Developing: Bridge Collapses Near Seattle…Unknown Injuries…See the Photos

Watch Today’s BlazeCast With Your Questions, Comments & Live Chat!

Faith

Did You Know John Stossel Is an Agnostic? Watch Him Challenge Fox’s Gretchen Carlson on Religion

Dec. 13, 2012 11:25am Billy Hallowell

Did you know that Fox News’ John Stossel, a libertarian who frequently touts personal freedom and individual responsibility, is an agnostic? Revered for his right-of-center views on a variety of issues, the fearless television personality has made his lack of a belief in a higher power known in the past. And this morning, he challenged “Fox & Friends” host Gretchen Carlson about the merits of religion in society, doubling down on his stance.

Stossel noted that, while he doesn’t believe in organized religion, he wishes he could. But based on the facts (or purported lack thereof), he simply cannot bring himself to do so.

Did You Know Fox News John Stossel Is an Agnostic?

Photo Credit: Fox News

“I want to,” he said of his urge to join believers in embracing a higher power. “I see the peace and purpose it gives most of you who believe — and I tried. I just can’t.”

Curious as to his reasoning, Carlson pressed Stossel, asking, “Why not?” Considering the investigative pieces he has become known for, his reaction to her inquiry is somewhat unsurprising.

“Because I want evidence. I want reason and explanation,” Stossel proclaimed.

Watch the fascinating exchange, below:

While Carlson attempted to sway him, noting that he misses the point of religion, an institution that is predicated upon faith in the unknown, her efforts fell flat. Despite being unable to convince Stossel to become a theist, the conversation did bring forth some intriguing details about his life.

The host was raised Protestant, although his parents were Jewish; they had come to America right before Hitler rose to power, subsequently joining a Congregational church. Stossel also noted that his wife, who is Jewish, raised his children in that tradition.

This isn’t the first time that he has discussed his failure to embrace organized religion. In 2010, the host first publicly labeled himself an agnostic. While he said he doesn’t currently believe, Stossel noted that he is open to the possibility that God exists.

“God may exist, but I want more evidence and I’ve looked for it,” Stossel said during the segment, noting that he can’t bring himself to see the Bible as “the word of God.”

We’ll leave you with video of that admission, below:

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (553)

TheVOR
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:38pm
John we don’t dislike you or hate you for your skepticism or disbelief. We won’t stop watching you.

We applaud your honesty. We appreciate your tolerance. We support your searching heart.

Most of all we pray for you. Dear Heavenly Father, please fall fresh upon John Stossel, reveal yourself to him, such that he may know You. And, come to know, trust, love, and accept Your Son Jesus Christ as his personal Lord and Savior. Amen

God Loves you and so do I.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Michael61
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:08pm
  Disclaimer: I am an atheist. Now, a little rant.
  
  Of course, Christmas tree is a pagan tradition, winter solstice tradition which originated in Babylon.
  
  Of course, Easter is a pagan holiday, celebration of fertility, which also originated in Babylon.
  
  Of course, the story of Jesus’ death and resurrection is copied from a similar Egyptian story.
  
  Of course, Santa Claus doesn’t exist.
  
  Why are those crazy raving atheist fanatics attack Christmas and Easter then??? Because they hate Christianity, of course, and everything associated with it. They hate all traditional values. They hate traditional morals and customs. They hate.
  
  Too bad those stupid rebels don’t realize: There could be no rebel without the establishment. There could be no alternative art without the classic art. There could be no originality without the mediocrity.
  
  They owe their whole ideology and their whole existence to protesting against traditional values. They would have no ideas what to believe in without those traditional values. They would be nothing, zero, zilch, if they destroyed all traditions.
  
  Let Christmas be. Let Easter be. Let Santa Claus be. Live and let others live. Enjoy life.
  
  Report this comment
- muffythetuffy
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:11pm
  Read the first Chapter of Microbiology I college textbook that describes the living cell. Cell reproduction requires 8 separate complex chemical reactions all of which must occur at body or room temperature. Cell mechanism for immunization works as if molecules have intelligence. Cell energy production is unbelievable. None of this could have come from random chance. There is no reason why organisms need vision but they do.
  
  Report this comment
- TomSawyer
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:13pm
  Amen
  
  Report this comment
- angelcat
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:41pm
  Well stated. I add my voice to yours. Stossel is not a hater.
  
  Report this comment
- beninferno
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:51pm
  At Muffy: The molecules energy is what is called chemistry. Amazing thing.
  On a different note, Agnostic people are not Aithiest and shouldn’t be treated as such. Most Agnostics do believe that a god must exist in some form, wheather it be a traditional form of god, or an eastern idea that god is in and of everything and not one enity. They do believe that this all can’t be just a mistake, everything is to complicated and perfect for there not to be a god. It just that the bible and other holy books have to many holes in them that they can’t be right.
  
  Report this comment
- ranepowel
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:57pm
  @muffy
  
  “None of this could have come from random chance.”
  
  Everything you said most (mostly) true until this remark. You offer no proof or evidence for this claim. You only say, “none of this could have come from random chance…” supposedly, “because it’s too hard for me to believe.”
  
  Well, it’s even harder to believe that God created cells as complex as they are, when there is no reason for him to have done so. Human beings didn’t even understand or recognize the use of cells for the first 90% of their existence on earth. You’re telling me that God went through all the trouble of making cells so complex, only to have 10% of the population that would ever exist even understand that fact?
  
  God could have made man physically look the same, while being propelled by magic, invisible dust. There is no reason for complexity in nature at all, and it goes against the idea of an all-knowing, all-powerful entity. Furthermore, it makes no sense why God would create such a complex, intricate system, only to continually use miracles, which violate the very rules he set in motion. That, again, sounds more like a myth-creating man in the bronze age, spouting ramblings to a nomadic group of Jews, rather than an omnipotent being.
  
  Report this comment
- Anonymous T. Irrelevant
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:07pm
  John, no evidence, no logic, that’s why it’s called a “leap of faith.” I like John, I truly hope he comes to believe and get saved.
  
  Report this comment
- JQuentinEvermann
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:23pm
  @Muffy
  
  Of course it could all happen by chance, to say otherwise is simply to admit that you don’t understand the magnitude of the universe.
  
  To say they odds of that happening here, and creating me, are so astounding that it couldn’t be accidental…well, that’s like saying, “It is unrealistic that the subject of a story did all those things.” It isn’t that the subject of a story does these things, it’s that someone who did these things is the subject of a story. Just like you being here on Earth isn’t only possible, but probable, almost entirely unavoidable. Life exists here on Earth because of uncountable possibilities that never became reality. We won the universal lottery.
  
  Report this comment
- CaliforniaD
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:24pm
  What proof do I have that God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ exist?–the same way I know I love my wife and children. I know it, but can’t prove it on a piece of paper. It’s a spiritual thing.
  
  Report this comment
- Pontiaku
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:26pm
  Michael61
  [Why are those crazy raving atheist fanatics attack Christmas and Easter then??]
  Gee, maybe because “paganism” is also a religion.
  
  [Because they hate Christianity, of course, and everything associated with it. They hate all traditional values. They hate traditional morals and customs. They hate.]
  When islam gets a foothold in government and starts abusing the system the same way christians have, what will you say then? If “In God We Trust” is acceptable then “In Allah We Trust” must be acceptable as well, right? Or how about “In no god we trust” when atheist have the majority. You see, if it doesn’t hold up to a “mirror test” then it probably isn’t something government should be involved in.
  
  I have no problem with christians celebrating on their dime and on private property. When they expect government to participate in their celebrations, this is where I draw the line. Btw I will be celebrating christmas with my “family” without the need for christian theocratic government coercion.
  
  Report this comment
- FlamingFartSyndrome
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:29pm
  @ Michael
  
  Im an atheist. I dont hate xmas, i dont hate easter, and i dont hate religious people. Only thing i hate is people trying to make me believe what they believe for reasons that go beyond actually doing good deeds. I dont need a reason to do something good, i dont need to be told that someone is judging me, or that my actions will recieve punishment/reward for me to live a good life. Please dont generalize atheists as people who hate xmas, easter, traditional values, etc, because then your no better than people who generalize christians as people who hate gays, women rights, etc.
  
  Report this comment
- Grubmeister
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:55pm
  @Michael61,
  Well of course, it’s the “crazy raving atheist fanatics” that hate christianity. The remaining atheists/agnostics, who I suspect are the vast majority, don’t hate christianity. We just want it pushed the heck out of our governement and put back on even footing with every other group making claims about the nature of reality. They should have to put forth evidence for the existence of god, Christ and any other thing they believe in. They get no free pass as to how this country is run, even if some, or indeed all, the founding fathers were evangelical christians (which you know they were not). They must operate within the democratic boundaries, and the court system, of this country.
  I’m not sure what to make of your tradition vs protest argument. Of course it’s true that without something to protest against there would be no protest. Uh-huh…so what? The fact that the world moves on is no reason to preserve the past. Those people who fought and died against slavery weren’t foolish idiots because they protested against a venerable tradition.
  
  Report this comment
- Grubmeister
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 4:16pm
  @Beninferno,
  Wrong, wrong, wrong. From a typical online dictionary:
  Agnostic – One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
  It makes no difference how you define atheism, agnostics are non-theists. They do not “believe” in the existence of god.
  If atheism is interpreted to mean “lacking a belief in god”, agnostics are atheist (as I claim for myself).
  If atheism is interpreted to mean “there is no god”, they are not atheist. The agnostic, though they may claim evidence is lacking to prove god does not exist, still does not believe in the existence of god. They are in both cases non-theistic.
  
  BTW, I disagree with the accepted definition of agnosticism. They only thing I believe is impossible is knowing what is impossible to know. That will be todays brain teaser.
  As I have worked it out over the years, there is no evidence god does not exist. That should be the limit of what an atheist can claim. Therefore, there is no difference between an atheist and an agnostic. Others disagree but I’ve yet to run into anyone who can “prove” god does not exist. They would claim it is unnecessary as they aren’t making the positive claim. To this, I say they should adjust their definition or they are making a positive claim. Too, without personally experiencing god, it ends with “there is no evidence of the existence of god”. In practical terms, there is no difference between the two though. In either case they live without a belief in god,
  
  Report this comment
- MrGeek
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 4:26pm
  What is wrong with being an Agnostic or an Atheist? If your goal is to follow in the footsteps of God, then you should be an Atheist. Why? By definition, God is an Atheist. Does God believe in an all powerful being that created Him in his own image? Of course not, thus God is an Atheist, we should all follow his example and be Atheists. An Agnostic is just someone that can’t make up his or her mind, or someone who is not willing to pick one side or the other due to the lack of backbone required to face the consequences of that decision.
  
  Report this comment
- nzkiwi
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 5:07pm
  I found myself fully agreeing with both of them…
  
  Report this comment
- SocietyOfUniversalKnowledge
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 5:09pm
  Muffy is so spot on. What she said and then some. One cannot look at the periodic table of elements and not see that there is a designer behind it.
  
  To say that any of this is by chance is the same thing as saying Websters Dictionary was the result of an exploding print shop.
  
  God has told us in his Word that when we stand before Him, we are without excuse because the evidence we so ignorantly demand is found in all that He has created. The problem is that we see through a glass darkly and and if we will humble ourselves and knock, He will answer and open our eyes to His Mystery.
  
  God purposely set things up this way because it requires us to make a decision grounded in Faith.
  We choose to follow Him or not.
  
  It’s really very simple. Read the Bible with an open mind. Seek Him. Seek Truth. You WILL find Him and ultimately understand that He’s been there all the time.
  
  Report this comment
- Timelord42
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 5:27pm
  @ Ranepowel
  
  “There is no reason for complexity in nature at all, and it goes against the idea of an all-knowing, all-powerful entity.”
  
  Actually, it makes complete sense and is, in fact, an inevitable consequence of God’s nature. Magic and pixie dust is arbitrary and chaotic. Natural law is structured and orderly. Scripture makes it clear time and time again that the Judeo-Christian God is a lawgiver who brings order to chaos. You must also consider that in Genesis, it says that God created Man for the expressed purpose of overseeing and harnessing nature for constructive purposes. If nature were not orderly, we would not be able to understand it well enough to do our jobs.
  
  As far as your comment on miracles is concerned, miracles were not things that happened every time God got bored. The purpose of miracles was to make it absolutely clear that a message or messenger was from God, otherwise, a miracle would be unnecessary and God would simply let nature do its thing.
  
  Report this comment
- Ohello
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 5:38pm
  If there were no God there would be no atheists!!
  
  Report this comment
- Grubmeister
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 5:40pm
  @Mr Geek
  Don’t take this personally but parts of what you are saying is ludicrous. You are applying definitions reserved to us non-godlike people to god. We and god are in totally different positions. We can choose, or choose not, to believe there is a higher power. Based upon what we believe, we can be atheist, agnostic or theist.
  We’ll make a few assumptions right here, just for the sake of argument. Let’s assume there is a god. We’ll simplify this exercise and assume there is only one, to eliminate the possibility this god may have himself been created. I think it’s fair to say, because this god has always existed, has created everything and knows everything, that this God “knows” he/she/it is “the” higher power. God is not an atheist because (to this god) there may be a higher power. In this monothistic scenario we’ve created, god is the highest power. There is no higher power.
  Unfortunately, we’ve gone too far already. As an atheist, we’re not arguing how many angels fit on the head of a pin, we’re aguing how many fleas they each might have.
  Also, you’re using one of the arguments that irritate me the most regarding agnostics. They are not people who can’t decide, mere fence sitters. By the definition I’ve given earlier, an agnostic is the most clear headed person on the playing field. They know exactly what it’s possible to “know” and exactly how much they can claim to be true. They are not making claims that cannot be supported by evidence or ex
  
  Report this comment
- muffythetuffy
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 6:11pm
  SO NOW WE KNOW WHY STOSSEL HAS BECOME THE DARLING OF THE LIBERAL NEWS MEDIA
  
  For decades Stossel was hated by the Drive by Media and he was almost driven out of journalism. Now that he is attacking God, wow, he is now an admired journalist.
  
  Report this comment
- UnknownUser1
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 6:48pm
  Great post Michael61
  
  Report this comment
- ChrisDiamond
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 7:06pm
  @CALIFORNIAD
  
  Actually, the love response can be measured in a brain scan. ;)
  
  Report this comment
- Ohello
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 7:10pm
  Pont: If there is no God ( Particularly of the Yaweh persuasion ) then there would be no inalienable rights and it is quite moral for one group of people to implement tyranny against any other group of people at the point of the legal system or the barrel of a gun. Both are now exercised by the current infestation of the GOVERNMENT OF THE USA.
  
  A Righteous and Holy Mind combined with Agape certainly provides a standard that no man or government would or could conceive let alone aspire to or attempt to model.
  
