The Most Unanswered Prayer that no one Admits to

((Reposting for cs this morning, the evangelical ecumenical wanna be. Enjoy. -Kia))

“And they’ll know we are Christians by our love, by our love…”
While one amateur Internet Apologist Extraordinaire recently blogged that Jesus Prayed like Someone was Listening, and I did a repost post to it… 

… another Christian blogger CS suggested recently that Unity could only be found among Christians by ignoring their differences and treating them, at least in conversations on the Net within earshot of non believers, as if they were too small to matter.

Recently THIS not so funny guy is saying that God Hates Denominations. I think he’s not completely being honest about the full implications of his ironic post. The issue isn’t as much that Christians can’t get their S#!T together… it’s that Jesus’ Prayer for Christian Unity in John 17 is… 

“The Most Unanswered Prayer that no one Admits to”.

I do think CS has got one thing right though. That the only way to have Christian Unity would be by completely ignoring the glaring and sometimes Huge differences in how they view (ie. their church doctrines) God, Jesus, Scripture and Salvation itself. Do pay a visit to CS’s and JB’s posts though. And say Hi for the KIA while you’re at it. 

Now back to your regularly scheduled programme. -kia


When God can’t even get His Prayer answered…


“I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.” -Jesus, Son of God, God in Flesh, recorded in John 17:23 KJV

The trouble with saying that God illumines scripture for believers to “rightly divide”, is that there are so many different believers “rightly dividing” with different opinions on what God has illumined them to understand.

The first indication that most Christians get that there is more to the story is when they start encountering and mixing with other Christians of different stripes and denominations.

The obvious answer is that the Biblical God is not able to illumine anything to anyone because He simply isn’t there to consult.

And it came to pass at noon, that Elijah mocked them, and said, Cry aloud: for he is a god; either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or he is in a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked.” -Prophet Elijah, 1 Kings 18:27 KJV

A different pseudo-apologist stated once that only believers can rightly interpret and understand scripture because God gives them insight. If that were true, One God… One interpretation and insight.. One understanding and doctrinal stance. Right? Apparantly not.

A test for readers here:

1. Oneness pentecostal or trinitarian?

2. Gifts of the Spirit operating today or ceassationism?

3. The Catholic Mass a continuation of Christ’s sacrifice or only a symbolic remembrance and Tradition?

4. Pre trib, post ,mid-,no trib, pre wrath, partial rapture, amill, post mill, no mill, ?

5. Hell, no hell, annihilation, purgatory, conditional eternal life, eternal security, OSAS, apostasy possible, ?

6. Five points, no points, 4 points, 3 points, Arminian, Amyraldism,

7. The list goes on and on and on….

“Honesty, is such a simple word” -Billy Joel

What will it take before some Christians realize that MOST of us who don’t believe in their christianity or their Bible USED TO BE JUST LIKE THEM? Yeah, it’s true. Most of us who challenge them and refute them and give them the biggest headaches trying to come up with excuses why we should just “shut up and believe them…” we’re once active and very involved believers in Jesus just like them. Some of us even in ministry roles for decades.

You can’t explain away the glaring inconsistencies or paper over the chasmous holes in the “Greatest Story Every Told”. It matters little how many people believe it and for how many centuries it has survived or the good impact believing it has on those who do. It just

“isn’t True, it isn’t History, it’s just more Astounding Rubbish from the NewTestament”- Ken Humphreys, (and Old Testament too, I might add -kia)

Enjoy a bit of Cab Calloway this morning with your humble pie.


176 thoughts on “The Most Unanswered Prayer that no one Admits to

    • Peter, I notice you spend a considerable if not all your time speaking of churches or denominations or people but never what is important: Christ.

      See, those who compare themselves among themselves =each other are not wise.

      Do you know why Jesus and the Father were one: because Jesus only said what He heard the Father say, He only did what the Father did; He only went where the Father led Him to go.
      This is His hope for all who are in Him. To think that Jesus can make any person do what they don’t want to do is beyond foolish.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Yet it seems that that the Father failed to answer the prayer of Jesus that Christians would be one as a witness to the world.

        If the Bible was a divine book we would expect such a clear prayer to be answered. The fact it has demonstrably failed is very strong evidence that Christianity is a human invention not divine.

        Bruce argues over on Ark’s blog that there is unity among ‘True Christians’ and the problem is that most people who claim to be Christian are not really so. If this was true then it would still mean that the witness to the world part of the prayer still failed.

        But the reality is that the argument Bruce puts forward really proves the point that there is no unity in Christianity. And as a result Christianity fails its own self imposed test of credibility.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Peter, how ironic that you and those like you, who do not believe the Bible to be true or divine, yet you all presume to teach it and tell the rest of us exactly what you know it’s saying.

