Watch Live: Congressional Hearing on IRS Scandal

Live Now on TheBlaze Radio: ‘The Buck Sexton Show’

Crime

Vandals Spray-Paint 3 Mass. Churches and Statues With Offensive Message: ‘Brainwashing’

Feb. 5, 2013 11:06am Billy Hallowell

St. Thomas of Villanova, St. Dorothys and the Congregational Church Spray Painted With Brainwashing Message

One of the stenciled messages spray-painted outside of a local church in Wilmington (Photo Credit: WBZ-TV)

Police are searching for answers after three churches in Wilmington, Mass., were vandalized over the weekend. Clearly taking aim at the religious beliefs being touted by the houses of worship, those responsible used a stencil to spray-paint the words “brainwashed” on the churches’ outside walls, doors and stairs.

Some of the spray-painting also featured television sets with the image of a brain inside of them. At least one statue was also covered in stripes of red paint. A priest at one of the churches first discovered the graffiti early on Saturday morning, alerting authorities to its presence. It is estimated that the attacks unfolded sometime between 12 a.m. and 3 a.m. on Saturday morning.

According to WBZ-TV, two Catholic churches, St. Thomas of Villanova and St. Dorothy’s, were targeted in the attacks, as well as a local Congregational church (called the Congregational Church). Fr. Phillip Early, a priest at the two Catholic parishes, spoke out in the wake of the attacks, expressing frustration over the methods those responsible used to voice their angst.

“It angers in the sense that they took that approach to our faith community,” said the faith leader. “But it achieves nothing, so in that sense I feel bad that’s the only method they had.”

Early seemed more interested in having dialogue with those who have grievances with the church community, calling the actions taken “a waste.”

“If someone has an issue with religion or the faith community, they should verbalize and stand up,” he continued. “Just doing this accomplishes nothing other than wasting the church’s cleaning resources.”

Congregants and local authorities are outraged and frustrated by the event, with state Rep. Jim Miceli calling for the criminals behind the attack to be punished.

“It’s disgraceful. It takes a sick mind to do something like this,” he said. “I hope they will catch the people who did it.”

Now, the churches are in the process of cleaning up and moving on from the incident, a challenge considering that there are still many questions unanswered.

(H/T: Lowell Sun)

–

Related:

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 (142)

affinity
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 5:32pm
Catch them, fine them, imprison them.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Pnis
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 6:26pm
  Imprisoning them seems a little harsh for some graffiti. A fine, sure.
  
  Report this comment
- G-WHIZ
  Posted on February 6, 2013 at 11:48am
  Make mummie’s li’ll brats WASH IT OFF…before imprisonment and fines!!
  
  Report this comment
- Heather Cocolin
  Posted on February 7, 2013 at 1:00am
  Really!? Who’s brainwashed? God gives people a choice to follow Him, you were taught to hate him. Now who is brainwashed?
  
  Report this comment
ThoreauHD
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 4:38pm
And this is why 1.6 Catholics died for every 1 Jew in NAZI Germany. Surprise. They don’t like being told they’re wrong.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
media-bias-steals-elections
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 4:31pm
Washing the filth out of your brain is part of live, get used to it?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
mcsledge
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:58pm
Conformists (like most ardent PC followers) are cowards and lack the mental capacity to think for themselves.

Many Churches are very deceptive. However, a belief in God will always be worth more than godlessness.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- JQuentinEvermann
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 4:10pm
  In all fairness, churches do say perpetuate the belief that if your child isn’t baptized shortly after birth and have the guardians swear before God to raise them in the church, then that child’s soul could be damned to Hell for all eternity.
  
  Imagine if this same thing was required for, oh, let’s say, Obama…it would clearly be “brainwashing” then. Sorry, I completely support people who choose to be Christian, but religion is the best example of “indoctrination” or “brainwashing” imaginable.
  
  Report this comment
- Chuck Stein
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 9:29pm
  @ JQ
  The article noted that “a local Congregational church” was targeted as well. I was a member of a Congregational church in Massachusetts. They are not very “conservative” churches. In fact, they are part of what is now called the “United Church of Christ” — Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s denomination.
  
