• Help Spread the Fire
  • Click here to read Dr. Brown's latest article
  • An Interview with Apologist Greg Koukl and a Conversation about Racism and the NBA

    April 30, 2014 | 82 Comments

    Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

    [Download MP3]

    Dr. Brown interviews well-known apologist Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason and then takes your calls on the NBA’s treatment of Clippers owner Donald Sterling, banned for life and fined $2.5 million for his racist comments. Listen live here 2-4 pm EST, and call into the show at (866) 348 7884 with your questions and comments.

     

    Hour 1:

    Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: Yes, there are many mysteries in the Faith, but without a doubt our Faith is reasonable, upright, and sound!

     

    Hour 2:

    Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: As we discuss issues of racism in the NBA, let us be determined to have more light than heat and let us be constructive in our interaction!

    SPECIAL OFFER! THIS WEEK ONLY! 
    This week, you can pre-order a signed and numbered copy of Dr. Brown’s new groundbreaking book, Can You Be Gay and Christian?, for $30 Postage Paid! (Release Date May 6th)
    Call 1-800-278-9978 or Order Online!

    Other Resources:

    Will EPSN Reporter Become a Media Martyr for Sharing His Christian Beliefs?

    Dr. Brown Interviews Dr. William Lane Craig and Takes Your Apologetics Questions

    Forgiveness and Restitution (and the Korean rapper Psy); and Who Says the World is Supposed to Like Us?

    Spread the Word:
    • E-mail this story to a friend!
    • Facebook
    • Digg
    • del.icio.us
    • Mixx
    • MySpace
    • Technorati
    • Sphinn
    • StumbleUpon
    • TwitThis

    Comments

    82 Responses to “An Interview with Apologist Greg Koukl and a Conversation about Racism and the NBA”

    1. Van
      April 30th, 2014 @ 10:35 am

      This should make everyone wonder what happened to the concept of free speech. What kind of a country do we live in where a man can lose his business just for saying something stupid? The NBA commissioner Adam Silver obviously hasn’t read the U.S Constitution or even the NBA Constitution which states that the only way an owner can be ousted is for financial difficulties. Silver has overstepped his authority and this will be shown in a court of law. Donald Sterling absolutely loves lawsuits and he’s going to have a good one here. If this tape is the only evidence the NBA has they are going to lose because it won’t be admissible as evidence in court. And Sterling will counter with charges against the NBA that his right to free speech has been violated and this will likely bring the entire league to its knees. I know Silver is new on the job and wants to make a big splash and a name for himself. He’s going to get those things by the end of this story but it won’t be the ones he wants.

      Sterling might be a despicable person but I happen to be involved in the sports world and know that he isn’t any worse than his players and looks like a paragon of virtue compared to most of them. I am not defending this guy. He is more than capable of doing that all by himself.

      Unlike Dr. Brown, Greg Koukl does not let critics who make solid arguments post on his blog.
      He knows very well that none of his arguments stand up to scrutiny. Dr. Brown on the other hand, is blissfully unaware of this fact

    2. Dr. Michael L Brown
      April 30th, 2014 @ 10:45 am

      Van, you actually had a decent post until disqualifying yourself and losing all credibility at the end. :)

    3. Bo
      April 30th, 2014 @ 11:35 am

      Van,

      This post is not to agree with or disagree with your post above. It is to help new readers understand who your are and why you post. It is time for you to prove any shred of intellectual honesty that you might happen to possess.

      Why should anyone listen to you when you have been proven wrong and won’t admit it? You discredit yourself over and over with insulting, arrogant, and bigoted language. You just can’t resist starting a fight and you refuse to answer valid challenges to your unfounded and deceitful assertions. Why should we listen to a troll?

      “troll
      One who posts a deliberately provocative message…with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument.”- http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=troll

      You have been confronted with this over and over:

      When are you going to answer the charge that you took Scweitzer out of context? Did you do it intentionally or were you duped by someone and then just regurgitate the lie? At least admit that you were wrong, even if you won’t tell us your motive. Don’t dodge or ignore this if you are an honest man. To refresh you memory, here is the challenge:

      Below is one of many examples of Van’s deception technique. He has been asked repeatedly to either admit that he has posted false testimony or to produce verification of his assertion. After being called on the carpet, he conveniently ignores all rebuttals and continues to regurgitate deception mixed with a huge amount of rhetoric, vitriol and insult. He is not to be taken seriously as scholar or a commentator. He is a troll, and nothing more.

      Van wrote:
      “’There is nothing more negative than the result of the critical study of the life of Jesus. The Jesus of Nazareth who came forward publicly as the Messiah, who preached the Kingdom of God, who founded the Kingdom of Heaven upon earth, and died to give his work its final consecration, never had any existence.’ – Albert Scweitzer (1875-1965)

      You just accused Albert Schweitzer of being classless, unqualified, and simple minded. Par for the course for people who have no respect for intelligence and education.

      Many scholars have tried to find evidence from outside the Bible that Jesus really existed. They came up with nothing, absolutely nothing as Dr. Schweitzer said.

      You people have bought into all the lies of religion and then you repeat these lies without any hint of a conscience. Calling me a liar when all I do is speak the truth just shows how backward your evil religion really is.”

      Sheila responded:
      “Well, it’s a classic move by you to rip a quotation out of context. Who is it you’re listening to? It makes no sense for you to drop what you think is a bombshell when all you’ve done now is make yourself look more foolish because you never considered that Google just might have Schweitzer’s book on line.

      Anyone who cares to can read further down the chapter and see that Schweitzer was referring to the historic Jesus as He was portrayed by the modern theological historians of his own time. His thought was that “That” Jesus never existed… His point was that we end up molding Him according to our modern way of thinking categorically. We essentially risk minimizing the astonishing profundity of His teachings.

      This link begins with the quote you gave us and then explains exactly what Schweitzer was getting at. The man made the cross he wanted on his own grave, for Pete’s sake.
      http://books.google.com/books?id=uzRXxvPsylkC&pg=PA478#v=onepage&q&f=false

      To date, Van still ignores the proof of his irrelevancy. He continues to persecute in the only way he as power to do. That power, in this instance, being the grace of Dr. Brown. Be sure to thank YHWH that Van is not in any governmental position where his bigotry and prejudice can do more harm.

      2 Timothy 3
      12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.
      13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.
      14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
      15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
      16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
      17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

    4. Van
      April 30th, 2014 @ 11:54 am

      Bo, you should think about who you are and why you post. I’m not going to respond to your or Adam’s posts.

      Dr. Brown,
      You make whatever argument you want to support whatever you want and I’ll refute it which disqualifies your previous statement absolutely. Or you can excuse yourself from a real debate by claiming you don’t have the time. I don’t care.

    5. Sheila
      April 30th, 2014 @ 1:09 pm

      Van,

      You’ve had more than ample opportunity to engage any one of us in a debate or even a conversation but that’s not what you’re interested in or we would have seen evidence of it by now. You post highly inflammatory remarks, as if you’re tossing in a grenade, and then you retreat until the next time. You’ve given absolutely nothing other than uninformed, prepackaged, one liners that you believe must really sting us; well they don’t. Anyone of us would gladly converse with you if that was your intention, obviously it’s not. Your sole purpose in posting is to mock us. The thing is we’re gracious enough to let you do it. You haven’t tried to reason with us, which is what most opponents would do. Then again, most would bring at least some verifiable “facts” to the conversation. Just bring something, anything to the table, preferably something substantive, and we’ll debate till the cows come home!