          I think it’s a good thing that you and Mike are out in the wilderness [where you should be learning instead of slowly perishing walking around in circles] because it’s teachers and ex-teachers of the word like you guys that create Christians of your caliber – very little to no understanding of the word.

          This is the prayer in discussion:
          “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their [the disciples message/teaching] word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.

          The prayer has been answered for all those who are one as Jesus and the Father are one.
          It’s beyond foolish to think or to try to convince yourself that because every single “Christian” do not live a life of oneness with the Father as Jesus, that the Father failed to answer the prayer.
          To further cite this as strong evidence that the Bible is a human book and not divine is just plain silly. You’re grasping at straws to justify your position and this is the straw you’ve latched on to.

          Can God change a person without their cooperation, without their willingness?

          Peter, it’s time to grow up. Look for the unity in the ones who are led by the Spirit of Christ within them, who are indeed one, as Father and Jesus are one.

          Parents whose kids earn a B and lower (especially Ds and Fs) in their classes have strong evidence that the teacher doesn’t know what they’re teaching and have failed their children otherwise all the kids would have gotten an A… r i g h t.

          Liked by 2 people

            • Kia, your whole blog is based on your inability to see evidence – even when it’s staring back at you.

              Needless to say, your judgment is absolutely unreliable. I wouldn’t stake anything on it.


              Liked by 1 person

          • How ironic that the ancients should tell Peter to grow up. Here is a man who believes in a holy spook (so that makes it REAL) and that his ‘son’, Jesus, was ‘beamed up’ to a place called Heaven after he was crucified. Guess what, the ancients, your imaginary friend is not talking – which is why so many sects have developed to talk for it.

            Give me a break. So the rest of us should all grow up because we’ve recognized malarkey when we actually do some digging and thinking? How condescending, to tell someone to grow up because they won’t shut up. You are the one with the problem here, the ancients. Not Peter. Tell you what though – if you really DO want to shut us up, give us some evidence that the imaginary is real. That’ll work.

            Oh, and I’m a High School teacher. Your behaviour is reminding me of a blabber mouth fellow I had awhile back – instead of presenting solid points for his side of the argument, he roared with laughter at others who were doing a good job of presenting the opposite side of the argument. Of course, that kind of behaviour made his position glaringly obvious, as is yours.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Carmen, that’s all they apparently have. No evidence, a bold and aggressive assertion, a forceful and threatening command to believe them, followed by ridicule. Mockery and condescending rudeness for those who dare question what they can’t answer. The childish and immature reactions are designed to shut the questioning down or push you away to maintain their comfort of not having to be confronted with the glaring lack of evidence for what they believe and are trying to make you believe.

              Liked by 1 person

            • This is Totalitarianism and religious Fascism. And if they had the ability here as the Muslims do in the middle East, they would once again enforce their Faith at the tip of a sword or the end of a rope


            • Carmen, if or when you can find 30 minutes to spare, I highly recommend the video KIA posted in his latest post. Something you said about the behavior of one of your students reminded me of this excerpt from the video:

              Outsiders are devalued by projection — this is when group members attribute to outsiders personality traits that they themselves possess but wish to deny.


              It also reminds me of a common psychological mechanism that operates in all child abuse, where children are used as receptacles in which adults project disowned parts of their psyches, so they can control these feelings in another body without danger to themselves.

              Liked by 1 person

              • Victoria, I watched the first 15 minutes of it and couldn’t help but wonder if the ancients, CS, and their ilk would ever listen to that? If so, I wonder what rationalizations they’d make for the excellent points raised in the video? Would they recognize their behaviour (projecting, dehumanizing others who disagree with their viewpoint, etc) in the behaviour spoken about? Or is their feeling of superiority so compelling that they will continue to display the characteristics referred to? I think we all know the answers to these questions. We’ve seen the behaviour time after time, on this thread and many others.

                Liked by 2 people

              • It’s my ‘belief’ that the reason they are here is that they DO have questions. They have niggling doubts and come to places like this to test the waters. Let’s face it, if they were so sure of their imaginary friend and the benefits they believe that will entail, wouldn’t they think, “Oh, well – poor them” and move along?

                Liked by 1 person

            • Hi Carmen,
              If you’re going to respond to one of my comments, at least attempt to write something that makes sense, please.

              What is mind Carmen? or consciousness or thought? Are these physical? If not, what are they and how do you know? – let’s see who’s actually doing some digging and thinking hmm.


              • Mind, thought and consciousness is emergent from the biological processes of a physical brain. I’m sure ancients knows this but he seems to be feigning ignorance to maintain his ignorance


              • hahaha…
                Your brain is a physical organ.
                Your brain is not your mind… neither can it produce mind or consciousness.

