Jesus And Yogi Berra.

Quotes from former baseball player, Yogi Berra, are used often.  A favorite is, “It ain’t over, till it’s over.”

Fortunately, Mr. Berra is still alive.  Many phrases attributed to him he testifies he never said.

An article in the Dec. 7 Wall Street Journal discusses the misquoting of famous people.  It discusses things allegedly said by, among others, Thomas Jefferson and Winston Churchill.

There are people with both great knowledge of and access to the writings and speeches of Jefferson.  They find many phrases attributed to him do not appear in any Jefferson records.  Apparently, he never said or wrote them.

Winston Churchill is another widely misquoted historical figure.  He wrote volumes of work and gave many speeches.  One would think there would be plenty of material to quote him on without the need to misquote.

With so much inaccuracy in quoting the words of relatively contemporary people, it is understandable why there would be skepticism of quotes from the Bible’s Jesus.  We have no record of scribes writing down what he said nor records of who was present to remember.

Yet, words attributed to Jesus are believed by many to be actual quotes.  Why would writers quote Jesus in some cases and simply make their own case in others?

It’s for the same reason incorrect quotes of Jefferson and Churchill are used.  Scholars say both the actual and fabricated quotes are used when they help emphasize some point.

Jesus quotes served the same purpose for propaganda in the Bible.

    Join our discussion on Facebook, Red River Freethinkers.  Thank you.

102 Responses

  1. entech

    Jon, you are deliberately misreading all of this stuff because of your lack of faith. If you had real faith, even as a grain of salt, you would know and be happy to accept that these are “revelations”, the words that Jesus said even if no one heard them, or, the words he would have said if he had thought of it at the time.

    You have to learn to accept that the “revealed word” is more accurate than the spoken or written word. 😕

    1. Wanna B Sure

      Entech; In our tradition, the “revealed word” is the “written word. Nothing more, nothing less. We don’t accept “private revelation”. Many others feel the same. some others don’t.

  2. Ed


    I apologize if you feel that I have attacked you in previous posts…..not my intent. Question for you here…..”quotes were used for propoganda in the bible.” In the aricle you refer to, the quotes who were attributed to people were corrected. Can you “correct” the quotes that were fabricated in the bible? Were all of Jesus’ quotes fabricated? Some of them? Or are you just assuming there must have been some fabricated? Can you specify which ones?

    1. Stanta

      Even better yet, show us where the quotes cause harm? Love one another. Love each other……so many evil utterances by Jesus, it hard to name them all.

      1. entech

        Large crowds were travelling with Jesus, and turning to them he said: “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple.

        For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s foes will be those of his own household.
        He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me;

        So much for family values.

        1. Henry

          endwreck: “Large crowds were travelling with Jesus,”

          No. No. You have it all wrong. Dusty said it was a small movement by all accounts. {sarcasm}

          1. Stanta

            Entech, as I read the Gospels the first five or six times, I felt that Mathew, Mark and Luke gave valuable information, John probably wrote his from the political side if we could loosely call it that. A little more depth then the others.

          2. entech

            Stan as I read the Gospels, I am increasingly doubtful about their veracity. I started at school at 10 years old 60 plus years an accelerating increase.

        2. Wanna B Sure

          Entech; You reference Luke 14:26 The context is not what you imply. A common and superficial mistake for anti-Christians. Re. “Hate”is not of the person to hate, but in the objects to be hated, the carnal. I can’t quote the source as I can’t type the Greek, but go to RCH Lenski, Vol 3 page 785-786. The setting is with the prospective followers, and in the decisions they must make if they were going to commit to become followers. Fully anticipating that once the decision was made, to follow, the family would most likely be divided in the faith. Not saying they would be permenantly divided, as whole families became believers. One needs to be a little more thoughtfull.

          1. Wanna B Sure

            If I’m not sure, I have several different comentaries, and compare. Much easier now with the computer. When I think of the time I spent with books over the many years…..But there is an upside to true books. Take the time to look up, you will remember it better. Now with the computer, I recall, and validate. Glad I went through the book period before the computer, and typewriter ribbons.

          2. Wanna B Sure

            However, there are priceless research books not available on the internet. The internet plus books is better.

          3. entech

            Wanna @ 2:17
            misei, hate no other translation found.

            Ok hate the people
            Hate the institution.
            Hate is hate.

            One needs to be a little more thoughtfull conversely if you are too thoughtful you can read into something that you thought was there but wasn’t.