  Report this comment
- Witness1974
  Posted on February 6, 2013 at 3:04am
  JQ: I came to Christ at the age of 24 independent of any church. I was arguing that the Bible was false and my girlfriend, now my wife of 40 years, challenged me to read the Bible so I would know what I was talking about. How I wish I had been indoctrinated by a good Bible believing church when I was a child. I would have avoided many foolish sins that affect me even today.
  
  Isn’t it a natural thing for a parent to instruct a child in whatever wisdom the parent has acquired? Is it better to raise up a child in the way he should go, or to let him discover for himself that hot things leave blisters and playing hopschotch on a freeway is not a good idea. There is a way to view all learning as indoctrination to one degree or another. God has given us His Word and reason in order that we may test the spirit of various teachings.
  
  Report this comment
- JQuentinEvermann
  Posted on February 6, 2013 at 10:38am
  @ Chuck and Witness:
  
  Good points, both, and I don’t disagree with either of you. In fact, I abhor the state-backed war on Christianity. My only problem with many, but according to Chuck, not this church, is the way that the threat of damnation is held over the head of innocents. I believe in God, and I love reading the great stories in the Bible, but sadly most churches are business, not places of education.
  
  It is clear to me that God as he appeared to ancient man was an alien, and even by today’s standards possesses powers that we are unable to duplicate or even understand. Reading the Bible made this very clear to me. But to even hint at the mortality of God in most churches is beyond blasphemous.
  
  Once question that I’ll pose, and this is an honest question, not a jab: Why is God praised for making a race of slaves (in Hebrew) or workers (in English) to “till the fields”, while Satan is demonized for giving man free will? This point always bothered me.
  
  Report this comment
- Witness1974
  Posted on February 6, 2013 at 1:53pm
  JQ: See my comments at the end of page two of this thread.
  
  Report this comment
- Heather Cocolin
  Posted on February 7, 2013 at 1:07am
  @JQ
  God did not make a race of slaves/workers. He made man. Man was deceived by satan. So God said if Man wants choice, fine, but Man will have to work for it. It is really that simple.
  
  Report this comment
- JQuentinEvermann
  Posted on February 7, 2013 at 10:17am
  @Heather, If you choose to ignore what’s written in the Bible and substitute your feelings about the matter instead, go right ahead. But I, for one, choose to read the Bible. God created man to work for him and praise him. When man was “given” free will by Satan, it ruined God’s plans, so he tried to kill the entire human race.
  
  I’m not going to make a personal attack, but c’mon, if you haven’t even made it through the first 10 pages of Genesis, you should.
  
  Report this comment
702TruthSeeker
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:40pm
Went to barnesandnoble to buy a bible this weekend. While searching for a good quality copy, i was laughed at by a bunch of kids. Then a family walked by, a mother and a bunch of children and the kids kept making jokes like “God was calling me too, but i didn’t pick up the phone” and parents and kids walked by looking at me and laughing. This is the country that I live in….

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Pnis
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:55pm
  I’m pretty sure none of this really happened.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 3:27pm
  I’ll admit, I’m less shocked at poor behavior from people in public, and more shocked to find that bookstores still exist. Those are still a thing?
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 6:00pm
  I’ll admit, I’m less shocked at poor behavior from people in public, and more shocked to find that bookstores still exist. Those are still a thing?
  
  That does not surprise me, not one little bit. You could find you library either
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 6:25pm
  @By Faith
  
  Go with Christ, brother. You obviously have anger in your heart.
  
  Report this comment
- Chuck Stein
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 9:32pm
  The religion-oriented articles seem to bring out posts by a disproportionate number of lefties.
  
  Report this comment
Locked
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:39pm
Yeah… yesterday you were insulting a bunch of regular posters, and 5 out of 10 of your last posts have been veiled advertisements for your anti-blaze site…

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Locked
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:14pm
  Note: This was a response to LQTM, who has been spamming veiled advertisements for an anti-blaze liberal site all day. The post has since been deleted.
  
  Report this comment
The Third Archon
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:16pm
“It’s disgraceful. It takes a sick mind to do something like this,” he said. “I hope they will catch the people who did it.”
And I hope they DON’T–JUST to piss off all you reactionary fascists whose solution to EVERYTHING is “well, throw ‘em in prison!”