  Report this comment
- ashestoashes
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 7:33pm
  Matthew 7:7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and you shall find; knock, and it shall be opened to you:
  John..I hope that you don’t stop seeking..When Jesus asked Peter.Who am I Peter?..and he replied..You are the Messiah…Son of the living God..and Jesus answered him..Blessed are you Simon, son of Jonah, (Peter)..For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you..but my Father in heaven.. Mat 16:16-17 So you see John..have faith that the Father will reveal Himself to you..it is by faith that we receive.. Blessings to you John Stossal..It will be a great day..when He does…
  For all of the ones who believe that when Jesus told Peter..and you are Peter..and upon this rock I will build my church.. that Jesus built the church on Peter..That is an easy assumption to make..but I tell you, and you will come to know, after pondering this in your heart..Jesus did not come to earth to build his church on Peter..The church is built upon Jesus Christ..Messiah..Son of God.. He told them..This temple (His own body) will be destroyed..and I will raise it up in 3 days..meaning He was crucified upon the cross and rose the 3rd day.. Jesus..Son of God..is the foundation on which the church was built..
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 7:36pm
  Nice Trevor. Very Nice
  
  Report this comment
- davecorkery
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 9:26pm
  Feel better now? Throwing you wishes in the air (prayer) didn’t do much good. He’s still an agnostic. Personally I think he is an atheist, but is too afraid of the backlash.
  
  Report this comment
- HappyConservative
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 10:35pm
  I have had issues with my faith throughout my life from childhood and being “forced” to go to different churches ever week and sit in Sunday school with strangers while my parents tried to find what faith/church best suited them. Taking confirmation classes in the Episoscol faith in my early 30s. In the Bush years my faith was strengthened..A party led by the good Lord had won as it should be.
  On 11/7 I became an atheist. Why? Because I spent the better part of a year on my knees praying for America and her people. Prayed night and day. God I feel deserted America by seeing to it that the godless man was re-elected and not the man who lived by christ, Mitt Romney. The evil that we have done as a people has chased god from our lives and we have obama as our “gift” of proof. I stopped believing on 11/7. I no longer pray, I took my cross necklace off I have worn for over a decade.
  
  Report this comment
- Max jones
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 10:56pm
  The gnostic has put himself in a trying position. Faith being the belief in things not apparent, and gnosticism ‘needing proof’, makes for a conundrum, in that both cannot exist in the heart. If Jesus were standing right in front of you, your faith in his being would be moot, for there he is, in fact. So, the gnostic has no capacity for faith, and he gets no proof.
  
  Report this comment
- Max jones
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:08pm
  Michael61 Atheism is Ok for people who believe there is no reality beyond this regular every day existence. This sort of person needs no assurances of Eternal value, for this does not exist in his reality. They can be regular decent folks, and pay bills on time and all that, but their lives will always be monochromatic, for the highs and lows of wrestling with the incorrigible “inner man”, is what builds our character and lends to each of us a taste of profound accomplishment.
  
  Report this comment
- HappyStretchedThin
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:20pm
  @Pontiaku
  The way you glibly string together the phrase “christian theocratic government coercion” makes me think you understand the conservative principle behind NONE of the four terms separately.
  Christians understand that belief cannot be coerced, and that only the free offering of one’s will to God is an acceptable sacrifice to Him.
  That said, a mayor, governor, or president wishing to use some of his budget to have a celebration on ANY given theme, religious or not, does NOT amount to theocracy.
  The problem with you blindly ideological atheists is that you don’t distinguish between ideas as soon as anyone applies the category “religious” to them. So you end up morally equating the perils of a rule by dogmatic authority which would sanction special taxes on those who don’t believe the way the state says they should with rule by believers whose theology constrains them to respect the US Constitution’s take on liberty, especially of religion.
  Finally, in no way does celebration along with citizens in the way they celebrate something constitute coercion. If you’ve got a beef with how an official spends your tax dollars, there’s a lot better places to attack the very real budget bloat than on your loveless quest to eradicate the merrymaking surrounding the national majority’s Source of happiness. Bah humbug.
  
  Report this comment
- HappyStretchedThin
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:28pm
  @ChrisDiamond,
  Careful, bro. The chemical reactions and electric currents involved in the “love response” can be measured, but science has yet to make ANY claim to be able to measure “love”.
  Of course there are brain functions ASSOCIATED with every emotion, and as long as we develop the instruments to detect them, ANY physical response in the organism can eventually be measured.
  But there’s a HUGE leap of logic to go from that to suggesting that science can give any MEANING to any of it. Understanding the mechanics of a phenomenon does not equate to understanding the phenomenon.
  Thousands of years of poets have delved into the meaning of love without discovering the bottom of its depths.
  And no amount of MRIs can ever tell me how much my wife means to me, how much my kids mean to me, etc.
  Get faith, my man. It’s not rocket science!
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:33pm
  Hi HappyStretchedThin,
  The way you glibly string together the phrase “christian theocratic government coercion”
  
  Sounds like my nuclear physicist’s friend’s “fuss phrase generating” computer program. LOL
  
  Hope you have a wonderful Christmas !!!
  
  Report this comment
- Max jones
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:43pm
  TIMELORD….Good thinking is good living…… congratulations.
  
  Report this comment
- Max jones
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:50pm
  HAPPYSTRETCHEDTHIN…..Yessiree bob…. poetry! Lends meaning where none is apparent, and lays flavor to discourse. Reveals worlds of depth, and lays open the unknowable.
  
  Report this comment
- Keatonc33
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:52pm
  Muffy of all organisms on earth most don’t have vision. also you are way off on your temperatures. honestly there is so much we don’t know about life to think we have all the answers is ridiculous! We have even found organisms that arn’t carbon based! how incredible is that!
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 12:00am
  @Keatonc33-333
  
  Gee whiz…. I have all the answers. Had them for the last 22 years or so.
  
  You don’t know any real Monks apparently. : )
  
  Report this comment
- Vegasdad702
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 12:01am
  “Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear.”
  Thomas Jefferson
  
  Report this comment
- PATTY HENRY
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 4:11am
  What troubles me is what Stossel said: “(paraphrased) I’ve tried to connect with God but I can’t”
  
  We pretty much acknowledge that GOD created the Universe and everything in it. God is the Great Creator, His world is beautiful beyond description. He created us to Love and to Love Him. In order for that to be ‘real’ (meaningful) He gave us FREE WILL. We’ve had that from the beginning. Once we became so sinful (our news is just beginning to expose the sick nature of human beings) that God destroyed all of us but NOAH…but He started all over again and this time Sent His Only Son. Not only to DIE for us for the forgiveness of our Sins by God, but also to teach us how to live.
  
  BUT WE STILL HAVE FREE WILL. GOD will not spoon-feed us. IF John Stossel doesn’t know about GOD, it’s because He has not studied the great minds of History to Present. Great thinkers and philosophers who “get it” …they could believe anything they wanted to with their great educations (Like C. S. Lewis, Henri Nouwen, Tolkien) and they all became aware that we are all connected. This flies in the face of some Libertarian thoughts of total independence. HOW does one get to know GOD? They read, they think, they take time to pray every day (same way you get to learn about anything) …the wonderful news is …the more you come towards GOD, the More You get to understand, the scales are removed from your eyes. GOD is the destination.
  
  Report this comment
- Domin0z
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 8:16am
  @MICHAEL61
  
  Well put.
  
  Report this comment
- RustyElbows
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 8:20am
  I’m getting into the fray a little late here, but I have a question for true non-believers. I think most would agree that it’s physically impossible to make something… from nothing. If this is true, how did the big-bang creation come into being, or any other idea of creation outside of a God that always has been and always will be. I can believe, and do believe in creation by God rather than making something…. from nothing. Some always are asking for proof – I think the proof they seek is very simple.
  
  Report this comment
- Domin0z
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 8:21am
  @PONTIKAU (or whatever, I didn’t remember):
  
  “When islam gets a foothold in government and starts abusing the system the same way christians have, what will you say then? If “In God We Trust” is acceptable then “In Allah We Trust” must be acceptable as well, right? Or how about “In no god we trust” when atheist have the majority. You see, if it doesn’t hold up to a “mirror test” then it probably isn’t something government should be involved in.
  
  I have no problem with christians celebrating on their dime and on private property. When they expect government to participate in their celebrations, this is where I draw the line. Btw I will be celebrating christmas with my “family” without the need for christian theocratic government coercion.”
  
  I am a Catholic and you almost have me around to your thinking. When you say, Christians shouldn’t celebrate on my dime, I think “yeah, he’s right”. But then it hit me. It’s also MY DIME. With MY DIME, I don’t want abortions to be paid for, with MY DIME, I don’t want to fund public schools where children are losing the education battle everyday, with MY DIME, I don’t want to fund 4 million dollar trips for our president, but with MY DIME, I do want public displays of faith. So how do we get around this? I am willing for Muslims, Jewish folks, etc. to pray in public, occupy the same area as the manger, whatever, why can’t we just continue our traditions that have been before you and I even HAD
  
  Report this comment
- Max jones
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 8:37am
  MUFFYTHEYUFFY…..Quite a discussion this story has generated, eh? I can not understand ‘Atheism.’
  It does not compute. Gnosticism, well maybe I can understand how person could have doubts about the form and substance of the Creator, maybe.
  Where a lot of the confusion comes from is an atheist seems to look at the situation as God being there for man….what has God done for man? What assurances does man have from God, when in actuality it is the other way around. I understand that I am created for God’s pleasure….alive and kicking for his purposes
  Conforming my life to His will is the hardest and most rewarding action there is for me. I pray for the day when my first and last thought is in the will of God. I’ll make it, too. I know it. I want it. I need it, more than anything else. I am thankful that I have the discernment to know His will.
  
  Report this comment
- Pontiaku
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 11:59am
  @Domin0z
  [But then it hit me. It’s also MY DIME. With MY DIME, I don’t want abortions to be paid for, with MY DIME, I don’t want to fund public schools where children are losing the education battle everyday, with MY DIME, I don’t want to fund 4 million dollar trips for our president]
  I don’t either. So I’m guessing you’re going to make the case that “two wrongs make a right” now?
  
  [why can’t we just continue our traditions that have been before you and I even HAD I do want public displays of faith]
  You’re conflating individual private practices with collectives using government to influence the beliefs of others.
  
  [I am willing for Muslims, Jewish folks, etc. to pray in public, occupy the same area as the manger,]
  There are as many religions as there are people on the planet. Why is it necessary for “government” to display your version of a “manger” (with or without animals) or any ones religion? Do you not have a home or church or body to display these things? How insecure in your beliefs do you have to be?
  
  @RustyElbows
  [but I have a question for true non-believers. I think most would agree that it’s physically impossible to make something… from nothing. If this is true, how did the big-bang creation come into being, ]
  Well for one we’re adults and we’re well beyond the elementary school layman understanding of the big-bang. There was never “nothing”, this is where quantum physics come into play.
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdv
  
  Report this comment
- Pontiaku
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 12:04pm
  It would be nice if the blaze would stop telling me I have 30+ characters left when I don’t…
  This is the entire link.
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdvWrI_oQjY
  
  Report this comment
- ChrisDiamond
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 12:43pm
  @HAPPYSTRETCHEDTHIN
  
  First, thank you for a kind and compelling post.
  
  Second, I understand what you mean: there is a big difference in quantifying an emotion and explaining it’s meaning. What I am saying though, is that there is a scientifically measurable change in the biochemistry of the brain when experiencing feelings of love. This does not do a whole lot to explain why love is, just why and how the sensations of love manifest physically. This is still valuable information to us because it helps us understand our humanity a little better, does it not?
  
  Someone I consider a mentor has a pretty staunch take on love. He believes that love is a response to the recognition of virtue in others. Outside of this, and I hate to paraphrase or do any misrepresentation to his stance, but I recall him saying something akin to any other claim of love without virtue being displayed by another is probably little more than infatuation, the impact of societal conditioning (i.e. you must love your parents) or a purely horomonal response.
  
  Like you, no instrument or technological implement could tell me or anyone else how much my wife or children mean to me. Consider: my dogs show devotion, loyalty, playfulness, honor, respect, affection… all things we would consider virtues, and we feed, play with, talk to, love on and praise our dogs. It’s arguable, sure, but the dogs display what most anyone would consider love, and yet they have no concept of God.
  
  Report this comment
- ChrisDiamond
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 12:58pm
  @PATTYHENRY
  
  “In order for that to be ‘real’ (meaningful) He gave us FREE WILL. We’ve had that from the beginning.”
  Two things: there seems to be more verses in the Bible to note predetermination over free will. See Acts 13:48
  Romans 8:29-30
  2 Timothy 2:13
  Ephesians 1:3-4
  2 Thessalonians 2:11-13
  Jude 4
  Romans 9:11-22
  
  Moreover, omniscience is not possible if humanity has free will. So either God is not all-knowing, or free will is a lie. Finally, the fall of man was hardly an expression of free will. Adam and Eve were not equipped to deal with the most incredible deceiver in the universe, but instead were built in such a manner as to be susceptible to his temptations. Of course, without the fall, there would be no need of a redeemer, and thus we must admit that God designed the fall and is holding everyone accountable for sin which he intended for us to commit.
  
  “the more you come towards GOD, the More You get to understand, the scales are removed from your eyes.”
  
  I wrote in a response below of my study of the word, prayer, fasting, lifestyle, earnestness etc… 30 months I did this in the face of ridicule, loss of friends and the like, but I stayed true… and never heard or felt anything. So your statement isn’t universally true, and makes the Bible’s discussion of ‘seeking and finding’ also not universally true. Of course, it’s somehow ‘my fault’ that I did not obtain this grand revelation. I think that’s awfully convenient.
  
  Report this comment
- Whiteeagle
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 6:36pm
  JOHN …. I Am a Believer, I Love You But, I Don’t Know Why … What is That ? All the Evidence tells me that you’re on the other ‘team’ …. but I’d rather watch you .. than TBN … I Can’t Explain it !! .. Something on the ‘Inside’ Tells Me that you’re one of the ‘Good Guys’ …
  The Scripture says; “As a man ‘Thinketh’ in his Heart, So is he” … Are You Kidding me ? The Heart is where the ‘Intelligence’ or Lack thereof, processes ? When I Look in Stossel’s Heart, I See Gold …….
  GOD Bless John !
  