      You have nothing, you’re faith in atheistic humanism is all in vain.

      Just Google Dr. Brown’s debates and take a listen before you challenge him. That’s funny!

    6. Bo
      April 30th, 2014 @ 1:10 pm

      Van,

      Well, I guess that just shows that you are doing what you condemn Dr. Brown for. I think that hypocrisy is your middle name. We all know that you won’t answer because you have no answer that serves your purpose. This is par for the course for you. You have done this over and over…projecting your own dishonesty upon others. Maybe Benjamin or Sheila will also call you on the carpet for being dishonest and self-serving also. Maybe Dr. Brown will do us all a favor and either moderate your posts or ban you from posting.

    7. Stew
      April 30th, 2014 @ 1:10 pm

      You don’t care. I suggest that you posted because you do care. You should listen to these guys. They talk sense.
      Not to mention Truth.

    8. Greg Allen
      April 30th, 2014 @ 1:39 pm

      Van,

      >> lose his business just for saying something stupid?

      It wasn’t “just something stupid” — it was racist speech.

      It is up to the NBA, not me, if this is worth banning him for — but let’s not soft-sell racism.

      By the way — in most jobs I’ve had, I could get fired for saying stupid stuff — to my boss, to co-workers, to co-2workers, etc.

      Stuff far less “stupid” than we heard on that tape!

      It’s not a free-speech issue. It’s about running a decent business. Free speech rarely exists in places of work.

    9. Adam
      April 30th, 2014 @ 1:42 pm

      Van is just upset because we actually challenge whar he says, rather than being intimidated as some Christans are when they come across his rhetoric. For the record, Van has also holdx to this idea that Jesus came from mythical sources like Horus and Boulder. Aside from the fact that even hard leftists like Bart Ehrman are scandalized by such a view, this video is excellent in showjng how silly those views reallyare:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0-EgjUhRqA

    10. Bo
      April 30th, 2014 @ 2:44 pm

      There once was a man that proclaimed,
      That all faith was proven defamed.
      But all he did post
      Proved that he believed most
      And he only knew not he was shamed.

      Well Van is the name of this dude
      Whose worship is easily viewed.
      Only his self-crafted god
      Is fatally flawed,
      His view of himself being skewed.

      His worship, he does, in the mirror.
      And it could never be clearer
      That for him what is “true”
      Can’t come from you
      For he is the only inventor.

      So he never answers The call
      To prove now once and for all
      That his deceit proffered quotes
      Which he shamelessly promotes
      Are more than just bigoted gall*.

      Now he is left with the knowing
      That his words are nothing but blowing
      For all substance is lost
      When he won’t pay the cost
      Of an answer to which he is owing.

      Added to this we all witness
      That he has boasted his fitness
      To answer any conclusion
      But it is just an allusion
      When challenged he fails to confess.

      This man of whom I make rhyme
      Has proven time after time
      That his lies and deceit
      And outrageous conceit
      Make his assertions are not worth a dime.

      *Gall: n. the trait of being rude and impertinent; inclined to take liberties

    11. jon
      April 30th, 2014 @ 3:16 pm

      The one thing I would want to post on Mr. Sterling is that he is an older man who has made the mistake of bringing to his table a young woman who is likely a Deliala. I do not necessarily think he is racist, I think what he is trying to say is that he does not want at his table/ or his sports box a certain class of people. This is not his crowd, and for that he should consider selling out of the NBA. He is looking more for a orchestra crowd type. Get rid of the young woman who is selling you out in your own home. Your should be more mature than to have a gold digging woman lie and stabbing you in the back.

      I give the Jewish people much credit for not maligning people for the role certain types of people played in the holocaust. I find this to be the highest degree of credibility that a human can have. I commend these people for not blaming a race when that was and is the easist answer. I will give Sterling the same consideration and not jump to the easiest conclusion that he is a racist which he is most likely not. I would even go as far to say that I have not meet a racist Jewish person.

    12. Bo
      April 30th, 2014 @ 4:24 pm

      Last line should be

      Make his assertions not worth a dime.

    13. jon
      April 30th, 2014 @ 4:37 pm

      Bo, you are actually quite talented when it comes to poetry. I enjoyed your post as Van most likely is over come with amazment that poetry is posted to this now famous Van! Wow

    14. Brian R.
      April 30th, 2014 @ 8:00 pm

      Jon,

      You said, “I do not necessarily think he is racist, I think what he is trying to say is that he does not want at his table/ or his sports box a certain class of people.”

      What is your definition of a racist, and have you listened to the tape?

      If he said the same things about Jewish people, I’d venture to say that you would have a different opinion. Sterling has had suits against him for not selling property to minorities as well. I find myself amazed at how people, such as yourself, can draw such a convoluted conclusion as demonstrated with your above statement… smh

    15. Bo
      April 30th, 2014 @ 8:16 pm

      Jon,

      Thanks for the kind words. Maybe Van can catch on if something akin to nursery rhymes or Dr. Suess is presented to him…maybe not. At least that is what Isaiah says.

      Isaiah 28 (The Message)
      9 “Is that so? And who do you think you are to teach us? Who are you to lord it over us? We’re not babies in diapers to be talked down to by such as you—
      10 ‘Da, da, da, da, blah, blah, blah, blah. That’s a good little girl, that’s a good little boy.’”
      11 But that’s exactly how you will be addressed. God will speak to this people In baby talk, one syllable at a time—
      12 and he’ll do it through foreign oppressors. He said before, “This is the time and place to rest, to give rest to the weary. This is the place to lay down your burden.” But they won’t listen.
      13 So GOD will start over with the simple basics and address them in baby talk, one syllable at a time—”Da, da, da, da, blah, blah, blah, blah. That’s a good little girl, that’s a good little boy.” And like toddlers, they will get up and fall down, get bruised and confused and lost.
      14 Now listen to GOD’s Message, you scoffers, you who rule this people in Jerusalem.
      15 You say, “We’ve taken out good life insurance. We’ve hedged all our bets, covered all our bases. No disaster can touch us. We’ve thought of everything. We’re advised by the experts. We’re set.”
      16 But the Master, GOD, has something to say to this: “Watch closely. I’m laying a foundation in Zion, a solid granite foundation, squared and true. And this is the meaning of the stone: A TRUSTING LIFE WON’T TOPPLE.

      Van the mocker, whose middle name is hypocrisy, is toppling, and is falling backwards and being snared even as we speak…he just does not know it…because he doesn’t want to be confused with the facts or with mature arguments. Van has digressed so far that nothing but ridicule can possibly get through to him…or maybe some huge catastrophic judgment…but that is YHWH’s decision. Van may be too far gone. It is very sad indeed…but Van’s deity (himself) will not be left standing…he will bow to Y’shua some day, whether by choice or by shear, trembling, begging, pitiful fear.

      Shalom

    16. Greg Allen
      April 30th, 2014 @ 8:25 pm

      Regarding the Sterling case, I have not heard any conservatives make this point — this is not about free speech, it’s about free association.

      Do the other NBA owners ave the right to disassociate with someone who is an expensive, embarrassing pain-in-the-neck?

      The answer is — conservative Christians better hope so.

      This NBA’s right to disassociate with Sterling is the same right your church uses to disassociate with gays or whoever else you don’t like.

      As often as I argue with you guys about homosexuality, I strongly defend to rebuke and expel gays from your “association” (aka your church.)

      I think that is un-Christ-like of you, but I do think it is your civil right.