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- trustintheconstitution
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:31pm
  you funny
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:36pm
  @The Third Archon
  
  You really have a bee in your bonnet about this, huh? The vandals will hopefully be caught, tried for their crimes, and have the sentence kicked up due to hate crimes laws. That’s why we have hate crimes legislation, right? This is an intimidation tactic against Christians.
  
  I feel the same way about folks who deface atheist billboards, by the way; this isn’t just because they’re Christian churches. If they do the crime, they should do the time… doesn’t matter which side is behind which action. We’re a nation of laws, and those laws should be enforced and followed.
  
  Report this comment
- 702TruthSeeker
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:45pm
  Hate crimes? Don’t you know that hate crimes are for when white people do bad stuff to minorities? Or when christians aren’t fair to atheists or some other religion? Hate crimes do not apply when a christian or a white persion is attacked. silly rabbit
  
  Report this comment
- The Third Archon
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 3:16pm
  @LOCKED
  Nah, it’s MUCH more entertaining to watch you “law & order” (not the TV show) zealots foam at the mouth. ;)
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 3:36pm
  I’m honestly not sure how any of my responses could be considered “foaming at the mouth”? A crime was committed. I pray the perpetrators are caught, tried, and punished appropriately. All private property should be respected; no matter if it’s a church, a display, or a billboard.
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 6:02pm
  Hey Locked,
  Funny how people think you are mad when you are not.
  
  Ironic isn’t it
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 6:25pm
  @By Faith
  
  Are you suggesting you’re as mad as The Third Archon?
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 6:35pm
  again you fail reading comprehension due to context
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 8:40pm
  @By Faith
  
  “again you fail reading comprehension”
  
  No, I simply don’t wish to insult someone who also claims to be a brother in Christ. I’d rather they reflect on their sins, that’s all :-)
  
  Report this comment
- TERossi
  Posted on February 6, 2013 at 7:47am
  You must be a Ronulan.
  
  Report this comment
Clownzilla
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:10pm
The irony is that those that wrote the graffiti are brainwashed into thinking that Catholic churches brainwash people.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
The Third Archon
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:10pm
“Early seemed more interested in having dialogue with those who have grievances with the church community, calling the actions taken “a waste.””
A ‘dialogue’ implies a TWO-WAY conversation, where BOTH parties are talking, listening, and willing to challenge their own notions of truth. But the person of faith CANNOT participate in such a dialogue, because “faith” based beliefs are by DEFINITION untestable (in other words baseless, unsubstantiated, unwarranted, unjustified, and not evidenced) beliefs. And therefore, no consensus and no dialogue can ever be had with a person of “faith,” so long as they persist in holding a belief that cannot be challenged or discussed by a standard mutually assented to.

“Just doing this accomplishes nothing other than wasting the church’s cleaning resources.”
I wouldn’t say nothing–it does warn people to know what to expect. Also, “wasting the church’s resources” is kind of the point–if you can’t decapitate the beast, bleed it dry by a thousand cuts. XD

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- e7705
  Posted on February 6, 2013 at 10:24am
  How can an atheist prove, without a doubt, that there is no God?
  
  Report this comment
- Kalshion
  Posted on February 6, 2013 at 6:51pm
  @Archon
  
  And you athiests WONDER why you can’t get along with the religious, but you never have any respect for THEIR RIGHT to belief.
  
  If you want a dialogue, then you gotta learn how to respect the opposition, oh and there are plenty of religious themed forums out there where REAL Athiests and the religious are able to get together and have meaningful dialogue without the worry of FAKE athiests ruining everything.
  
  Report this comment
The Third Archon
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:00pm
“Clearly taking aim at the religious beliefs being touted by the houses of worship, those responsible used a stencil to spray-paint the words “brainwashed” on the churches’ outside walls, doors and stairs.”
Seems like they are more clearly taking aim at the uncritical, dogmatic, absolutist way those beliefs are INCULCATED more than the, albeit absurd, beliefs themselves.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- battles
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:40pm
  Your 3 uncontrollable God hating rants above have been noted.
  