  Report this comment
- Whiteeagle
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 6:39pm
  Add your comments
  
  Report this comment
- milez5
  Posted on December 15, 2012 at 3:32am
  I don’t understand how those who do not believe in God or intelligent design can explain how earth changed from the primordial atmosphere—which would not support most forms of life—to our current one. Where did the blue algae come from?
  Recently, some scientists have claimed that water came to our planet by comet and asteroid impacts. Some have even said that these would make the perfect vessels to transport water.
  They can never explain though, why, when the comet or asteroid hits the earth, generating tremendous heat and releasing kinetic energy that is equal to the force of several atom bombs, does the water not just evaporate.
  They can’t explain how life spontaneously evolved into single celled organisms when efforts to recreate that evolution under the most controlled conditions have failed.
  And of course, they have never explained what made us break off from the apes, and what made nature feel that it needed a bipedal hominid with our enlarged brain size and use of language when no other animal needed such evolved adaptations to survive.
  
  Report this comment
- Pontiaku
  Posted on December 15, 2012 at 11:23am
  [Where did the blue algae come from?]
  Maybe you should look read up on research being done on synthetic RNA.
  
  [does the water not just evaporate.]
  Ok, where do you suppose that that evaporated water would go after it’s already within earths field of gravity? Duhhh…
  
  [They can’t explain how life spontaneously evolved into single celled organisms when efforts to recreate that evolution under the most controlled conditions have failed.]
  Now you’ve gone from questions to an absolute dogmatic position. Maybe you should do some more reading.
  
  [And of course, they have never explained what made us break off from the apes,]
  Sigh…
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zi8FfMBYCkk
  
  [and what made nature feel that it needed a bipedal hominid]
  Sorry but I can’t fix stupid… Just continue to wallow in your ignorance.
  
  Report this comment
- nuckollsr
  Posted on December 15, 2012 at 12:25pm
  The founding fathers taught us the One True Religion based not upon faith but on confidence. It’s the religion that pre-dates every other religion. It describes a heaven on earth wherein nobody has reason to fear any other individual. You can walk down the street on a dark night without fear. You can leave you keys in your car and know that it won’t be stolen. You can send your children to school knowing that they will not be molested, brainwashed, or co-opted into cults of self-serving cultural destruction.
  
  The One True Religion give foundation for the Church of Liberty which preaches simple doctrine: “Thou salt refrain from the doing of things to thy neighbor.” If we were all secure in property and persons, what else could we ask of our fellow citizens? What would a just god expect of his/her believers? Would supplicants to heaven not of this earth be denied entry because they went to the wrong church, wore the wrong clothes, ate the wrong food, or killed an insufficient number of unbelievers?
  
  Suppose a supplicant to heaven not of this earth never attended a church, never rose up in action at the exhortations of a church leadership, but simply lived their life in the protection of liberty for themselves and their fellow citizens. Would a just god turn them away? Would Christ condemn persons of honorable behavior because they were ignorant of His father? Ignorance can be forgiven; the doing of things to one another without permission is another matter.
  
  Report this comment
- azrt
  Posted on December 15, 2012 at 12:50pm
  regarding Pontiaku claim about when islam takes over. Islam is not a religion it is the largest cult in the world.
  
  Report this comment
- smv803
  Posted on December 15, 2012 at 1:05pm
  I have faith that John will experience our Lord. His eyes will be opened. I like and have enormous respect for John and only wish the very best.
  
  Report this comment
- smv803
  Posted on December 15, 2012 at 1:07pm
  @muffy
  You see John as attacking God just because he hasn’t as yet come to him? Be patient……it will happen.
  
  Report this comment
- Pontiaku
  Posted on December 15, 2012 at 1:19pm
  azrt, get a dictionary. ALL organized religions are cults.
  
  Report this comment
- simpletony
  Posted on December 15, 2012 at 2:45pm
  That’s great that you prayed for him in print available for him to see. I too offer that I pray for John and trust He will shed his grace on him. John seems to have such an honest, forthright outlook and attitude, one can’t help liking, make that loving, him. Geraldo on the other hand, not so much.
  
  Report this comment
am123
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:37pm
The kingdom of this world and the kingdom of heaven are diametrically opposed. For those in this world who have their minds set on earthly things, they want to see and understand things first and then they will believe. But in the kingdom of heaven, it is the exact opposite. Believe first and then you will see and understand. You must trust in the LORD and lean not on your own understanding (Proverbs 3:5). In order to enter the kingdom of heaven, you must take the step of faith. Believe first and then you’ll see.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- am123
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:00pm
  It’s like this: Humans are composed of body, soul, and spirit. Your soul is made up of your mind, will, and emotions. The point of contact between God in heaven and men on earth is through a person’s spirit. But for those who are “of this world”, they are spiritually dead (not totally dead, but on life support, everyone has a flicker of God’s spirit in them). So they cannot receive revelation from God, for the line of communication is not working. So when the people who are “of this world” try to understand the supernatural world, they are using only their natural minds (their soul) and it makes no sense to them. They cannot see, nor can they hear. But once a person takes the step of faith and believes on Jesus, they become born again and their spirit comes alive and the line of communication between them and God works. So then God, who is Spirit, is able to communicate with that person’s spirit and gives revelation to that spirit. The spirit of such a man then is able to infuse the soul with the revelation it has received. Such a person is able to see God and hear from God because his spirit has been quickened and made alive in Christ.
  
  Report this comment
- Greenwood
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:12pm
  @123………….You don’t have a soul you are a soul and your spirit is that which gives you life.
  The first lie is recorded in Genesis 3:4 when Satan as the serpent says to Eve “At this the serpent said to the woman: “You positively will not die. He was saying God lied.
  
  Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah God proceeded to form the man out of dust from the ground and to blow into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man came to be a living soul.
  
  Psalms 146:4 His spirit goes out, he goes back to his ground; In that day his thoughts do perish.
  
  Genesis3:19 In the sweat of your face you will eat bread until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken. For dust you are and to dust you will return.”
  
  Ezekiel 18:4 Look! All the souls—to me they belong. As the soul of the father so likewise the soul of the son—to me they belong. The soul that is sinning—it itself will die.
  
  Report this comment
- Old Truckers
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:27pm
  am123, – “Believe first and then you’ll see.”
  
  A man cannot believe in something without knowing why he should believe it.
  Knowledge comes before belief. – John 17:3
  
  Report this comment
- Greenwood
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:47pm
  Proverbs 1:7 The fear of Jehovah is the beginning of knowledge. Wisdom and discipline are what mere fools have despised.
  
  Report this comment
- ChrisDiamond
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:58pm
  AM123
  
  What, then, do you say to atheists who were raised from the time they were children to believe, who intensely studied the scriptures, who prayed, who fasted, who lived as humbly and as meekly as they could, who embodied selflessness, who judged not, who tried to show love in their every action, who followed the word and teachings of Jesus as directly as possible (stopping just short of selling all that he owned, forsaking his family, taking up my cross and following him), but who neither saw, neither heard, neither felt nothing of a divine touch? What did we do wrong? Or… why did God create atheists?
  
  Report this comment
- Grubmeister
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 4:21pm
  @ Old Trucker,
  “A man cannot believe in something without knowing why he should believe it.
  Knowledge comes before belief. – John 17:3″
  
  That is contrary to the accepted understanding of the meaning of the word faith. Most people say that faith is believing without seeing. How do you square the two? Perhaps the quote was referring to more practical matters than belief in god?
  
  Report this comment
- L.B.Stephens
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 4:29pm
  ChrisDiamond,
  
  Is God obligated to you, or are you obligated to God?
  
  Did you do a favor to God by your actions, or did Jehovah God do you a favor through His Son, Jesus Christ?
  
  Report this comment
- L.B.Stephens
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 4:39pm
  Grubmeister,
  
  Hebrews chapter 11 has a lot to say about ‘faith’ and how it is manifested by God’s servants.
  
  Report this comment
- am123
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 4:57pm
  @CHRISDIAMON,
  
  One can have a head knowledge of Jesus, but knowing Him in your heart is completely different. One can go through the motions and try to live a righteous life through human effort, but that is not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about being “born again” so you that your spirit comes to life and your spiritual eyes and ears are opened.
  
  Report this comment
- ChrisDiamond
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 7:05pm
  As expected, I didn’t get an answer. I got confirmation that it was somehow my fault just like it’s the fault of many others who made a similar walk as I did only to end up where I am.
  
  LBSTEPHENS
  
  I’m not obligated to a mythical entity. Going back to when I was studying/praying/fasting and otherwise wasting my time, it stands to reason that if there was a God and He is as the Bible and Christians say He is, then there should have been a feeling at least. I was terrified and spoke to my pastor a lot about not understanding why I felt nothing. He was shocked, honestly. I studied more, taught Sunday school, was a counselor, learned ancient Hebrew and ancient Greek to study passages in more original languages (I got to study out of a Bible that was reportedly over 1,400 years old in ancient Greek), and did NONE of it for my own ‘glory’. That would have been dishonest, and I worked very hard at keeping myself honest, non-judgmental, to behave with charity and kindess. So please… try again. My questions deserve more than your dogmatic rhetoric as a response.
  
  AM123
  You didn’t answer my question, and you assume that I somehow didn’t open my heart and mind to the spirit. Wrong. And this is one of those paradoxes that puts believers in a weird place; I get it. Because I probably lived a more Christian life for those 30 months than anyone else I’ve ever met, and that’s being humble. But no God sense for me. Why? And why does it happen to others?
  
  Report this comment
- L.B.Stephens
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 7:32pm
  ChrisDiamond,
  
  I read carefully and put thought into your comment and in phrasing my question. I asked with a desire to stimulate some thought as to motives. I am sorry you took offence.
  
  Report this comment
- WhiteFang
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 8:00pm
  Mr. Diamond,
  
  Do you think God will respond favourably to a man who considers him to be a mythical god? – Hebrews 11:6
  
  You may have worked hard in the past, but perhaps there was something you missed in reverentially approaching God. – 1 Peter 5:5-6
  
  This is not meant to offend you, it’s just something for a peaceful humble man to consider.
  
  Report this comment
- Max jones
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:39pm
  AM123 Very beautiful and consise….thanks….you are now in my .archives.
  
  Report this comment
- am123
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:46pm
  CHRISDIAMOND,
  
  Here, I will answer your question succinctly:
  
  You asked what about those “who neither saw, neither heard, neither felt nothing of a divine touch? What did we do wrong?”
  
  What you did wrong is you were looking for a divine touch when a true believer walks by faith and not by sight:
  
  “7 (For we walk by faith, not by sight:)”
  —2 Corinthians 5:7 KJV
  
  Walk by faith, lean not on your own understanding, and enter into a daily relationship with the living, loving God.
  
  Report this comment
- Max jones
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 8:14am
  GRUBMEISTER….“A man cannot believe in something without knowing why he should believe it.
  Knowledge comes before belief. – John 17:3″
  Knowing ‘why’ Is much easier to explain to a non-believer than ‘what’, as there are many practical reasons to practice faithful devotions. Improved physical health, improved mental and emotional health. Patience, thrift, self discipline all benefit. Family relations are easier and make more sense. Self worth and confidence benefit as do peace of mind and intelligence. Yes, faith makes a person smarter, because it displaces doubts and various insecurities and worries that distract the mind and hinder concentration.
  It makes playing with your dog more fun. Your guitar playing becomes more heart felt. Your bad knee hurts less, cause you sorta feel lighter.
  You respect yourself more, and love people more….Things just make more sense.
  
  Report this comment
- Max jones
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 9:09am
  Chrisdiamond….”Because I probably lived a more Christian life for those 30 months than anyone else I’ve ever met, and that’s being humble. But no God sense for me. Why? And why does it happen to others?” You will never answer that without ‘self examination’. Although clues abound.
  
  Report this comment
- Max jones
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 9:29am
  CHRISDIAMOND, Asked……”Because I probably lived a more Christian life for those 30 months than anyone else I’ve ever met, and that’s being humble. But no God sense for me. Why? And why does it happen to others?” .Some people are ‘in love’ with their own intellect. They find it difficult to believe that there are any human issues that they cannot fathom, because they are so impressed with themselves. So, if some ‘understanding’ eludes them, then it can’t be real. It must be fallacy. I call this narcissism, which is a clinical term for “stupid arrogance”. Your understanding has failed you. It would be well, if I, or somebody else could solve this for you………but some things are beyond our understanding. Not to say that your problem is not real, far from it….But you must take this up with a higher intelligence to find an answer. Therein lies YOUR conundrum.
  
  Report this comment
- Greenwood
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 12:38pm
  @GRUBMEISTER……………..Faith = Is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonsration of realities though not beheld. True faith is not a readiness to beleive something without sound evidence or just because a person wants it to be so. Genuine faith requires basic or fundamental knowledge, acquaintance with evidence, as well as heartfelt appreciation of what that evidence indicates. Although it is impossible to have real faith without accurate knowledge, the Bible says that it is “with the heart” that one exercises faith. – Romans 10:10
  
  Report this comment
- ChrisDiamond
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 1:18pm
  @LBSTEPHENS
  
  No offense. I apologize to you. My remark was snarky and you didn’t deserve that.
  
  @AM123
  
  And what of Jesus’ promises, “Ask and it shall be given to you. Seek and ye shall find,” in Matthew 7:7? I can’t adequately portray in words here just how humbly I approached my study and prayer in part because I believed that God would not hear the prayers of the arrogant or self-righteous. Pastors, ministers, priests, rabbis… I studied with all of them and never once earned rebuke or even counsel for high-mindedness or arrogance. Quite the opposite, in fact. Of course no one here will believe that, since I am now an athiest. And not to be snarky, but you have to understand how those who’ve had experiences similar to mine find the assertions that it’s somehow our fault appears overwhelmingly convenient.
  
  MaxJones
  
  If I was in love with my own intellect, I would have a real hard time admitting what I don’t know or when I am wrong. Quite the contrary. An attitude like one you softly accuse me of is prohibitive to learning and growth in any area, but your comment adds yet another person to the crowd of people who did not observe my study and walk (have you ever fasted for 7 days and gone without water for 3 of those, all the while in prayer and praise to bring your body, mind and spirit under subjection? Try it sometime and get back to me), but who simply assume the problem was with me. Thank you.
  
  Report this comment
- ChrisDiamond
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 2:44pm
  @WhiteFang
  
  “Do you think God will respond favourably to a man who considers him to be a mythical god? – Hebrews 11:6″ – At the time, I believed in God with all my heart, mind & spirit, hence the study, prayer, fasting, & effort to live Christ-like. So at that time, there was no reason for God to not respond favorably to my humble request for communion with Him.
  
  “You may have worked hard in the past, but perhaps there was something you missed in reverentially approaching God. – 1 Peter 5:5-6″ – This was a bedrock in my approach to study and prayer.
  
  “This is not meant to offend you, it’s just something for a peaceful humble man to consider.” – And I am certainly not offended, sir. I appreciate your comments. At the end of the day, what people who attribute this familiar to me, or think I didn’t do enough, or had a heady/arrogant attitude must be willing to concede is that perhaps they are wrong. I’m pretty sure if we watched a replay of my life during that time, that perhaps one or two of you would reconsider this dillemna.
  