      This is the same civil right that the NBA owners are exercising when they rebuked and expelled Sterling.

    17. Brian R.
      April 30th, 2014 @ 8:40 pm

      Mike asked the question if it was right for the President to weigh in on the Sterling case. I would say two things on this. First of all, President Obama was asked this question so that was why he spoke on it; and second, his comments were sound and accurate are are to be commended.

      Regarding the NBA’s ruling. I believe it to be just indeed. The question of privacy is not the issue. The FBI was invading MLK’s privacy 50 years ago, and that was never a collective issue raised, so this is nothing new.

      The fact is, if we are going to stand as followers of Christ first, then we should not compromise with racist who have been exposed. If the Church won’t judge with righteous judgement, then we are a people to be pitied. So let’s stop putting the players on trial with “what if” seneros, while attempting to soften the ugliness of this sin. The ruling was just as a clear message has been sent.

    18. Benjamin Warkentin
      April 30th, 2014 @ 9:29 pm

      Greg, I think you misunderstand. Conservative Christians welcome homosexuals into the Church, as it’s only there that they can find healing and be saved.

      1 Corintians 6:9-11 (NRSV)

      9 Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And this is what some of you used to be. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

      Verse 11 is especially important. “… this is what some of you used to be. But you were washed…” They are no longer those things. The doors are open for all to come and be washed.

      ————–
      (KJV)
      9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

      10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

      11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

    19. Sheila
      April 30th, 2014 @ 9:46 pm

      I left a comment on Youtube under a video about the flood and in it I’d said that all the water didn’t come from just rain, as someone had calculated (or seemed to) the amount of rain that would have fallen in an hour. He thought it was beyond belief. Recently we had really bad floods with an astronomical amount of rainfall in one hour! Anyway, I thought nothing of it but then I get an email with a new comment. Anyone care to take a stab at it. I haven’t determined how I’ll answer it yet but it might be a good exercise for us. This is it:

      lennyhipp
      “Sheila C it really doesn’t matter if all the water came from rain or not until you reconcile the following: 1)if the water came from “the deep”, WHERE are these huge underground empty caverns that once contained water? 2)WHERE did all the water go? 3)there’s ZERO evidence for a global flood 4) there’s a boat load (pun intended) of evidence that a global flood COULD NOT have happened in the last 150MY.”

      Anyone?

    20. jon
      April 30th, 2014 @ 10:57 pm

      Brian, What I was saying is that he deserves a hearing to explain himself. Maybe he feels threatened with this younger woman of not being stealthy enough some younger horned up basketball players. Do we throw the racist card down and take everything away from him. Brian if the German’s had put your people through the holocaust would you be able to separate the people from the cause? It takes a special people to get to the truth of a matter, without the actual truth say in science you do not have something that works. Brian think it through this is an important concept. Brian I do not know you possibly you are a German what would you think if you had put a different people through such a tragedy.. you would not be able to live without someone trying to wipe you off the earth. I am overcome with the amount of fortitude that the Jewish people have had to get to the truth of the matter- it is more difficult than words to describe reasons for such atrocities in yet reason’s do exist. I will still be slow to persecute this owner of the NBA- He

    21. Greg Allen
      April 30th, 2014 @ 11:16 pm

      Benjamin,

      >> Greg, I think you misunderstand. Conservative Christians welcome homosexuals into the Church, as it’s only there that they can find healing and be saved.

      Oh, I understand. Conservative Christians welome gays as long as they stop being gay.

      It’s a very convoluted definition of “welcome” that makes conservative Christians feel better about themselves but doesn’t fool anybody else.

      >>sodomites, 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God

      Just curious… does your church treat the greedy the same way they treat the gays? Has your church every endorsed laws denying greedy people their civil rights, for example?

    22. Greg Allen
      April 30th, 2014 @ 11:33 pm

      … and I’m waiting for Dr. Brown to go on Piers Morgan’s show to school him about the bible and greedy, so-called “Christians.”

    23. Greg Allen
      April 30th, 2014 @ 11:43 pm

      Shiela,

      >> I left a comment on Youtube under a video about the flood and in it I’d said that all the water didn’t come from just rain, as someone had calculated (or seemed to) the amount of rain that would have fallen in an hour. He thought it was beyond belief.

      The Flood makes sense once you get your mind around the cosmology of that day. The earth was viewed as in a “vault” that sat above and below a cosmic sea.

      It’s perfectly clear in Genesis 1 but a lot of people miss it, since it is so radically different from what we know from science.

      “And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so.”

    24. Greg Allen
      April 30th, 2014 @ 11:49 pm

      I didn’t state the obvious: since the earth sits on water and under water, there is more than enough water to cover the entire Earth in 15 cubits of it.

    25. Van
      April 30th, 2014 @ 11:55 pm

      “You’ve had more than ample opportunity to engage any one of us in a debate or even a conversation but that’s not what you’re interested in or we would have seen evidence of it by now”

      > Hilarious! I asked you to present me with some real evidence that Jesus Christ actually existed. Do I have to point out AGAIN that you and everybody else has completely failed to do this? You told me how MUCH other believers BELIEVE they really really do! That just doesn’t cut it. So debate away. Let’s see you verify the existence of Jesus Christ using sources independent of the Bible. I’m waiting… and waiting… and waiting… and I’ve BEEN waiting… and I’ll wait forever because no such evidence exists and you KNOW it.

    26. Dr Michael L Brown
      May 1st, 2014 @ 12:53 am

      I’m beginning to think that Van actually doesn’t exist.

    27. Stew
      May 1st, 2014 @ 3:52 am

      Dr Brown.
      Is that one of Greg Kounkl’s tactics?
      I must get that book.

      Here’s a question.
      Who would you choose as the most ’rounded’ apologists currently, rather than science weighted or scholarly or philosophical.

    28. Robert Marks
      May 1st, 2014 @ 4:44 am

      Here’s your Evidence Van

      Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, Julius Africanus,
      Origen, Pliny the Younger, Thallus.

    29. DB
      May 1st, 2014 @ 4:47 am

      Van,
      Bart Ehrman says he knows of no serious historian who doubts Jesus existed.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdqJyk-dtLs

    30. Ray
      May 1st, 2014 @ 6:34 am

      Van, I’ve encouraged you to find absolute infallible proof that Jesus exists, and I don’t believe you did what was asked.

      The proof you pretend to seek that Jesus is true, alive, and real, is all over the world.

      Or, do you believe that some people have simply evolved into having the ability to speak in tongues, and they…..they….just happened to be believers in Jesus?

      Did you go to those who speak in tongues for real, and hear what it is they say? Did you listen to see if each one has his own language (tongue)? Did you notice the different sounds?
      Did you notice how it flows, like Jesus said it would? (like rivers of living water)

      If it’s just natural ability, why don’t you do it?

      Or, is it simply that some people have not yet evolved into having the ability to speak in tongues and you just happen to be one of them because you do not believe in Jesus?

      Van, why is it that you will not come under the authority of any, but instead, as you say, “give orders, not take them.”?

      Do you really believe yourself to be unbiased, true, truthful, honest, and just, more than any, and therefore you deserve the seat you have placed yourself in?

      There is one that is higher than the heavens and he is watching over you.

    31. jon
      May 1st, 2014 @ 6:58 am

      How many of us when you choose a place to live, or a school for our children look for the poorest neighborhood to live in? Is not that a form of what Sterling who is in his 80′s is doing? When we have guests over do we look for the poorest people to invite into our homes? It’s not that we are against poor people we are just choosing when and where to have them over. But, what about if I tithe and even hire some poor people which helps them out tremendously.