                Just trying to get those who love to declare that they are thinkers to think – it’s proven harder than I thought. 😦


              • Seriously Carmen, now that I’m forgiven, can you seriously tell me where you got all that “information” about Holy Spirit and all the other stuff you wrote in your initial comment?


              • As a christian, (taken from CARM)
                “The Bible itself reveals those doctrines that are essential to the Christian faith. They are 1) the Deity of Christ, 2) Salvation by Grace, 3) Resurrection of Christ, 4) the gospel, and 5) monotheism”
                SO, you must believe in one god (in your case, I assume it’s Yahweh), deity is another word for supernatural, and that he was resurrected.(he rose from the dead).
                There you have it. But then again, you may believe all sorts of other things, which was the point of the post.

                Liked by 1 person

              • Many of those “other things” actually divide Christians so severely that they refuse to accept each other as True Christians ™. Cs, tom, ib, and ancients would all like to declare for public consumption that the differences are minor and it’s really just one big diverse and happy family… but “it ain’t necessarily so”.
                The prayer of Jesus for Unity, and Paul’s desire in 1 corinthians that the believers all believe and say the same thing, matched with the reality of the division and multiplicity of different christianities thru the centuries, especially the wars, killing and torture of other Christians, PROVE to anyone with a mind willing to understand reality that… the prayer of Jesus in John 17 is the most Unanswered Prayer that no Christian is willing to admit to


              • Exactly, KIA. The problem is, all these people in all these sects are adhering to things that some MAN said. There’s been many different men interpreting the fiction they all believe was Yahweh-inspired. 😦

                Liked by 1 person

              • And how does the above square with what you wrote initially, especially what I’ve bolded –
                Here is a man who believes in a holy spook (so that makes it REAL) and that his ‘son’, Jesus,was ‘beamed up’ to a place called Heaven after he was crucified.


              • For one, the Holy Spirit is not the Father of Jesus.

                The Kingdom of Heaven/God is the rule of God over your life… it’s independent of location.


              • Is conception a male or female act.

                That which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.

                The Holy Spirit is feminine. She’s the Spirit of Wisdom.

                Liked by 1 person

              • The Holy Spirit is feline? I get the reference to proverbs 8. But how do you know? Male and female are physical points of reference and the HS in the Bible has no body. You’re just again


              • Kia are you this obtuse… Everyone knows we’re speaking of Spirits…
                Are you that incapable of thinking beyond what you know… what you’re used to.

                Jesus: If I tell you of earthly things and you believe me not, how can you believe if I tell you of heavenly things.

                Expand your thinking…


              • That’s not thinking you want me to expand otherwise you’d be providing evidence for consideration. You want me to re expand my faith. Sorry, been there, done that. Got the t shirt. Gave it back


              • The gospels say that the Holy Spirit is the one who caused Mary to conceive. That means to anyone with ‘ears to hear’ and a mind to think that the HS is the father of jesus


              • It says The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highestshall overshadow thee.

                Do you believe the Holy Spirit has a womb Kia?

                Nicodemus- how can a man be born when he is old? can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?

                Jesus: Truly, truly, I say to you, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

                That which is born of flesh is flesh… that which is born of Spirit is spirit.


              • No.. the HS doesn’t have a womb. The biblical HS doesn’t exist to have a penis either, so he couldn’t have caused Mary to become pregnant. It’s a myth, a Hellenistic,dying and rising god Mythology that was incorporated into a Messianic cult of Judaism.
                It’s a myth


              • In other words, KIA – he’d rather hang onto his fantasy than THINK. So many of them prefer life in their delusion – as the video pointed out, it’s very comforting.

                Liked by 1 person

              • As I pointed out to another one last week, when they start doing that it’s obvious they’ve lost the argument. Along with their credibility.

                Liked by 1 person

              • P.S. the ancients – I don’t use the word ‘forgiveness’ – it has all sorts of religious connotations. It’s not in my vocabulary.


      • Do you know why Jesus and the Father were one: because Jesus only said what He heard the Father say, He only did what the Father did; He only went where the Father led Him to go.
        This is His hope for all who are in Him. To think that Jesus can make any person do what they don’t want to do is beyond foolish.

        This is a meaningless retort to anything Peter has said, principally because it relies on two very important unverified premises.

        A) God exists
        B) Jesus existed or at the very least was divine

        You need to begin there before really anything you say can be taken seriously. Because your response to Peter’s very measurable observation about the evolution of religious denominations and how believers often perceive their being right over believers in another denomination makes no sense without proving those very two important facts. Using the interaction of two possibly fictional entities doesn’t disprove Peter’s point unless you can prove they are not a fiction.

