“Jesus Prayed like Someone was listening…”

… and Frodo really did disappear when he put on the Magical Ring

From a Christian Amateur Internet Apologist Extraordinaire this morning…


September 21, 2016 • 5:54 am
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Jesus prayed like someone was listening…

Of course he did. And the ‘fellowship’ holed up in Minas tirith hoped for gandalfs return, just like he was actually going to return.
They hoped in the Lord of the Rings like the nt Jesus prayed in the nt. But can you tell me, Brother James, is there any evidence outside of the nt that the character described in the nt is any less of a fictional person than gandalf the white?

The problem with actually saying this kind of stuff in public on the  internet… is that there is no way to call it back when you get called on your silliness. And that it makes for a great segue to reissuing a challenge that no one seems to want to accept.

“Go ahead, give us the non-biblical, 1st century contemporary secular historians that documented this Greatest Story Ever Told at the time it happened… The life, death, resurrection of the New Testament Jesus.. I’ll be waiting.” -kia

You see James, just because the Jesus portrayed in the NT said it, did it, ‘prayed’ it or anything else’d… it, does not mean that some Jewish zealot rabbi who might have  lived (and died) in the first century did it.

Ichthus… Precarious Perch

The four Gospels we still have after the Church either destroyed or ‘anathematized’ the rest of the 40 or so others are clearly works of fiction which in many places don’t even agree with each other, let alone much of actual history and archaeology. 

They along with the rest of the NT, and the OT for that matter, have been shown to be so edited, ‘interpolated’ to, redacted from, that they literally cannot be relied on to faithfully represent the original content or material written down in them. Forget the fact we don’t even HAVE original manuscripts, but pieced together and collated copies of centuries later, that don’t even agree with each other in hundreds of thousands of places.

‘Know’ Gandalf, know Peace?

No James, you don’t even know for certain or for original accuracy what the NT Jesus said or did or even how he ‘Prayed’, let alone that an actual 1st century Carpenter turned Prophet of Doom said or did or even Prayed any such things or ways.

I know that you think you do, but you don’t ‘Know’ THAT Jesus. And the one portrayed in your NT is a myth… you don’t know him either any more than you have a ‘living relationship to and with’ Gandalf the White Wizard of the Lord of the Rings. 

“And now back to our regularly scheduled content”



389 thoughts on ““Jesus Prayed like Someone was listening…”

  1. mike-
    You are showing circus antics. Tolkien and Lewis both knew the difference between their characters and the Lord Jesus Christ of scripture.

    Why don’t you………………..?

    and now to this, you words:

    ‘The problem with actually saying this kind of stuff in public on the internet… is that there is no way to call it back when you get called on your silliness. And that it makes for a great segue to reissuing a challenge that no one seems to want to accept.

    “Go ahead, give us the non-biblical, 1st century contemporary secular historians that documented this Greatest Story Ever Told at the time it happened… The life, death, resurrection of the New Testament Jesus.. I’ll be waiting.” -kia’

    A CHALLENGE NO ONE WANTS TO ACCEPT? Ha. How about a challenge that good minded people will not waste their time on. There. Fixed it for you. And for what its worth, I watched your interchanges with Wally and James some time ago, and observed carefully your doubleminded deceit and wily craftiness as you feigned Christianity while you supposedly ‘deconverted.’

    It was crafty then. It is worse now, as you continue to malign scripture, trying to pin your rebellion on others. It is not amusing, and you wonder why others are hesitant to accept your bait.

    Liked by 4 people

      • If you really appreciated the truth of scripture mike, you would know the weight of the words when the Lord sent a message to that fox Herod.

        The word of God is blameless and answers every issue. Your challenge? Yeah, like your friend’s zandes, are pointless.

        Liked by 2 people

          • If the New Testament does not arrest your attention, if it is not enough to speak to your conscience, if the life and times of billions of people who relied on its contents through thousands of years are not enough, then no, it is not worth wasting further time, for you are not that special snowflake.

            The truth is free for the taking, yet you persist in trying to find weakness in people. Not too smart.


            • If the Qur’an does not arrest your attention, if it is not enough to speak to your conscience, if the life and times of billions of people who relied on its contents through thousands of years are not enough, then no, it is not worth wasting further time, for you are not that special snowflake.

              The truth is free for the taking, yet you persist in trying to find weakness in people. Not too smart.

              Liked by 2 people

              • Uh huh sure, and Christians everywhere blow others up in the name of the one they revere. Right. Sure.

                Maybe you heard of Billy Graham asking people to kill themselves.and others………Right.Sure……..

                Night and day. Darkness and light. God has no competitors.

                Grace and truth are non existent in your imagined comparisons.

                As I said: CONSCIENCE. Go learn what that means.


              • Cs, you forget, conveniently I might add, centuries of Christian history when the church did just that… killed people for not converting. Even other Christians for doctrinal differences like God is one vs god is a trinity (servetus anyone?). Why in the heck do you think the puritan father’s came to America? To escape religious oppression and violence, from other Christians. Then they started oppressing and killing people here for their religious differences.
                Chriat8ans killing other christians… Christians killing other people who were not christian because they weren’t Christians (native americans, may answer, aztecs) the list goes on and on.


              • Nope, didn’t forget anything. The comment stands on its own.

                The leaders of is-lam require that of their followers (kill themselves and others) that which Paul, Peter, James, John, and Christ never did….

                Grace and truth as I said. As to others who kill in the name of ‘religion,’ draw your own conclusions, but do not think for one second they represented the living God.

                But once more, you prove your own rebellion by trying to compare apples and oranges. You may want to read the New Testament again.


              • Perhaps you haven’t read the news lately either. Scripture records the bare bones of life.

                Israel was like no other nation and you know it. Those were the days my friend, we thought theyd never end……..

                Then came grace and truth. (for the third time)

                Liked by 1 person

              • Actually, historical and Archaeological records have nothing whatever to say about Jewish slavery in Egypt, an exodus and wandering for decades in the desert of 2 million people, or the conquest of Caan an


              • It is you mike who find the scriptures detestable not me or other believers.

                Thus are our hearts revealed. God, as always, stands unaccused. As far as history? Aw nevermind……………..if


              • How is this for history mike:

                Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judaea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of Ituraea and of the region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene,

                Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.