      Now you come into my home and catch me complaining to my young mistress who wants to invite her associates to come in and have a back yard party in my home. What would you be caught saying in a secret I phone recording?

      Jesus did go to the homes of the poor/tax collector’s/ did not have a mistress / I think the millennium period will be a different world.

    32. jon
      May 1st, 2014 @ 7:08 am

      I do not defend Sterling’s having a mistress/his ego/his likely not giving 10 percent of his wealth to a church or synagogue/any part of his life in being a mature human with limited time he is acting foolishly.

      I do defend him in he is categorically not a racist. His pants are down and he has been burned but his whole life he did not get where he is by being a racist. This is just not accurate.

    33. Ray
      May 1st, 2014 @ 7:15 am

      Van, If God doesn’t exist, why is there so much good in the world?

    34. Greg Allen
      May 1st, 2014 @ 8:08 am

      Jon,

      >>When we have guests over do we look for the poorest people to invite into our homes? It’s not that we are against poor people we are just choosing when and where to have them over. But, what about if I tithe and even hire some poor people which helps them out tremendously.

      On first blush, this is highly offensive.

      Being white is not like being rich and being black is not like being poor!

      This fact that this analogy makes sense to you makes me wonder how you view race.

      I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.. surely you don’t view it this way. Where you trying to explain how a racist views black people (but not necessarily you)?

    35. Van
      May 1st, 2014 @ 8:12 am

      “Here’s your Evidence Van
      Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, Julius Africanus,
      Origen, Pliny the Younger, Thallus.”

      > Even the most conservative scholars say that Eusibius forged the golden paragraphs in the works of Josephus. If they were there before then why didn’t Origen mention them? He was very familiar with Jospehus’ book. None of the rest of these men were alive when Jesus supposedly was. So you have second century writers giving hearsay accounts of stories from the first half of the first century. Hearsay is not evidence. Your argument is one gigantic fail. You are guilty of promoting an obvious hoax. Your punishment is in the fact that you have been totally discredited. Don’t waste my time with anymore ridiculous arguments that any fith grader could easily see through.

    36. Greg Allen
      May 1st, 2014 @ 8:14 am

      I, personally, like having Van here.

      It means I get a whole lot less vitriol for disagreeing with you guys.

    37. Greg Allen
      May 1st, 2014 @ 8:19 am

      Jon,

      >> I do defend him in he is categorically not a racist.

      Seriously? You didn’t detect any racist attitudes in those tapes?

      The worst, for me, was his “I give them houses” part of the rant.

      This attitude seemed straight out of the plantation where black people didn’t “earn” their living. It was “given” to them by the largess of the plantation owner.

      How is that “categorically” not racist?

    38. Greg Allen
      May 1st, 2014 @ 8:24 am

      Jon,

      Here is the exact quote:

      Sterling: “You just, do I know? I support them and give them food, and clothes, and cars, and houses. Who gives it to them? Does someone else give it to them? Do I know that I have—Who makes the game? Do I make the game, or do they make the game? Is there 30 owners, that created the league?”

      This strikes me as a profoundly racist attitude. It seems, in his mind, it’s all about the white owners giving stuff to the black players.

      It’s like the plantation attitude where the South was not built by the hard work of black people — it was built only by the plantation owners.

    39. jon
      May 1st, 2014 @ 8:46 am

      Greg he makes the mistake of saying that ” HE GIVES ” God gives- only God Gives- God gives me breath and life- Only God can give and that is what this man of age 80 needs to find out.

      Only God can give say a miniVan the life in him and allow him to poke back and deny everything! We are given opportunities to think through things to have opinions. This is a place to figure it out and then to worship the God of the universe. The miniVan can be a little cranky crab and say that he is smarter than everyone else. Remember the number 1 866 34 TRUTH.
      Truth is always available a phone call away. But, if you want to be a crabby paddy you can be you have the freedom to do so.

    40. Benjamin Warkentin
      May 1st, 2014 @ 9:58 am

      Greg,

      “Oh, I understand. Conservative Christians welome gays as long as they stop being gay.

      It’s a very convoluted definition of “welcome” that makes conservative Christians feel better about themselves but doesn’t fool anybody else.”

      Then I will just ask you to exegete 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (NRSV)

      9 Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And this is what some of you used to be. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

      You don’t want them to be washed? Or inherit the kingdom of God?

    41. Benjamin Warkentin
      May 1st, 2014 @ 9:59 am

      And we do not welcome them as long as they stop being gays. We welcome them so that they can have the opportunity to hear the Word, which if thats the case, will produce real change and fruit i their lives.

    42. Sheila
      May 1st, 2014 @ 1:34 pm

      Robert Marks and DB,

      You see now why there’d never be a debate with Van. He rejects all the scholars in favor of his mantra. “Jesus never existed.” I pointed him to Bart Erhman’s book but I can’t imagine him actually reading it as the conclusion is not what he wants to believe. Ignorance is bliss, don’t you know?

      It’s one thing to say you don’t believe you need His salvation, it’s another to say He never existed. Let alone still exists! Has always existed is way too much to believe!!

    43. Sheila
      May 1st, 2014 @ 1:44 pm

      Thanks for your thoughts on the flood, Greg.

      Bo, that was a cool rendition of Isaiah’s words!

      We do need to pray for Van. We never know but that God has plans for him such as he had for Saul/Paul.

    44. Brian R.
      May 1st, 2014 @ 5:12 pm

      Jon,

      You said, ” I do defend him in he is categorically not a racist. His pants are down and he has been burned but his whole life he did not get where he is by being a racist. This is just not accurate.

      Your statement is as bit illogical. Are you concluding that no successful people are racists? His real-estate practices have a racial history as well. I previously asked you fair questions, but you didn’t answer either one. Because you believe that Mr. Sterling is not a racist, I asked you:

      What is your definition of a racist?
      Did you listen to the recording in its entirety?

      I only ask this because it is baffling to believe that you would take such a stance in light of what has been said. Dr. Brown was clear in stating that something would be wrong with and individual who didn’t recognize that, of which I totally agree. So, I’m giving you the benefit of doubt that you may not have actually heard it. Some of the statements he said to his girlfriend were as follows:

      “Why are you taking pictures with minorities?”
      “It bothers me a lot that you are associating with black people”
      He did not want her to be seen walking in public with black people…

      The NBA needed to take swift action, because it was the right thing to do. Mr. Silver performed his due diligence in the matter and made an educated judgment, of which he is to be commended.

      As to your comments regarding the Holocaust and positing a different scenario, you lost me, and I really couldn’t follow where you were going and didn’t know the point that you were trying to convey. Simply put, racism is hatred, and hate is as murder in the eyes of G-d (1 Jn 3:15). He turned Miriam into a leper because of similar sentiments, so I don’t know what your defense is all about. He admitted that he made these comments, and because they are public, swift action had to be taken.

    45. jon
      May 1st, 2014 @ 6:03 pm

      Brian I will answer your question if you can answer mine.

      What is your definition of a homophobe? If you can answer my question I will answer your question fully.