          4. Wanna B Sure

            I believe there was a movie/book; The Color of Hate. Could just as easily been called The Color of Love. More accurately the colors of.

            Didn’t use Lenski? That’s fine there are others. Lenski goes into greater depths with original languages, punctuation , grammer, syntax, etc.

            Go on-line to paralell Bible, to the verse. Scroll down to the various commentaries. While not exactly the same, the overall flavor and content is pretty much in—- accordione. (that’s a joke).

          5. entech

            OK. we will go to Mathew, you don’t have to hate them, but you just better love me more!
            All this was when the Kingdom was at hand, there was an urgency, Gotta save you now before it is too late. Well we are still waiting, and we will wait a long time to come, God or not I don’t know, your version pretty certain not.

            But I have been wrong before.
            What kind of fisarmonica, do I turn your key or push your button?

          6. Wanna B Sure

            Dosen’t make any difference which fisarmonica . I can play them all and in all the keys. Some keys just seem to work better than others, with less trouble. I just get a little leary when I see something outside of the scale, like an H note, or S, or a Z note. On non fretted stringed instruments, one can slide up or down to get to the written notes, but they are the goal, not the slurs. The slurs make the finally attained notes sound so much better, and better yet when in harmony don’t you think? I don’t know if you play anything, but if you do: Ever play something, get interupted at a sub dominent chord position, go to bed, only to get back up, and go over to play the tonic major, to complete the progression? I think there is a metaphore in there someplace.

            As far as “the kingdom at hand”; The song; “Enjoy Yourself, Its Later Than You Think.” Think I’ll walk over to my pianeio and play a couple verses in memory of you. Eschatology is as long as your, (and mine), heart beats.——Knock-knock–(meekly) “Who”s there?” Or— there’s another tune; “I Hear You Knocking, But You Can’t Come In.”——But” He stands at the door and knocks.” ( A metaphore).

        3. Stanta

          Even the family of Jesus was divided. They thought him sick or stupid. Then later His brother James became the bishop of Jerusalem. If our families hold us back from accepting the grace of God, of course we have to leave.

          Just as politics divides family, so did the gospel of repentance. He also tells use if we are going to temple but have a grievance against our brother, to stop, seek forgiveness because to hate him is the same as killing him.

          1. entech

            How did he get a brother. I thought Mary was the perpetual virgin, did the celestial impregnating device work overtime, if so why one and not the other, simple primogeniture.

          2. Stanta

            personally, I don’t care what they call him, but we do know he was related closely and did scorn him. It is also possible he was a half brother from an earlier marriage of Josephs.

        4. Dustin White

          Henry and Stanta- I suggest that instead of making foolish statements, it may be worth picking up a credible book on the subject. Grow a little. Expand your minds.

          Bart Erhman has some excellent books on the subject.

          1. Henry

            Dusty, I did. Two of them, in fact. Primary sources. To me, it makes sense to rely on works that have been well-respected for 2000 years when there is a difference.

          2. Stanta

            Primary sources are the most reliable, then reference with secondary, the early church fathers. St Augustine and St Francis.

            If you want to destroy Christianity, Bart looks like the guy to do it.

            When you get done tossing out everything you don’t like, consider inaccurate or wrong in the Bible, what is left?

          3. Dustin White

            Stanta and Henry- The Gospels are only a primary in the sense that we don’t have the sources in which they relied on (with the exception of Mark, which was used by both Luke and Matthew, but which was also based on earlier sources).

            Also, primary sources are not necessarily better. If we look at the Gospels for example, none of the authors were eyewitnesses (nor do we actually know who wrote them. Instead, the “According to …” was a later addition to all of the Gospels, and even then, it wasn’t fully agreed who wrote these Gospels.

            Luke actually tells us that he is using a variety of sources (and it is known he used Mark), both oral and written. The reason being that those previous sources were not actually accurate.

            And then there is the problem that the four Gospels that we have today often contradict each other. What day Jesus die? According to the Synoptics (Mark, Matthew, and Luke) it was after the Passover meal. According to John, it was before. Where was the holy family from? According to Luke, they were from Nazareth (Luke also uses a fictional account in order to get Jesus to Bethlehem. Galilee, which was not directly under Roman rule, never would have been part of the census. More so, there is no record that people had to go to their ancestral homes to register for a census, and it is illogical anyway as people were taxed in the area that they lived, not where their ancestors lived. And the census didn’t happen until long after Jesus was born anyway), while according to Matthew, the holy family lived in Bethlehem, and only later relocated to Nazareth.