                Yeah, go ahead. Also try to lie about the times and life of King Darius, Daniel, the Herod’s, King Agrippa, and Solomon’s temple.

                You will lose every scriptural argument. As a matter of fact, you have.

                It is HIStory, not MIKEstory.


              • Truth, there is none. Grace? Give me a break… grace is supposed to be ‘unmerited favor’ and unconditional acceptance. The conditions of faith in Christ and blind and mindless obedience to a mass murdering genocidal maniac of a God is not Grace. It’s spiritual Stockholm syndrome


              • Uh huh sure, and Muslims everywhere bomb abortion clinics in the name of the one they revere. Right. Sure.

                Maybe you heard of Anjem Chourdry asking people to kill abortion doctors and others………Right.Sure……..

                Night and day. Darkness and light. Allah has no competitors.

                Grace and truth are non existent in your imagined comparisons.

                As I said: CONSCIENCE. Go learn what that means.


      • CS never actually spends any time defending any of his claims. It’s his answer to everything “It’s the truth, if you don’t want to hear it, I am not going to waste my time.” This is why he appears the charlatan because he is smart enough to know his position is indefensible. Apparently he’s only good at talk in metaphors, and the animal kingdom, and he’s not very good at either of those! lol

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Kia. Right now, I couldn’t care less whether you are a Christian or not. You don’t even have to believe the Bible is the word of God or spiritual in any way.

    But to come out and state the Bible is edited, that the NT doesn’t give an accurate representation of Jesus, without giving any sources to back up your claims is ridiculous. You claim it is a negative thing that we don’t have any of the original manuscripts. Why is this a bad thing? You claim that the copies made of the original letters contradict each other ‘in hundreds of thousands of places.’ Prove it to me. Show me some examples.

    If you’re such a big advocate for credible historical material, you can’t make blind assertions based on feelings. You need to be credible in your rebuttal. Don’t tell us how these things are bad. Show us. Prove it to us.

    Sorry if I come across a bit rash. I do love discussing this stuff. Am willing to discuss and compare evidence for the credibility of the Bible. If you would like some sources outside the NT, some non-biblical scholars documentations which give mention to the life of Jesus, I am happy to provide you with some.

    Appreciate it man 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

    • Sorry John to upset you so. But a good bunch of reading on the topic of how we got our bible and how it was translated and transmitted, basically textual criticism and historical study of the topic might do you better than just taking my word for it.


      • You haven’t upset me Kia, haha 🙂 I just wish more people would back up their claims with evidence and clear explanations. I have also done a lot of reading on this topic – and I wish to see your side of the story too.

        I will give you some non biblical, secular sources for Jesus in due time if that’s what you would like of me. And if you’re willing, I want to ask you a question. Or two.

        – First of all, what original copies of any historical source do we currently have or know of?
        – What makes you think not having original copies of Biblical letters is bad in terms of its credibility?

        Looking forward to your response. Feel free to give evidence for your response 🙂 Cheers Kia!

        Liked by 1 person

    • You’ve gone about this exactly backwards Jonathan. The people who believe that the bible is an accurate account of the life and times of Jesus (NT) are the ones who have the proving to do. For starters, the gospels, which are supposed to be an account of his life are rife, with contradictions and omissions. Prove it to you? Have you ever used Google? Type in “New Testament Contradictions” and start reading. Secondly, while there are other documents that make mention of a historical Jesus, there is certainly nothing that documents all of the supposed miracles and people rising from the dead that are contained within the bible. Other than Jesus’ baptismal and crucifixion, there is virtual nothing else that scholars agree on.
      “Sorry if I come across a bit rash. I do love discussing this stuff.” No, I don’t think that’s actually the case. I think it’s more along the lines of “I want everyone to believe that the god that I worship is the real McCoy and I’ll say and do anything to “prove” my point”. You’re not fooling anyone Jonathan.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Great response Ashley. You make a good point. I believe in the Bible as a (for the majority) a credible historical source. Therefore I should be the one providing evidence for such a case – to which I am more than willing.

        But if someone is going to intentionally argue that the Bible isn’t reliable, contradicts itself in thousands of places, that we don’t have the original copies as bad – you need to back up those claims. Whether you believe the Bible or not. This is debating 101. Claims from either side need to be backed up with solid evidence and clear explanations as to why such an opinion on this is held.

        You suggest typing in “new testament contradictions” into google is solid evidence. This isn’t. You have to be willing to show me where these contradictions are specifically in the Bible, and how they apparently throw off the whole course of the Bible’s credibility. Give me a reference in the Bible where a contradiction is made. Then we can talk.

        You’re spot on at the end there Ashley. I sure would love you guys to see that our God that is most definitely the real McCoy. But I also love discussing Bible credibility, because it played a big part in my coming to faith. It goes hand in hand.

        What topic in Biblical credibility are you guys keen to discuss first? 🙂

        Liked by 2 people

        • How about the non biblical 1st century contemporary, secular historical references to the life death and resurrection of the jesus portrayed in the nt?
          Can’t find those, then it’s myth


        • Are you for real right now? Go to google. Type in “New Testament Contradictions”. You will find pages and pages of website that will literally walk you through, bible page by bible page, bible verse by bible verse, all the contradictions in the New Testament. It will tell you what book of the bible and what verse says ‘X’ and tells you another verse that directly contradicts ‘X’. Open up your own bible and play along. It’s not my job to go and dig this stuff up for you. It’s already all there. Your ignorance and refusal to look for information that pokes gigantic holes in your precious beliefs is YOUR problem not mine. YOU’RE the one telling everyone that the bible is real and it’s true. YOU’RE the one who has to explain away all the contradictions. Plugging your ears and pretending they don’t exist and/or demanding that someone else do it for you might be a great way for you to maintain your willful ignorance but it’s not going to score you any “debate” points. Please don’t lecture me about “debating 101”.
          You’ve clearly demonstrated you can’t maneuver your way around basic logical fallacies.
          There’s no such thing as biblical credibility. Scholars, who make a living studying this document, can agree on little more than there was an historical Jesus who was baptized and crucified.
          I know you think all of this is real, but that is because you’ve been lied to, inculcated and brainwashed to think that it’s true. This has got nothing to do with evidence or sound argument.