      Where I lost you is actually quite simple and let me be very direct with this. Have you ever visited a holocaust museum. I have and I have German ancestory. I felt such condemnation could easily be piled on me for being born into my family. I am overwealmed with the accuracy of getting to the truth of the eveil that happened. I am impressed as a people that had the fortitude to not only sort this out, but to build a country stronger and more technological than almost every other country. The only way that they could do this is to assign accurately the events of the past and build upon those truths. (AND of course the GOD OF ISRAEL>) So, you see Brian to not quickly label with a bumbper sticker racist/homophobe/anti meat/ polluter/ ect ect ect makes actually a lot of sense when we can see God’s own people accuately sorting out events in history that would be quite simple to lable all Germans and murder’s – beast- animals! I appreciate being able to come to God to be judged on my merits.

      I will be slow to judge this 80 year old man, he deserves that from me, Brian you can slap your own bumber sticker on your car.

    46. Van
      May 1st, 2014 @ 6:05 pm

      Kobe Bryant, the washed up, past his prime, moody star of the Lakers needs to banned from the NBA for life immediately. He hurled a homophobic slur at an NBA official and hundreds of fans and all the players, coaches and officials heard it. This was no private conversation, it was a public comment. If Kobe doesn’t get a life time ban for this then the NBA needs to leave Mr. Sterling alone.

      Ray there is so much good in the world because people are basically good, more proof that the Bible is just plain wrong, about EVERYTHING.

    47. Brian R.
      May 1st, 2014 @ 6:31 pm

      Jon, why the games with you answer my question first? Also, Your comments about me putting a bumper sticker on my car is unwarranted and out of touch.

      You said, “What is your definition of a homophobe? If you can answer my question I will answer your question fully.”

      My definition of a homophobe would be one who is afraid of homosexuals.

      You asked me if I’ve ever visited the Holocaust museum, well, the answer to that is, yes. Very telling indeed! The difficulty with your analogy was found in your poor sentence structure, so it wasn’t quite as simple as you implied. Please re-read and then you will see what I mean.

      Again, Jon, he’s been judged him by what he “said,” for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. Hence,this is what has been taken into account. Also, just to clarify, I asked you two questions.

    48. jon
      May 1st, 2014 @ 7:55 pm

      Brian the answer to your two questions

      1. My definition of racism is someone who assumes they are racially superior to other groups.
      2. I have seen and heard nonstop this story on the news on every media available, so yes I have heard the tape in its entirety.
      3. Why the games? The question is to see where you answer what you have been taught in society how to label a group of people. Your answer is actually a correct one and is followed up by do you actually know someone who is truly homophobic? I have never meet someone is traumatized by meeting a homosexual and reject the labels that our society names other people. The democrats are experts at naming things like pro choice for murder, out of touch for the other views in government when they are actually much out of touch with God.

      I know that you have heard the tapes and have already labeled someone with a label that has been conditioned to stick on someone who has uttered something at his personal home in a personal environment. It is deeper than this quick knee jerk reaction, there is much more to this story and needs caution before you pull out a label and stick it on someone.

      That does not mean I agree with his life style, or defend him unconditionally. I only say that he deserves the right to defend himself in the public court of TMZ.

      Brian you should see my texting it is even worse.

    49. Bo
      May 1st, 2014 @ 8:13 pm

      Sheila,

      Paul had a clear conscience and was trying to serve YHWH. Van is quite the opposite. There are some things and people that YHWH says not to pray for. Sometimes it is time to move on. The Message version gets a few things right now and then, esp. as to the feel of what is being said. The complete Jewish Bible actually does a better job actually, but I wanted to be as simple as possible for Van.

      1Sa 16:1 And the LORD said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite: for I have provided me a king among his sons.

      1 Ti 1:12 And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry;
      13 Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.

      Ac 23:1 And Paul, earnestly beholding the council, said, Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.

      1Jo 5:16 If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.

      2 Ti 4
      14 Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works:
      15 Of whom be thou ware also; for he hath greatly withstood our words.

      Acts 13
      8 But Elymas the sorcerer (for so is his name by interpretation) withstood them, seeking to turn away the deputy from the faith.
      9 Then Saul, (who also is called Paul,) filled with the Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him,
      10 And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?
      11 And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season. And immediately there fell on him a mist and a darkness; and he went about seeking some to lead him by the hand.
      12 Then the deputy, when he saw what was done, believed, being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord.

      Shalom

    50. Bo
      May 1st, 2014 @ 8:37 pm

      Van wrote:
      “> Hilarious! I asked you to present me with some real evidence that Jesus Christ actually existed. Do I have to point out AGAIN that you and everybody else has completely failed to do this? You told me how MUCH other believers BELIEVE they really really do! That just doesn’t cut it. So debate away. Let’s see you verify the existence of Jesus Christ using sources independent of the Bible.”

      There has been real evidence presented over and over. Van just refuses to accept it. He cannot prove the universe came into being except by sources that were not just hearsay form a hundred years after, but he relies on speculation that supposedly came billions of years after the fact. None of it can be replicated in a scientific experiment. He can show no documentation to back his claims and foolishly denies history and it’s writers. He does not accept the eyewitness testimony of the Bible, but blindly has faith in scientific speculation that he nor the writers of it have ever witnessed.

      He tries to draw people into an argument that must conform to his rules instead of being judged by the merits of case. All he does is say, “That is ridiculous.” He never shows why…except from unreliable pseudo-scholars that would do better writing for the National Inquirer. He quote mines people like Schweitzer and will not admit it even when the proof is presented (see post #3 above.) He deceives and lies and insults, but he never proves anything. You will not change his mind, because he will do anything to cover his lies and deceit and cannot admit when he has been shown to be wrong. It is a heart issue.

      When someone presses him for an answer, as Adam and I have, he then declares that he will not answer our posts. He does this, but condemns Dr. Brown for not answering his posts and throws insults at everyone else to intimidate them. He allows himself to play by a different set of rules than he will allow to us. According to the scripture he is a fool. Read the list below and see for yourself if there is any category that he fails to fulfill.

      Pr 27:22 Though thou shouldest bray a fool in a mortar among wheat with a pestle, yet will not his foolishness depart from him.

      Pr 17:10 A reproof entereth more into a wise man than an hundred stripes into a fool.

      Pr 17:16 Wherefore is there a price in the hand of a fool to get wisdom, seeing he hath no heart to it?

      Pr 18:6 A fool’s lips enter into contention, and his mouth calleth for strokes.

      Pr 20:3 It is an honour for a man to cease from strife: but every fool will be meddling.

      Ps 14:1 A Psalm of David.» The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

      Pr 10:23 It is as sport to a fool to do mischief: but a man of understanding hath wisdom.

      Pr 12:15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that hearkeneth unto counsel is wise.

      Pr 12:16 A fool’s wrath is presently known: but a prudent man covereth shame.

      Pr 13:16 Every prudent man dealeth with knowledge: but a fool layeth open his folly.

      Pr 14:16 A wise man feareth, and departeth from evil: but the fool rageth, and is confident.

      Pr 26:3 A whip for the horse, a bridle for the ass, and a rod for the fool’s back.
      4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
      5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

      Pr 26:8 As he that bindeth a stone in a sling, so is he that giveth honour to a fool.

      So do not give him any honor, whatever you do. He deserves only ridicule.

      Shalom

    51. AaronC
      May 1st, 2014 @ 8:41 pm

      There are three basic laws of logic.

      1. Law of Identity

      purposeful equals purposeful

      meaningful equals meaningful

      meaningless equals meaningless

      purposeless equals purposeless

      2. Law of Non-Contradiction

      meaningless cannot equal meaningful

      purposeless cannot equal purposeful

      3. Law of the Excluded Middle

      meaningless cannot equal meaningless AND meaningful

      purposeless cannot equal purposeless AND purposeful

      Atheist scientists agree that the universe is without God and is therefore purposeless and meaningless.