  Report this comment
DeavonReye
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:33pm
Before I read any other posts, . . . vandalism of any time is an absurd way to “get your message out”. It is someone else’s property and you have no right to damage it. If they are caught, I hope they are fined.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Gonzo
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:29pm
Liberals projecting.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Chuck T
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:25pm
And of course, these hateful, ignorant, mental midgets have certainly NOT been brainwashed, right?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
by faith
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:07pm
As a follower of the Lord Jesus, I know I will come under attack!
That is His promise to His followers, John 15:18; 1 John 3:13.
No one likes to think about being hated for their faith, but it shouldn’t be a surprise when the devil and His crowd attack and treat us like they treated Jesus.

Probably one of the anti-catholic’s Blaze poster

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Cavallo
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:29pm
  Well it wasn’t me. I respect the property rights of others, even if the Catholics don’t respect my rights.
  
  Report this comment
- DLG123
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:41pm
  When did Catholic’s not respect your rights?
  
  Report this comment
- Cavallo
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 3:58pm
  When they equated economic liberty with terrorism, and told bobo the wonder marxist that his fascist gun control crusade was a good start. They don’t get to advocate for my enslavement to their new God, The State, and expect to count me as an ally.
  
  Report this comment
Mapache
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:06pm
Would this be a “hate crime” or “”I just don’t like you” crime? If it had been on a black church the FEDS would be all over this and Obama would be weighing in.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:14pm
  Obama would say: “If I had a church, it would look like Trevon…uh I mean this. My church would look like this.
  
  Report this comment
- Cavallo
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:15pm
  No extra punishments. Thought crimes are only applied to those that the State wants them applied to. It’s all exceptionally arbitrary, subjective, and conditional.
  
  Report this comment
- Bearfoot
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:51pm
  Mapache,
  
  All crimes are “hate crimes.”
  Criminals are not motivated by love.
  
  Report this comment
- The Third Archon
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:21pm
  “All crimes are “hate crimes.”
  Criminals are not motivated by love.”
  
  What about Andrea Yates?
  
  Report this comment
- Bearfoot
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:39pm
  Well, what about Andrea Yates?
  
  What?
  
  Report this comment
RodT82721
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:30am
I have to wonder what type of person would do something like this.
I wonder, are these the same type individual that insist that any cross must be removed, so as not to offend them? Demand war memorials remove any Christian reference?
The new America, from the bowels of our progressive education system, where hate is taught.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- THERAPTURCOMES
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:41am
  (1) Catholicism is not Christian it is a perversion of Christianity and those priests are servants of satan just as is Mormonism, JW, SDA and Emergent Church
  
  (2) It is a crime of the ignorant against the ignorant but yes it is breaking the law.
  
  (3) The resurrection/rapture is at hand http://youtu.be/ahEVxIzlxwo and the funny thing is, both parties will be left behind.
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:59am
  I have to wonder what type of person would do something like this.
  
  Answer: THERAPTURCOMES
  
  Report this comment
- DLG123
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:05pm
  The pretribulation Rapture is the MOST unbiblical peice of fiction that was ever made up in the 1800′s. Unbelievable that so many people beleive this garbage…. Jesus has a SECOND coming… not a Third nor a 1 and a half time… TWICE!!!!
  
  And if you enjoy reading your Bible… Thank a Catholic
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:08pm
  The word Rapture is connected to the Latin word rapiemur, which appears in Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians in the Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible. It means to be raised up or caught up:
  The dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord. (1 Thess. 4:16–17)
  
  The theological notion of”rapture”, however was invented 182 years ago. In 1830, in Port Glasgow, Scotland, fifteen year old Margaret MacDonald had a vision concerning the return of Christ. Her vision was adopted by John Nelson Darby a British minister and founder of a denomination called the “Plymouth Brethern.” In 1909, an American, C. I. Scofield, pubished an annotated version of the “King James” translation of the Bible called the “Scofield Reference Bible.” Scofield’s annotations were based on the theology of John Nelson Darby. The “Scofield Reference Bible” popularized the teachings of Darby. Fundamentalist Christians in the U. S. adopted Scofield’s Bible as authoritative. With the rise of fundamentalism in the U. S. in recent years, the popularity of the theological notion of the “rapture” has also gained popularity.
  