  As a sort of corroboration, I would invite you all to read “Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light,” where she revealed that for the last half-century she felt no presence of God at all— or as Rev. Brian Kolodiejchuk, wrote, “neither in her heart or in the eucharist.”
  
  Report this comment
- Izzy383
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 3:43pm
  I’m Agnostic, I don’t know for sure if there is a god or not. In case he/she exists I do thank him/her when things go well and I vent to him/her when things aren’t so great. (but I’m always clear that I don’t blame him/her) However I have not found any religious theory that feels right to me. The last time I went to church I was 14. It was about two weeks after I asked the question “if it’s wrong to hurt someone for not agreeing with you, then why is it ok to throw them in a pit of fire to be tortured for all eternity for not agreeing with you?”
  I was shushed and told to have faith.
  Well I do. Just not in organized religion.
  
  Report this comment
bankerpapaw
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:37pm
That sure disappoints me about John. He is a fine journalist. I’ll pray that he comes to know Jesus
Christ as his Savior. John, you are an investigating reporter. Read God’s Word.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- dealer@678
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:02pm
  My heart goes out to an atheist who wants to believe in God but can’t
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:03pm
  @Dealer
  
  “My heart goes out to an atheist who wants to believe in God but can’t”
  
  … SE Cupp? Stossel isn’t an atheist, but Cupp is. Both have said they would like to believe, but can’t.
  
  Report this comment
- jay1975
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:03pm
  It is not easy. I would love to believe that after I die, I will be with friends and family forever, but the irrationality, the impossibility and the complete lack of any evidence drives me away. I cannot simply believe because of legends written down thousands of years ago.
  
  Report this comment
- smv803
  Posted on December 15, 2012 at 1:13pm
  As I see it, John needs to pay attention to the little things that occur in his life. As a journalist, he only see the big picture. On 9/11, Someone had to take their child to school and was late to work at Cantor Fitzgerald. Do you think he believes in God? I would say so…..if not, he should.
  
  Report this comment
FightingBear
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:28pm
John,

It’s called “Faith” for a reason. If you have evidence, reason and explanations…..we;ll then it is no longer faith but rather it becomes scientific fact.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- FlamingFartSyndrome
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:45pm
  Faith in Obama is just as meaningful as faith in a religion. Whats the difference, ‘i wish i win the lottery’, i have faith that i will win the lottery’. Does having faith make it more probable that i will win the lottery?
  
  Report this comment
- jorart
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:47pm
  For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
  
  Romans 1:20
  
  Report this comment
- searcher619
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:58pm
  John is telling you faith isn’t in him. He has a desire to know. The faith part is what’s lost on Atheists even though they have their own faith. Faith int eh non-existence of something they know there is no way they can prove.
  
  Report this comment
- BasketFullOfPuppies
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:16pm
  Why is there a problem with “scientific fact”? Faith should not be placed in “fairy tales”. Faith should not be above fact. Facts can only deal with the past. Faith is for the future.
  
  What you should be questioning, is whether the facts given to you by scientists, are really “facts”. Don’t assume that they know more than you. They are people, just like you. There may be a consensus. But, that does not place their opinion above ours, especially when the same facts may yield different interpretations, aside from politics or the scientific “thinking of the day”. That the sun revolves about the earth, was once an established “fact” by the leading scientists of the day. Our scientists are no different, other than they follow their peers and politics, while those in the past followed the church.
  
  Find the truth. Be knowledgeable. But, don’t ever think that “they” are smarter than you. If you let the true facts speak for themselves, you’ll often find that they have a much different story to tell. That is where you will find truth in the past. And, that is where you will find faith for the future.
  
  Report this comment
- jay1975
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:16pm
  My youngest has faith in Santa Claus, that doesn’t make him real. Of course, come Christmas morning, there will be more evidence supporting Santa than there is for Jesus.
  
  Report this comment
- ChrisDiamond
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 7:12pm
  @JORART
  
  Have you considered all that they did NOT know about the world through scientific discovery at that time? Weather? Earthquakes? Genetics? I mean c’mon. When Galielo dared to state that the earth orbited the sun and not the other way around, he was threatened with death, had to retract his statement and was held in house arrest by the church. Why? Because a provable, scientific discovery put a doctrinal/dogmatic tenet of the day in doubt.
  
  Do we regard the early writings of the Shaman about what causes weather as credible? Why not?
  
  Report this comment
- Pontiaku
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 2:32am
  [That the sun revolves about the earth, was once an established “fact” by the leading scientists of the day.]
  Those weren’t scientist. That’s like comparing astrology to astronomy or alchemy to chemistry. There was no “scientific method” in those times thus no “scientist”. Sadly even today there are people (Christians) in America that believe in geocentrism.
  
  http://i50.tinypic.com/b964nc.jpg
  
  Report this comment
watashbuddyfriend
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:27pm
John, and Gretchen, especially John, I cannot believe mine eyes! Do you ever look in the mirror, as you are primping in the morning? Have you ever asked yourself ‘how did I ever get to be the being that I am, with all these intricate features, which I see?’ Those features did not just happen; someone God had to bring them about! He, God Planned, Created, then brought the Universe into existence, and with a BIG BANG (fact, not fiction) brought Mankind into existence, with a place to roam. He prepared for YOU, and all mankind to live and die, but with two places to go after death; one place for you to choose, the other, you do not have to choose. Aint that nice!

You have to choose Jesus Christ, but you can follow Satan, So Damn Insane, Hitler, and Bin Laden without making a choice!

Be Wise, and choose Jesus Christ!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- dealer@678
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:58pm
  You’re right. The human body is too complex . It’s impossible for God not to exist.
  
  Report this comment
- jay1975
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:23pm
  And all of the “Chosen People” (Jews) say you are wrong. So, if the Jews are right, do you go to hell for worshiping a false profit, or, if you’re right, do all of the chosen people go to hell for not worshiping Jesus? Either way, it would seem your god doesn’t have much love for anyone if he doesn’t come down and just tell everyone which was is correct. If your god loved us all so much and wanted us to go to heaven, then why does he hide from us? Why does he not make himself known? If the bible is correct, he used to interact with man quite a bit, but then just disappeared. Why?
  
  Report this comment
- dealer@678
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 4:00pm
  Jay, He did make himself known by coming to us through his Son Jesus Christ. Read the words of Jesus and you are literally reading the word of God
  
  Report this comment
- jay1975
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 4:27pm
  I read the words of Jesus and he said he would be back before the generation passed and before the destruction of the temple. Both occurred within that generation, but he never came back. Either he was lying, he wasn’t really the son of god (but is god at the same time somehow) or it was all just a myth passed down through the years. Here is a question for you. Do you know about the gospel of q, or the “q” source? You should look it up and see where it takes you.
  
  Report this comment
- watashbuddyfriend
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 8:41pm
  @ jay1975
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:23pm
  
  “And all of the “Chosen People” (Jews) say you are wrong.”
  
  Jay, God’s Chosen People must travel the same route as ALL Mankind, no exception! They, too, are being USED by God to fulfill a Purpose, just like you must travel the Road God has set you on, even though you do not realize it!
  
  I hope you will see the light, before it is to late!
  
  Report this comment
- skaulr
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 12:01am
  @Jay1975: “I read the words of Jesus and he said he would be back before the generation passed and before the destruction of the temple. Both occurred within that generation, but he never came back. Either he was lying, he wasn’t really the son of god (but is god at the same time somehow) or it was all just a myth passed down through the years.”
  First, you left out a possibility: That your interpretation was wrong. You didn’t reference all of the data (Mark 13) and you of all people should realize that all of that information has to be placed within the context of its statement. There are a lot of things that are listed as having to come to pass before ‘that generation shall pass’. He was not referring to the then existing generation, but rather to the generation who would see all those things come to pass.
  Secondly, the Jews are still God’s chosen people. That never changed. The covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants is still in force. The believers in Christ are grafted into their promise, not the other way around (Romans). As far as who ultimately will be saved is up to God, one thing is for sure, no one will ever be redeemed without the atoning sacrifice of Christ.
  Thirdly, you mention the lack of evidence. Please, tell me what in the Bible is not factual? Furthermore, a truly honest approach would require a person to not only question whether God exists, but also whether He does not exist.
  
  Report this comment
- davecorkery
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 10:21am
  DEALER678
  
  Your brain is not complex enough to figure out the scam.
  
  Report this comment
JediKnight
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:24pm
And? It doesn’t change that he’s a small government kind of guy. I’d rather have an agnostic or even atheist in charge that isn’t going to try to tell my church what they can or can’t do like the HHS mandate does.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- frust@ted
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:38pm
  Jedi,
  
  There are 2 catagories that Atheists and Agnostics typically fall in, the ones who are fine with others still beleiveing and the ones that turn very bitter and grow to resent anyone that does beleive.
  
  I find Stossels views to be refreshing, he chooses not to mock or prevent someone from enjoying their faith.
  
  Report this comment
- searcher619
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:42pm
  An Agnostic simply says you can’t know and chooses not to believe. I’m an Agnostic and see no problem with people embracing religion. It’s one of those “whatever works for you” kind of deals. If it helps you lead a happy life and helps you be a better person then I’m all for it. I find, and many Atheists hate when I say this, that many people need religion in their lives. It gives them moral compass they’d lack otherwise. I’ve know plenty of people who were complete a-holes as Atheists and when they found religion they became much better people. More tolerant and more friendly in general. Religion is a part of our genetic makeup for reason.
  
  Report this comment
- SurryCoPatriot
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 7:39pm
  @ Searcher
  
  great post…I agree wholeheartedly.
  
  An agnostic myself, I don’t have any problems with people of faith. Jesse Ventura once said, “religion is a crutch for weak minded people”. I think that statement is cruel and lacking in class, but essentially true. If religion and the promise of eternal life (or the fear of eternal damnation) is the carrot you need to lead a moral life, then so be it. I guess its too much to ask that folks treat each other with respect for the sake of it. There is far too much evil in the world without knocking the foundation that keeps some folks walking the straight and narrow.
  
  Report this comment
Remember_Benghazi
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:20pm
I never understand people like Stossel. They’ve seen through the lies of religion, but still want it to be true. This is a horrible thing to wish upon yourself and the entirety of humanity. To want this to be true means that you want an unalterable, unchallengeable authority that can never die to watch over you at all times and can convict you of thoughtcrime, while you’re awake and asleep. By wanting this to be true, you are also nonchalantly condemning billions of people past, present, and future to eternal torture, if they don’t think like you do. This is evil. These are not beliefs worthy of respect. This is the least moral thing I could imagine.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The Third Archon
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:39pm
  While I agree it’s a silly thing to say and believe in view of the historical record, it’s not all that incomprehensible why many have it.
  (1) The culture is still predominantly comprised of the religious, everyone (religious or no) therefore has strong incentives to “make nice” with the institution of religion even if they don’t buy what it’s selling.
  (2) In Stossel’s particular case, I’m sure he is painfully aware of how many of his political allies have invested heavily into this delusion, so he has additional reasons to avoid stepping on the toes of the religious.
  (3) Largely (if not wholly) BECAUSE a strong segment of the population is religious, the dominant view of religion that history and culture reflect and teach is heavily colored by the pro-religious biases of those who ALREADY have a predisposition to believe in the truth and value of religion and its teachings. There’s good reason that the class of arguments attempting to justify religious belief are called “apologetics.”
  
  Report this comment
- TheSword
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:43pm
  Without religion there would be no system of morality and ethics so your point is nonsensicle. Your alternative explanation says that morality is man-made which would mean that there is no right or wrong answer to what is and is not moral/ethical and thus you have no right to tell anyone else what is moral/ethical. If morality comes from God, then there is a set standard that exists across humanity.
  
  Aside from that, you have a gross misunderstanding of the nature of what Christians believe about eternality. Yes, EVERYONE has sinned and deserves eternal punishment for that sin but God is merciful and loving and has given EVERYONE a incredibly easy way to avoid that. It’s your choice that condemns you, not man.
  
  Report this comment
- searcher619
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:50pm
  Remember_Benghazi:
  
  The flaw in your argument is that you don’t KNOW that there isn’t such a thing. Personally I envy the peace of mind many of those who believe have in regards to what awaits them after they pass. My being an Agnostic don’t have that. I will forever be unsure. It’s nice to feel you know even if you are wrong you don’t find out till the end. You believe you know for a fact that there is no God or god out there. What if YOU are wrong? Ever think about that? You are making a choice in what you believe based 100% on faith not facts. So you are just as likely to be wrong as the theists are. In the end we all have to decide for ourselves and live our lives accordingly. No one can make this decision for you. Personally I expect most of us are in for a surprise at the end of the road.
  
  Report this comment
- TomSawyer
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:22pm
  Justice from a holy God is evil? God is merciful and sacrificed more than you can imagine to save you from the consequences of your own actions. You decided not to accept the gift of redemption under the pretense that He does not exist. If you pray and ask if God exists, then you will be surprised what happens next. If you think God does not exist, that is your biggest problem. Nothing else even matters.
  
  Report this comment
- red1
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:26pm
  I am a person like Stossel so I will try to explain our position to you. Although I don’t believe God exists, I wish He did. If there is no God, then it is difficult to find meaning in life, and ultimately we exist only to feed the worms. I find your arguments for why this is horrible to be unpersausive. Clearly God would not want the outcomes of anything you list, those can only be blamed on man. It is my opinion that only an insane person would not wish that God exists. If I did believe that God exists, I would consider a person who denies a wish that God exists to be under the influence of Satan.
  
  Report this comment
- skaulr
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:38pm
  The very fact that you’re able to label something “evil” proves the existence of a moral absolute in your own mind. Since you have moral and ethical guidelines that are almost universally held (murder, theft, evil, good, etc.), then there must be an absolute ‘guide’. For something to be absolute, it must always be. Therefore, an absolute authority must exist. By your labeling it as the “least moral thing” and that it is “evil” and are ‘beliefs not worthy of respect’ it is seems obvious that you are trying to justify a way of not being held accountable for what is against that very same “unalterable, unchallengeable authority”. If there is no such authority, how can you label my belief in it evil? On what moral ground can you make that judgment?
  