      Dr. George Gaylord Simpson:

      “Man is the result of a purposeless and natural process that did not have him in mind.”

      http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_Gaylord_Simpson

      Dr. Jerry Coyne:

      “For to the best of our knowledge evolution,

      like all natural processes, is purposeless and unguided.”

      http://www.richarddawkins.net/news_articles/2012/7/17/what-s-the-problem-with-unguided-evolution#

      Dr. Larry Moran:

      “That evolution is a blind, purposeless process is difficult to grasp, yet it is a fundamental part of understanding biology.”

      http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2009/03/richard-dawkins-on-purpose.html

      Dr. P. Z. Myers:

      “Yes, it is a meaningless universe; the universe doesn’t care about us, doesn’t love us, and is mindless and indifferent.”

      http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/01/13/ken-ham-baffled/

      Since our universe is purposeless and meaningless, then, by definition, everything our universe contains and produces is meaningless. It cannot be meaningless and yet meaningful (Law of the Excluded Middle).

      Consider this logical syllogism:

      Major Premise: Every part of this universe is purposeless and meaningless.

      Minor Premise: All humans and their thoughts and actions are a part of this universe.

      Conclusion: Therefore, all humans and their thoughts and actions are purposeless and meaningless.

      Humans are a product and part of this universe; therefore, everything about us is purposeless and meaningless. Every thought we think, every feeling we have is purposeless and meaningless. Good and evil are meaningless, truth and error are meaningless; liberty, life, death, love,hate, murder, everything we think and do which we consider “good” are all nothing more than meaningless sparks in our meaningless brains.

      When atheists like Van post their opinions, they are trying to act purposefully and meaningfully in a meaningless and purposeless universe. Not only are their thoughts and acts illogical, they are irrational, because they are in denial of the meaningless nature of themselves, their thoughts and acts, as part of a meaningless universe. Why should we listen to someone that is inherently illogical and irrational? What would a government be like which was run by illogical and irrational people?

      But could it be that Van is driven to post here in a meaningful and purposeful way because he is created in the image of a meaningful and purposeful God?

    52. Brian R.
      May 1st, 2014 @ 9:02 pm

      Jon,

      It doesn’t matter if Mr. Sterling made these comments in his home or in the public square, that absolutely does not excuse the condition of
      his heart and of accountability. Again, this is not a political issue, nor is this about homosexuality. Let’s address the issue at hand and refrain from confuscation.

      This comes regarding Mr. Sterling’s heart condition, and what was said in secret has been brought to the light. I deem his comments to be racist, just as G-d did Aaron and Miriam’s, from which He acted swiftly. There have been no knee-jerk reactions as you assume, the NBA acted accordingly after weighing everything out. Cuddo’s to them for sending a clear message that racism will not be tolorated, no matter who it comes from.

      Shalom

    53. jon
      May 1st, 2014 @ 10:17 pm

      Well Brian the NBA will be a model in the future to take a sermon out of context and quickly change ownership to the state and change ownership to the state. It takes just a simple misrepresented out of context comment and the public will vilify you. anyone can call it racism or homophobia it is all the same in the eyes of the secular state. Racism the definition and all the conditioned drones accept the politically correct definition. Christianity is a form oh homophobia and sexism with racism. Tape in part of the conversation play it for the media and give ownership to the state. Case closed in less than one week.

    54. Bo
      May 1st, 2014 @ 11:05 pm

      Aaron C,

      Keep in mind that Van will not answer you…except with something like, “That’s hilarious” along with an insult. He really will not answer logically or reasonably because he can’t and still maintain his unfounded faith and unreasonable stance. He will not play by his own rules because he thinks that he is above the rules. He thinks that he is god. He is not really an atheist…he is a god that rejects all gods but himself.

      “I do not think there is a demonstrative proof (like Euclid) of Christianity, nor of the existence of matter, nor of the good will and honesty of my best and oldest friends. I think all three are (except perhaps the second) far more probable than the alternatives. The case for Christianity in general is well given by Chesterton…As to why God doesn’t make it demonstratively clear; are we sure that He is even interested in the kind of Theism which would be a compelled logical assent to a conclusive argument? Are we interested in it in personal matters? I demand from my friend trust in my good faith which is certain without demonstrative proof. It wouldn’t be confidence at all if he waited for rigorous proof. Hang it all, the very fairy-tales embody the truth. Othello believed in Desdemona’s innocence when it was proved: but that was too late. Lear believed in Cordelia’s love when it was proved: but that was too late. ‘His praise is lost who stays till all commend.’ The magnanimity, the generosity which will trust on a reasonable probability, is required of us. But supposing one believed and was wrong after all? Why, then you would have paid the universe a compliment it doesn’t deserve. Your error would even so be more interesting and important than the reality. And yet how could that be? How could an idiotic universe have produced creatures whose mere dreams are so much stronger, better, subtler than itself?”

      Shalom

    55. Bo
      May 1st, 2014 @ 11:06 pm

      ooops! The above quote was from CS Lewis.

    56. Sheila
      May 2nd, 2014 @ 12:00 am

      Aaron C,

      It sounds to me like they all need to see a good Psychiatrist!!

    57. Sheila
      May 2nd, 2014 @ 12:02 am

      Or, they ran across Solomon when he was in one of his funky moods:

      “All is vanity, emptiness.”

    58. Ray
      May 2nd, 2014 @ 1:03 am

      The atheist sees everything without God, therefore how can he find anything but vanity?

    59. Van
      May 2nd, 2014 @ 7:58 am

      “Conclusion: Therefore, all humans and their thoughts and actions are purposeless and meaningless.”

      > Yes there is no purpose or meaning to life. This is not a bad thing. It allows each one of us to give whatever meaning and purpose to our lives we want to. How great is that? You have chosen to let OTHER PEOPLE tell you what purpose your life MUST have. How sad it is that you will waste your life in intellectual servitude to false beliefs. All you had to do was learn just a tiny bit about science or get a whiff of common sense and you could have easily seen through the lies of your religion. I feel so sorry for all of you.

    60. Bo
      May 2nd, 2014 @ 8:03 am

      See! I told you Van would have no good answer or present any facts. Just insults and foolish reasoning. He has let other people make the rules for him as much as anyone. He just doesn’t know it or, more precisely, won’t admit it. He has blind faith in his supposed experts.

    61. Sheila
      May 2nd, 2014 @ 10:13 am

      Van—”Yes there is no purpose or meaning to life. This is not a bad thing. It allows each one of us to give whatever meaning and purpose to our lives we want to. How great is that? You have chosen to let OTHER PEOPLE tell you what purpose your life MUST have. How sad it is that you will waste your life in intellectual servitude to false beliefs. All you had to do was learn just a tiny bit about science or get a whiff of common sense and you could have easily seen through the lies of your religion. I feel so sorry for all of you.”

      You haven’t brought any reasonable arguments as to why we shouldn’t believe in the God of the Bible. Bring your strong reasons why and I’ll consider them. Meanwhile, who are these “OTHER PEOPLE” you’re referring to because there weren’t any “OTHER PEOPLE” in my life telling me what to believe. You’ve made broad, generalized statements from day one which only shows the weakness of your basic premise. “Us people” against “Your people” I suppose.