        Right now what your quote really says is:

        “Do you know why Fiction A and Fiction B were one (fictional entity): because Fiction A only said what He (Fiction A…gets a bit confusing since He and Him often refer to God or Jesus) heard Fiction B say, He (Fiction A) only did what Fiction B said. He (Fiction A) only went where Fiction B led Him (Fiction A) to go. ”

        I think you get the point…but wait you say…the Bible says…

        Ah but here we also have a book written by men, translated through many languages that discusses this same God that nobody had ever seen, and this Jesus that nobody had ever met, who was prophesized in a book that was written by a group of men in a culture who don’t even think that Jesus was the one the prophecies talked about.

        How can something that is so obviously the Truth be so difficult to agree on, whereas things derived through empiricism and testing like the First Law of Thermodynamics are so easily agreed on.

        Without the Bible, there is no way in hell (fun reference here) that anything in this world through observation, experimentation, archaeological findings, etc that would help construct Christianity the exact same way as you understand it. But erase the First Law of Thermodynamics from all the books and minds of people, and we will discover it again. You see when something is a fiction, then man can define that fiction anyway they want…and boom you have different religions and denomination. When something is actually truth it can be found over and over again. Now that doesn’t mean there isn’t a God who made the First Law of Thermodynamics, but what it does mean is that the narrative you’re following doesn’t hold salt. And you shouldn’t feel bad about that…well you should a little…I mean it’s all 2000 years old…we know a lot of new stuff now that we didn’t know back then. It’s really time people made another attempt at the God thing again and brought in some new information. The First Law of Thermodynamics is actually pretty cool…Second Law of Thermodynamics is even better…maybe there could be a few chapters celebrating God’s creation of the physical laws of the universe…but…in the end people are still going to want to see this God person to really appreciate your religion. So think about how you can make a fool proof argument for its existence. Well…looks like you’ve got some work to do, so I’ll leave you to it.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Swarn, you are right. The place to begin is to establish the actual existence of the God of the Bible and Jesus. Those cannot be done so they turn to bullying and aggressive tactics to as CS puts it “shut the mouths” of those who oppose.
          They can’t win in an open discussion so the only options they have is to flourish on and hope the opposition gets tired…
          Bully and berate them into silence…
          Or leave the discussion (and if it’s on their blogs, block others from seeing the comments and questions from the opposition that they don’t want to deal with.)
          Bs is what they got. Bs is what they give. That’s why I have blog posts pointing it out and hoping other Christians can wake up to the unchristian like strategies and tactics, then start questioning why they don’t have better answers

          Liked by 1 person

          • I mean it’s not even good apologetics. I mean I’ve read essays and had discussions with people who were able to have meaningful discussions about God’s existence even if in the end they still had to rely on faith as an explanation. Their arguments are not substantive or logical.

            Liked by 1 person

            • The many posts, videos, debates and article on the compatibility of science with faith are just a big ruse. When youbpushbthem hard enough and long enough. When they are forced to think it thru and defend their evidence… It all comes down to blind belief. The have faith because they can’t think of not having faith.
              This is why people like robertson, james, wally, ib, cs and all the others will do anything they can, even blocking,vdeleting and editing comments to keep themselves from honest open and civil discussion. They know they can’t win, but can’t even fathom losing

              Liked by 1 person

        • No work at all.
          It’s your and Peter’s belief that God doesn’t exist and you both doubt the divinity of Jesus.

          Your belief or nonbelief does not change the reality of God’s existence nor the divinity of Jesus.
          It only has consequences for your own reality. It’s that simple.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Again, ancients… atheists don’t have a positive belief THAT god does not exist. You are mythologizing what atheism is so you can turn it around on them unfairly, as if belief is the default, and escape your burden to demonstrate that what you believe is actually True to reality.


            • Kia, I’ve found the only persons who do not know what an atheist is are atheists.

              What the heck is atheists don’t have a positive belief that God does not exist
              What then is their positive belief.
              or negative belief for that matter.

              I’m not burdened in the least or cares not whether an atheist can or cannot prove his belief. That’s his burden to bear.


              • Atheist don’t believe in God or gods. Much different than believing THAT God does not exist. They by definition have no god belief to defend or bear burden for. It is you who have the responsibility to demonstrate that what you believe is actually True in reality. God ahead… I’m waiting


              • Atheists believe in “no god”… that’s their god… plain and simple.
                Every one believes in something!

                Kia, I’m not asking you guys to defend your belief in “no-god”… that’s your choice… that’s your business.

                You’re asking for something that you’re incapable of comprehending and knowing when it’s presented to you. Truth.