  Report this comment
- skaulr
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:41pm
  Remember_Benghazi: From what you’ve written it seems you believe that 1) the universe and how it works can exist without absolute laws (the need of absolute laws like what governs the physical would be equally demanded of the spiritual), and 2) that we can condemn or redeem those not of faith (that is Gods judgement). What sense does it make that we all have ideas of moral/ethical right and wrong (absolutes) even though in our current state we cannot attain them? From where did the moral absolute come? Why is it that it seems we are the only creature on the earth that is fully capable of abstract thought? Could it be because part of our essence is not of this realm, but another? There can be no condemnation without an absolute (Gods law) as well as there can be no redemption without an absolute (Christs sacrifice); just as there is no variance with the physical laws of themodynamics which govern how the universe works. To put it plainly, yes, I want an “unalterable, unchangeable authority”, it is the only way I can depend on right and wrong being always right and wrong. How can one live life with no rule, no idea of what is required to live peaceably in a society let alone to answer to that which is eternaly required. If there is no eternal authority that watches over us awake and asleep that has granted a moral guidpost by which to guide our lives, then no cohesive society would be possible. Besides, without those absolutes, how can you label anything “evil”.
  
  Report this comment
- searcher619
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:44pm
  The Third Archon:
  
  “While I agree it’s a silly thing to say and believe in view of the historical record, it’s not all that incomprehensible why many have it.”
  
  How many historical facts have been discovered by following fables and myths? How do you know that the existence of so many religions since our very beginnings isn’t evidence that there may be some kernel of truth to it all? I don’t get why Atheists have such a hard time simply being honest and saying “I Don’t Know.”
  
  Report this comment
- jrc99
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 4:43pm
  @RB
  
  Look to the National Monument to the Forefathers and then get back to us on, “By wanting this to be true, you are also nonchalantly condemning billions of people past, present, and future to eternal torture, if they don’t think like you do.”
  
  Report this comment
- ChrisDiamond
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 7:31pm
  @THESWORD and others who believe morality cannot exist outside of God:
  
  So how did hunter gatherers survive with no knowledge of Jehovah God? I mean, they somehow managed to work out a system of fairness fit to at least ensure survival and propagation of the species. I mean, we’re all here, right? If morality is the basis of law, as some argue, then how did ancient tribes work out law without knowledge of Jehovah? The Chinese? Did Jehovah do some kind of ancient Matrix plug-in job to infuse them with a basic sense of morality fit for writing law without hinting at who He really was or am I just missing something?
  
  THESWORD
  
  As a counter to religion for the basis of morality, I would say that study, philosophy and observation of relevant data can (and does) lead people to moral precepts not founded by Christianity. I don’t need God to tell me that it’s wrong to murder, steal or rape because I see those things as the initiation of violence against others (which I believe is morally reprehensible) and a disregard for their property rights, which is also morally reprehensible.
  
  BTW, your mention of God’s mercy is ironic. I mean, how much mercy was involved in flooding the earth and undoubtedly killing thousands or more innocent children and infants? How much mercy and love is involved in promising an eternity of torture, misery, screaming, pain, suffering and anguish if you fail to believe in something that has no empirical evidence to prove it?
  
  Report this comment
- OlderCowGirl
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 8:55pm
  Well, you can either focus on the scary parts of God (which I don’t) or focus on the more positive aspects of God (Father/Son/Holy Spirit).
  
  When I was a kid I went to church only to play with my best friend. Growing up I had a horrible life…and so I just sorta left God, if I even had Him in the first place. I didn’t blame God…I just didn’t think about God. I did a lot of terrible things. And I was miserable.
  
  Apparently, God had more of a hold on me than I realized. I began leaning towards God without even realizing it. Then one day while living in a terrible situation…I had a “God experience”. It was awesome…the most wonderful and peaceful experience I’ve ever felt. I did not see God. I felt Him…sensed Him. I promised God that very moment that I would never leave Him again. And it’s been easy to keep that promise.
  
  Now I have a wonderful God-loving husband. My life is peaceful now, and finally a happy person. I don’t like churches very much. Some weird people in churches…really into some goofy stuff. But there are some really good churches out there, too.
  
  It’s all about your own personal relationship with God. Praying is talking to God. And I talk to God along my way. I read a book called “The Shack”. Stated in this book: “Everyone is broken”. Those 3 words changed my life. I wasn’t the only unhappy person in the world.
  
  People ought to let each other believe in their own way. It’s never too late, unless you a
  
  Report this comment
- skaulr
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 12:24am
  Mr. Diamond: How do you know “hunter gatherers” had no knowledge of God? You say that “study, philosophy and observation of relevant data” leads people to moral precepts, but the example you give about not needing God to tell you is predicated upon the very basis of an already existing idea that violence against others is ‘morally reprehensible’…why? If there is no absolute basis for moral right and wrong, wouldn’t harming others for your benefit be permissible…I mean, if there is no absolute, that means whatever is best for ourselves is what’s important…not others. Also, without that moral absolute, from what basis do you determine a presumption of Gods guilt if he gives those people who’ve rejected him their ultimate decision? After all, they chose not to accept Him, not the other way around. And if it were dependent upon empirical evidence, what manner of ‘faith’ would it be?
  
  Report this comment
- PATTY HENRY
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 5:09am
  FOR those of you struggling with GOD/no God: What if LIFE as we know it means you ‘won the lotto’ insofaras being able to move to the next level. What if this LIFE were nothing more than a testing ground, a school, a “race” to complete; a course to learn; a separating factor to determine who gets to go on to Heaven forever and who refuse to have faith, try to have faith, refuses (like Satan) to submit to GOD, or understand that GOD is the TOP of the food chain. There is nothing better.
  God would like to save everyone. Satan is out there trying to corrupt everyone. It is a fight between Good and Evil. Good wins. None of us are saying anything that hasn’t been said for centuries. None of your doubts are unique. You are being asked to comprehend why you are here. You are being asked to decide.
  Knowing that this life here on earth is all about choice – your personal choice (something that can’t be done ‘collectively’) and it concerns your life forever, it’s probably a good idea to take this quest seriously and KNOW THIS: Satan is out there roaming the earth, spreading evil (such evil that defies description most of the time); People die. Tragedy happens. This is the sin-filled life we exist in but we have been promised by GOD that we will survive this life if we come to Him. He said it, I believe it. I can see the difference between a life with GOD and one without. Can’t you?
  
  Report this comment
- ChrisDiamond
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 3:49pm
  @SKAULR
  
  “How do you know “hunter gatherers” had no knowledge of God?” In fairness, I don’t, but there is no evidence that ancient tribes outside of Judea knew of Jehovah.
  
  “…is predicated upon the very basis of an already existing idea that violence against others is ‘morally reprehensible’…why?” – Perhaps I didn’t explain property rights clearly enough (and without rereading my post, maybe didn’t explain it at all). But to save space, I’ll simply offer this: there is no commandment against assaulting or raping someone, only commandments against lying, killing (which God commanded a lot of), disrespecting your parents, coveting (which arguably drives violence for acquisition) and worshipping other Gods. God doesn’t have a problem with initiating violence, so the question doesn’t really apply to my statement.
  
  With regards to absolutes, we go back to killing, or murder. God commanded David to kill every lliving thing in villages, man, woman, child & beast. Innocent children. That’s murder, but God commanded it anyway, so apparently He is also no respecter of his own absolutes for us.
  
  Ah, faith… I presume you regard faith as a virtue, and you’re of course free to do so. I just disagree. I think faith is a flimsy surface to establish one’s stance when pondering eternity, in my opinion. It also seems asinine to me that ‘faith’ would be demanded by an all-powerful being with ecstatic joy or eternal torure as the only possibilities for etern
  
  Report this comment
fedlibertarian
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:13pm
Love this guy! Ancient Astronaut theory hold just as much if not more water as the Judaism/Christianity hypothesis. Ancient peoples would have no way to differentiate what we think of as “god(s)” and species from other worlds and times. This in part explains polytheism such as Greek/Roman mythology. Blind faith is just as silly as the martyrdom/72 virgins ideology practiced by enemies of humanity.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- FlamingFartSyndrome
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:37pm
  People turn to religion for happiness because they are lonely. People turn to religion for security because they live in fear. People turn to religion for answers because they are uncertain of their purpose. People turn to religion because they are either lonely, fearful, or clueless.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:53pm
  @Flaming
  
  And if you insert “government” in place of “religion” in your statement, you will have explained Leftists to a tee.
  
  End of the day, the majority of people on this planet seem quite determined to look for some kind of authority outside of themselves to justify whatever it is that they are deficient with in life. This is an apolitical statement, btw.
  
  Report this comment
- TheSword
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:58pm
  @ Flaming
  
  People run from religion because they’re afraid to be loved. People turn away from religion because they’re afraid that there is a holy and righteous God that they would have to answer to. People turn away from religion because they know if there’s a purpose they would have to acknowledge it. People turn away from religion because they are afraid, uninformed, or foolish.
  
  See what I did there?
  
  Report this comment
- FlamingFartSyndrome
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:20pm
  “People run from religion because they’re afraid to be loved.”
  -You dont have to be religious to be loved, thats just an absurd statement, being loved and being capable of loving is in human nature, not a divine power.
  
  “People turn away from religion because they’re afraid that there is a holy and righteous God that they would have to answer to.”
  - Thanks for concurring my statement that “People turn to religion for security because they live in fear.” Of course the fear being that you will be judged for your actions, therefore the main goal in doing good is to be accepted by God, rather than do good because you have love for your neighbor.
  
  “People turn away from religion because they know if there’s a purpose they would have to acknowledge it.”
  - Your purpose in life is decided by you, because if it was decided by someone else, already decided, or decided by a supreme being, you are nothing else but a slave following Master’s orders.
  
  Report this comment
- TheSword
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:55pm
  I’m aware of the absurdity, that was the entire point. Your assertions were equally absurd, overly generalized, nonsensicle, and entirely antagonistic.
  
  Report this comment
Daithi
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:10pm
I’m with Stossel except that I go even further. I’m an atheist. I make decisions based on reason, logic, and evidence. I don’t have blind faith. I’m willing to change my mind if the evidence changes, but that makes me atheist not agnostic. I suspect Stossel is the same but doesn’t have the courage to admit it.

I also don’t begrudge anyone their spiritual beliefs (they are none of my business), and I happen to love the traditions of Christmas, Easter, marriages, funerals (ok, I don’t love funerals but do appreciate the gathering of friends and family to say good-bye and mourn together), etc. However, you don’t have to be religious to be moral, ethical, and to lead a fulfilling life.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- CALLMEMSGT
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:21pm
  Sure you can be good, honest etc. but without faith but how do your sins get paid for?. Do you believe that they do not create a debt?
  
  Report this comment
- The Third Archon
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:31pm
  Yes, it’s a common misconception that “atheism” and “agnosticism” are mutually exclusive. In fact, there not and often overlap. Agnosticism/gnosticism speaks to what you KNOW, while theism/atheism speaks to what you BELIEVE. Thus, Stossel, though he’d probably never admit it or call himself this (for a variety of socially pragmatic reasons, not JUST because of common cultural misconceptions–misconceptions which those hostile to atheism/agnosticism have every reason to continue to perpetuate), is by his own words and definition an atheist since he lacks a belief in the existence of God (or gods, or goddesses, or any divine entities it would seem). Now, he is ALSO an agnostic because he doesn’t claim to KNOW in any absolute sense (and probably in his case any colloquial sense either) that God does not exist, but that doesn’t make him NOT an atheist (which would be by proxy a theist–people could figure this out themselves if they think about it for two seconds; you are EITHER a theist OR you’re not, i.e. an A-theist, there’s not “middle ground,” you either do or don’t believe a claim).
  
  Report this comment
- watashbuddyfriend
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:33pm
  Ok, Daithi
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:10pm
  
  All of that is for nought, unless you choose the Road to the Right! See my comments, above!
  
  Also, Christmas, and the other Pagan things are ways for God’s chosen people to take money from you, me, and ALL mankind, BUT, I still like Christmas, because it is suppose to tell the Real Story about Jesus Christ!
  
  Merry Christmas, and I hope you take the Right Road, before it is to late!
  
  Report this comment
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:40pm
  @CALLMEMSGT
  
  You have yet to prove that any such thing as “sin” exists.
  
  Also, let’s say “sin” does exist, what “sin” did I commit in Christianity? According to their theology, I was born with this “sin” and must accept that a human sacrifice was necessary on my behalf.
  
  Jesus doesn’t “judge” the “souls” of man by any standard of good vs evil. You could be a complete psychopath and at the last second, accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior, vs an atheist as you said, could be good, honest and moral, but because he/she doesn’t accept nonsense about afterlife, heaven/hell, Jesus, they are doomed for an eternity of torture? It’s utter nonsense.
  
  Not only it is nonsense, it’s actually an immoral and evil worldview. Again, Christianity says that every human is BORN worthy of an eternal torture(because of the original sin of Adam of Eve) and are then forced to accept a human sacrifice to avoid a torture that God says I’m worthy of(but also doesn’t want for me).
  
  I can’t bear to look at all the nice, Muslims, Jews, Agnostics, Buddhists, Atheists and say “yeah, well they may be nice, but they don’t accept Jesus so they’re doomed for hell”
  
  Therefore, even of the God of Christianity is the correct God, I would NEVER worship it because of how evil it is to create such an inhumane and callous system. I would never worship anybody or anything. Why does a supernatural being need constant praise and worship?
  
  Report this comment
- FlamingFartSyndrome
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:40pm
  Im also an atheist and i would never try to convert anyone to think as i do, as i wish religious people would not try to convert me to believe as they do.
  
  Report this comment
- The Third Archon
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:41pm
  @CALLMEMSGT
  I think the point is that he (we) don’t believe in the existence of “sin” in the first place.
  
  Report this comment
- skaulr
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:44pm
  @THIRD…ever feel guilty about something? Then you do believe in ‘sin’. Guilt is a response to wronging someone, which is in essence, sin. The subject is not the existence of sin, but rather whether or not you believe you’ll be held eternally accountable for it.
  
  Report this comment
- enzomedici
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:59pm
  Christians believe that god sent his son down to Earth to sacrifice himself in order to protect us from himself. Huh? That is probably the dumbest thing I ever heard. The Christian god supposedly exists and is all powerful, but yet won’t stop true evil from existing in this world which means God can stop it, but won’t, which makes God evil or God cannot stop it which makes God not very powerful. The whole cult of Christianity is ridiculous. Jesus said nothing about a church and the pope runs around like a king with people kissing his hand and feet. Utter nonsense. Any other organization with as many pedophiles as the Catholic Church would have been shutdown years ago and yet every week people take their kids there. This is truly unbelievable to me. Any adult who believes this nonsense needs to be declared mentally ill.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:10pm
  @Skaulr
  
  “ever feel guilty about something? Then you do believe in ‘sin’. Guilt is a response to wronging someone, which is in essence, sin. ”
  
  As a fellow Christian, I believe you’re definely sin incorrectly. “Sinning” is doing something contrary to God’s will. There are plenty of things contrary to God’s will that people don’t feel guilty about doing. Pre-marital sex comes to mind. Heck, remarriage comes to mind (if you’re divorced and remarried, you’re committing adultery).
  