          Liked by 2 people

          • You’re entitled to your own opinion my man, and you don’t have to do your own research. That’s fine. You aren’t obliged to.

            But this really is debating 101. Directing someone to research themselves, and actually providing resources to back up your opinion, are two completely different things. If you were in court trying to justify to a judge why the Bible isn’t a credible historical source, I’m sure you wouldn’t just tell them to ‘just do a google search.’ The judge would disregard your opinion and tell you to come with your own research. You have to provide the evidence for them to make a judgement on. Again, you don’t have to enter the metaphoric courtroom if you don’t want to. But it might help us both. Hope you see what I mean 🙂

            I have researched this in google a bit though. And from what I have seen so far, I haven’t found any blatant contradictions. What I have found is slight differences in interpretation of words, but the overall message throughout translation remains the same. Feel free to show me some bible verses where such contradictions throw Christianity off course. I’m open to see your opinion here. Honest. I just need to see some examples to understand where you are coming from.

            Just to clarify – do you agree that scholars believe Jesus was baptised and crucified?

            Again, no obligation to do any research if you don’t want to 🙂 Thanks for your time Ash!


            • What scholars believe, which scholars? And are they religiously biased to believe even if evidence doesn’t support it?… as I was saying before I so rudely interrupted myself, what scholars believe is not the point. It’s what the Evidence reveals.
              Now back to the challenge question… shall we?


            • By the way, the lark about no obligation to do any research if ash ‘doesn’t want to’ is kind of a backhanded way to claim the upper hand and imply that she hasn’t done the research either you have,more that you think she needs to.
              Not a great way to start a ‘civil’ discussion.
              Actually, so far in the discussion, you are the one who has displayed the least understanding and knowledge of whats beingm’discussed’. Just sayin’


              • Kia, you are again entitled to your opinion. And it’s fair for you to say what you want.

                So far in this discussion, I have simply asked that you guys provide evidence for your claims. Solid evidence. Not a google search or a sweeping term claiming ‘hundreds of thousands’ of contradictions can be found. I want examples. Proof. That is all I am asking. And like I said, you guys don’t have to do the research if you don’t want to. Completely up to you. But if you want to prove your lack of belief to me, show me the money (so to speak).

                To be fair, I have tried to be reasonable and open to discussion throughout this forum. And yet, I have been labelled as having outrageous contempt on everyone. I seriously want to understand your opinions. I really do. But as yet, I haven’t seen any contradictions that might throw Christianity off course. Would be pumped to see some.

                Also Kia, I did ask you some questions. Are you willing to answer them? I’ll post them here again:

                – First of all, what original copies of any historical source do we currently have or know of?
                – What makes you think not having original copies of Biblical letters is bad in terms of its credibility?

                Thanks again for your time in this Kia 🙂


              • We are actually starting with the question of the post in order not to get bogged down.
                Start with what I have asked you. Shouldn’t be so difficult if there actually are such references… have a go. Visit the other post and also read the comments

                Liked by 1 person

              • Thanks Kia. I have accepted your challenge to compile these sources for non-biblical, secular accounts of Jesus.

                But whilst I am spending time doing this, it would be awesome if you could also spend time answering a question too. Then we can sort of kill two birds with one stone. You don’t have to answer my questions if you don’t want to. I respect your take on things. But it would just make this debate go smoother.

                Thanks for this opportunity brother!


              • Oh… I think you’re time will be pretty tied up trying to find the references. Wouldn’t want to distract from a Civil and orderly conversation, would we?
                We can wait till you get the references I asked for in the post… if of course you actually ARE accepting the challenge and not trying to muddy the waters.

                Liked by 1 person

              • I sure am accepting the so called challenge 🙂

                But if you’re not willing to accept mine, I just wish to ask one thing of you. When I answer your challenge, can you promise to also give a strong answer and evidence for my two questions?

                Thanks Kia 🙂


              • Sorry, my blog. Don’t have to accept you challenge.
                You are the one who is called ‘to give answer to all who ask for the hope that is within you’
                The blog post is about the challenge of references. Good place to start. It’s a big enough cookie without another 5 plates before we even finish dinner

                Liked by 1 person

              • I’ll answer this so called “challenge” of yours. But from then on, if you aren’t willing to answer some of my questions, then I’ll stop answering man. Fair is fair.

                I would seriously love you to answer regarding your comments on the original manuscripts. But if you aren’t willing, I will stop this discussion after completing your “challenge”.


              • Here’s the thing. You made claims that, because we don’t have the original manuscripts of the Bible, it is a bad thing. Truth is, we don’t have any original manuscript of any historical documents in history. If you yourself want to be credible, you should be willing to back up your claims. But each to their own, I’m not forcing you to do that.

                I will answer your challenge. But you not being willing to answer mine speaks volumes. Unless you are willing to answer my challenge, I will not continue this conversation once I have completed your challenge.

                I am not, and will never, blame you for my actions. But a debate goes both ways, takes two to tango. And if you’re not willing to tango, I’ll leave the dance floor after the challenge is down.

                Hope you can understand that 🙂


              • Sorry buddy, but your continued attempted to call the tunes on a post that is pretty specific is also fairly telling. It’s passive aggressive and controlling. I don’t like it. You don’t get to tell me what I will do on a post on my blog. Then say it’s my fault when you decide not to continue (if I do) if I decline your challenge of questions. My post is pretty specific, if you answer, great, we will deal with that. There will be more than enough to go on with that. But whether I answer your questions on a post that is not about your questions … is irrelevant. And your attempt to paint me into a corner is bully tactics. I’ve asked you not to make anyone else responsible for your willingness or unwillingness to continue. It’s on you, not me. Please stop trying to control


              • No by trying to make me responsible for your continued participation or not, for trying to change the topic, for trying to change the questions altogether.
                Please just stick to the question of the post


            • Its not “my opinion”‘it’s fact. Since you insist on plugging your ears and saying “la la la” I’ll demonstrate what an incurious ignoramus you are for all to see
              There are HUNDREDS of contradictions – complete with book and verse citations.
              But please, by all means, continue to pretend they still don’t exist Jonathan. You’ve been doing a bang up job so far. Why stop now?
              I don’t know what scholars agree on in regards to Jesus and to be frank, I could not care less. It’s like debating who had the better ships – the Klingons or the Romulans. It’s stupid, it’s a waste of time and can never be settled because it doesn’t rest on any evidence. It’s fiction. Just like your bible and your imaginary best friend Jesus.