            And this really has nothing to do with wanting to destroy Christianity (and Bart in no way even tries), nor is it about throwing things out of the Bible (which I don’t). Instead, it is about looking at the accounts as they were written, and not making up things that simply don’t appear there. That doesn’t mean I throw things out, it means that I see things differently then you do. Instead of taking the accounts literally true, I see them as having theological ideas attached instead.

          4. Henry

            Dusy, then I must use a malcontent agnostic’s copy of a copy of a copy? That is more accurate?

            Dusty, you are very blessed. Invest your “talent” like a good steward would.

          5. Dustin White

            Henry- I haven’t produced a copy of the Gospels (even though I have translated large portions of them for my own sake). I also haven’t referenced anyone who as created a copy of their own Gospels either. Instead, this is a matter of interpretation, and finding the historical context of the works.

          6. Henry

            Dusty, I was referring to Bart Errman, your resource. He certainly makes copy of a copy with his own interpretation. You feed off of that regurgitation.

            You have been very blessed. Please use the “talent” given to you. It seems you are burying some of it in a hole in the ground. i.e. miracles.

          7. Dustin White

            Henry- Ehrman does not make a copy of a copy. He doesn’t even do much interpretation, but sticks within the fields of textual criticism and historical research. That is why his works are actually quite useful. Also, the views that he puts forth in his books are generally the ideas that the consensus of scholars agree on, regardless of religious affiliation.

            I find the most people who outright reject Ehrman simply haven’t read him.

          8. Henry

            The little bit I have read on Errman, he makes some pretty big leaps that are false in order to fulfill his agenda. But, what would one expect from an agnostic scholar dabbling in Christian studies?

            I have also heard him speak a little bit some time ago, and he didn’t make any sense at all.

      2. Dustin White

        They cause harm when individuals are trying to figure out who Jesus is. If Jesus did not state half of what is attributed to him, then trying to figure out who Jesus is becomes much more difficult.

        Also, some of the supposed sayings of Jesus are less then loving. But those usually just get swept under the rug.

        1. Stanta

          So Dustin White and colleges become the self styled final editor on the Bible.

          2 Corinthians 11:13–15

          13 For such men are lfalse apostles, mdeceitful workmen, ndisguising themselves as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as oan angel of light. 15 So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as pservants of righteousness. qTheir end will correspond to their deeds.

          1. Dustin White

            How am I editing the Bible? It seems to me that you are spending way to much time trying to discredit me by making foolish statements instead of actually dealing with the issues.

            It’s no wonder why so many see Christianity in a negative light.

          2. Stanta

            “If Jesus did not state half of what is attributed to him” I am sorry, you didn’t mean the Bible? That is where I send people with questions on what Christ said.

            But when you deny the supernatural miracles of Christ, you call into question your own trust in the Book.

          3. Dustin White

            Or I simply see the Bible in a different light then you do. You’re acting as if your interpretation is the only reasonable one and everything else must be wrong. Not really a good argument.

        1. entech

          The Jesus Seminar was a group of biblical scholars starting about 1985 whose main failing was that they were “liberals”, of relevance to this topic:
          The Seminar concluded that of the various statements in the “five gospels” attributed to Jesus, only about 18% of them were likely uttered by Jesus himself even at that it is probably a higher mark than deserved.

    2. Ed 12:53 “I apologize if you feel I have attacked you in previous posts, not my intent.”
      Thank you for that.

      “In the article quotes (wrongly) attribute to people were corrected….can you ‘correct’ the quotes that were fabricated in the Bible..Can you specify which ones?”

      Those questions were the point of the blog. (1.) There is no record of the Jesus statements, (2.) There is are self serving reasons people quote prominent others, correctly or incorrectly and (3.) the Bible’s authors seemed to run out Jesus when they wanted to deliver various messages. It’s possible every word attributed to Jesus in the Bible was actually spoken by Jesus. It’s also possible not one of them was. It’s seems especially likely many of the super natural acts attributed to the Bible’s Jesus did not happen.

  3. June

    I just wish that Jon was not so obsessed with something that he: A. Does not believe; B. Does not like; C. Does not understand; D. Does not know anything about.

    1. June 4:34 “I wish that Jon was not so obsessed with something that he: A. Does not believe; B. Does not like; C. Does not understand; D. Does not know anything about.”

      I admit to not knowing much about Christianity. I do know about Yogi. I know about Jefferson and Chruchill. I know there is no known record of Jesus’ remarks. Then, I know humans trying to influence others use the means at their disposal, in this case, quoting Jesus.