      You mention “intellectual servitude” as if you’re completely free of it without giving thought to your own enslavement. I think perhaps you’re not strong enough to go against the grain of those theories taught as if they were fact. Bring your strong evidence, Van. Show me the imperical evidence of your science. I’ve not seen anything other than insults presented by you. H*@^, give me a book to read! I’ll actually read it! I’d love to have something, anything that sums it all up in your opinion because you honestly believe that all of us are intellectual lightweights which only proves to me that you’ve not cracked open the first book, nor listened to the first recording of any Christian apologist alive today. How intellectually honest is that? At least go educate yourself as to the opposing viewpoints available to both of us and then come back better prepared to do battle with today’s educated Christians or just give it up. There’s a phrase, I think it’s from the Book of War, that says, “Know your enemy” and considering that that’s what you consider us it’s best you take the time to do that as opposed to slinging insults at us that just wash over our backs. You should have learned by now that we’re not going to lie down so you can walk over us. The new Christians of today are better equipped than ever to answer the new atheists thanks to the giants of our faith that fight the good fight everyday. You might say they’re raising up an army of Christian soldiers. Maybe you’re familiar with that song? Anyway, I’m ready to begin when you are.

      Bring your strong reasons, we’re waiting…

    62. Sheila
      May 2nd, 2014 @ 10:15 am

      Oops, I must have clicked a button and accidentally deleted part of my post. The part about the meaninglessness of life. Oh well, maybe I’ll work it up again later.

    63. Sheila
      May 2nd, 2014 @ 10:21 am

      I don’t know how many people can listen to the show live, but there’s a clip with Ravi Zacarias in it where he expounds on the reality of moral absolutes and where the notion of good and evil comes from. The commercials are cut out by the time they’re posted here so if you can take a listen.

    64. Bo
      May 2nd, 2014 @ 10:48 am

      Van wrote:
      “Yes there is no purpose or meaning to life. This is not a bad thing. It allows each one of us to give whatever meaning and purpose to our lives we want to. How great is that?”

      Is it really great, Van? Are you really happy when someone decides to rob you or to molest young children? If it gives them purpose and meaning, why should you condemn them? Why is it that you do not allow us give whatever purpose and meaning to life that we want to? Why do argue against what trips our trigger? You, once again, have proven your hypocrisy and lack of reason.

    65. Bo
      May 2nd, 2014 @ 10:57 am

      So van gets some, maybe most, of his meaning and purpose in life by opposing, insulting, and slandering what gives us meaning and purpose. He does not want everyone to be able to choose what gives their lives meaning and purpose…unless it is more closely what supposedly gives his life meaning and purpose. He wants us to validate what he thinks gives his life meaning and purpose. His life must be lacking in meaning and purpose for him to need to cut us down for our meaning and purpose in an attempt to validate his meaning and purpose…which is obviously lacking.

    66. Sheila
      May 2nd, 2014 @ 11:18 am

      Van–”Yes there is no purpose or meaning to life. This is not a bad thing. It allows each one of us to give whatever meaning and purpose to our lives we want to. How great is that?”

      Here’s an example of meaninglessness:

      One woman bears children and raises them up with what she believes to be the principles between right and wrong, good and evil, and they go on to become pillars in their community and they raise their children up the same way and so it goes.

      Another woman bears children and raises them up with beatings and prejudice and they’re subjected to molestation and hunger and they go on to neglect, and beat and molest other children in the same way, and so it goes.

      According to you, there’s no difference between the two because they each chose how they would live their lives and, accordingly, there should be no punishment for the ones who chose a negative course for their lives because all is meaningless anyway.

    67. Van
      May 2nd, 2014 @ 6:09 pm

      “…but there’s a clip with Ravi Zacarias in it where he expounds on the reality of moral absolutes…”

      Oh, I absolutely LOVE knocking down this stupid argument. Name something that is always wrong.

    68. Bo
      May 2nd, 2014 @ 7:23 pm

      Van,

      According to you it is always wrong to believe in a moral creator of the universe.

    69. Bo
      May 2nd, 2014 @ 9:37 pm

      Shabbat Shalom everyone!

    70. AaronC
      May 2nd, 2014 @ 11:26 pm

      Van says, “Yes there is no purpose or meaning to life. This is not a bad thing. It allows each one of us to give whatever meaning and purpose to our lives we want to. How great is that?” It is not great; it is illogical and meaningless. If there is no God, everything we think and do is meaningless–including giving “whatever meaning and purpose to our lives we want to”. To do what Van says is to act in an illogical and irrational manner, pretending that there can be meaning in a meaningless universe–a direct contradiction of the Laws of logic.

    71. Van
      May 3rd, 2014 @ 11:44 am

      Someone whose beliefs are an insult to logic and common sense should not be talking about the laws of logic. Once again I challenge the Christians and once again they ignore the challenge and continue to preach nonsense to me. Nae something that is always wrong. You are jealous that I am free to make up my own mind while your minds are being controlled by OTHER PEOPLE.

      “According to you it is always wrong to believe in a moral creator of the universe.”

      > According to your oppressive religion it is wrong to doubt the existence of such a creator. This is a most destructive teaching of Christianity. This makes Christianity the enemy of truth and the faculty by which humans discover truth: reason.

    72. Bo
      May 4th, 2014 @ 12:29 am

      Van,

      Do you believe this absolutely? Do you think that is always wrong go against truth?

    73. Sheila
      May 5th, 2014 @ 9:50 am

      Van—”Oh, I absolutely LOVE knocking down this stupid argument. Name something that is always wrong.”

      You’re kidding right?!!

    74. Sheila
      May 5th, 2014 @ 10:04 am

      Van,

      They changed Ravi’s message after I wrote that. You can find it, though, on many of his messages from Youtube or his website.

      Reasoning encompasses much more than one liners. Tell us how you would argue against moral absolutes in a reasonable way.

      How are the doctrines of Christianity oppressive?

    75. Van
      May 5th, 2014 @ 1:06 pm

      They changed Ravi’s message after I wrote that. You can find it, though, on many of his messages from Youtube or his website.

      > There are many websites that debunk all of Ravi’s ridiculous arguments. I suggest you read these refutations so you will no longer be fooled by his nonsense and lies. I have heard him preach and he has a very shallow understanding of the things he preaches about such as atheism and philosophy and a reckless disregard for the truth.
      And like all Bible believers he knows absolutely nothing about science.

      Reasoning encompasses much more than one liners. Tell us how you would argue against moral absolutes in a reasonable way.

      > Why are you so afraid of all of my challenges? Step up to the plate and name something that is always wrong, and then I will demonstrate why you are always wrong.

      How are the doctrines of Christianity oppressive?

      > Because they teach that some important things are above questioning and to do so is wrong and immoral. This makes Christianity the enemy of truth and the faculty by which humans discover the truth: reason.

    76. AaronC
      May 5th, 2014 @ 6:50 pm

      Someone who continues to try to act meaningfully in a meaningless universe should never criticize anybody about anything, because everything he says is illogical and irrational.

    77. Sheila
      May 5th, 2014 @ 10:28 pm

      Let’s just start with rape, Van. It’s always wrong!

