1

        Do you have all the information on that or are you repeating some others who speculate on these minor details? It’s like to disprove something based on the lack of findings.

        • Shane Egan

          Sorry, I’m not the one claiming the book is the infallible word of an all-knowing god – christians are. Either it is all correct or it is not. If it has errors then it is all questionable – hence the christians who cling to it being unerring because they refuse to admit ANYTHING in the Bible could ever be wrong.

      • Jason Todd

        It was for taxes. (Luke 2:1-3)

  • Liz

    I do not think he mocked anything — with all due respect. I think this is great, and an opportunity for other Iowans of various backgrounds, and beliefs, to be actively involved in government. We should all have an influence in our government, because government is for all of its citizens, not just for some who believe in any one particular religion. I really wish you would be a more fair, impartial, and honest publication about anyone else who does not share your religious beliefs. This article is quite negative, and dishonest.

    • zeddicuskotor

      You don’t understand the mind of the christian extremists. To them, anything that doesn’t glorify their petty and evil ideology is automatically their enemy, regardless of context or rights or laws.

  • Charles

    “The trinity I invoke today isn’t rooted in any kind of doctrine or dogma,”

    I’m sorry.. That’s laughable. Today’s “Trinity” of science is simple.. “Lies, Lies, and more Lies”..

    • This style 10/6

      How about some examples. If we jump off a cliff will we fly?

      • 0pus

        Fcked any little boys today, fairy?

        • This style 10/6

          You have got your knickers in a knot, haven’t you!

          • bfw314159

            Some people like 0pus have no arguments, so they lash out with mindless insults.

    • bfw314159

      That’s why airplanes can’t fly and GPS doesn’t work, right?

      • Charles

        What in the World does that have to do with the lies they pawn off?

        • bfw314159

          What lies? You weren’t specific, so I picked aerodynamics and relativity.

          • Charles

            NASA for one. I search a hundred pictures. Every single one is photo shopped.. Did you know that? Of course you didn’t. No one knows what “Gravity” actually is. Even though, they certainly try to make is sound like they did. Never went to the moon. NASA itself has admitted that time after, time. Not to mention, they seemed to have “Lost” all the original Apollo footage.. But you just keep on sleeping..

          • bfw314159

            Every single one is photo shopped.. Did you know that? Of course you didn’t.

            No, they aren’t. Many are processed since they are photos in parts of the spectrum that aren’t visible.

            No one knows what “Gravity” actually is.

            So what’s the lie?

            Never went to the moon.

            Oh dear, you’re one of those. You know they left retroreflectors on the moon during Apollo 11, 14, and 15 that bounce back lasers for the Lunar Laser Ranging experiment don’t you? How’d they get there?

            NASA itself has admitted that time after, time.

            No, they haven’t.

            Not to mention, they seemed to have “Lost” all the original Apollo footage

            The slow-scan television tapes made during the live broadcast were lost, but there are lots of videotapes and kinescopes.

          • Charles

            “”No, they aren’t. Many are processed since they are photos in parts of the spectrum that aren’t visible.””

            Hmm.. So they need to do that for the Mars rover? Uh huh.

            “”Oh dear, you’re one of those. You know they left retroreflectors on the moon during Apollo 11, 14, and 15 that bounce back lasers for the Lunar Laser Ranging experiment don’t you? How’d they get there?””

            You do know you can bounce lasers off the moon without those right? ha ha..

            “No, they haven’t.”

            You mean you don’t believe what they say? Ha ha.. Too much.

            “”The slow-scan television tapes made during the live broadcast were lost, but there are lots of videotapes and kinescopes.””

            Wasn’t live is the problem. It’s a lie. All of it. We’ve never been out of low earth orbit. Go ahead.. Listen to it in their own words.. Go back to sleep..

          • bfw314159

            So they need to do that for the Mars rover?

            They need to do color correction, that’s one of the functions of the American flag on the rover.

            You do know you can bounce lasers off the moon without those right? ha ha..

            Not to measure the distance, no. You’d get scattering.

            So how’d they get there?

            You mean you don’t believe what they say?

            Where? You’re a conspiracy nut claiming NASA admitted that they never went to the moon, but your evidence is zero.

            Listen to it in their own words..

            Where? You haven’t cited anything at all.

          • Charles

            ha. ha.. Ok.. You just continue on in your slumber. Meanwhile the Believers in Jesus Christ will continue to get the real scoop.. Hilarious you guys hang out here. It’s amazing how much you hate God. Truly.