                How would you know if you were presented with the truth Kia?


              • Atheists have no belief. They don’t believe in no god. Surely you see the difference, which is why you refuse to give up your incorrect and intentionally wrong definition of atheism. How does it feel to continually lie for jesus?


          • But it’s not my belief at all that God doesn’t exist. Your religion is the one asserting the existence of an entity. I assert no existence of that entity. So the onus is on you to provide that evidence. Atheism is the null hypothesis here. We are all born without a belief in a God. So if we are going to say there is one, then we better have proof.

            You use the word reality but fail to provide evidence that you understand what this is, because the very entities you believe in have no proof in reality. Now it could be that you are living in a different reality then the one I live in where the First and Second Law of Thermodynamics works reliably and continue to somehow charge you for electricity and don’t run on a never ending power supply as might be the case in your reality. But if you want to live in the same reality, then it is you that has to provide evidence of God’s existence. Saying they do, doesn’t make it so.

            Liked by 1 person

            • The issue is not evidence of God’s existence. The evidence is all around us.

              You have access to the same evidence that I do.
              You’ve “considered the evidence” and found it lacking.
              I’ve considered said evidence and more and found it convincing, undeniable proof of the existence of God.

              Asking me to present you with additional evidence after you’ve conveniently dismissed all that’s available to you is rather silly don’t you think.

              Declaring that the onus is on me to provide evidence of God’s existence is tantamount to cutting off your nose to spite your face.

              You won’t believe because God says so… but you’ll believe if I just provide you with all the additional evidence that you just happen to need on top of all God has presented you with.


              • No ancients. You dont get to assume the existence of God by interpreting the existence of all there is was created by Him.
                You first need to demonstrate that there actually IS a Him in existence to have created it all to justify your interpretation of the facts. Arguments from ignorance or incredulity won’t do either. Just because we don’t know and can’t prove that it all came into being by natural processes ( the success of which is closer every day by the tool called science ) doesn’t mean you get a pass for your unproven belief that your particular god did it. And the sheer incredulity of not being able to comprehend that all of existence WASN’T created by your particular god doesn’t give you a pass once again to NOT bearing the burden of proving that your God a.actually exists and b. Did it all.


              • Kia…
                The demonstration that there actually is a HIM is very simple: Christ Jesus
                Take it or leave it.
                You may choose to leave it but continuing your foolish request for what has already been presented to you is not saying much for you.


              • The demonstration of God’s existence is jesus… OK. I will ‘resurect’ my challenge to you… please provide non biblical, 1st century contemporary historical references to the life, death and resurrection of the Jesus of the nt.

                I’ll be waiting for this one a LONG time


              • If you can explain why you reject the Bible seeing that you’re asking for historical reference…
                I’ve asked you numerous times and you’ve failed to answer – Is King Nebuchadnezzar a historical figure and where and how did you first learn of him.

                Your inability to answer this very simple question makes your request null and void.


              • By the way, ancients, Muslims use the same reasoning and ‘intelligent design’ arguments to ‘prove’ Allah exists and Created it all… William Lane Craigs favorite hobby horse the Kalam was actually created and propagated as a Muslim Apologetic for Islam centuries before Bill picked it up for christianity.
                If they use the same arguments, evidence and interpretation for islam… a. Would you say Islam is equally valid as christianity and b. Can you see by the two VERY different religions using the SAME Apologetics… that BOTH are misinterpreting?


              • Hmmm…that’s interesting logic. First if you are saying the world around is evidence of God. That’s very different than saying that the Christian God is true. Almost all religions say God created this universe but have different attributes for God and claim their religion is true.

                Also citing the world around us evidence of God also doesn’t support the idea of a personal God, one that takes an active interest in the lives of individual people and is willing to bend the laws of the universe in favor of that person based on prayer or good deed. God could indeed be indifferent to humanity, and indeed indifferent to all of his/her creation and this evidence you cite would still be true.

                Saying the evidence is all around me doesn’t preclude the idea that this evidence supports the idea of multiple Gods…who knows how many?

                You presume that I reject the evidence around me as evidence of God, but I simply say that this evidence all around me can be explained in multiple different ways “Christian God, Islamic God, Hindu God, indifferent God, multiple Gods perhaps active in our lives, perhaps not, or a mixture there of…or no God at all and that since science does a pretty good job of explaining everything except the very basic question about why is there existence instead of non-existence, and the answer to that question again has multiple possibilities I leave myself open to the possibilities based on further evidence to the fact. What I do know is that science works rather well and so requiring some ability to measure/observe this God entity seems like not so bad of a requirement.

                And again, I could simply say the Flying Spaghetti Monster made it all…the evidence is all around you…you just reject the evidence. There has to be some evidence that supports your belief over mine.