  Not all sins lead to guilt, and not all sins affect others. And not all guilty feelings come from being “wrong.” If your friend does breaks a law and you call the police, you might feel guilty for betraying a friend, but you did “the right thing.”
  
  Report this comment
- FlamingFartSyndrome
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:30pm
  @skaulr
  
  What came first, sin or guilt? Guilt exists because of human nature, not because of a supreme being.
  
  Report this comment
- skaulr
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:36pm
  @Locked: I was giving a simple example to an oversimplified statement. Whereas the bulk of your comment is correct, one must realize that in todays society many of those things God ‘wrote upon our hearts’ have been desensitized (remember Overton Window) and even as hinted in part of your answer, the plight of ‘situational ethics’…
  Please forgive me for not giving a complete answer…
  
  Report this comment
- skaulr
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:39pm
  @Flaming: Where did “human nature” come from?
  Biblically, sin came first. After Adam and Eve sinned, they hid themselves because they were guilty.
  
  Report this comment
- CALLMEMSGT
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:05pm
  @moderation- Actually, you got things about right accept the part about it all being nonsense. I won’t even argue with you because you seem to have a lot invested in your disbelief. I will say though that I don’t believe that all non-Christians perish after death. Dont know, don’t really care. I know the deal god has made with Christians, maybe he has another arrangement with Jews, Hindus, Muslims.
  
  @ Archon- Maybe you don’t believe in sin, would you agree that lying, cheating, stealing, murder, are wrong no matter what you call it.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:29pm
  @Skaulr
  
  “Please forgive me for not giving a complete answer…”
  
  No forgiveness needed, my brother. It’s nigh-impossible to boil down complex theological matters into easy-to-digest morsels; I think we all know that!
  
  Report this comment
- FlamingFartSyndrome
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:31pm
  @skaulr
  
  Where did human nature come from?
  
  -Biology
  
  Report this comment
- alinmatt
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 7:02pm
  @callme, morality could be the result of self-interest. Ex: Even without laws, most people won’t kill their neighbor or steal from him. Why? Revenge. On top of inviting harm upon myself, without law in place to protect property, I’m the only one left to defend my stuff. Morality is a result of property protection. Murder – taking someone’s life. Stealing – taking someone’s stuff. Adultery – taking someone’s spouse (people invest both time and money into family and relationships, it‘s stealing). Rape – taking that which isn’t given to you.
  My point is that morality is a derivative of property protection.
  If you want to believe that the Bible has the ultimate in moral absolutes, then I will ask you when is it morally acceptable to intentionally kill babies and children? Read 1 Samuel 15 or Numbers 31.
  @skaulr, my mom could make me feel guilty for doing something right. Huckleberry Fin felt guilty for helping Jim (a slave in the south) escape to freedom.
  
  Report this comment
- ChrisDiamond
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 7:38pm
  Sin… Let me tell you what I believe ‘sin’ is: Sin is a disease invented by a group who wanted to sell you a cure you don’t need. You can never quit ‘sinning’, so you’ll always need their ‘cure’. Brilliant business plan.
  
  Report this comment
- skaulr
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 9:03pm
  @Flaming:
  Your basic argument comes down to nature or nurture. Morals (right/wrong, sin/forgiveness) cannot be taught by ‘biology’, so it has to be nurture.
  Re: your comments about love (“being loved and being capable of loving is in human nature”)…Just what is love and from where does it come?
  Re: your comments about doing good (“the main goal in doing good is to be accepted by God”)…actually Christianity teaches there is no good you can do to be accepted by God, it is only the sacrifice of Himself (Christ) that can make that acceptance possible.
  Re: your comments about purpose (“Your purpose in life is decided by you, because if it was decided by someone else, already decided, or decided by a supreme being, you are nothing else but a slave following Master’s orders.”)…actually belief in Christ as my Savior has set me free from a sinful nature and its drive to justify itself. Faith in Him gives me the liberty of knowing my purpose; I am liberated from being a slave to sin and the guilt thereof. And, I am not a slave to the narcissistic blindness of humanism.
  
  Report this comment
- OccamsSword
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 2:12am
  Do you believe in evolution? Have you at least researched why many scientists think its not a plausible theory? Life from non-life … what say you?? My logic says no… I would have to use FAITH to believe it, not facts or logic.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 8:45am
  @Occam
  
  “Do you believe in evolution? Have you at least researched why many scientists think its not a plausible theory? Life from non-life … what say you?? ”
  
  Uh, that’s not evolution you’re talking about. It’s abiogenesis. They are completely different things.
  
  Report this comment
- skaulr
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 1:33pm
  Oh, come on @Locked! No matter which direction you go down the evolution pathway, eventually you have to get to a point that inorganic materials somehow, against mindnumbing odds in a supposed choatic soup of some kind, somewhere combined to eventually become what would be living matter. No matter what you label it, that’s where it has to go. They are not completely different, simply two different places in the theorized journey.
  
  Report this comment
WhiteFang
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:09pm
John Stossel is a honest man. I respect his forthrightness in this matter.

Mr. Stossel, if I may, you are looking for God in all the wrong places.
Religion is not the answer and you cannot find God there, because they all speak according to their own ideas and philosophies. We need to throw away “religion” and accept God’s Word in its unadulterated form – The Holy Scriptures tell us of our Creator and it does so without all the confusion of religious mayhem.

http://www.jw.org

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- pinostabaum
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:20pm
  whose holy scripture should stossel be reading?
  
  Report this comment
- WhiteFang
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:36pm
  pinostabaum,
  
  The KJV is good, the ASV is good, the NWT is good.
  
  Read the Bible, without religious pre-conceived ideas. It is like wanting to learn the metric system of measurements, if we always want to compare how the metric system corresponds to the U.S. measurements, we only get confused and give up. Just forget about the U.S. measuring system and throw it away, then your mind will be able to digest the new knowledge.
  
  Report this comment
- ZAP
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:00pm
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXkFjz7XEgc
  
  Report this comment
- WhiteFang
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:15pm
  Generally, people have the tendency to fit the Bible around their own pre-conceived ideas and family inspired traditions. When that happens, understanding the Bible’s clear message cannot come forth. For example; if a reader of the Bible was raised with the trinity idea of God, then when reading John 3:16-17 comes along, they ignore what the scripture actually says and they continue to hold to the previous wrong teaching. There will be no progress in his understanding in such a case.
  We need to let the Bible speak for itself.
  
  Report this comment
- WhiteFang
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:34pm
  ZAP,
  
  But Saul, still breathing threat and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest2and asked him for letters to the synagogues in Damascus, in order that he might bring bound to Jerusalem any whom he found who belonged to The Way, both men and women.
  
  3Now as he was traveling he approached Damascus, when suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him,4and he fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him: “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?”5He said: “Who are you, Lord?” He said: “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. (Acts 9:1-5)
  
  Could this education for Saul (Paul) apply to your senseless opposition to truthful statements?
  
  Report this comment
Cavallo
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:08pm
Faith and spirituality is a journey, not a destination. John’s position is far more honest and real than the evangelical atheists.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
blarman
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:07pm
That’s the great thing about America that few recognize: we have the ability to believe (or not) in whatever we choose. And at least he’s honest about his convictions and is willing to allow others to differ in their opinions. I highly respect that – unlike those who are so insecure in their beliefs that they feel like they need to denigrate others’.

For Stossel: Many religions (notably Christianity) rely on faith – a belief in something not seen which is nevertheless true – before the evidence happens. Putting evidence before faith is putting the cart before the horse. If you refuse to believe in religion until it proves itself to you, you are never going to find it. You may be okay with that, but that mindset will never lead to answers for the basic questions: “Where did I come from?”, “Why am I here?”, and “Where am I going when I die?” Those questions can only be answered via religion.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- DeavonReye
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:29pm
  Of what value is it, really, to “believe in a happy afterlife”, if just to satisfy a fear of death? Seems to me, it would be of more value to come to terms with it, accept it, then attempt to enjoy your life as much as you can while you’re here.
  
  As for “…a belief in something not seen which is nevertheless true…”, how do you know YOUR “something not seen” is more correct than the muslim’s “something not seen”? Or the hindu’s? Or the wiccan’s? Or the thousands of other “faith beliefs” in the world?
  
  At least an agnostic is wise enough to say, “I don’t know. . . nor CAN know”. Outside of physical evidence, all “beliefs” are suspect.
  
  Report this comment
- God_Is_Not
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:04pm
  “You may be okay with that, but that mindset will never lead to answers for the basic questions: “Where did I come from?”, “Why am I here?”, and “Where am I going when I die?” Those questions can only be answered via religion.”
  
  In all fairness, these questions can be answered without religion. However, I often find that religion provides the answers that the religious desire.
  
  Report this comment
kindling
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:04pm
John, my 3 year old severely autistic NON VERBAL son was in my arms as we walked into a room where the baptism of a child was about to take place. The room was full of people all sitting quietly when out of the blue my son started reaching up toward the ceiling opening and closing his fists and calling out in a clear baby voice “Jesus, Jesus, Jesus”. He had never said a word before and I had to take him from the room so the baptism would not be interrupted. He tried to get out of my arms to return but I held him back. He saw someone no one else did but I know he did because my son can’t lie. He is as free of sin as our Savior. My son didn’t start talking for several more years.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- dealer@678
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:14pm
  Witnessing that would surely change any atheists mind about God
  
  Report this comment
Nevermind
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:02pm
grayling646
…but it’s OK for you to push your beliefs on us?
**********

What belief would that be and provide and example of a time i pushed that on you. I dont have a belief, therefore am unable to push that on you.

As far as the person who said i will get proof if i asked, been there done that and got nothing.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- TheSword
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:33pm
  Not to split hairs, but your argument about not being able to push your beliefs on someone because you don’t believe is illogical. Saying that there is no God is every bit as much a position of faith/belief as saying there is one. If God exists, then you would be eternally answerable for your actions (good, bad, or otherwise) here on earth. If not, then you just disappear when you die. Believing in God (from a Chrisitian perspective) means having faith that He will have mercy on you as He says He will. Believing there is no God means having faith that there are no eternal rewards/consequences. You as an agnostic/atheist have faith in no consequences while I as a Christian have faith in salvation. That’s the difference. Atheism and agnosticism are faith systems just as Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc.
  
  Report this comment
- DoseofReality
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:51pm
  Thesword – Aethism is a religion and faith just like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
  
  Report this comment
- TheSword
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:06pm
  I didn’t say atheism was a religion, I said it was faith system. I don’t assert that it is organized or practiced (aside from organizations such as FFRF and AA) but it most certainly is dogmatic in that it is a position of faith that there is no God. You can’t empirically prove it any more than than I can prove there is. You, by faith, believe there is no God and no eternity/afterlife. I, by faith, believe there is a God and an eternity/afterlife. That has nothing to do with going to a church, praying, or getting baptized. Those are a resulting action from the faith stance I’ve chosen. You do none of them because of the faith stance you’ve chosen.
  
  Report this comment
- FlamingFartSyndrome
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:05pm
  @ thesword
  
  So you must be christian or religious to believe in an afterlife? Your beliefs all come from other people’s opinions. The bible was written by people, not a “god”. Your beliefs are just a replica of someone else’s beliefs, and because there alot of people who have the same beliefs you somehow think it must be truer. Using irrational logic in order to give meaning to why you have faith makes absolutely no sense.
  
  Report this comment
- TheSword
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:46pm
  All religions purport to explain human existence in terms of their concept of afterlife so you certainly Christians are the only ones to believe in one. Atheism by definition disbelieves in supreme beings and an afterlife so on that point I’d say yes, I think you would be hard pressed to find a true atheist that believes in an afterlife. It’s not a requirement or a permission, it’s just a charactistic of the faith system.
  
  You clearly misunderstand what Christians believe about the Bible and why, but no matter, explaining it wouldn’t make any difference to your opinion. However, your argument about beliefs being a replica apply equally to atheism. No one is born in a vacuum devoid of influencing opinions and writings. The logic you deem to be irrational is only so because you fail to understand it. Faith, by definition is a belief in something that is not based on proof (I recommend a dictionary). Your belief that there is no God is faith because it cannot be proven just the same as a belief that there is. I understand atheists are reluctanct acknowledge this fact because it means that they would be said to have faith in a belief and it would shatter their worldview. The logic doesn’t give meaning to my faith, or yours. It’s only an explanation of what faith is. You can use common talking points to try to tear down my faith all you want, but it doesn’t change the fact that it’s a faith position just like I could tell you about God and Jesus until
  
  Report this comment
- TheSword
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:14pm
  (cont’d)
  
  …until I’m blue in the face but it won’t change your mind because it’s not an argument based on emprical proof, but on faith (see definition above).
  
  Report this comment
bobfrommosinee
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:02pm
In the Constitution, It is Freedom of Religion, Not Freedom from Religion.

Free speech, Does not end at the Door of the Church, So there is no separation of Church and State, But there is a separation of State from the Church, and Interfering with the Free Speech of the Religious in the public square and the halls of power of Government.

There is no right in the Constitution not to be Offended, Only a right to speak freely, Free Speech.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- YouCantExplainThat
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:39pm
  So you are okay with the Qur’an being displayed at the courthouse?
  
  Report this comment
- ChrisDiamond
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 7:45pm
  And to add to YOUCANT’s question, what about a Satanic Bible?
  
  Report this comment
DeavonReye
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:01pm
Personal experiences can be deceptive.

I don’t get the “you won’t get the ability to choose” argument. Of what value is credulity?

As I have contemplated this topic for several years, I am one who doesn’t have an absolute on the “is there a god” question. All I can do is be sincere and honest, though some “christians” will call me a liar on that. I don’t care what they think. They can strawman me as “one who knows there IS a god, but don’t want to admit it because I would have to submit to that god”. But the actual truth is, . . . like Stossel, there IS a requirement that supersedes “faith” when it comes to something where I MUST comport my life under a religious authority. When there is nothing credible/compelling to offer that THIS religion is correct, it is no different than how a christian rejects the claims of other non-christian religions.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- CALLMEMSGT
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:17pm
  Deavonreye-
  There is a really great book by C.S. Lewis titled “Mere Christianity”. Helped me when I was “contemplating”. I
  
  Merry Christmas!!!
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:43pm
  Thanks for the suggestion. However, what “helps” one won’t necessarily “help” another. And as I contemplate the possibility of a deity, I don’t find christianity “the most palatable”.
  
  Report this comment
- TheSword
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:59pm
  Deavonreye,
  
  I understand what you’re saying about a superceding requirement. From a Christian perspective, the Bible is clear that faith is the superceding requirement and held above emperical proof. However, if you don’t believe the Bible then that argument probably doesn’t carry much weight.
  