          • bfw314159

            You just continue on in your slumber.

            No, no. You CLAIMED that NASA admitted that they never went to the moon.

            WHERE?

            C’mon, you said NASA admitted it. Where?

          • Charles

            Look it up. I’m not going to gift it. If you are truly interested in it. You’ll find it.

          • bfw314159

            Look it up.

            No. You CLAIMED it, YOU back it up. It should be simple for a genius like yourself to find it, right?

          • Charles

            Sorry. You aren’t interested in truth. That’s why you believe the lie. It’s the strong delusion God passed on you. If you are REALLY interested in the truth. Look it up. You’ll find it. Right out of NASA lying pie hole.

          • bfw314159

            You said NASA admitted it. Where? Quote something from NASA.

            It seems the liar here is you.

          • Charles

            Look it up. Good day.

          • bfw314159

            I did. It doesn’t exist. You’re lying.

          • Worf

            “When two parties are in a discussion and one makes a claim that the other disputes, the one who makes the claim typically has a burden of proof to justify or substantiate that claim especially when it challenges a perceived status quo.”

          • Charles

            Look it up. You’ll find it.

          • bfw314159

            I did. It doesn’t exist. You’re lying. Again.

          • Charles

            Apparently you haven’t.

          • bfw314159

            Yes, I have. I can’t find it. Please give me a link to the NASA website.

          • Charles

            I’m sure it doesn’t exist. You don’t want it to. Or you DO know and you’re a shill. I mean why else would be on a Christian website? ha ha.. Funny.

          • bfw314159

            Why won’t you provide a link? It should be easy if you’re right.

            But you’re lying and you know it. You can never come up with a link, so all you can do is try to dodge.

          • Charles

            Uh huh.. moving on.

          • bfw314159

            So where’s a link?

          • Charles

            Seek and ye shall find.

          • bfw314159

            I did. There isn’t one. Because you’re lying.

          • Worf

            You made a claim. Burden of Proof means you have to show evidence for your claim. Not pass it on to the disputer

          • Charles

            I gave you the initial lead. Look it up.. Move on.

          • bfw314159

            Why won’t you provide a link? It should be easy if you’re right.

          • Worf

            Ya…. that’s not how burden of proof works. Provide evidence. Without it, I will dismiss you as a troll.

          • Charles

            Yet, I’m not one trolling a Christian website defending the ungodly am I..

          • bfw314159

            What does the moon landing have to do with “the ungodly”?

          • Worf

            Hmm.. Disappointing second rate troll. You should read some posts from Amos Moses. Maybe you can learn how to really troll these comment sections.

          • Charles

            ha.. ha.. I know it hurts your feelings.. Truth hurts doesn’t it..

          • Jorg Donde

            Except for the little niggling fact that the signal returning from lunar soil is different than the one returning from a metal object.

          • This style 10/6

            A conspiracy nut I see.

          • Charles

            Shh…. Back to sleep now..

          • Mark Bender

            I’m interested in this statement where NASA said they didn’t go to the moon. Haven’t seen a credible reference anywhere. So, Charles, can you back it up or are you still sleeping?

          • Charles

            Look it up. They admit a few times on video.

          • Mark Bender

            I have. Nobody has said such a thing. You are either completely mistaken and cannot bother to correct yourself, or you are a liar.

          • Charles

            Well.. Let me tell you this. Lying is a big deal in God’s world. I’m not lying. If you say you looked it up, and say you couldn’t find it. You are either not listening, searching in the wrong place, or you are the liar sir.

          • Mark Bender

            “That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.” (Christopher Hitchens).

          • Charles

            Ahh.. Hitchens. The mastermind of foolishness. Well, he’s decomposing at the moment. I don’t think he’s going to help you.

          • Mark Bender

            Well, Charles, at least he supported his claims with evidence — something you continue to fail to do.

          • Charles

            Really? What evidence is that exactly?

          • Mark Bender

            Yawn. You are dull, man. You’ve provided nothing to support any of your claims. I’m not going to discuss Hitchens to you. If you want to know more about him, look him up. I’m not going to, how did you say it? Oh yeah, ‘gift it to you’.

            You’re here for the fight, but you bring a stick of butter to defend yourself.

          • Charles

            I’m well of aware of Hitchens. Thanks. But, I don’t need any verification to his tripe. Unfortunately, he found out the truth a bit to late.

          • bfw314159

            Where’s a link where NASA admits we never went to the moon?

          • Charles

            I don’t know.. Look it up.