  Pre-tribulation rapture does not appear in the Bible.
  
  Jesus’ second coming does not happen twice.
  
  Report this comment
- DLG123
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:38pm
  Evangelicals (Which i assume you are since you so blatently stated the Preists are servants of satan… Judging these mens faith and their hearts with your fake piety and “Christian” charity and love.) have a bad habit of taking scripture out of context… Scripture needs to be read in the context of the audience they were writing to THEN and now. Also read in context of the chapter then in contexet of the Letter then on a larger scale of the Bible. Remember there was NO New Testament when these Letters where written. That wasn’t compiled until those (as you say) satan worshiping Preists in the Catholic Church compiled it for you.
  
  Picking and choosing what to read and how i can twist it to fit MY beleifs is what librals do… Come on man you are better than that.
  
  DLG
  
  Report this comment
- SquidVetOhio
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:45pm
  “And if you enjoy reading your Bible… Thank a Catholic”
  
  I was just about to defend Catholics… and then I read this. That is the most historical ignorant statement that has ever been made. Perhaps you should look up why the dark ages were called the dark ages. Because the Catholics would kill or imprison you for having a Bible.
  
  And please stop with the lie that pre-tribulation theology was “invented” in the 1800′s. Everything doctrine outside the accepted Roman Catholic theology and the “accepted” Protestant theologies were surpressed because of the persecution that would come from being open about it. Pre-tribulation is the ONLY theologically reasonable doctrine. Eschatology requires the the nation of Israel to exist so it nullifies post-tribulation since it didn’t exist until 1948 (as was predicted in the Bible). Pre-trib does not say there are 2 second comings. There is only one that happens at the end of Tribulation when Christ returns on the Mount of Olives during the Battle of Armageddon.
  
  During the Rapture, Christ does not return to earth. Believer are “caught up” (the latin word for that is where we get the word Rapture) to heaven with Him to be judged during the Tribulation. So Christ does not “return” to Earth. Plus the principle for the rapture is throughout the Bible. Whenever Divine judgement came (directly from God). He always rescued his people from it. (Noah, Lot, Israel in Egypt, etc…)
  
  Report this comment
- DLG123
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:48pm
  I would like to apologize for painting with broad strokes… I should have said certain sects in the Evangelical world.
  
  Report this comment
- SquidVetOhio
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:52pm
  @DLG123
  
  The “Catholic Church” did not exist before Constantine. No matter how bad you want to believe it did. And Peter was not the first Pope. He was married which ironically would forbid him from being a Pope. Mary did NOT remain a perpetual virgin as Jesus had brothers and sisters. 2 of them wrote books in the NT. (Jude and James).
  
  Now, I’m not agreeing that Priests are “servants of Satan”. One of my hero’s of the faith is C.S. Lewis who was catholic. I just think he was loyal to his church. But, you guys should read John Foxe’s Book of Martyrs and learn some of the history about your church that I’m sure they don’t teach you.
  
  Again, the catholic church is the reason we had the Dark Ages. Did you know that the Papal edict for the Spanish Inquisition still exists? Just the name has been changed.
  
  Report this comment
- DLG123
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:00pm
  that Catholics would kill or imprison anyone that had a Bible is not true… But the Church did ban the Bible in certain locations. But the ban was temporary and location specific and it is greatly misunderstood.
  
  There was one place, I believe it was somewhere in France (working from memory here), where heretics were teaching that physical creation was evil and the spirit was good. These heretics were using the Bible to teach this heresy and were using Sacred Scripture to encourage people to commit suicide. The church rightly clamped down and the ban was lifted when the controversy subsided.
  
  There was another occasion some time in the middle ages, where people were using the Bible to teach that all oaths were evil. The feudal society of that time was based on oaths. Oaths of allegiance were what held communities together under a ruler who provided protection for his subjects. People started renouncing their oaths of alliegiance and it led to riots and food shortages. In order to quiet the social unrest caused by those who were interpreting scripture incorrectly and teaching error, the Church made an effort to stop public use of Bibles. Once order was restored, the ban was lifted. The ban was an act of mercy for a suffering population.
  