  Consider this from a historical perspective…Jesus historically existed, that can’t seriously be disputed. Every one of His disciples believed that He was God and that He was crucified and rose from the dead and preached this knowing that they would be persecuted. All but one of them were killed for their beliefs and preaching (except for John was was boiled in oil but did not die), refused to recant, and died as believers.
  
  Either they all truly saw the risen Lord or were all lying about it in concert. How likely is it that all of them would be telling the same story across the known world and be readily willing to die for it if the story were a not true?
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:41pm
  @thesword
  
  I’m sorry, but as a Christian who enjoys learning about the history of the most important faith in history, I need to correct a few things you posted without qualifications.
  
  “Consider this from a historical perspective…Jesus historically existed, that can’t seriously be disputed.”
  
  It certainly can be dispited. The evidence shows it’s very likely He existed, but there are certainly disputes. Even if He did exist, there’s very little consensus outside of the religious about what He did while alive.
  
  “Every one of His disciples believed that He was God and that He was crucified and rose from the dead and preached this knowing that they would be persecuted.”
  
  Technicality, but Judas didn’t according to the Bible.
  
  “All but one of them were killed for their beliefs and preaching (except for John was was boiled in oil but did not die), refused to recant, and died as believers.”
  
  Extremely unlikely. This version of the fate of the disciples came from the 16th century, from John Foxe’s Book of Martyrs (1563). Hippolytus of Rome (170–235), on the other hand, wrote “On the Twelve Apostles” in the early third century and claimed only 7 died a martyr’s death… but even this account came at least 150 years after the fact, in a time when fan fiction about Christ was becoming popular (stories like the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, for example).
  
  (Cont. in next post)
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:46pm
  @Thesword (cont)
  
  “Either they all truly saw the risen Lord or were all lying about it in concert.”
  
  Or there’s another option: we don’t know the actual story of their deaths.
  
  “How likely is it that all of them would be telling the same story across the known world…”
  
  Even the Gospels don’t align correctly, and the Bible didn’t come together in a form we recognize until hundreds of years after Christ’s death; and even then what was chosen was the parts that seemed most likely and in concert, though none were eye-witness accounts.
  
  “… and be readily willing to die for it if the story were a not true?”
  
  Joseph Smith died for a his beliefs and never recanted. And we have a clear record of that happening. We can say when and where, and even name some of the people involved, including those were not members of Mormonism. Does dying for your belief without recanting mean that Mormonism is valid as well? Heck, since we know exactly how and why Joseph Smith died, does that mean it’s more “true” than Biblical accounts?
  
  (Hint: Of course not!)
  
  We’re not all Mormons because we trust in FAITH, not in the strength of physical or historical evidence. Claiming with certainty that we “know” all the things we take on “faith” is lying about Christianity.
  
  Report this comment
- TheSword
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:11pm
  @Locked (post 1),
  All valid points and criticisms.
  
  “It certainly can be [disputed].”
  You would have to ignore first century writings (both historical and canonical) or provide proof that they were not written by whom they are attributed and when they were claimed to be written. The Gospels were written by eyewitnesses (or under their authority/input) to the events. Non-religious writings would naturally not include what they viewed to be a Jewish commoner while Jews would also be unlikely to expound on what He did due to their opposition to Him (such as Josephus’ writings which were at best neutral).
  
  “Technicality, but Judas didn’t according to the Bible.”
  You can argue what the source of his suicidal remorse was, but he also did not see the risen Lord. Even the disciples did not fully believe or understand until they saw him risen. The technicality is moot I think.
  
  “Extremely unlikely….”
  I’d have to dig back into my resources to quote them to you but I don’t think it is as doubtful as you assert. At the very least you have to acknowledge Peter, Paul, Stephen, James, and John. Also, I don’t think you can equate Hippolytus’ writings to the Gnostic gospels like Thomas and term either one of them fan fiction.
  
  Report this comment
- TheSword
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:25pm
  @Locked (post 2),
  “Even the Gospels don’t align correctly…”
  I don’t think there’s enough space to fully support this with my research/sources, but suffice it to say I disagree from both a Christian and academic/scholarly position. I’m well aware of the textual criticism and disagree with just about all of their conclusions. When you study the Gospels for what they are and understand the formats and chronologies, they align perfectly. On the eyewitness point, Matthew (the disciple) wrote Matthew, John (the disciple) wrote John. Those are two direct eyewitness if you accept their authorship, which I do based on my studies. Mark was written by John Mark, a comtemporary and follower of Peter (the disciple) while Luke was written by Luke, Paul’s (apostle by direct revelation) physician and missionary partner. The only one you can say is definitively not eyewitness is Luke, but he admitted to using eyewitness sources.
  
  A fair point on Joseph Smith, though I would say he was one man preaching a new religion while Christianity was propagated multiple people that were geographically separated. When looking at it from a historical point of view, I think there are enough writings from the Apostolic and post-Apostolic years as well as the Ante-Nicene church fathers that support what we know about Christianity to be reliable.
  
  (I appreciate the honest engagement on the issues rather than rhetorical attacks)
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:47pm
  @Thesword
  
  “The Gospels were written by eyewitnesses (or under their authority/input) to the events.”
  
  Again, very unlikely. The EARLIEST Gospels are liberall dated at 40 years after Jesus’s death; there is much more of a consensus that they are closer to 60AD. Eyewitnesses would be extremely unlikely. As far as I know, it’s agreed upon by all theologians that none of the apostles actually wrote the Gospels; some have been attributed to apprentices or scribes following them, but again, the time makes it seem more likely that they were passed by oral tradition or copied from a long-last manuscript.
  
  “Jews would also be unlikely to expound on what He did due to their opposition to Him (such as Josephus’ writings which were at best neutral).”
  
  I agree with that, though by the time Josephus mentions Jesus (through the death of “James, brother of Jesus, who was called Christ”), it was already 90AD and the earliest Gospels had already been written. It is not unlikely that Josephus only knew of “Christ” because the Gospels were spreading several decades after His death. As Josephus was born after Christ’s death, he also is not an eyewitness account; though he’s the best “proof” for the historical existence of Christ, if not His life and actions.
  
  Report this comment
- jay1975
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 4:53pm
  Locked is right, none of the books in the NT were written by anyone who could have known Jesus. The oldest gospel is Mark and it is the shortest which leads researchers to believe that Matthew and Luke were written well after and expanded to further the myth. John isn’t even related to the other 3 and may have come from a different region all together since the first three were most likely created using oral accounts only. Then there is the gospel of “q” theory and the fact that no one who would have been alive during Jesus’ life every wrote about him.
  
  Report this comment
- skaulr
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 12:58am
  @Locked and Jay1975: I find it interesting that you believe something written in 60-80AD could not possibly have been written by someone who was an eye witness of Christ in 30AD…on what basis do you pose that? Only thirty years and you think no one would still be alive?
  Thank you ‘Thesword’ for your argument…it makes sense.
  
  Report this comment
- TheSword
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 12:10pm
  @Locked
  
  I’m not sure you’ve done well in your history reading/study. Christ was crucified around 30-33 AD, so when you say “liberall dated at 40 years after Jesus’s death; there is much more of a consensus that they are closer to 60AD.” It makes absolutely no sense unless you’re trying to support my point. 40 years later would be about 70 AD, making the consensus 60 AD closer to Christ and supportive of my point rather than yours. Additionally, as Skaulr so ably put it, it’s ridiculous to say that a mere 30 years after Christ’s death all of His followers would dead. At most, they would be 50-60 years old. Further, the Apostle John lived until around 90 AD when he penned Revelation, so your point is moot anyway.
  
  Also, I am a theologian who is not even close to alone in my position so your point about no theologians accepting apostolic authorship is utterly false and shows me that your not speaking from a studied point of view but one of practiced/learned rhetoric. I have always found it odd and perplexing how “scholars” today dismiss almost 2000 yrs of history and scholarship from people much closer to the events (all the way back to the first century). The authorship and dates of the NT books was never seriously questioned until the 19th century when humanism, liberalism, and evolutionism began to spread. I find that to be quite telling.
  
  Report this comment
Gary_K
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:57am
Did you know there may have been Bengazi survivors?

Who are they?

Where are they?

Why is bathhouse flobama keeping this a secret?

http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/12/13/obama-hiding-the-living-benghazi-bodies/
Log in to Reply Reply
kindling
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:55am
I used to believe like he does because of the lack of faith shown by my parents. If it were not for the fact that I have seen angles and a few other things that have happened to me, I may still be stuck in “show me the proof”. Faith is hope of things unseen. I understand enough now that I would not need to see angles now, but I am glad I did.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- searching for the Truth
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:05pm
  ” The Angle is out there.”
  
  Report this comment
- Cavallo
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:11pm
  Is it acute, obtuse, or right?
  
  Report this comment
- searching for the Truth
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:39pm
  Very few Right Angles right now, much more obtuse angles , but will be soon.
  
  Report this comment
- DougHuffman
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:20pm
  No no no. Obtuse angels! Right angles, but obtuse angels.
  
  Report this comment
- searching for the Truth
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 9:19pm
  My Father told me to apologize Kindling , I thought you were being clever with the word – but I misspell all the time.
  
  Report this comment
- searching for the Truth
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 9:22pm
  I’ve seen angles as well.
  
  Report this comment
DougHuffman
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:53am
The faith of agnosticism is precisely the same as the faith of religious faithful. The hypothesis and the null-hypothesis are not falsifiable, thus not scientific but supernatural and subject only to faith.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The Third Archon
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:08pm
  “Lack of faith is faith”
  DERP!
  
  Report this comment
- MBridOKC
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:10pm
  Your statement is deliciously fantastical! Well said!
  
  Report this comment
- athiest-infedel
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:36pm
  Faith is beliving in something when common sence and reason tell you not to, like jumping off a bridge thinking you can fly. I just can’t belive in the magic sky daddy, I have read my bible and the murder, rape, incest, slavery that is endorsed by god in the bible, what a horrible thing to teach children.
  
  Report this comment
- DougHuffman
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:56pm
  Oh well said, “athiest-infedel, Faith is beliving in something when common sence and reason tell you not to …” The conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense.
  
  Report this comment
- God_Is_Not
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:04pm
  If we’re honest about it, it is obvious that agnosticism does not require the same form of faith as theism. The type of faith that many attempt to attach to agnosticism is much more similar to the amount of faith required to dismiss the existence of magic unicorns. In no way am I attempting to mock theistic faith. I’m simply saying the comparison doesn’t work.
  
  Report this comment
- YouCantExplainThat
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:41pm
  Exactly correct.
  
  Report this comment
- Noumenon
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 6:43pm
  I think you’re a little mixed up. It is Atheism and Theism, that relies on the standard of faith. Atheists and theists evoke Belief for or against such metaphysics. In contrast, agnostics don’t regard such questions as being epistemologically meaningful at all, so they don’t evoke ‘belief’ at all.
  
  The person who coined the term ‘agnostic’, Thomas Huxley, based his position on an analysis of knowledge by Immanuel Kant,.. who showed through reason, that metaphysics cannot be a source of knowledge. So, agnosticism is not based on faith, but instead on a ‘critique of pure reason’.
  
  Report this comment
searching for the Truth
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:47am
Fear comes first, then Wisdom.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The Third Archon
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:00pm
  No, fear usually precedes one thing–unthinking emotional reaction.
  
  Fear turns peoples’ reasoning and perception off, not on.
  
  Report this comment
- Stelex
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:11pm
  Third, there is a healthy fear and there is irrational fear.
  
  Report this comment
- MBridOKC
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:12pm
  I may be wrong but I think he could mean a reverent type of fear. Fear of the Lord comes before wisdom. Not emotion fear.
  
  Report this comment
- ares338
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:15pm
  Fear can make you unthinking and emotionally reactive but to some extent this can be nullified by proper training.
  
  Report this comment
- The Third Archon
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:25pm
  “Third, there is a healthy fear and there is irrational fear.”
  No, there is UNDERSTANDABLE fear. And there are sometimes rational reasons to engage in the behavior fear sometimes/often induces (such as flight from a predator)–but fear is ALWAYS irrational. It is an automatic unthinking emotional response to external stimuli. It is not a methodological guide to truth or useful behavior–it is nothing more than a biological reflex that just happens to have historically conferred a survival advantage by coincidence for a long enough period to be inherited.
  
  “I may be wrong but I think he could mean a reverent type of fear. Fear of the Lord comes before wisdom. Not emotion fear.”
  There is no “non-emotional fear”–fear is by definition an emotion. Yes, that’s obviously what he meant–and it’s every bit as irrational and unwise whether you put the word “reverent” in front of it or not.
  
  “Fear can make you unthinking and emotionally reactive but to some extent this can be nullified by proper training.”
  Yes, and the “proper training” is ignoring the fear based impulses and making one’s decisions to act or not act based upon rational and thoughtful consideration of what one perceives. Nullification is the removal of fear and/or the neutralization of its effects–thus “proper training” that stops the negative effects of fear is aimed at stopping the fear itself (which is not say you can always, or even ever, inhibit the BIOLOGICAL reaction, just ignore it)
  
  Report this comment
- skaulr
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:24pm
  In the english translation of the Bible, the use of ‘fear’ in the referenced context means to ‘respect’; like in the way I respected my father…I did not ‘fear’ him as in being afraid, but rather with respect and awe.
  
  Report this comment
- Stelex
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:30pm
  Well ain’t you just the balls Arch……….fearless…….I wish I could be you.
  
  Report this comment
- searching for the Truth
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:50pm
  No, no,no. – when the atheist faces Jesus, – they will be vary afraid, then they will experience wisdom.
  
  Report this comment
Nevermind
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:45am
For once i can agree with Stossel, i am an agnostic myself and share his views. I have always been a fact based person ( explains why did accounting and data analysis) and without proof of god i cannot support religion. All i ever ask is to those that do beleive not to push your views on me or dont think of yourself as superior becasue you took a leap of faith becasue you arent

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- kickagrandma
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:52am
  Hi, NEVER~~~
  
  Here’s how you get proof you say you need: Ask GOD to show you to HIM. If you mean it, HE WILL, and you will be awed.
  
  By the way, Christianity and Judaism are not religions; they are a way of life. Big difference.
  
  Report this comment
- grayling646
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:54am
  …but it’s OK for you to push your beliefs on us?
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:06pm
  Kick, . . . I did that [as you suggested] for YEARS. Never had one “show” of any type.
  
  Report this comment
- DoseofReality
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:06pm
  Kick…and Islam and Buddhism and Hinduism and Catholicism and Mormonism arent religions either…they are ways of life. Do you not see how ridiculous you sound?
  
  Report this comment
- FoxholeAtheist
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:06pm
  I really really asked god. I really really meant it. It really really never showed up. God doesn’t exist.
  