          • bfw314159

            You have plenty of time to type replies telling people to look it up, it’s easy to find. Yet you never look it up and give us a link, which would have stopped all of this an hour ago.

            You’re lying.

          • Charles

            I respect the Lord so I’m not lying. You however…… Never ceases to amaze me how there’s always a fresh batch of trolls in here with your pagan morals.. By design? I think so.. It’s not going to work just so you know. You can’t defeat the Most High. I know you’ll keep trying.. But it’s in vain kids. God has given you up to your own unrighteousness.

          • Mark Bender

            Says the liar who can’t support his own claims. So, if you are lying about the moon landing, how can anyone trust what you assert about the ‘Most High’? You continue to fail in promoting your assertions. How does that feel, you know, failing so much?

          • 0pus

            Does your owner order you to post comments?

          • Mark Bender

            Who are you trolling?

          • Charles

            Ha.. ha.. There’s plenty of evidence if you look for it. Obviously, you have no desire to.. Moving on.

          • Mark Bender

            I’ve seen conspiracy websites and not anything more than that which have produced little to no evidence to support the claim. But you’re not worried about evidence. That’s sad, but not unexpected.

          • Charles

            Right. Plenty of photos and videos you can research yourself. Doesn’t take a “Rocket” scientist to clue in on what’s going on..

          • Mark Bender

            Lying for Christ is not a good thing in your circles ‘Charles’. But hey, at least you’re entertaining yourself. That’s worth something since you lack the collateral and intellectual honesty to back up your own claims with your own evidence. But again, who needs evidence when you can just lie about whatever you want and then play ‘nanny nanny boo boo’ with those who call your bluff?

          • Charles

            Talk about boring….. You are going to get it worse from the Lord “Posing” as a Christian. Keep that in mind.

          • Mark Bender

            Listen, brother, I said I would give you the last word, but I do want to set the record straight. I never claimed to be a Christian. I do claim to be your brother though. You can deny it, but I will not deny you. Again, please take the last word. I insist.

          • Charles

            (1Co 5:11) But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
            (1Co 5:12) For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?
            (1Co 5:13) But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

          • Chris

            “Again, please take the last word. I insist.”

            Now that is gracious.

          • Mark Bender

            Again, this is dull. You are lying, but that’s okay. I forgive you, brother. I’ll even let you have the last word.

          • Charles

            You aren’t my brother.. You are of your father the devil. I’ve read enough of your post to know who and what you worship.

          • bfw314159

            There’s plenty of evidence if you look for it.

            I have. I couldn’t find any. Could you please provide a link to NASA saying they faked the moon landing?

          • Charles

            You haven’t looked for it. You are lying. If you did look for it, you would find it.

          • bfw314159

            I did. Nothing on the NASA website about them admitting it’s fake.

          • Charles

            I wouldn’t suspect so.. That would be financial suicide wouldn’t it? I never said it was on NASA website.

          • bfw314159

            I never said it was on NASA website.

            Then where did NASA admit it was fake? Provide a link.

          • Charles

            Look it up. It’s videos they (NASA) made.

          • bfw314159

            WHERE? I can’t find them. Provide a link.

          • Charles

            Maybe if you removed those spiritual blinders you could find it? Gonna take a bit more effort than “Where’s the link”.. But then you would have to lower your pride.. That’s a tough one for those without Jesus Christ. In fact, I would say impossible WITHOUT Jesus.

          • bfw314159

            Maybe if you removed those spiritual blinders you could find it?

            Maybe if you provided a link I could…

          • Charles

            God only speaks truth. Seek Jesus Christ, and you’ll find the link.

          • bfw314159

            Why can’t you provide a link?

          • Charles

            Because you aren’t interested in the Truth. If you were, you would seek his face, but you wish to live in your sin. Seek his face, and you will find many truths. That’s (NASA) or is it NAZI? Is just one of many lies we were told.

          • bfw314159

            Because you aren’t interested in the Truth.

            No, I am. Provide a link where NASA admits they faked the moon landing. Why do you have so many replies when a link would be much faster?

          • bfw314159

            I respect the Lord so I’m not lying.

            No, really, you’re flat-out lying. You can’t come up with a link of NASA saying they faked the moon landing, because it doesn’t exist.

          • Charles

            Well.. I’m certainly not lying. But I’m sure it doesn’t exist in your mind. I’m sure you wish to keep it that way.

          • bfw314159

            Why don’t you provide a link?

          • Charles

            That wouldn’t be any fun now would it? Because if you were truly seeking the truth you wouldn’t be arguing with me about on this site. You would be seeking the truth. Something the (“Paid”?) trolls aren’t interested in.