                Liked by 1 person

              • That’s like saying that you proved Hobbits exist because…how else would the ring of Sauron been destroyed. Again Fictional Figure A doesn’t prove the existence of Fictional Figure B.

                I mean can you provide any solid evidence that Jesus existed or was divine? Let me guess the evidence is all around me and I just refuse to believe it. We all know there is a false bottom in the hat where the rabbit is…please come up with at least a new trick.

                Liked by 1 person

              • It’s only 21st century atheists with no shame at their blatant ignorance and outright lies who claim the non-existence of Jesus, proving why they’re atheists.

                Liked by 2 people

              • No, there have been fools since Biblical times.

                I said it’s only the 21st century atheist with no shame or integrity who denies the existence of Jesus.

                They’re somewhat different.


              • Not every non-Christian has rejected Jesus.

                The one who has been told of Jesus -that He’s the only way to bridge that divide between spiritual death (separation from God) and eternal life (relationship with God)- since they’ve rejected him, they will have to present themselves as their own savior or have some other savior that they have placed their trust in to bridge that divide.
                Obviously that’s not going to work as God only has 1 Son.
                Only 1 person was capable of ensuring a way out of death for us.

                It’s important who you place your trust in Kia.


              • “Only 1 person was capable of ensuring a way out of death for us.”
                There you have it, readers. As I suggested to you before, the ancients, you need to face your mortality. How much of a fantasy is it to think you will live forever?? Do you REALLY believe that’s possible? Give your head a shake.

                Liked by 1 person

              • Go ahead and prove the nt Jesus existed in history… non biblical, 1st century contemporary, historical references to the life, death, resurrection of the nt Jesus. I’m waiting….


              • Well considering nobody who wrote about Jesus actually knew him…it’s a reasonable question. But more importantly can you prove that Jesus was divine. Because it’s two very different thing to say a man named Jesus existed, and a man named Jesus could walk on water. Again no person that wrote about him actually saw him do those things. No person that wrote about him directly heard a word that he said.

                Also your assumption that only 21st century atheists with no shame dispute Jesus and/or his divinity. Plenty of other religions dispute his divinity at the very least. Also do you have evidence that nobody before the 21st century disputed his existence? Such people tended to get killed a lot who did and anything they might have written would likely have been destroyed. That’s the kind of compassionate Jesus loving people that existed in the Holy Roman Empire.

                Liked by 1 person

              • Jesus’ life – His birth, His death, His resurrection is solid evidence for His existence!

                As I said to your friend tildeb, the testimony of two witnesses is evidence, even in your downtown court of law.


              • Witnesses who actually observed something happening… We know none of the books in the new testament were written by people who observed him do anything. That’s very different than eye witnesses who actually saw something happening as I’m sure tildeb was talking about.

                Liked by 1 person

              • Lol… I know Jesus. He lives down the street from me here in AZ. The other guy? There is no evidence that the Jesus of the nt existed. Maybe A Jesus, or Joshua if you prefer, but not the Jesus of the nt variety.


              • The old “you don’t believe me cus you’re biased” schtik. The last resort of a bad argument is to assume the other can’t, won’t or is prejudiced against believing things on horrible evidence.

                Liked by 1 person

        • They can’t establish the actual reality of what they believe so the tactic is to turn it around as if belief on nothing but faith were the default, and force the disbelievers to prove that god/Jesus doesn’t exist. Not honest, not correct, not fair and totally lacking in intelligence and integrity

          Liked by 1 person

  1. I just have a good laugh when I read all the comments from evangelicals who claim that they are the chosen ones — the mouthpiece of god. If such a god existed, he/she/it wouldn’t need anyone to speak for it. I love the cartoon above where the little girl says “Jesus is so lucky to have us.” Lol

    Liked by 3 people

  2. Hey mike

    I suppose I should thank you but slap your hands at the same time. You mentioned my post, and maybe a few of your customers will appreciate it; yet you as usual, completely misrepresented the heart of the matter. No surprise here.

    Where did I mention the word UNITY which you purport is the thrust? The post was not a doctrinal essay in which unity would be critical. Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures. Yeah, that is an article of unity which ALL of your 68 thousand denominations agree. Wake up.

    You cannot see that ancillary issues may be viewed differently while still maintaining unity? Read ib22’s astute comment about unity as it is spot on. But you are not interested in the truth of believers now are you?

    The pic at the head of your post suggests there are many ‘denominations’ striving for this unity, which you apparently say does not exist. Perhaps you are also not aware HOW and WHEN prayer is answered. Of course not.