              Liked by 2 people

              • Thank you for providing a source Ashley. I really appreciate it. Will have a look in just a sec and get back to you 🙂

                Just to be clear: are you claiming that Jesus never existed?

                Thanks again for your co-operation in giving that source. Legend 🙂


              • More accurately, the Jesus of the NT never existed or there is no evidence of his existence… thus the challenge. Please stay on topic and don’t dodge. That is where you need to begin.

                Liked by 1 person

              • It’s 9pm here in Arizona and I have a 4am wake up for work. Post the comments when you like. I’ll see them even when I’m at work. It’s all good, it’s not like sister Mary is there with her ruler.


              • bruh, you answered the question, haha. But please do go to my comments at the very bottom of this page and answer my question:

                If I cannot answer the exact requirements of your initial question, is there any point in me trying to answer the question?

                Would appreciate an answer to this 🙂


              • Ashley. I have looked at the source you provided me with. There are a lot of apparent contradictions in there, which would take a long time to pick apart and analyse.

                Just so it benefits us both – are there any in particular which you would love me to focus on?

                Thanks again Ash 🙂


              • Alot of contradictions and difficulties is why we need to focus on the question of the post, rather than get bogged down and torn in 200 differ3nt directions?.. and never get the references dealt with. Capice?


              • I believe that is is highly probable that some man, named Jesus, existed and was baptized. It’s also probable that some man named Jesus was executed by crucifixion by the Romans. These are not all that extraordinary claims. Do I believe that a man named Jesus walked on water, cured lepers, made people’s dead daughters rise to life again, or was crucified to absolve all mankind of the original sin of Adam and Eve. No. I’d have to be a gullible fool to believe idiotic nonsense like that.
                I second KIA. Quit with the question dodging and the reversing of the burden of proof. On with the show. You have all these non biblical sources. Let’s see ’em. How does it take a week to compile this information!?!?!?!?!?

                Liked by 1 person

          • Going off topic here Arkenaten 🙂 And to be honest, I haven’t done much research in this area.

            But as Kia himself said, ‘please stay on topic and don’t dodge.’ So I will be true to what he wants and try to stick to the topic.

            Thanks Ark 🙂

            Liked by 1 person

            • You come across like some pre- pubescent newbie re-born ‘who’s still studying at some place like Biola?
              I cannot believe the naivety of your responses.
              Do ”they” encourage you start a blog as part of some teenage ministry programmer for re-born Christians?
              Is this some sort of a project or something to get your debating feet wet?
              Seriously, every non believer on this thread could shred you flaky Christian arse with the nonsensical diatribe you keep posting.
              KIA, for one, did missionary work for the gods sake. He know the bible and related texts inside out and backwards.
              So does Peter and Also Arch.,

              Liked by 1 person

      • Jonathan doesn’t really care that much to investigate for himself… Much too busy defending a god who can’t defend himself or his Word. And much too busy baiting decons to do his research for him.
        You see… He just doesn’t care that much


        • I never said this Kia – I am more than willing to discuss with you, as I said at the end of my first message. More than happy to. I simply asked you to provide evidence for your claims, and somehow you have assumed that I am not willing to make my own. This is a classic example of an assumption lacking credibility.

          In due time I will come back to you with some sources. But I only ask one thing. Let’s keep this debate civil, open to reason, and void of all blatant assumptions based off nothing.

          Cheers man 🙂


    • ?!
      “But to come out and state the Bible is edited, that the NT doesn’t give an accurate representation of Jesus, without giving any sources”

      The bible is edited. There are groups editing it as we speak. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_Bible_translations]
      Removing, altering, or adding text to literature is the very definition of changing it. The changes are considerable and observable by comparing the Latin Vulgate to say, the King James Version. The Septuagint can be also compared to modern books. I’d recommend reading [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint] esp. the section on “christian use”. The number of non biblical sources of historical documentation are legion. In fact the information is so well known in academic circles it boggles my mind that anyone could claim in the 21st century that the text remained unchanged from Roman times.

      Liked by 3 people

      • What I am only lately appreciating is how the translation choices made in the English versions of the Bible are faith based. This especially applies to the Hebrew Old Testament, as an example, Psalm 22 which is said by Christians to prefigure the crucifixion is translated in a way that encourages this interpretation. So in verse 16 the Hebrew word כָּ֝אֲרִ֗י is translated as ‘pierced’ when it actually means ‘dig’.

        Compare an english translation of the verse:

        Dogs surround me, a pack of villains encircles me; they pierce my hands and my feet. [NIV}

        With a Jewish translation:

        For dogs have encompassed me; A company of evil-doers have inclosed me; Like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet. {JPS Tanakh 1917}

        This sort of thing happens throughout the Bible translations. The NIV has even taken to adjusting the text to remove some of the inconsistencies between Kings and Chronicles.

        The evidence from the Greek OT, the LXX, shows that the Hebrew version changed over time.

        Likewise of the 30,000 plus Greek manuscripts of the NT, there are not any two which are identical. The whole thing is thoroughly edited.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Appreciate your response man. And well done for providing some sources to back up your claim. That’s what I like to see.

        Having read that article, I notice there are differences. You are correct. However, in the examples shown (e.g. Genesis 4:7), the differences seem minimal. The main point of the scripture remains essentially the same – just minor changes in wording. I fail to see where one text is compared with another nor highlights any major contradiction. If willing and possible, please compare a text where major contradictions are mad between today’s text and the original text. Not just differences in wording, but a complete contradiction of the original text. That is what we are looking for.

        Thanks brother 🙂 appreciate your time!

        Liked by 1 person

        • It’s almost like you didn’t read my answer to you. It’s important to me that you gain something from this experience Jonathan. There should be a catholic bible at your local library or perhaps a priest at a nearby parish might provide one. Compare it to whatever version of the bible you’re using. find in *your* scripture Tobit,
          Judith, Additions to Esther (Vulgate Esther 10:4–16:24), Wisdom (also called the Wisdom of Solomon), Sirach (also called Ecclesiasticus), Baruch, including the Letter of Jeremiah (Additions to Jeremiah in the Septuagint), and 1 Maccabees.
          I have no idea what you are comparing when you cite Gen 4:7. Different than what specifically?