      Otherwise, I’m clueless.

  4. entech

    A topic that got more interest than I would have thought.
    Certainly made a unity of the trinity here, Wanna the Father, Stan the son and Henry the unholy jest.
    You three usually seem to be pretty independent, even contradicting (or correcting) each other, well done Dustin, bringing them together like that, their foolishness comes into a sharper focus when combined than it is when individually expressed.

    1. Wanna B Sure

      And so it is also when the tag team of Jon unites.

      I see Dustin a potential for the UCC, or if he continues to grow, even into the UUC. Add the advisor to the The Jesus Seminar. Hook up with Oprah and Osteen, and there is a powerhouse.

        1. Wanna B Sure

          Are you judging?

          I love my children even when they need/ed correction. Without love, no correction is appropriate. Ever have kids? In some circles, it is called “Tough Love”. I don’t really care for that term. I preffer “More Love”, sometimes more than what they would like at the time. “No dearie, you can’t go out with “Charles”. I’t 10:00 Pm. (Tough Love, or More Love)? You decide. You don’t know that just a half hour ago I saw Chuck come out of the liqour store with a brown bag under his arm. He’s over 21, and “dearie” isn’t. (A true story). —–Correction and guidance. Sometimes not appreciated at the time.

        2. Wanna B Sure

          I must add that love and concern is not really any different if is neighbors, fellow Christians, or Children. Only with children, it is closer, and more intense. Plus “It’s the Cowboy Thing to do.”

        3. Stanta

          Entech, this “Christian” denies the supernatural in the Bible, yet believes in God? Contradiction right there.

          Forgive us as we test his Spirit. There are concerns about his theology. We may have gotten a bit rough, but some of his statements are pretty far out.

          We have been called to be sharp as serpents but gentle as doves. As I have stated before, here or elsewhere, we are open minded but not so far that our brains fall out.

          Wanna, Henry and I have the most important thing in common. Love of God and Christ and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Nice that you notice and maybe are concerned that three so diverse in our Faith can work together. I would take both into my prison ministry work.

          1. Dustin White

            I don’t deny the supernatural. I deny the miracles. There is a difference.

            Miracles are the least likely thing to have happened. Because of that, historians can not verify miracles. And I take that seriously.

            I don’t deny the supernatural though. I also don’t deny that God has had a hand in everything. But I don’t think it comes out in the sense of miracles.

          2. Stanta

            When you take the miracles out of the Gospels, what do you have? A man with a good message, but no saving of souls.

            There is so much in the Bible on believing on faith, yet you throw it away on what historians believe is probable. I am having a problem wondering how you can have faith and yet deny the Book.

            You sound Gnostic, looking for a higher truth.

            Another question that bothers be. Magician as an illusionist, physical manipulator?

          3. Henry

            Dusty: “I don’t deny the supernatural. I deny the miracles.”

            It is not a huge leap to go from accepting the supernatural to accepting miracles. Miracles are in essence revelation of the supernatural as occurring in the Gospels.

          4. Henry

            Certainly another growth area, Dustin. There is a lot of room for expansion. You are blessed to have the opportunity to study the Lord’s Word. I am a little envious, I would have to confess.

          5. Stanta

            I was offered the chance to study for a deaconship in the Catholic Church, could I even say recruited? Time constraints and a feeling that I wasn’t worthy of the investment the Church would have to make held me back.

            Congestive heart failure several years ago and memory problems brought on by sleep apnea and continuing heart problems have me looking at less the 3 score and 10. I choose to work in the now, at retreats for the broken and imprisoned.

          6. Dustin White

            Stanta and Henry, my biggest fans- If all you can see in the Gospels is miracles, then I feel sorry for you. I can deny that historically, miracles actually happened. That doesn’t mean I ignore what the miracles were supposed to signify, or what they actually mean. I can accept the resurrection on theological grounds, and that it represented a symbolical truth, without seeing it as historical.

            When I look at the story of creation, I don’t see a historical account. I see a theological story that portrays a “truth.” When I look at the resurrection, I don’t see a historical account, I see a theological “truth.”

            I don’t need to see the Bible in the way that you do to also take it seriously (in fact, a graduate of Concordia, and now a very well respected scholar, Marcus Borg, wrote a book on just that, called Reading the Bible Again for the First Time, which is about taking the Bible seriously, but not literally.

          7. Henry

            Dusty: “If all you can see in the Gospels is miracles, then I feel sorry for you.”

            That representation was never made, and is intellectually dishonest. Stop burying your “talent”.