    But your fabrication of absurdity is hardly lost on people who actually believe the good book. God is perfect, His word sure, and people, eh, we are just a bunch of misfits called the human race, some at least trying to walk in the daylight, as opposed to others who scorn the very dawn.

    Liked by 3 people

        • Hey notes-

          What will you then say when mike here catalogs his journey and writes at a later date, that yes, atheism and unbelief are the father of lies, and while scripture may have been abused, it stands tall, resolute, and perfect, as God is Himself.

          What will you say when the rkia recovers again, and leaves you once and for all to your own devilish devices?

          Yep, that day will come. Will you then sing his praise for his amazing intellect, or will you say he reverted back to brain damage……………..

          Careful how you answer, as any answer will hang your ignorance.

          Liked by 2 people

          • “What will you then say when mike here catalogs his journey and writes at a later date, that yes, atheism and unbelief are the father of lies,”

            Lol — I wouldn’t hold your breath Mr. Bamboozler. I saw this short clip today and thought about you and your “just wait and see — someday your ass is gonna be grass” mentality. 😀

            Liked by 2 people

            • LOL!- “The Thinking Atheist”! Seriously Ms. V.

              The thinking person wouldn’t subscribe to a fringe loony to make their ridiculous, albeit hilarious point (hilarious because it’s all wrong of course).
              The thinking person would go to the source and say what the source says – no man knows the day nor the hour
              That seems pretty straightforward to me.

              No wonder you guys are atheists 🙂 “thinking atheists” – hmmm… I guess you mean “thinking of nonsense all the time atheist”…
              Cheers… it was funny in an atheistic type of way – whatever that means. 🙂

              Liked by 1 person

          • Hey notes.

            Ancients is correct. When you try to wrap us in YOUR image of believers, citing your own mirages, you show your true colors.

            Then again, it’s what you do. You may not think so, but you do worship the creature, in this case, you worship yourself. You view the Creator through your own delusions; it’s no wonder you can’t see straight. But one can always hope for you.

            Liked by 2 people

          • Cs what will you say, as long as we are dealing in hypotheticals, when you go into recovery from Christianity? What a crock argument to attempt to silence those who oppose. There is not biblical God to silence the mouths. The ot is cultural mythology


        • Hi Victoria, yes it’s very entertaining. The issue was cs’s post was a “circle the wagons” post to get other Christians to stop disagreeing publically. Far from misrepresenting what he was saying. I hit the nail on the head. There are whole tracts of “the body” that due to huge doctrinal and theological divides refuse to accept others as True Christians ™
          Cs is trying to quiet the din and encourage them all to present a unified and undivided face to the world and non believers. It’s a fantasy

          Liked by 2 people

    • “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity.”

      ― Augustine of Hippo

      There you go CS, I am doing your work for you. This particular quote is very popular in Christian circles. However when it gets down to actual application it turns out many denominations fail to agree as to what is essential versus non-essential.

      Liked by 1 person

        • Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones argued that Christians should never split over the matter of Baptism. He argued that the mode and timing of Baptism was a non essential. However the Baptists and Pentecostals would see it as an essential.

          I was baptised as a child by sprinkling, but was so worried by the fact that this might not be the correct way that some years later I was baptised again by immersion by a Pentecostal minister.

          In the persion between I researched the matter in great depth and concluded that the better interpretation was immersion as an adult. But it did puzzle me that if the issue was so critical and that potentially salvation was at stake then why did God not make the matter clearer in the Bible, either to state that it should be done such and such a way or to state that the mode and timing were not important.

          Look at some of the other debates over history, such as what about children who die before baptism, that caused Augustine much angst, and indeed at times such children could not be buried in church graveyards. Or the debates in early Christian circles regarding whether sin after baptism could be forgiven.

          Such issues just reinforce my view of the Bible as a very human and fallible book.

          Liked by 1 person

          • @pete-

            At least there are 38 thousand groups (?) which despise atheism and godlessness……….. 😉

            And THAT is a very good thing. A bunch of unity there too btw…………. 😉 😉 😉

            Viewing the scenery from a different chair is not a bad idea. You may want to try it.

            Liked by 1 person

              • No mike, not the chair of religion. All of a sudden you are wiser than Nicodemas? You have upseated the master of Israel?

                So you have become ‘unborne?’ Give me a break mike. Religion is not spirituality.


              • Your stubbornness knows no measure mike.

                Can a man enter his mother womb to be unborn???????????

                In all your blog writings mike, you have never even wrote what a christian is!

                Sure, we all know what you ‘did,’ where you ‘went,’ etc etc, but you have not once mentioned the truth of your relation to the Head. He hasn’t moved…………..gee I wonder what happened………….Just sayin…….