          • bfw314159

            Where’s the beef link?

          • Lexical Cannibal

            Look. This is getting silly. We’re all friends and fellow human beings here; you can be honest with us. There’s no need for all this runaround over something so simple.

            Are the Lizard people keeping you from sharing your sources? Is that it? Lizard People? I get it. Their mind powers can be formidable and they hold their moon base in utmost secrecy. I understand, friend. I understand.

          • Charles

            You believe in Lizard people? What are you nuts or something?

          • Shane Egan

            With regards to the reflectors on the moon you can actually do experiments yourself you know. High school students do it regularly. Aim at the reflectors – get good return signal – move off the reflectors and signal return drops off. It’s not rocket science (well it sort of is but you get the idea).

          • AnastasiaBHausen

            Awww, come on, don’t you know that without Jesus we would all just fly right off the earth?! He’s the only smart one for not buying the hype about such silliness as “gravity” since obviously prayer makes the sun rise and set.

          • Jorg Donde

            You can find and download raw data sets with a simple google search. Try browsing through the PDS repositories. Or look at the datasets at Astronomer’s Bazaar.

    • Shane Egan

      Please demonstrate these ‘lies’ with actual evidence – you know, like science! Otherwise what you have is unfounded opinion which does not provide a good pathway to truth.

  • Ben Welliver

    This Justin Scott character is no scientist, he’s a photographer. You’ll notice something about atheist spokesmen: they always claim to be representing science and reason, but they are never scientists themselves. His “education” is from some place called Hawkeye Community College, he doesn’t even have a bachelors degree. People like him are just attention-seeking losers, pretending that it’s some big brave act in 2017 to bash Christians.

    Is that the best these brilliant atheists could come up with? Some photographer who doesn’t even have a college degree?

    • Mark Bender

      So, by your logic, any Christians here who represent Christianity and are not degreed in divinity are ‘just attention-seeking losers’. Congrats pal.

      • http://www.gmail.com/ David van Heerden

        No, that does not follow: atheism idolizes scientists as the true priests of their religion. Christianity has ALL believers as priests.

        Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
        And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
        (Logic: get a better perspective, and the logic changes.)

        • Jorg Donde

          1.Um, no. Not really. Science is not an esoteric subject and anyone can learn plenty about it. And, of course, there are no “priests” in atheism and we do not “idolize” anyone in general (although some atheists can, and do, have their own heroes).

          2.No, logic does not change. A formal logical representation is what it is; information accessible to us may change, but that has no relevance to the truth value of a logical construct in itself.

          • Amos Moses

            “1.Um, no. Not really. Science is not an esoteric subject and anyone can learn plenty about it. And, of course, there are no “priests” in atheism and we do not “idolize” anyone in general”

            Um, no …. a-theists are their own gods ….. they are the heroes of their own stories ….. legends in their own minds ………..

            “2.No, logic does not change. ”

            cant even tell us from where logic came …..

          • Jorg Donde

            Logic is a formal system, defined by us. Easy peasy.

            And no, the first paragraph is just silly: the majority of atheists are just people; some may have delusions of grandeur, but that is also true about any number of believers of all sorts.

          • As I was saying…

            atheists are a particularly virulent breed of pagans who base themselves on the teachings of marx and neitzche, the students of feuerbach who created the religion of “atheism.”

          • As I was saying…

            “atheism” (a modern form of gnosticism) has many priests of the pagan variety.

            The photographer ben was talking about is just one of those pagan priests.

          • http://www.gmail.com/ David van Heerden

            The force of your argument is that you don’t appeal to authority. Interesting. Especially interesting if true. A logical construct that arrives at an error is a stupid thing, no matter how many nice words you decorate it with.

          • Jorg Donde

            Why would it arrive at an error? I am not sure I am getting whatever it is you are trying to express. Are you saying that the change in conclusions based on new information is “stupid”? Or are you saying that the form of the logical construct itself changes?

            Regardless, logically I can make two important claims:

            1.There is no need for a deity/god/creator, and

            2.There is no evidence for one.

            (1) naturally follows from modern physical cosmology and theoretical physics; (2) is a corollary of observation, where observed phenomena can be explained without invoking such an entity.

            The two claims, together, do not PROVE that there is no God (s/he may still exist, of course, and be very well-hidden) but they establish a good reason for a probabilistic claim against his/her existence.