  Report this comment
- DLG123
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:01pm
  …
  The “Myth” that the Church chained Bibles so that no one could read them gets similar treatment from both sides. Non-Catholics hear that the Church chained Bibles so that no one could read them and it sounds provocative. Catholics say it never happened. But it did happen. That the Church chained Bibles is not a myth. The Church absolutely chained Bibles, but they did it for the same reason the post office chains the pens to the table – so that they don’t get stolen! Bibles were hand copied, and very valuable, and no one could read a Bible if it was stolen so the Church chained them to the table just like the post office chains pens; not to prevent people from using them but so that everyone can use them.
  
  Report this comment
- DLG123
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:26pm
  @ Squid…
  There are only four brethren of Jesus named in the Gospels:
  Matthew 13:55 “Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?”
  
  Mark 6:2-3 – “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?”
  
  Let’s begin with James. There are two men named James among the disciples. One, of course, is the brother of John and the son of Zebedee. This cannot be him then. So, this is the other James, called in Scripture James the less:
  Mark 15:40: “There were also women looking on afar off: among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less, and of Joseph, and Salome.”
  
  So James is indeed the son of a woman named Mary. Not only that, but Joseph is his brother. That’s two of the four, right? Then, in Matthew, reciting the names of the twelve:
  Matt 10:3: “…’James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddeus.”
  
  This too is talking of James the less, as the other James, son of Zebedee, is spoken of in the previous verse. Alphaeus is this James’ father, not Joseph, the husband of Mary, mother of the Lord.
  
  Now go to John also speaking of those witnessing the Crucifixion:
  John 19:25: “Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother (Mary) and His mothers sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.”
  Continued in the Next Post…
  
  Report this comment
- DLG123
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:28pm
  Look up John 19:25 at http://www.blueletterbible.org/ and click the ‘C’ icon (for the Strong’s Concordance), then click the Strong’s number for the name Cleophas. It comes up “father of James the less, the husband of Mary the sister of the mother of Jesus.”
  
  Did you get that? That Mary, who was the mother of James the less, and of Joseph, from Mark 15:40, is the wife of Cleophas, the father of James the less, and she is called the ‘sister’ of Our Lord’s mother – Mary!
  
  So, two of the four ‘brothers’ have been identified as the children of parents other than Joseph and the Virgin Mary. Of the brothers named, that still leaves Jude and Simon. Next, Jude:
  Acts 1:13 “…James, the son of Alphaeus , and Simon Zelo’tes, and Jude the brother of James…”
  
  There goes Jude out of the mix! Matter of fact, Jude says the same in his own epistle:
  Jude 1:1 “Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James…” (emphasis added)
  
  Lastly, Simon. Simon, called the Zealot, is identified as coming from Cana, not Nazareth as were Joseph, Mary and the Christ!
  Luke 6:15 “and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon who was called the Zealot,”
  
  Mark 3:18 “Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Cananaean…”
  
  Matt 2:23 And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.
  
  Report this comment
- DLG123
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:30pm
  We see that Simon the Zealot being from Cana, and a ‘brethren’ or ‘brother’ of the Christ. Let’s go to John’s Gospel, chapter 2. Mary and Our Lord are invited to a wedding there. So, close business associates, maybe, of Joseph from the carpentry trade, or more likely – family, or brethren, relatives, are having this wedding. Like, maybe the Holy Family had actual kinfolk in Cana, be they cousins, in-laws, nephews, aunts, uncles, all of which are routinely called ‘brethren’.
  
  Remember what Mary said to the servants? She told them to ‘Do as He says.’
  
  Think about that a second? What would give this humble woman from Nazareth any position to so speak to the servants of someone else in an entirely different town, at their wedding? The simplest and most easily understood answer would be – she is a family relation to those giving the wedding feast..
  
  So Simon is from Cana, and a ‘brother’ of the Lord! He’s not a sibling though, but very likely related. And James, Joseph and Jude all have the same father and mother, and it is not Joseph and the Virgin Mary, but their mother is named Mary and called the sister of Jesus’ mother Mary. Even here ‘sister’ may not mean blood sibling, or we have two sisters with the same name in the same family.
  