          8. Stanta

            Dustin, words into our mouth, I read the whole Word and will not depend on you to tell me what is true or not according to scholars who are removed by centuries.

            I do have to admire your gumption though. You provide a full service wedding day. Pastor, reception entertainment as a magician,then spin the disks for the dance.

          9. Dustin White

            Henry- Read Stanta 5:13. He places a definite emphasis on the miracles. The fact that you ignored rest of what I said, and took one sentence out of context though shows true intellectual dishonesty, and I expect nothing less from you now.

            Stanta- I am very glad that you are so interested in my work. However, I myself am not a DJ, but do provide such services as I’m hooked up with DJs because of the work that I do.

          10. Henry

            Dusty: “The fact that you ignored rest of what I said,”

            There is no obligation of mine to review and critique all of your material.

            You also need to read Stan/Stanta/Santa’s opinions. He has gone beyond miracles. You are getting more confusing.

            I am afraid your “talent” is done buried.

          11. Henry

            It is also intellectually dishonest for you to lump me into what you consider to be Stan’s “crime”, which you originally did several posts back. Now, my guilt hinges on Stanta’s supposed emphasis on miracles.

    1. .e 1:40 “How do Christians know what books belong in the Bible?”

      You are a Christian–I’m not sure who you are asking. I my opinion, it was not up to “Christians”. It was whoever had the most power at the time.

    2. Stanta

      ,e i assumed you are Christian. If so, wouldn’t be a lot more polite to discuss that in a forum that is not run by someone who will use your own words back against you later?

    3. entech

      Stand up and cheer I am going to disagree with Jon. As far as I read the Books of the Bible were pretty well established by about 150 AD. and were based on the most widely accepted usage amongst the early church. The main influence of Constantine was not in any form of influence on the decision making process or the formulation of any lists of books or creeds, but as this was becoming a more influential religion and likely to become a state religion a consistent format was needed. The Empire had enough fighting and ambition at the time without adding religious infighting.

        1. entech

          Gnostic Gospels? Probably not even considered, having an alternative and incompatible pleroma would automatically exclude them. Even though your God became three in one it was still, kind of, the God of Abraham.

      1. entech 9:55 “Stand up and cheer I am going to disagree with Jon…pretty well established by..150 AD…”

        And here I thought I had experienced revealed truth from the Flying Speghetti Monster it was 300. Now, I have to reconsider. 🙂

  5. .e

    Actually I am asking the sola scriptura Christians about the Bible. But Jon if you care to look at the history of it, it is interesting at least.

    If the Bible is the total end all source, where does the Bible say that? Also by the same token, where does it say on the Bible which books are to be included?

    1. Wanna B Sure

      E; By your 2:44, that was a baited question, and your mind is already made up. Sincerity is a hard commodity to find here. I was just about ready to help, but fortunately you beat me to it.

  6. .e

    Baiting is such a harsh term. I am sincere in the question. I am a Christian, and believe the Bible was inspired by the Holy Spirit and is infallible in matters of faith and morals. I do not believe in sola scriptura though. Just wondering the reason for Christians taking that position.

      1. entech

        Wanna you told me before that Revelation actually means writing. As writing and scripture are synonyms, scripture being usurped by the religious for their personal use, in your terms scripture must be the only source of knowledge. The rest, the Lenski are merely commentary.
        So a simple question, if you will pardon the intrusion, What is your “other” source of divine revelation?

        1. Wanna B Sure

          And that is my question. Beyond the Bible, is it—“Traditions of men”, golden tablets, private revelation; (Jesus spoke to me last night and told me to tell you—) , a book written 600 yr. later, a committee, old but questionable provinance written after the canon???? Just a handfull of posibilities.

          1. entech

            A handful of deniablities Boring, I know, but have to say it again – can’t all be true, but, can all be wrong.

          2. Wanna B Sure

            One big excuse, but in every error, there is an element of truth. Like your last post “This is going to hurt me more than you.”—-The truth is —there is going to be hurt.

  7. Ed

    “There is no record of Jesus making the quotes?” Aren’t they contained in a book written called the bible? So what you’re essentially saying is …the bible is not an actual account. It’s fiction in your world. To Christians, they believe the book is an actual account of events. Perhaps the authors wrote things differently, but readers believe in the events contained in the book. So is that so bad? Christians believe – you don’t? Does that make you a free thinker more than a Christian? If you believe Lance Armstrong used drugs to enhance performance and someone else doesn’t… one more of a free thinker? Your self righteous views imply everyone else is naive, brainwashed, stupid, or not a free thinker. Lots of intelligent, free thinking people believe the events recorded in the bible occurred. Therein “lies the rub” with some of your posts in my eyes. It’s not that you simply have a belief or opinion – it’s that you have it all figured out…..