          • http://www.gmail.com/ David van Heerden

            My book says you choose error because of your wickedness:
            Psalms 53:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good.

            That dull thunk that you are ignoring in the back of your mind is from what remains of your conscience. I’ll appeal to that. When you say “modern blah physics” you are appealing to authority.

          • Jorg Donde

            Haha, of course not. I *know* the relevant subjects, so I am basing my conclusion on my actual knowledge, tested via proving necessary mathematical theorems and observation.

            On the other hand, you ARE appealing to authority–and a questionable one at that, considering that the Bible is a synthesis of several religious traditions, none of which are based on observation or reason, but are simply mythical descriptions of reality (there are many of those, and they serve a purpose, but taking them literally is,erm, generally silly).

          • http://www.gmail.com/ David van Heerden

            Your fake mathematical universe is not in accord with the real universe. You’re chasing a fantasy. Go watch some sci fi and console yourself with vain ideas of rigging up that heat exchanger in hell. I’ll offer this great new word for you: “Mathemythics” – the math of string theory.

          • Jorg Donde

            Did I say anything about string theory? I am not a big fan; I prefer cyclical conformal cosmology, or even LQC. But–that is all rather irrelevant again. I am an *observational* astrophysicist by initial training; and the math comes from observatons, not vice versa.

          • http://www.gmail.com/ David van Heerden

            Ooh – you have your own personal universe! You must be a god of some sort. Yet, your math universe is made of observatons. Have you considered using bogons instead?

          • As I was saying…

            You prefer a pagan religion that you can turn on and off like a light, that is clear.

          • As I was saying…

            The New Testament of the Bible is preserved eyewitness accounts of the first bishops and priests of the Church who were the apostles and disciples of Christ respectively.

            The Old Testament was written by the prophets of old.

            It is one long tradition, not a synthesis of anything.

            And in this message you show your gnosticism, the idea that you can “know” away reality and replace it with your wishful thinking.

          • Brian Asklund

            The Bible says you’re a fool if you don’t follow the Bible. And that doesn’t strike you as the least bit convenient? Also, plenty of non believers do good. That’s demonstrable. But since the good was done without expectation of a reward, it’s somehow a bad thing? You went right past full retard straight to licking glass. Goo for the sake of good will always be more moral than good done with the hope of salvation is just self serving and disingenuous at best.

          • As I was saying…

            Good are things that are as God made them to be.

            You have no foundation for what good is therefore you can do no good at all.

    • Jorg Donde

      How is it “bashing Christians”, and what does his profession have to do with the validity (or lack of such) of his beliefs?

      • As I was saying…

        The fool spends his days attacking Christians, as do you. And his profession has everything to do with it.

        Allow Sheen to help you:
        “Not only does the substitution of words for argument betray the existence of this false tolerance, but also the readiness of many minds to accept as an authority in any field an individual who becomes a famous authority in one particular field. The assumption behind journalistic religion is that because a man is clever in inventing automobiles, he is thereby clever in treating the relationship between Buddhism and Christianity; that a professor who is an authority on the mathematical interpretation of atomic phenomena is thereby an authority on the interpretation of marriage; and that am an who knows something about illumination can throw light on the subject of immortality, or perhaps even put out the lights on immortality. There is a limit to the transfer of training, and no one who paints beautiful pictures with his right hand can, in a day and at the suggestion of a reporter, paint an equally good one with his left hand. The science of religion has a right to be heard scientifically through its qualified spokesmen, just as the science of physics or astronomy has a right to be heard through its qualified spokesmen. Religion is a science despite the fact that some would make it only a sentiment.

        Religion is not an open question, like the United Nations, while science is a closed question, like the addition table. Religion has its principles, natural and revealed, which are more exacting in their logic than mathematics. But the false notion of tolerance has obscured this fact from the eyes of many who are as intolerant about the smallest details of life as they are tolerant about their relations to God. In the ordinary affairs of life, these same people would never summon a Christian Science practitioner to fix a broken windowpane; they would never call in an optician because they had broken the eye of a needle; they would never call in a florist because they hurt the palm of their hand, nor go to a carpenter to take care of their nails. They would never call in a Collector of Internal Revenue to extract the nickel swallowed by the baby. They would refuse to listen to a Kiwanis booster discussing the authenticity of a painting, or to a tree‐surgeon settling a moot question of law. And yet for the all‐important subject of religion, on which our eternal destinies hinge, on the all‐important question of the relations of man to his environment and to his God, they are willing to listen to anyone who calls himself a prophet. And so our journals are filled with articles for these “broadminded” people, in which everyone from Jack Dempsey to the chief cook ofthe Ritz Carlton tells about his idea of God and his view of religion. These same individuals, who would become exasperated if their child played with a wrongly colored lollipop, would not become the least bit worried if the child grew up without ever having heard the name of God.