          Liked by 3 people

          • Thanks again for your reply.

            You sent me [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint] as a source I should read regarding Christian use. Look higher int he comments for it. You said in this the ‘Septuagint can be also compared to modern books.’ The only comparison I saw in that article was of Genesis 4:7, and that showed no contradictions. Just different ways os saying the same thing.

            I would appreciate it if you compared some texts from the Septuagint to modern version of the Bible that clearly contradict the Christian faith.

            Thanks man 🙂


  3. CS and Jonathan – if (your) good and powerful god does exist, why is it that you two mere mortals must consistently defend its existence with pithy assertions and outraged contempt?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Carmen.

      I certainly hope I haven’t come across to you guys with outraged contempt. I certainly don’t consider Kia or any of you guys as outrageously worthless or beneath consideration. That would be completely contrary to my beliefs. As to my thy assertions – please direct me to times I have made pithy statements regarding Bible credibility. I don’t think I have. So far I have simply asked that evidence me made for the claims suggested.

      I am just a mere mortal, and an average one at that. God doesn’t need my defending, quite the opposite. I just look for solid debate based off evidence and clear explanations based on fact from either side.

      Please let me know if my actions have demonstrated outrages contempt. I certainly hope not. And if they have, I genuinely sorry mate.


  4. Hey ash and carm. Do you ever read what you write?
    Let me quote myself from another post, which answers your gripes.

    —Certain folks demand answers from scripture, Sola scriptura! they shout, while at the same time deny the authority from scripture which gives the answers their only merit. Look at the supreme lack of logic being engaged, where the precursor to the question, guarantees ANY answer as completely unacceptable.

    There is no correct answer to the atheist under his own terms.

    Would it be wrong of me to laugh at such a statement? Hoop jumping, fact twisting, and logic avoiding are all used to justify further unbelief, while at the same time charging the believer with malfeasance. Indeed, it is the believers fault the truth is vague! Yea, there’s a chuckle in there somewhere.—

    Yep, some things never change, and the song, er uh, the truth remains the same. It is hilarious to watch people exhaust their huffing and puffing at the Creator of all things. Therefore your so-called ‘challenges’ are seen for what they are.


    • I think you made a typo there, CS. I’ll fix it for you.
      “Hoop jumping, fact twisting, and logic avoiding are all used to justify further BELIEF”.
      Question unanswered, as usual.


    • CS, you wouldn’t know what logic and critical thinking was if it ran up to you and slapped you in the face. Constantly repeating that there is only one god, that the bible is the one true holy scripture and anyone who doesn’t see it your way is proof of only one thing. That you are a severely deluded individual incapable of distinguishing fantasy from reality, as testified by your mouth-frothing ranting and raving and cryptic gibberish that you usually write.

      Liked by 1 person

      • It’s very obvious what’s going on here. Both CS and Jonathan are at their most vindictive because KIA has resigned from ‘team Jesus’. They both recognize that their spiritual house of cards is undermined by any defectors; after all, there’s no replacements. People are leaving the faith quicker than you can say, “Watch out for that draught!”
        They are pissing-their-pants scared because everyone knows what happens to card houses in the breeze.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Hey Kia, Ashley and others I have discussed with on this page.

    First of all, thanks for the opportunity to discuss this topic around Biblical credibility. I think it is awesome that we bring this sort of stuff into a public forum. Kia has specifically challenged me to find ‘non biblical 1st century contemporary, secular historical references to the life death and resurrection of the Jesus portrayed in the NT.’

    After compiling research and formulating my opinion from the evidence available, I’ve realised a comment on here alone would not do it justice. The accounts are so compelling and vast to just to leave in a small comments section. So I have started the process of writing a blog on the topic of whether Jesus existed according to the criteria suggested by Kia. It should be done in (hopefully) max of a week, considering the time it takes to research and write – complete with a full reference list and evidences to back up any claims made.

    My last thought I will leave you with is this. Regardless of your position of faith, continue to find solid evidence to back up your claims. Really research why you do or don’t believe something. And don’t just google search these things. Read books. Get in touch with experts. The scholars. The historians. Be confident in your positions based on evidence and probability, rather than feelings and popular views. Be the judge in the courthouse as you weigh up the evidence available to you.

    Thanks again for your cooperation on here everyone. I certainly haven’t tried to belittle anyone or crush opinions. Sorry if you feel I have done so. I respect all views and you are entitled to your own. I just ask that we all have enough solid evidence to make a verdict on this one.

    Thanks heaps guys! Hope it’s an awesome rest of the week for you all 🙂


    • @Jonathan Camac

      After compiling research and formulating my opinion from the evidence available,….

      The accounts are so compelling and vast to just to leave in a small comments section.

      Compelling and vast? Wow!
      I in particular, look forward to reading all the vast, contemporary non-biblical historical evidence you have compiled that thousands upon thousands of people have somehow missed, including, biblical scholars, historians, archaeologists,amateurs, Noah’s Ark theme park owners, former atheist rock stars and amateur golfers such as Alice Cooper, and born-again porn stars have all missed.
      This should be a blog post par excellence. A genuine goddamn miracle in fact!
      Truly, I can hardly contain my excitement.
      Oh, and if you have a contemporary account of when Jesus raised Lazarus I will be so impressed I might even convert.

      Over to you, my dear boy ….

      Liked by 2 people

      • It’ll all be here in “due time” Ark as he’s still “compiling” them. He has time to reply about 300 times in back and fourths between me and Kia but all those sources, curiously not at his finger tips. He has to “compile” them and will provide them in “due time”.
        Poor lad. Can you imagine how furiously he’s typing away at his computer right now looking for something that doesn’t exist? I too cannot wait to see how he’s going to dig himself out of this extraordinary claim.

        Liked by 1 person

          • I’m sure he understands the challenge question well enough. Seems intelligent. Just trying to filibuster and get us away from it… I do hope he comes up with the goods


            • KIA Even though you said, right at the outset “How about the NON BIBLICAL 1ST CENTURY CONTEMPORARY SECULAR HISTORICAL references (emphasis mine) to the life death and resurrection of the jesus portrayed in the nt?” – a challenge he accepted several times –
              Are you sure you weren’t:
              Trying to “trick” him?
              Being too specific?
              Being too rigid or inflexible by being unwilling to budge or renegotiate the terms of the original question after he realized he couldn’t weasel his way out of it by playing the victim card and/or filibustering?
              Being curt, mean or rude to him by not wanting to talk about the Arizona Cardinals and what happened in week 1 of the NFL season?
              Secretly trying to get him to leave the conversation?