              • What… So you can disagree with my definition and then feel justified in rejecting me as having been a True Christian ™? Do you realize you’re doing that right now?
                That’s the point of the post


              • Sigh mike.
                there is another ‘chair’ too ya know.

                Trent Reznor sang a song, perfected by Johnny Cash, (a very good man btw) and it speaks to this very thing.

                Enjoy, and do appreciate the ’empire of dirt,’ and the fleeting of time.


              • Kind of illustrates the point though about Christians telling other Christians they aren’t/weren’t True Christians ™ if they don’t agree with them


            • CS well you might cite Nicodemus. The thing is it is almost certainly a fabricated account. It contains wordplay that only works in Greek not in Aramaic, so we can be confident that if there was a Nicodemus that the words recorded in the Bible are not those that were actually spoken.

              Liked by 1 person

            • Viewing the scenery from a different chair is not a bad idea. You may want to try it.

              CS are you deliberately being ironic? It is I who have viewed the scenery from a different chair and discovered it is all smoke and mirrors (sorry for mixed metaphors). I have seen behind the curtain and realised Christianity is all an illusion:

              I would respond that it is you who should start viewing the scenery from a different chair.

              Liked by 1 person

              • Hey pete

                ‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth……………….’ is hardly a Christian concept.

                Geez man. Maybe you should face the chair north.


              • Cs, the question is… why do yiu believe this and what evidence is there for your belief that the God of the Bible is the one who created the Heavens and the earth? Is it evidence or is it just sheer faith alone in what the Genesis account says?


              • Faith and evidence are not synonymous. You can say they are, but Hebrews 11.1 isn’t telling the truth. It’s supporting a lie that faith is the Evidence and the confidence.


              • The same ‘evidence’ you use to believe the Genesis account is the same ‘evidence’ Muslims use to believe the Koran and allah.


              • For once, CS, you’re correct. It is not a Christian concept. It is Jewish as they were the ones who wrote the Hebrew Bible where the concept is found.


              • Nan, he will never admit that the first Christians were just a Jewish sect mixed with Hellenistic paganism that cribbed the OT for their own


              • The question cs is still… Why do you believe the gen account of “in the beginning God” to be true in the first place?
                You have nothing but the same “evidence” that Muslims do for Allah creating the world. Faith alone


              • YOU used the term concept. Not me.
                BTW, if you can PROVE your god God exists (and not through bible verses and references or your personal quips), perhaps I could demonstrate the “courtesy” you requested.

                Liked by 1 person

              • That’s right nan. The point being: Creation is hardly a matter of religion.

                The creation of the tree, the whale, the dove, and the lily of the valley are hardly matter for religious dispute.

                Some things are just so darn clear……..

                That’s the point that escapes you.


              • Yep, and the master Biologist made it so.

                Unless of course you or you of your friends can create a tree or even a fingernail.

                Didn’t think so, and thus do the facts of life and common sense elude you as well as shut your mouth.

                Liked by 1 person

  3. Pingback: RIDICULE – Citizen Tom

  4. Pingback: I regret this already, but… | See, there's this thing called biology...

      • Mike you seem to have touched a bit of a nerve with this post.

        The point which the faithful can’t refute is that Jesus’ prayer clearly failed. That is a fact and as a fact it proves the Bible is wrong.

        As I mentioned in another comment I have been reading a commentary on Hebrews and noticed this morning that the learned commentator observed that it is undeniable from the earliest Christian writings that the ‘inspired’ writers of the Bible expected that the second coming would be within a generation or so. It is only the last book written in the Bible (in chronology), 2 Peter where a correction is added to try to explain away the failure of Jesus to return.

        Of course most Christians would not accept that 2 Peter was the last book of the Bible in Chronology. However the evidence is overwhelming, if one studies the finalisation of the Canon, it is interesting to note that 2 Peter was questioned from the start and only barely scraped into the Bible, it is not like it was universally accepted by the early church. But once again this just proves that the Bible is human as the author of 2 Peter pretends to be the apostle but is not.

        A question for the thinking Christian is ‘why would the author of 2 Peter copy swathes of material from the letter to Jude?’. Just to clarify when I said ‘thinking Christian’ I don’t expect CS to address this matter, but I hope some of your other readers are a bit more intellectually open and honest.

        Liked by 2 people

        • My hope for referrals by the other blogs is that their readers would come back to mine for a point of reference, possibly see the other side and be confronted with thinking. So I’m happy for the spread around, good or bad press


        • But definitely, the post has stirred up a hornets nest of cognitive dissonance and apologetics excuses and spin. Good post I guess. Shit storms are high praise sometimes


  5. Pingback: “Look Ma, no hands…” | The Recovering Know It All

Please comment Responsibly and Respectfully

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s