        Would it not be in perfect keeping with the fitness of things to insist on certain minimal requirements for theological pronouncements? If we insist that he who mends our pipes knows something about plumbing and that he who gives us pills knows something about medicine, should be not expect and demand that he who tells us about God, religion, Christ, and immortality at least say his prayers? If a violinist does not disdain to practice his musical scales, why should the modern theologian disdain to practice the elements of religion?”

    • Liz

      It’s really unkind of you to speak about someone that way. They are a ‘loser’ because they value science and reason? Anyone can value science and reason, and they do not have to be a degreed scientist to do so. Maybe Christians who comment negatively about atheists as ‘idolizing science’ and other character-put-downs are themselves ‘attention-seeking-losers.’ Wow. What an attitude. I sure wouldn’t want to be in any kind of heaven with a bunch of people like you lot.

      • As I was saying…

        Reason would imply thought and science would imply observation.

        What you have instead are political actors of a modern pagan religion. You use “reason” and “science” as euphemisms and know nothing of actual reason nor actual science.

        When your kind has no argument you go after tone, as you do here.

        To answer your stupid rhetorical threat: You cannot go back to Heaven until you repent of your mortal sin. There is no salvation outside of the Church.

        God will -however – allow your choice to separate completely from Him, which is hell and eternal suffering. You would not make this choice of you had any idea what you were doing, but such is free will even when you have a reprobate mind such as yours.

        • Liz

          You Christians are funny. You think yours is the only religion with claims of damnation, and the only ‘right one.’ Listen, I don’t care about your mythological story. Your threats to me are just as scary as a threat of Santa Claus not bringing me any presents. You are going to be just as dead as any dead animal on this planet, and are not going to go to any special place. You have no evidence for your magical and fantastical claims… You — along with all the other Christians — just don’t want to own up to all the BS you do HERE… RIGHT NOW. And have some make believe threat of hell, and whatever. lol You can scream about damnation and mortal sin, till you’re blue in the face… But I know your religion, and your Bible, more than YOU do… ANY DAY OF THE WEEK. 😉 Capisce? And if you knew anything, too, you’d also be another atheist. But you need your crutch to make yourself more sanctimonious in front of others. Have a good time with your imaginary friend. Cus the rest of us certainly don’t care.

          • As I was saying…

            God created the Church at Pentacost. We are also the only salvation from damnation.

            myth is a type of storytelling using stock characters and has nothing to with Christianity.

            No man is an animal, and death of the body is only a result of sin. True death is hell, which you will get if you don’t repent of your evil.

            You clearly know nothing or else you would not be on such a dark path. As I said, you would not be doing what you are doing if you had any idea of the truth.

            You may be ignorant and mentally ill, but God will respect your descision to separate yourself from Him.

          • Liz

            I’m thinking the only mentally ill person here is you. I’m sorry, but for a Christian, you sure really are a TERRIBLE one. You arr NOTHING like what Jesus calls any Christian to be. Oh, and I… I don’t believe any of that stuff — so again, I don’t care. You can talk till your blue in the face about deities, and hell, and mumbo jumbo… And it’s irrelevant to me. I’m not someone living in the Bronze age. I don’t need to believe books written by primitive men who didn’t know here the sun went at night.

            Honestly, you ate the most HATEFUL individual on here — and you claim *I’m* on a dark path. haha! Go tell someone who cares.

            Religion is nonsensical, but we could explain it to you for a whole week straight, and you wouldn’t get it because you are SO brainwashed and deluded. That’s what indoctrination does. I feel sorry for you, really.

          • As I was saying…

            I have heard tour rhetoric before word-for-word. You have to be getting it from somewhere.

            If I was hateful, I would be encouraging you to persist in your mistakes.

            Instead I am warning you of the grave consequences of your evil, that is love.

          • Liz

            What you are, is a condescending son of a bitch who had better hope there is no god, because if there is one — you will be the first one in hell for being a self-righteous, mean spirited person, arrogant in your own sense of self and your thinking you are saved. lol I hope the words “away from me, I never knew you,” ring a bell, motherfucker. lol

          • As I was saying…

            Such a vulgar monster you are.

            You will be judged harshly for claiming to damn me and claiming to know the state of my soul. You cannot arrogate for yourself Divine Judgement.