  Again it all goes back to reading the Holy Bible in Context
  
  Report this comment
- DLG123
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:36pm
  Also Squid you can provide NO historical evidence that Constantine created the Holy Catholic Church… Constantine simply LEGALIZED Catholicism (Christianity).
  
  You should read the letters of Saint Ignatious of Antioch who was taught by the Apostle John… He would disagree with you on the time that the Holy Catholic Church was formed…
  
  Report this comment
- Bearfoot
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:52pm
  DLG123,
  
  How many ‘Mary’s are there? How many ‘James’ are there? John’s, Peter’s, Jesus’, Elizabeth’s, Judas’, ?? There was and is more than one person with the same name.
  
  Report this comment
- THERAPTURCOMES
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:10pm
  DLG123
  
  Here are two videos that I have done about the resurrection/rapture subject
  
  (1) http://youtu.be/UwL3rKteOng
  
  (2) http://youtu.be/k8nm5rMcozE
  
  The resurrection/rapture is one of the most misunderstood REVELATIONS in the scriptures. If a person tries to read the bible strictly through a western world mind set then that person will not understand the bible
  
  Hebraic studies are essential in understanding the Scriptures and that study starts with this one clear fact.
  
  Jesus = Hebrew
  Apostles = Hebrews
  Prophets = Hebrews
  Moses = Hebrew
  
  Without study of Hebraic idioms, figures of speech (phraseology), ancient Hebraic customs and practices one ends up in heretic man made cults
  
  John 14:1-3 is Jesus Christ speaking to His betrothed church/bride and is the RESURRECTION/RAPTURE.
  
  Rev 3:10 is Jesus saying He will remove His bride/church FROM = EK = OUT OF the tribulation before it happens
  
  Rev 5:9-10 KJV shows the REDEEMED from EVERY kindred, people, tongue, nation in heaven as kings and priests PRIOR to Rev 6:1 breaking of the 1st seal by Christ releasing the anti christ
  
  If you study ancient harvest customs and marriage customs you will see these are being used as types and shadows
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:13pm
  @Squid
  
  I’m not a Catholic, but I am a Christian and a huge fan of the history of our faith and the veracity of it. So when you say:
  “Perhaps you should look up why the dark ages were called the dark ages. Because the Catholics would kill or imprison you for having a Bible.”
  … I need to correct you. It was called “the Dark Ages” because the “light of Rome” was extinguished by invading (non-Christian) barbaric marauders. While there’s no doubt that the rise of the Catholic Church as a secular superpower led to many abuses (as so happens when theocracy flourishes), the Catholic church is also responsible for much of the preservation of knowledge that would have been lost to the invaders at the time.
  
  It’s also an outdated term, much like “first/second/third world” has been replaced by “undeveloped/developing/developed.” “The Dark Ages” now generally refer to the period we call “the early Middle Ages.”
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:19pm
  Did the Emperor Constantine found the Catholic Church?
  
  Impossible claim to sustain. Constantine did not come into power until the early 300’s. As early as the 2nd half of the 1st century, you can find writings referring to THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. Constantine was the first Christian emperor and he ended the persecutions of Christians(The Edict of Milan). Something Catholic haters still do to this day.
  
  As Greek scholars—even non-Catholic ones—admit, the words petros and petra were synonyms in first century Greek. They meant “small stone” and “large rock” in some ancient Greek poetry, centuries before the time of Christ, but that distinction had disappeared from the language by the time Matthew’s Gospel was rendered in Greek. The difference in meaning can only be found in Attic Greek, but the New Testament was written in Koine Greek—an entirely different dialect. In Koine Greek, both petros and petra simply meant “rock.” If Jesus had wanted to call Simon a small stone, the Greek lithos would have been used.
  I agree with you that we must get behind the English to the Greek. But I’m sure you’ll agree with me that we must get behind the Greek to the Aramaic. “The what?” The Aramaic, As you know, Aramaic was the language Jesus and the apostles and all the Jews in Palestine spoke.
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:19pm
  It was the common language of the place. Many, if not most of them, knew Greek, of course, because Greek was the lingua franca of the Mediterranean world. It was the language of culture and commerce; and most of the books of the New Testament were written in it, because they were written not just for Christians in Palestine but also for Christians in places such as Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, places where Aramaic wasn’t the spoken language. I say most of the New Testament was written in Greek, but not all. Many hold that Matthew was written in Aramaic—we know this from records kept by Eusebius of Caesarea—but it was translated into Greek early on, perhaps by Matthew himself. In any case the Aramaic original is lost (as are all the originals of the New Testament books), so all we have today is the Greek.
  