  Report this comment
- pinostabaum
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:19pm
  why would NEVER ask god to show him he is real? he doesnt believe god is real in the first place, but he should put aside that disbelief, pretend god is real, and ask god to demonstrate his reality? if god were real, couldnt he just demonstrate his reality in the first place? if for no other reason than to prevent folks like NEVER from lying to themselves in order to discover the truth? what kind of relationship can god and NEVER have, if it begins with NEVER lying to himself?
  
  Report this comment
- Daithi
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:23pm
  @GRAYLING646
  
  You may not have noticed, but this is a discussion about agnostics. If you didn’t want to hear his viewpoint you probably shouldn’t have viewed this thread.
  
  Report this comment
- kickagrandma
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:38pm
  @GRAYLING~~~ We are sent by the I AM to share what we know. Just because you don’t want to believe doesn’t mean I am to stop sharing the miracles in my life and the awesomeness of CHRIST JESUS. GOD leaves you free to accept HIM or not. Sorta different from our current administration which says their way or the HIGH way. I, like others, choose the HIGH way, HIS way.
  
  Life here without HIM is tough enough, but forever without HIM?
  
  HIS offer. Your choice.
  
  Report this comment
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:50pm
  See, that’s how people like Grandma work.
  
  “Ask and if you REALLY mean it, he will show himself to you.”
  
  Therefore
  If you actually become religious, wow, God is great!
  If you don’t, well you didn’t REALLY mean it.
  
  Just like the
  “If you’re a TRUE Christian, you’ll never leave the faith.”
  “Well what about this person who was a Christian for 15 years and left?”
  “Well they weren’t a TRUE Christian.”
  
  It’s win-win for them.
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:54pm
  Kick, . . . it isn’t “HIS offer”. It is a collection of works, from humans [a few thousand years ago], who made the claim. There is a HUGE difference between and actual deity coming to me in the way I would understand it . . . and this “choice” many christians think “we all make.” That is a fallacy.
  
  Report this comment
- Tractorboy
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:17pm
  Wow, so a few Atheists here didn’t get their prayers answered, thats surprising…….God does not always say yes…….just because you want to win the lottery or need a new car……there is a difference between wants and needs………bring your biggest struggle to the lord, something you can’t handle on your own, only you know what that is, anger, addiction, being able to take care of your family, a broken relationship, etc, everybodies story is different………….only when you are true and ready in your heart, then pray……..God will see through you if you’re lying and your not ready for the change, then come back in a year and let us know how it went…………God Bless you all, especially you Grams, I too have had many miracles in my life, others would call them coincidences….
  
  Report this comment
- kadster01
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:47pm
  A man after my own heart. While believers look at me with sadness, as though they are envisioning me engulfed in eternal flames because I won’t lie and say I believe what I don’t really believe, God (if He/She/It is real) is smiling that all-knowing, yet forgiving, smile that says, “You don’t have to believe. I’m not threatened one way or the other. I still love you.”
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:52pm
  Good post, kadster. That response would be advanced, would be true justice [since a complete lack of evidence in him/her/it has ever been found], and would be the logical response to an honest statement from a limited human being who is being truthful with what he/she has been given.
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 7:50pm
  DoseofReality
  and Islam and Buddhism and Hinduism and Catholicism and Mormonism
  ***
  Buddhism does not have a God. To be buddhist is to try to not exist because life is an illusion that brings pain. Buddha was an Indian Prince that preached this. It is something he discovered. He was not a prophet. So I don’t see Buddhism as a religion, but I would not get into any Buddhists face.
  
  Catholicism is not a religion it is a Christian denomination silly. :)
  
  Islam has Jesus as a prophet. There are good Muslims, but I don;t see any religion or atheists co-existing on a long term basis with Islam in peace or successfully. So while you are here trying to tear us a new one or trying to convert us to atheism, check your six.
  
  Hinduism is a polytheistic religion like ancient European, African & Amerind religions.Other than a 1 off of someone going off on Sikhs (who are not Hindu), I have seen no one go after Hindus. Maybe you will take this up as a personal project when you think there are few Christians & you need someone to hassle.
  
  Remember there are & countries that ban atheists on penalty of death & not a one of them Is Christian (Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Maldives & 2 others). Maybe you should use the Pareto method & attack the biggest problems 1st for atheists. I suggest that you enlighten them in the Maldives. It would be a 2-fer. You could sit on the beach on the Indian ocean between harrangues. :)
  
  Report this comment
TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:45am
LOL…. pffft…. Libertarians have little to offer except a plan on how to save a buck. There’s more to life… and death than that. I figured Stossel out ages ago.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- pinostabaum
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:53am
  libertarians arent about saving a buck. they are about saving your personal liberty. that includes but is not limited to your economic liberty. stossel emphasizes economic savings because his career has been as a consumer advocacy journalist.
  
  i like him more and more each day.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:53am
  “Libertarians have little to offer except a plan on how to save a buck.”
  
  What a terrible notion, being fiscal responsible!
  
  Report this comment
- Stelex
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:58am
  Yes, saving a buck, small un intrusive government of, by and for the people, personal liberties and responsibilities. The freedom to make your own life choices, good or bad. Yes Libertarians bad, especially those agnostic ones like me. Have you taken down your Ron Paul posters yet??
  
  Report this comment
- naughtycal
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:58am
  You haven’t figured out anything and that’s obvious. Libertarianism isn’t about saving a buck it’s about FREEDOM and SELF RESPONSIBILITY.
  
  Report this comment
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:58am
  LOL… okay boys, I guess if a Godless rendition of “Thrifty-Liberallism” floats your dingy’s… go for it.
  
  Report this comment
- pinostabaum
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:13pm
  “LOL… okay boys, I guess if a Godless rendition of “Thrifty-Liberallism” floats your dingy’s… go for it.”
  
  now youre getting it: if it works for you, and it doesnt harm someone else… go for it. we will make a liberty lover out of you yet…
  
  Report this comment
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:33pm
  PINO. Yep, that’s what I keep trying to relate (that ol’ stuff that doesn’t harm others, so just DO IT argument you have eh?). Must be my wording or something… but I keep trying to remind everyone about the lax attitudes that Liberal-tarians have just like the rest of the left… but you spin it into Freedom and Liberty rationalizations to suit you hedonistic tastes.
  
  What are the views of Liberal-tarians that think it’s okay for Uncle Fred to have sexual relations with your 18 year old sister? It isn’t harming anyone… SO it MUST be okay right… they’re just consenting adults entering into contract eh?? Nothing to see there….
  
  The Blaze had an article on here months back regarding the same thing…. and man, MAN… the Liberal-tarians were down with rationalizing that one like pot heads looking for a way to legalize drugs…
  
  Report this comment
- naughtycal
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:51pm
  Time,
  whats makes you think that people will be hedonistic if given freedom……do you require government forces to control your behavior if left to you own demise would you wallow in selfishness,and over ebdulge in things best kept in moderation. You aren’t the center or the norm for that matter and for the record libertarians isn’t about absolute freedom just a heck of alot more than we presently have.
  People like yourself need structured enviroments like a government approve tararium to save you from yourself and that an easy fix let those who want freedom enjoy it you can where a government tracking device. Why should everyone suffer for your inability to control yourself.
  
  Report this comment
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 1:37pm
  Lmao…. I’m not the one who describes himself / herself as “NAUGHTY’ now am I?
  
  That being said you in part wrote…. “whats makes you think that people will be hedonistic if given freedom.”
  
  You my friend must be living in an alternate universe where everyone is responsible, there are unicorns roaming the countryside and dope is just a tool to relax and doesn’t hurt kids.
  
  I am forced to live in the reality of the situation where your brothers and sisters on the left have done everything possible to make (turn) as many as they can to irresponsibilty and are WINNING on that front… and you… YOU want to ADD more chaos to the mix on any number of “supposed” liberty and freedom fronts?
  
  Report this comment
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:24pm
  @NAUGHTYCAL
  
  What in the world are you babbling about?
  
  I’m for actual liberty of all people, not just the people I agree with.
  
  It’s the fake “libertarians” on here that say they want limited government, then use the government to ban gay marriage, ban abortion and ban anything that is counter to their “holy” book.
  
  Report this comment
- naughtycal
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 2:47pm
  Naughtycal is a character froma coconut pete song…..I use it as a tribute to the broken lizard comedy troop.
  And I live in the real and have endulged on more than one occassion some of the things the government has deemed without merit. And yet I always pay my bills and stay grounded to my belief that freedom is a good thing. And yes there would be period of insanity if people were given freedom to do somethings that are currently illegal it would be followed by a learning period when people realize they have to suffer the consequences of their actions. I sure more thana few would parish under freedom but many more would flourish under freedom. Society can’t grow to it’s full potential living ina padded government room scotch guarded and filtered free of potentially harmful liberty.
  When fighting disease what does science do inject the host with a weaken strain of the disease and the body builds immunities. We have no immunitys in a pasteurized society.
  
  Report this comment
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:01pm
  MODERATION…. you’re a little off, but right about fakes (Libertarians are fake Conservatives)…
  
  Liberal-tarians are also the pass the buck party. They’ll pass the buck to the states (gay marriage, abortion etc…) then biatch about the Liberal murderous results of their pass the buck attitudes… because they simply can’t, or are simply unwilling make the hard decisions.
  
  Can’t make these little bastiges happy… EVER….
  
  Report this comment
- ChrisDiamond
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 8:12pm
  @TIME_TO_END
  
  The Anti-War libertarians at least understand that bombing for peace is like screwing for virginity. But your responses and snarky assertions lead me to only one relevant conclusion: you enjoy the gun in the room when ‘your guy’ is holding it and doing the pointing, and complain about it when it’s turned against you. But your hatred of it being pointed at you (higher taxes, Obamacare, and any other gov program you disagree with) isn’t great enough to disavow the initiation of force… you want your turn with the gun, too.
  
  “If it neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket…” I’m not sure why that wisdom is lost on so many. You end up making excuses for the state when it comes to issues like drug legalization (the war on drugs is violent disregard of self-ownership), social security, ‘murrcan exceptionalism (a fancy repackaging of Imperialism), but hat ethe state when they come to take your money for all these programs, and corporate welfare, subsidy, bailout, social welfare, foreign aid (except for Israel), junkets, loans to presidential donors etc… An enigma wrapped in a mystery…
  
  END THE STATE. END THE INITIATION OF FORCE TO ACHIEVE ENDS. REMOVE THE GUN IN THE ROOM. ELIMINATE THE MECHANISM BY WHICH THE FEW WILL ALWAYS GET OVER ON THE BACKS OF THE MANY. ELIMINATE THE BODY CAPABLE OF LEGALIZING CRIMES LIKE INTERGENERATIONAL THEFT. Have the damn courage to take personal responsibility, demand your freedom, and respect that of others.
  
  Report this comment
- Stelex
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 8:30pm
  Damn, I missed all the fun……Stossel Rules…..at this point thats all I got.Time 2, can I have you’re Ron Paul footie PJ’s? 6′ 2″ moderate build ……..close?????
  
  Report this comment
- Max jones
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 9:05am
  MODERATIONISBEST…..People of faith look at people like your self as errant children. Now, you would not allow a child to play in the busy street, would you? You would have concerns for the child’s safety and knowing his ignorance of the hazard, you would try to ‘instruct’ him about the risk. There is no difference when I tell you ….”LOOK OUT…..you are heading into danger without protection!”
  
  Report this comment
CALLMEMSGT
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:44am
Stossel is not only agnostic, he is also dyslexic and has amnesia.

He lays awake at night and wonders whether or not there is a dog.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- iampraying4u
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:34pm
  stossel will soon find out if there is a God
  
  Report this comment
- searching for the Truth
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:45pm
  I Pray that he begins to believe in God for he already has an ” old dog.”
  
  Report this comment
- TheVOR
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:56pm
  Absolutely hilarious. Thanks, CALLMEMSGT, for your wit and the laugh.
  
  Report this comment
Jude 4
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:44am
John’s investigation must certainly be void of the rules of evidence. The resurrection of Jesus is unimpeachable in an impartial court of honest inquiry. Jesus emphatically claimed to be the almighty creator in the flesh, and His resurrection validates that claim. If Jesus did not overcome death, then he certainly is an imposter. You can’t make Jesus something other than his own claim. You have to deny Him or acknowledge him for who he said he is.

Simon Greenleaf captured the nature of John and Michael’s problem;

“Christianity demands nothing more than is readily conceded to every branch of human science. All these have their data, and their axioms; and Christianity, too, has her first principles, the admission of which is essential to any real progress in knowledge. “Christianity,” says Bishop Wilson, “inscribes on the portal of her dominion ‘Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, shall in no wise enter therein. Christianity does not profess to convince the perverse and headstrong, to bring irresistible evidence to the daring and profane, to vanquish the proud scorner, and afford evidences from which the careless and perverse cannot possibly escape. This might go to destroy man’s responsibility. All that Christianity professes, is to propose such evidences as may satisfy the meek, the tractable, the candid, the serious inquirer.”

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- DoseofReality
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:52am
  So because jesus claimed it in a book written years after his death 2000 years ago its 100% true in a court of honest inquiry? You have not put one fact forward – how can you claim its unimpeachable?
  
  Report this comment
- pinostabaum
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:57am
  um, jesus never wrote anything down. the claims you claim he made were claims made by authors that never knew the man personally. in your impartial cour of honest inquiry, we have a word for that: hearsay.
  
  Report this comment
- starview
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 3:09pm
  Pin, Jesus could read and write, I did a search on this. At the time when he was growing up, it would have been his fathers duty since they were Jewish to send him to the local synagogue to learn to read and write. Although at that time most people were illiterate. Did he write what is written in our modern day bible, no, he did not.
  
  Report this comment
- Moozmom
  Posted on December 14, 2012 at 3:58am
  Believing like a child is what I do and I cannot help it-it is just the way it is. Might be because I am, ultimately, stupid. I know He is with me and has been with me all my life, even when I didn’t realize it. It’s just the way it is-He is my friend and has helped me endure this life.
  
  Report this comment
RodT82721
Posted on December 13, 2012 at 11:40am
John being a libertarian, at least is not demanding that every one be agnostic.
He doesn’t run to his lawyer to sue anyone that wants to practice their own religion, like leftist and their ACLU do.

You should know that anyone that thinks they can control the climate, with your tax dollars, are also agnostic.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Bonnieblue2A
  Posted on December 13, 2012 at 12:04pm
  Exactly. I don’t attack those who have not yet arrived at the point where they understand that without taking that leap of FAITH they will not be able to find Yah. At least he isn’t telling others not to believe and attacking the fact that they have what he lacks, namely, FAITH.
  
  Most of what is taught in modern American Churches is a lie anyway. Too many Christians have allowed themselves to be led astray by false prophets. Read your bible, keep the commandments and the festivals commanded by the most high and not the pagan based commercialized ones the Churches in the USA focus upon today.
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.