            You however are clearly in a state of mortal sin from constant blasphemy, a sin that cries to Heaven for vengeance. Please repent.

            It is hardly hateful to warn you of the consequences of your evil. You clearly hate yourself and are projecting that hatred onto me.

            You are blocked for your vulgarity.

        • Liz

          Also, if a god really did exist (and it was the god of the Bible) — he wouldn’t have any arrogant sanctimonious people like you in there, to begin with — so I dunno what you’re bragging about. lol

          • As I was saying…

            All things need a singular, uncreated, uncontingent cause. That is the proof of God.

            arrogant means that you are claiming for yourself something that isn’t yours. You are trying to claim for yourself what belongs to God, and that is the capital sin of pride.

            Here is a Sheen quote for you:
            “As all men are touched by God’s love, so all are also touched by the desire for His intimacy. No one escapes this longing; we are all kings in exile, miserable without the Infinite. Those who reject the grace of God have a desire to avoid God, as those who accept it have a desire for God. The modern atheist does not disbelieve because of his intellect, but because of his will; it is not knowledge that makes him an atheist…The denial of God springs from a man’s desire not to have a God—from his wish that there were no Justice behind the universe, so that his injustices would fear not retribution; from his desire that there be no Law, so that he may not be judged by it; from his wish that there were no Absolute Goodness, that he might go on sinning with impunity. That is why the modern atheist is always angered when he hears anything said about God and religion—he would be incapable of such a resentment if God were only a myth. His feeling toward God is the same as that which a wicked man has for one whom he has wronged: he wishes he were dead so that he could do nothing to avenge the wrong. The betrayer of friendship knows his friend exists, but he wished he did not; the post-Christian atheist knows God exists, but he desires He should not.”

  • Copyleft

    Looks like we have another hysterical distortion for a headline; the invocation never even mentioned the Bible, let alone ‘mocked’ it.

    But I guess Christians don’t feel right unless they can pretend they’re being persecuted. And by equality, no less!

    • USborderpatrol In God We Trust

      That is just not true. As Christians we just hope you will open your heart and mind and realize that God loves you. Jesus lived and died for our sins that we can have everlasting life.

      God does not want to lose you and he will be unhappy if you do not chose to follow Him. Your Choice, judging Christians just to vent is just plain sad,… for you.

  • Ruth1940

    Prayers at government meetings are inappropriate and should be stopped, but since the Supreme Court has ruled that they’re permissible as long as all are views are allowed, why a protest against some? When I was growing up in rural Iowa in the 1940s and 1950s, I was taught that silent prayers are heard the same as spoken. When did that change?

    • http://maxfurr.com HobbesianWorld

      Seems clear, to me, Ruth. Ever since the neoconservatives gained power in the late 70 and then a lot of power in the Reagan Administration, they’ve stopped fiddling around with being civil and turned to a perpetual program of demonization and fear. And what better a platform to use for this but religion.

      Certain leading Republicans considered it a culture war and they were not just making sounds. They meant it. Liberals paid virtually no attention. The first casualty of a war is truth (misinformation and disinformation). The second front is to focus their supporters and undecided voters attention on certain groups to fear and drum up the xenophobia.

      Blacks and liberals were certainly the first main targets (they set about equating liberals with communists and blacks as lazy). In the mid ’90s we saw the establishment of FOX “News,” which, at first denied they were a de facto arm of the RNC, but later tended to admit it (it was quite obvious). That network most often gave real news, but slanted it such that almost everything became the fault of the liberals and blacks.

      After 9/11, of course, the focus became Muslims that joined others such as Wicca as demonic religions whose members didn’t deserve religious rights. Then, of course, mixed with all that, politicians always came down of god, guns and gays (always a winner go get votes and ramp up the fear and hatred of liberals.

      So, you get the point. Check out Newt Gingrich’s formula for effective but subtle propaganda titled, LANGUAGE: A Key Mechanism of Control. That would be, of course, “mind control” of the public. After reading that, be alert to how the conservatives ALWAYS use the word “failed” in the same sentence with Obama. Works on other liberals too. They never give arguments, just use negative words.

      Thus, the two sides grow farther and farther apart. Conservatives no longer will even consider working with liberals for the good of the nation.

  • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

    Can you imagine this occurring in 17th-century Colonial America whose governments of, by, and for God established upon His unchanging moral law, beginning with the First Commandment? Not hardly!