              Liked by 1 person

              • Totally kidding dude. I just read through most of the exchange between you and Jonathan. He’s so disingenuous. It appears as though his tactic was to paint you as an intolerant person unwilling to listen to reason. He never had any intention of having any kind of meaningful discussion of any kind.

                Liked by 1 person

              • I saw his intention and called him on it several times. Tried to even blame me if he didn’t decide to continue the Convo. Called him on that too. Called him on all his passive agressive deflection and bully tactics


      • What we are looking to do is to consider the probability of whether Jesus existed and died. Nothing more or less.

        We aren’t looking at Noah’s ark or Lazarus or anything else. Just whether the probability of Jesus having existed is high enough to put the myth beyond any reasonable doubts. And considering the weight of evidence we have for Jesus’ existence, what the implications might be for disregarding this evidence and what that might mean for other historical figures/sources which you may claim to believe under less documentation.

        Glad you are so keen to read Arkenaten! I certainly sense no level of sarcasm in your comment 😉 haha. All good banter hey. Good onya man


          • Get to the references and stop trying to change the topic. Your challenge is to establish the nt Jesus. Not ask us what we believe or not, then twist it into a different discussion. Just get back to the topic


              • Why would they not exist? If the nt Jesus was so ground shakingly momentous of a character in history? You mean no where in all of Judea and Roman historians contemporary to the life of the nt jesus did ANY ONE mention someone who had mass conversions to a new section of judaism and raised such riots for and against him? No mention of him at all?
                BTW, Josephus was 6yrs old at the time of the supposed crucifixion. He wrote between 93 and 97 ad. He was reporting what he would not have seen and experienced of the life, death and resurrection. And no Apologist of the Faith EVER used the testimonium reference before the 4th century. Nit even the Father who gave eusebius his copy of Josephus’s works. The section where Josephus raves about the man, if it’s lawful to call him a man… is admitted by all honest and non biased scholars room have been forged and fraudulently inserted, probably by eusebius in the 4th century… not contemporary, and not even Josephus’s words.


              • “I will give you some non biblical, secular sources for Jesus in due time if that’s what you would like of me.”
                Less than 24 hours later:
                “Mate, I would be happy to. But as I’ve explained, non biblical and contemporary accounts of Jesus do not exist (to my knowledge). Therefore the question is impossible. ”

                Cheeks feeling a little red yet? If not, don’t worry, I’ll be embarrassed for you. However, it would have been nice if you’d done your research first instead of dragging this out for nearly 24 hours and 300+ bullshit, pointless-question-asking, question-dodging, burden-of-proof-shifting, pity-party, persecution complex posts. Do you honestly think you’ve served any purpose with this garbage other than to make yourself look like a complete fool?!?!

                Liked by 1 person

              • Exactly Ashley. I made a point of allowing the back and forth and making sure we kept on point and were not distracted exactly for that reason. He doesn’t know anything more than what apologetics books tell him. Which point I hope he sees crystal clear now. I also hope he takes the sting and makes it a motivation to do his own research


              • You may want to rethink the contemporary for the bible. None of the gospels are named by their authors, they were ascribed to them by later century fathers. We literally have no idea who really write them for sure and thus no way to guarantee they were written by anyone contemporary ot even familiar with the nt Jesus


        • Oh, gods forbid I might be sarcastic. Any god you want to nominate, in fact.
          Jonathan, you did specify contemporary evidence did you not?
          FWIW, No one is questioning whether there was some smelly little itinerant eschatological itinerant Jewish Rabbi running around Palestine during the first couple of decades of the 1st Century who got himself nailed to a pole by the Romans for sedition.
          For heaven’s sake, Josephus mentions more than one ”Jesus”.
          No, what we are after is contemporary evidence for the biblical character, the Lake Tiberius pedestrian, and enemy of Judean Pig Farmer everywhere, Jesus of Nowhere Nazareth.

          The floor is yours….

          What you got, my man?
          Oh, Pee Ess.
          None of these count as contemporary:
          Tacitus, Seutonius, Josephus, etc …

          Neither does any mention of any tomb unless you can identify the tomb in question and fully explain why your Jesus wasn’t dumped in a communal grave to be munched upon by stray dogs.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Actually, Josephus only mentions Jesus twice. Please show me where he mentions more than one different Jesus.

            I was planning on unpacking Kia’s question in my blog, and keeping the relevant parts. I was going to delve into explaining how contemporary documentation for any person in ancient history is very very limited. So just because Jesus’ contemporary sources only appear in the Bible, this doesn’t discredit his existence or take away from his credibility.

            So answer me this question, if you are willing: What contemporary evidence/documentation do you have for any person in ancient history?

            Cheers man 🙂


            • Please show me where he mentions more than one different Jesus.

              With this statement you demonstrate you have not read Josephus. (except maybe the TF like all dim-witted apologists as part of their Apologist 101 course)
              And no, I will not enlighten your ignorance with links. Do the bloody homework yourself.

              So just because Jesus’ contemporary sources only appear in the Bible,

              The bible is not a contemporary source.
              Stop being a giant Nob. (sorry, I am not the ”nice one” …that’s Mike.

              So answer me this question, etc…

              No. Not willing at all.
              You made the claim for contemporary evidence. ”Vast” was the term you used, so stop being a frakking little Dipshit and step up to the plate and provide it.
              Or be honest and admit you have nothing except faith.
              (I realise honesty in this regard may be a novel concept for you but please try.)

              Liked by 2 people

              • One reference is widely believed to be completely true. His works.

                Parts of the other reference very likely have been edited by over zealous Christians. Yet, many historians still believe that the rest of this quote was still originally written by Josephus – regarding Jesus as a wise man, and having been sentenced to death by Pilate. Such statements are still believed to be written by Josephus. The parts about him rising after 3 days are contentious.