    1. Stanta


      Jon’s circular reasoning.

      US:The Bible recorded that which is needed including the words of Christ.

      Jon: The Bible is a fairy tale, I don’t believe in it so it didn’t happen, There was no Jesus so he couldn’t have said it, he couldn’t be the son of God because there is no God. No god, no sin, we can do what we want unless someone with more force (government) tell us we can’t. That includes 16 ounce drinks in NYC and how much salt we are allowed in our diet. It’s for the children, it for the common good, it’s because I told you so.

      “Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good
      of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live
      under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies.
      The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may
      at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good
      will torment us without end for they do so with the approval
      of their own conscience.” CS Lewis, former Atheist

      Jon, you hate religions because it doesn’t give you the control you think you should have over all people, Central planning right to my breakfast (three eggs, bacon, hashbrowns with sausage gravy thank you very much).

      Rant off.

      Jon, I have seen a lot more happy Christians the atheists. If it all ends at death why should you care. Faith is better then psychotropic drugs any-day.

      1. entech

        Actually I think circularity goes:
        1. We know it is true because it is in the Bible,
        2. we know the Bible is true because it is the word of God,
        3. we know there is a god because the Bible tells us about him,
        4. Got to 1.

        What you attribute to Jon is a straight line.
        1. It is not true
        2. There is no 2.

        Government and the rest is irrelevant to the discussion, so are quotes from other people, I can give you one that you will not accept in any shape or form:
        “It is rubbish”, entech former Christian.

        The Lewis quote is a good one, does it apply to Stalin, or, Torquemada or both.
        As the little boy would have loved to have been able to say, “if it hurts you more than me, and you are doing it for my own good, why don’t you beat yourself”.

    2. Michael Ross

      “There is no record of Jesus making the quotes?” Aren’t they contained in a book written called the bible? So what you’re essentially saying is …the bible is not an actual account.”

      2000 years from now we will be quoting Jon Lingren.

    3. Ed 4:24 “So what you’re essentially saying is..the bible is not an actual account. It’s fiction in your world.”

      The people who wrote the Bible did so to communicate a specific message to a specific audience at the time the message was written. It was not written for people today. One can corroborate a few parts of the Bible with other historical records, but most of it not. For example, there is no “third party” source for the words attributed to Jesus. That is, no one who did not believe in the “Jesus-is-Devine” agreed he said all those things.

      I simply apply the same standards for varification in religion I require in areas of life. Believers apply a different standard in religion. In fact, they apply no standard but rely on their emotional reactions.

      I have no objections to people who do this. I would hope they would have no objections to my different view. I do object to taking these unsubstantiated opinions and treating them as so true they should be incorporated into government.

      1. Stanta

        I have seen the Bible work miracles with the same message for murders and thieve in the past year. What audience were you talking about?

        “In fact, they apply no standard but rely on their emotional reactions.” And this never happens in the non-faithful? Latest global warmish data shows no increase in 16 years.

  8. Michael Ross

    “Winston Churchill is another widely misquoted historical figure. He wrote volumes of work and gave many speeches.”

    “I do not understand the squeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisonous gas against uncivilised tribes.” Winston Churchill – 1919

  9. Ed

    OK. Thanks for the clarification John. So it’s not that you think I’m an idiot for being a Christian and you mean no offense for the flying spaghetti stuff……but it really boils down to seperation of government and religion. Actually I struggle a bit with that too. As a nation we profess freedom of religion yet there are things that are “religion specific.” There are a number of references to God by our founding fathers….In God We Trust, One Nation Under God, Ten Comandments, God Bless America etc….I don’t think Abe Lincoln or Thomas Jefferson envisioned the country being occupied by Muslims or Atheists. So do you suggest revising our constitution? Is it outdated? Related to this, there has been considerable discussion about religion in schools……it seems to me all people should be given freedom to worship as long as their worship is not disruptive or unreasonable. For example…”I can’t go to science lab cause I need to meditate this afternoon” or “my religion doesn’t believe in phy ed class – I’ll skip the running in period 5 today.”

        1. Dustin White

          Why do you insist on making asinine statements that are meant only to spread intolerance? It seems to me that the emotional arguments that you are putting forth are based on ignorance and egotism.

Comments are closed.