    Consequently, there must be a definitive moment in America’s history when her Christian character and biblical course were formally altered. That point was in 1787 when the replaced the 17th-century Colonial governments for their own humanistic government of, by, and for the people based upon man-made capricious Enlightenment and Masonic traditions.

    America was once great but not for the reason most people believe it was. In fact, quite the opposite – a classic case of Isaiah 5:20, calling evil good and good evil.

    Yahweh, God of the Bible, blesses nations (makes them great and prosperous) when they look to Him as their sovereign and thus His moral law as the standard for government and society, per Deuteronomy 4:4-8, 28:1-14, etc. Consequently, America’s greatness was the result of the 17th-century Christian Colonial governments of, by, and for God established upon His unchanging moral law:

    Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 1835: “They [the 17th-century Colonials] exercised the rights of sovereignty; they
    named their magistrates, concluded peace or declared war, made police regulations,
    and enacted laws as if their allegiance was due only to God. Nothing can be
    more curious and, at the same time more instructive, than the legislation of
    that period; it is there that the solution of the great social problem which
    the United States now presents to the world is to be found [in perfect
    fulfillment of Deuteronomy 4:5-8, demonstrating the continuing veracity of
    Yahweh’s law and its accompanying blessings, per Deuteronomy 28:1-14].

    “Amongst these documents we shall notice, as especially characteristic, the
    code of laws promulgated by the little State of Connecticut in 1650. The
    legislators of Connecticut begin with the penal laws, and … they borrow their provisions from
    the text of Holy Writ … copied verbatim from the books of Exodus, Leviticus,
    and Deuteronomy.…” (Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 2 vols. (New York: NY: The Colonial Press, 1899) vol. 1, pp. 36-37)

    On the other hand, Yahweh curses nations who reject His sovereignty and replace His law with their own man-made surrogates. Thus, America began to be cursed (by God’s long suffering only incrementally at first) when the 18th-century founders replaced the 17th-century Colonial
    governments with their own humanistic government of, by, and for the people based upon capricious Enlightenment traditions. Without repentance for these sins of sedition our complicity therein, it was inevitable that America would find herself teetering on the precipice of moral depravity and destruction.

    For more regarding these two polar opposite forms of government, see online Chapter 3 “The Preamble: WE THE PEOPLE vs. YAHWEH” of “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective.” Click on my name, then our website. Go to our Online Books page, click on the top entry, and scroll down to Chapter 3.

    Then find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the right-hand sidebar and receive a complimentary copy of a book that examines the Constitution by the Bible.

    • faithlocke

      Ted R. Weiland – a few questions. Do you condone parents turning their children over to the government to be killed if they are “rebellious”? Deuteronomy 21:18-21 Second, how do you explain the many “blessed” pagan nations and empires throughout history that were not founded on the Pentateuch? Third – most would consider America at it’s “greatest” in the 1950’s, when they were by far the strongest country, economically and scientifically. What measure are you using to claim America was at its greatest in the late 1700’s?

      • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

        Faithlocke, thanks for demonstrating the inspiration and veracity of the Bible, especially 1 Corinthians 2:12-14.

  • Fur Hunter

    Don’t you just love these folks who wave THAT BOOK in the air, screaming out that it is the ‘Word of God’? What a CROCK!!!! If every word in it is God’s, then God is a MORON. It took millions of years to create the universe and the earth….not 6 days. And the Ark story is a joke. One old Geezer and a few of his sons built a wooden boat that is over half the length of the Titanic, from scratch after cutting down a gillion trees and lifting heavy beams up 5 stories in the air. Yeah. Sure. Believe it. And for it to hold 2 of every creature, the boat would have had to be the size of New York State. And who feed all of them and who cleaned up all the $H!T? And regarding THAT BOOK. From which one are they quoting? The Catholic version, the King James or one of those revised editions? Well, if they truly are the ‘Word of God’…they should all be exactly the same. Guess what , Sweeties!!! They are NOT the same. So which one is actually correct and the true ‘Word of God’? Those are just a FEW of the problems I have with THAT BOOK and the MORONS who claim it to be the…..’Word of God’.

  • BuckeyePhysicist

    Hilarious. I’m an actual physicist and a practicing Catholic. There’s no contradiction between faith and science.

  • SoundMind

    The buzz words this guy used, ‘sexual orientation and gender identity,’ shows his god is himself and his unholy worldview. Whenever he’s scheduled to ‘pray’ again, righteous members of the Iowa legislature should wait outside the door until he’s done.

  • As I was saying…

    That is because they are little more than politically motivated apparatchiks, not scientists.