              • Tell me how a six year old can know all that the section claims to know? Tell me why not one of the fathers quotes it before the 4th century if it was there and so important a reference?
                Eusebius made it up and inserted it. He was a great, but very dishonest Apologist who also knew there were no contemporary references when there should be tons. So he made one up in the fourth century and stuck it into someone else’s book so it would look like it was authentic


              • Regarding the authenticity of Josephus’ first reference – John Dickson states that ‘there is nothing to suggest a forgery’ [6], whilst Professors Gern Theissen and Annette Merz confidently state that ‘the authenticity of the text may be taken as certain.’ [8]


              • John Dickson, have him on my shelf, is a Christian Apologist. He is not a biblical historian and he certainly isn’t unbiased or secular. Now your not even trying to think for yourself


              • In Josephus Autobiography the name Jesus is mentioned 20 times.
                This is one of my favorite passage…. the characters may even sound familiar!

                So Jesus the son of Sapphias, one of those whom we have already mentioned as the leader of a seditious tumult of mariners and poor people, prevented us, and took with him certain Galileans, and set the entire palace on fire, and thought he should get a great deal of money thereby, because he saw some of the roofs gilt with gold. They also plundered a great deal of the furniture, which was done without our approbation; for after we had discoursed with Capellus and the principal men of the city, we departed from Bethmaus, and went into the Upper Galilee. But Jesus and his party slew all the Greeks that were inhabitants of Tiberias, and as many others as were their enemies before the war began.

                Liked by 1 person

              • The second reference to a Jesus in Josephus’s work is to a high priest, son of… can’t remember the dads name, but the brother of James. Obviously NOT Jesus of the nt. Although he is said to have had a brother named james, in the nt gospel narratives anyways, THAT Jesus supposedly was the Son of God and the step son of Joseph. And was never high priest or even a priest. Couldn’t have been either supposedly being from the tribe of Judah, not levi


        • No… read the question again. Not a probability question. 1st century contemporary, secular historical references to the life, death and resurrection. Don’t rewrite the challenge, please


      • You see, I realise now that Ark and yourself were so keen on the contemporary sources outside the Bible. Unfortunately for your sake there is none – except that which is contained in the Bible.

        So I cannot meet the specific criteria of your question. But I can give some solid evidence to give good reason for the life and death of Jesus, with accounts from historians and other people of the 1st and 2nd century. That’s the limits of my ability to answer the question.

        Having said that, the lack of contemporary material for any ancient figure in history is very real. But that doesn’t detract from their credibility it seems. Why then, does it detract from the credibility of Jesus?


        • FINALLY…. ugh!! And the question was about 1st century, contemporary non biblical, secular historical sources for someone who is supposed to have caused riots and mass conversion to a new section of judaism…. you’d see tons of them if it actually happened. That’s the point.
          “Limits your ability to answer”? I don’t think so. You just answered there are none. That is the answer. What it does limit is the Evidence you have to back your Faith and belief that it actually did happen in real history. Which is what the post was about.


        • And dude… stop trying to wiggle and dodge. It’s just not honest and it is disrespectful and rude. Dir3ct questions, deserve direct answers. Not dodge, weave, misdirect, obfuscate, diffuse, distract and muddle


        • “Having said that, the lack of contemporary material for any ancient figure in history is very real. But that doesn’t detract from their credibility it seems. Why then, does it detract from the credibility of Jesus?”~Jonathan Camac

          Doesn’t it strike you as odd that this Jesus you deem to have been the most important person in all of history left absolutely no physical trace of his 30+ year existence on earth? No birth announcements? No portraits or sketches? No third-party reports of his activities? No trial transcripts? No execution decree? No bill of sale for the burial plot? No personal journals? No copies of his sermons or teachings? No handwritten instructions to his followers?

          Wouldn’t you expect an all-powerful, all-knowing deity to leave a better trail of evidence than your run-of-the-mill king or emperor?

          In fact, why would your god communicate its most important instructions to humanity via fallible humans knowing in advance how badly they’ll mess it up? Does this seem logical to you?

          Liked by 2 people

          • You see, I see the gospels written of Jesus as very credible, trustworthy accounts of the person and works of Jesus. You guys obviously don’t. But I also believe there is enough evidence form outside the Bible to believe jesus lived and died.

            In my opinion, you would have to be pretty ignorant to history to suggest Jesus didn’t even exist in the first place. Not sure if this is what you are implying (don’t think you are), but this is the tact I am coming from 🙂


            • I think the prevailing wisdom is that yes, a person named Yeshua probably lived in that time period. It was probably a common name, even. The big question is – was he someone who performed miracles/ son of god/ ‘beamed’ up to Heaven after he was crucified? THAT’s the part that sounds mythical. Remember, Jonathan, that Christians should really be referred to as ‘Paulians’.


              • KIA,

                Perhaps. However my approach is to to pose questions probing the epistemological underpinnings of someone’s beliefs. They’re meant to serve as food for thought and private reflection, so to me it doesn’t really matter if I get a response.

                And please consider this:

                Hammering someone over the head with facts seldom persuades them to abandon their deeply held beliefs, largely because those beliefs were never based on facts to begin with. Plus, most people hate being lectured.

                At our core, we are irrational beings driven by emotional needs and desires. I embraced the faith due to social conditioning and fears of what awaits those who reject Christ as their Lord and Savior. Similarly, I abandoned my faith because I simply could not sense God’s presence in my life despite years of fervent prayer pleading to be granted that experience.

                And based on what you’ve posted elsewhere, your journey away from the faith began in a hospital room (my sincerest condolences for the loss of your loved ones), which is far removed from engaging the facts and arguments presented by non-believers on a blog.

                As always, YMMV.

                Liked by 1 person

              • Thank again for the comment and the reminder that emotion and irrationality is the front and the back door to Faith. I agree. It’s different when you’re outside, seeing in


              • The NT was written between 40-100 A.D, and copies made within 100 years of the time of writing. This is important because it means there were plenty of people around when the New Testament documents were penned–people who could have contested the writings. In other words, those who wrote the documents knew that if they were inaccurate, plenty of people would have pointed it out. But as I’ve said, we have absolutely no ancient documents contemporary with the First Century that contest the New Testament texts. So in terms of history, the new testament proves to be an incredibly short amount of time between the writing of events and copies made. It gives great credibility to the writings of the new testament.