    78. Van
      May 5th, 2014 @ 11:57 pm

      Sheila, I would say that rape is always wrong. However the Bible clearly and repeatedly sanctions the rape of young women. I’ll just mention a couple of the many disgusting Bible passages that sanction rape:
      “Then they thought of the annual festival of the LORD held in Shiloh, between Lebonah and Bethel, along the east side of the road that goes from Bethel to Shechem. They told the men of Benjamin who still needed wives, “Go and hide in the vineyards. When the women of Shiloh come out for their dances, rush out from the vineyards, and each of you can take one of them home to be your wife! And when their fathers and brothers come to us in protest, we will tell them, ‘Please be understanding. Let them have your daughters, for we didn’t find enough wives for them when we destroyed Jabesh-gilead. And you are not guilty of breaking the vow since you did not give your daughters in marriage to them.’” So the men of Benjamin did as they were told. They kidnapped the women who took part in the celebration and carried them off to the land of their own inheritance. Then they rebuilt their towns and lived in them. So the assembly of Israel departed by tribes and families, and they returned to their own homes.”

      > Clearly the Bible sanctions rape.

      “Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the people went to meet them outside the camp. But Moses was furious with all the military commanders who had returned from the battle. “Why have you let all the women live?” he demanded. “These are the very ones who followed Balaam’s advice and caused the people of Israel to rebel against the LORD at Mount Peor. They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the LORD’s people. Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves.”

      > Once again, the Bible sanctions rape. So for a Bible believer rape is not always wrong and in fact NOTHING is always wrong. As long as Bible believers believe their God is commanding rape, murder, genocide, infanticide or any other crime against humanity it is not only permissible it MUST be done. This is called Divine Command Morality, it comes right out of the Bible and it is insane. So your argument is a gigantic fail.

    79. Van
      May 6th, 2014 @ 12:14 am

      Aaron,
      You are not hiding your envy and jealousy very well at all. It just eats you up that I can define my own life, I can give whatever meaning I want to my life while you have let OTHER PEOPLE do all of that for you. You have the freedom to change all that but I doubt you will ever have the courage. Very sad indeed.

    80. Bo
      May 6th, 2014 @ 9:48 am

      VaIn,

      I think that you have been leaving a letter out of your stage name. Just like you used to spell Bore us, “Boris” in the past. There really does need to be an “I” in your name, since you are so enamored by yourself. As I have said and proven many times, you do not understand English and context. Also you pull quotes out of context and point your finger at YHWH instead of yourself or mankind. Anyone with a 8th grade education can see through your tactics.

      The story in Judges 21:21-25 about what was left of the tribe of Benjamin obtaining wives is a story about what the Israelites decided to do, not about something that YHWH told them to do. There is nothing in the passage about rape. It is quite interesting that you leave out verse 25 in your quote since it is the end of the story.

      Ju 21:25 In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.

      This is exactly how you think everyone should live…giving their life meaning however they want to. The end of this story tells us that the book of Judges is about Israel trying to live the way you preach instead of how YHWH instructs. Three fingers pointing back at you once again.

      The other passage that you fail to give a reference for is Numbers 31:13-18 and it does not sanction rape either. It is a story about mercy upon a totally corrupt society. Those girls that were left alive were spared and then given places in families and married. How long would they have survived if left to fend for themselves? Why did you not show the passage about the statutes for this kind of thing?

      De 21:10 When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive,
      11 And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife;
      12 Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house; and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails;
      13 And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife.
      14 And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her.

      So, if the woman, after 30 days of getting used to the idea and after trying things out is unwilling to be his partner, what other reason is there that she does not please him, she is set free to go where and to whoever she wants. In this situation, a young woman loses her whole family and has the possibility of being cared for and even set free if she doesn’t like the situation. Sounds better than being killed or left to die to me. And it is not about rape, but marriage.

      Now concerning your non-answer to Sheila.

      You wrote:
      ““…but there’s a clip with Ravi Zacarias in it where he expounds on the reality of moral absolutes…”

      Oh, I absolutely LOVE knocking down this stupid argument. Name something that is always wrong.”

      Sheila responded:
      “Let’s just start with rape, Van. It’s always wrong!”

      And you VaIn, did not show her how rape is not always wrong. You loose once again.

    81. Sheila
      May 9th, 2014 @ 3:19 pm

      Van,

      I feel like you tried to set me up, but, regardless, you could have just brought the topic up yourself as it’s one that seemed at first glance a bit minimized to me as presented in the Bible. I’ll gladly reason out anything that’s in the Bible with you. The law of Moses states that the man only shall die in the case of forcible rape of a married woman, “or” he shall marry the woman if she is a virgin. Deu 22:25, 29

      At first it seems that the virgin gets the short end of the stick but in a society where women were not as equally valued, it’s actually for her benefit that the law states what it does for if she were found to be with child from the rape, she would have a husband to care for her and since he was the one who overpowered and thoroughly shamed her it’s only right that he marry her. It’s not like she could go out and find a job or that any other man would marry her now that she’d been defiled. It was that or live in her father’s household for the rest of her life. The married woman was defiled and shamed as well, because even though she wasn’t a virgin, she could still be pregnant from the rape and the sacred union between that married couple was forever violated. So, it seems that to rape a married woman held a more severe penalty than the rape of a virgin. The man would be forced to marry the virgin but seeing as the married woman had a husband, that’s not possible. It’s the same today; if you know the penalties of breaking the law and you do it anyway, you suffer the penalties.

      Our modern society doesn’t give the death penalty for rape in either instance. However, it’s always wrong and you didn’t argue as to why it’s “not” wrong as the Bible never sanctions it. The example you gave states that they may take those unmarried women for wives. You can argue that the killing of the others was wrong but it doesn’t say take the virgin women and rape them. It says to take the women for wives. It’s only in the case of marriage that sexual relations were acceptable in Biblical times. For the Israelites, there was no such thing as casual sex.

      In the Bible, we don’t deal with many stories of women as the main characters, although there were certain of them that we hear more of than others, however, if you’ll notice in the stories involving rape, it always ends very badly. I think the negative stories only lend more credibility to the Bible as what actually happened at different times in ancient Israel. Why would a people include such negative publicity if it weren’t true? See that’s part of the atheist dilemma; you pounce all over stories like that on the one hand and on the other you deny the Bible all together as fantasy. You can’t have it both ways, Van. Either discount both types of stories or none.

      In the context of a patriarchal society the Torah actually protects the honor of the woman. The women who were raped in the Bible age felt just as much shame as any would today and the stigma would have been equal to modern day, perhaps even moreso, the difference being that we don’t kill the perpetrator nor do we make them marry the one they rape.

      Notice in 2 Samuel 13 the story of one of David’s sons, that the rape of a half sister, in which it was acceptable practice to marry a half sister, ultimately ended in the death of two of David’s sons, Amnon and later that of Absalom. We don’t know why Amnon wasn’t made to marry Tamar except that we’re told he, afterwards, hated her more than he loved her. Obviously he had some real mental issues. David, as king, could have, and perhaps should have, as we’ll see, forced the marriage. She was forever disgraced and no longer marriageable and she would have spent the rest of her days without a husband and in David’s household. Her brother, Absalom, plotted revenge and killed Amnon two years later for raping his sister, Tamar. I believe Absalom should have been brought to justice right then for the murder but in the end of it all, Absalom comes against his father, King David, and seeks to kill him yet he ends up losing his own life with no heir to keep his name alive. He died by the blows inflicted on him while hanging on a tree that he was caught up in. The Torah says, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree.” Absalom’s line was cursed with no more descendants.

      All this story began with the rape of Tamar. Seems to me like divine justice prevailed.

    82. Sheila
      May 10th, 2014 @ 9:30 am

      What was the “real” curse on Absalom? He had sons so that wasn’t it. I imagine the curse was that he never became king. Maybe. I’ll be thinking on that one…

    Leave a Reply