                However, many other ancient texts don’t carry such credibility. For example, Tacitus wrote manuscripts around 100 A.D. Copies of this original were not made until approximately 1000 years later. And yet, his writings and copies are generally believed to be credible accounts.

                Many ancient documents have huge time gaps between the writing and copies made of documents. The New Testament on the other hand, doesn’t – only 100 years between writing and copies made. The closest we have to this sort of accuracy is in the Iliad, where copies were made 500 years after the original manuscript was written.

                You can claim the Biblical texts were biased, that’s for you to decide. But when the timeframe of gospel writing and copies is in question, we must realise the credibility it actually provides.


              • No… the earliest date of authorship for the first of the four is NOT 40 ad. Try more like 70 ad, and since it was the first that the other two Synaptics were based on (Matt and luke copied from mark, ) neither of them can be any earlier.
                John is special. The earliest date is NOT before 100. Try early second century. You really sucks at this, you know?


              • The first of Paul’s letters was 1 thessalonians and that isn’t dated any earlier than 58. Paul never refers to any of the gospels or other letters in his writings. It is well accepted that Paul’s writings were first. Not the gospels. So no…. the gospels were not written from 40 ad on thru 100 ad


  6. Ashley, I don’t mean to be blunt. But if you’ve ever put together an essay or any material similar, it takes time to gather resources and write them out into a document that flows. You can’t do it as quick as a simple comment.

    Cheers lads!


  7. If all you want is contemporary non-biblical accounts, then I’m done here. In the blog I was setting about explaining why that aspect of the question was ridiculous. There’s a extreme absence of contemporary documentation of anyone in and around the time of Jesus. Does this discredit all people living during these time, such as Pharaoh? Heck no.

    So if that is all you wanted, then I’m out. The only contemporary accounts are for Jesus are from the people who actually followed him at the time – and their recordings are found in the Bible.

    But if you want some good evidence to believe Jesus lived and died, from non -biblical people of the 1st and 2nd century, I can do that.

    Thanks my dudes 😎

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Jonathan, I can’t help but wonder if what you are experiencing on this thread is your first ’bout’ of cognitive dissonance. . . have you interacted with non-believers much before this thread? Honest question. 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

    • Problem here was my initial understanding of the question. I thought I’d be able to answer it, until I realised what contemporary implied. I was trying to highlight to everyone that I had made this mistake – which it was my fault for answering.


        • That’s Jonathan’s specialty – not answering questions.
          “oh…Oooooohhhhhhh! You wanted “contemporary” sources?!?!?! You didn’t say that! I said I’d provide non biblical “secular” sources – you added “contemporary”, therefore, I cannot answer your impossible question. You’ve tied my hands! Clearly you guys are setting me up so I’ll just leave now”
          ***then proceeds to respond to another 20-30 posts ending each one with – “see ya later, I’m outta here!”***
          What dipshit.

          Liked by 1 person

      • I’m game if you guys are!!!! Let’s see your non-contemporary, non-biblical sources – you know, the ones you’ve been “compiling” for the better part of 24 hours now. Hell, any non-biblical source will do. Remember now, we’re looking for the Jesus of the bible – the one that can cure lepers and raise people from the dead, not just some dude named Jesus. We’re discussing the miracle working, rising from the dead Jesus. What were you going to show us before you didn’t realize what the word contemporary meant? You’ve been working so hard at it for so long, I’d hate to see all that effort go to waste. Let’s see what you came up with.

        Liked by 1 person

  9. Pingback: Music: Jesus The Missing Years | MyDoorIsAjar

    • I’ll have to checkm8t out. Just waking up. But calvinism and even the softer Reformed traditions have always been a bit of a thing with me. No matter how many points a person says they are, 5 or 4 or even less, when push comes to shove in discussion, they are all really dependant on all five points… even if they don’t realize it.


    • The Baptist Church, as well as one of my old churches, calvary chapel, has been fighting an invasion of sorts of Reformed Calvinist teaching that traditionally does not mix well with their foundational doctrines. What is termed ‘new calvinism’ is really the old calvinism, just more aggressive and modernized. Many Reformed these days, when pushed to their logical conclusions, will even admit that for them, calvinism and Reformed theology IS the true gospel. Which by unspoken default means that they believe, at least unconsciously, that all other Christianity’s and denominational leanings that are not Calvinistic or Reformed are NOT the true gospel.
      That’s why I told bruce that as a Christian, I probably would have called him and his church cultic as well as he calling UUs a cult.


  10. “Go ahead, give us the non-biblical, 1st century contemporary secular historians that documented this Greatest Story Ever Told at the time it happened… The life, death, resurrection of the New Testament Jesus.. I’ll be waiting.” -kia

    KIA: Thank you for writing about a serious topic that both theists and atheists should consider. I commend you for it. But the way you’ve posed the challenge slants it away from the possibility of a worthwhile response. You ask for “non-biblical, 1st century contemporary historians” but historians are, by definition, not contemporaries. There are no 5th century historians writing about Attila or 11 century historians writing about William. It is the nature of history that it is written after the fact.

    Secondly, in the first century there was no such thing as professional secular historians. Historians were military men, politicians, and other scholars who investigated and wrote about past heroes, wars and movements.

    That being said, we have the gospels, which record what contemporaries of Jesus claim to have seen. Of course, eyewitness claims are the foundation of much history. (BTW, of the Gospels, Luke comes closes to a modern’s idea of an historian.) We also have the extra-biblical secular historian and near contemporary Josephus, who mentions Jesus, and within about 70 years we have a record of Pliny the Younger asking the Emperor Trajan what he should do with the followers of Jesus. Already they were meeting early on the first day of the week and would “sing a hymn to Christ as God.” These are the kinds of sources with which historians always work.

    As regards the authenticity of the biblical texts, we have better manuscript evidence for the Bible than for any other ancient religious or historical document by far. Of course this does not mean that claims made in the text are true, just that we can have confidence that they were actually made. What one does with those claims is not so much the province of the historian as it is of the philosopher.

    For those interested in an historian’s perspective, I would encourage reading Paul Maier from Western Michigan or N.T. Wright from St. Andrews (“The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering Who Jesus Was and Is” might be a good place to start.)

    Best to you,


Please comment Responsibly and Respectfully

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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