  We know that Jesus spoke Aramaic because some of his words are preserved for us in the Gospels. Look at Matthew 27:46, where he says from the cross, ‘Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?’ That isn’t Greek; it’s Aramaic and it means, ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’
  And what does Kepha mean? It means a rock, the same as petra. (It doesn’t mean a little stone or a pebble. What Jesus said to Simon in Matthew 16:18 was this: ‘You are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my Church.’
  
  Report this comment
- THERAPTURCOMES
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:21pm
  DLG123
  
  The priests are the priests of the whore that rides the beast and therefore are servants of satan. Every priest that administers the Mass (Eucharist) is worshiping an idol of Christ and not the real Christ
  
  It was that catholic church that would kill people for owning a bible and believing Grace through faith plus nothing else
  
  It is the catholic church that prays to idols and has given Mary co redeemer status to Mary.
  
  Here are two videos that you all should watch and understand
  
  (1) http://youtu.be/oUFhGQ4Do9s
  
  (2) http://youtu.be/c3N4E-TNYdA
  
  If you have watched these two videos you now have a deeper understanding of the cult of Catholicism
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:21pm
  When you understand what the Aramaic says, you see that Jesus was equating Simon and the rock; he wasn’t contrasting them. We see this vividly in some modern English translations, which render the verse this way: ‘You are Rock, and upon this rock I will build my church.’ In French one word, pierre, has always been used both for Simon’s new name and for the rock.”
  “Wait a second,” he said. “If kepha means the same as petra, why don’t we read in the Greek, ‘You are Petra, and on this petra I will build my Church’? Why, for Simon’s new name, does Matthew use a Greek word, Petros, which means something quite different from petra?”
  “Because he had no choice,” I said. “Greek and Aramaic have different grammatical structures. In Aramaic you can use kepha in both places in Matthew 16:18. In Greek you encounter a problem arising from the fact that nouns take differing gender endings. You have masculine, feminine, and neuter nouns. The Greek word petra is feminine. You can use it in the second half of Matthew 16:18 without any trouble. But you can’t use it as Simon’s new name, because you can’t give a man a feminine name—at least back then you couldn’t. You have to change the ending of the noun to make it masculine. When you do that, you get Petros, which was an already-existing word meaning rock.
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:22pm
  Beyond the grammatical evidence, the structure of the narrative does not allow for a downplaying of Peter’s role in the Church. Look at the way Matthew 16:15-19 is structured. After Peter gives a confession about the identity of Jesus, the Lord does the same in return for Peter. Jesus does not say, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are an insignificant pebble and on this rock I will build my Church. . . . I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” Jesus is giving Peter a three-fold blessing, including the gift of the keys to the kingdom, not undermining his authority. To say that Jesus is downplaying Peter flies in the face of the context. Jesus is installing Peter as a form of chief steward or prime minister under the King of Kings by giving him the keys to the kingdom. As can be seen in Isaiah 22:22, kings in the Old Testament appointed a chief steward to serve under them in a position of great authority to rule over the inhabitants of the kingdom. Jesus quotes almost verbatum from this passage in Isaiah, and so it is clear what he has in mind. He is raising Peter up as a father figure to the household of faith (Is. 22:21), to lead them and guide the flock (John 21:15-17).
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:22pm
  This authority of the prime minister under the king was passed on from one man to another down through the ages by the giving of the keys, which were worn on the shoulder as a sign of authority. Likewise, the authority of Peter has been passed down for 2000 years by means of the papacy.
  
  Continuing to spread lies about the Catholic church cannot be pleasing to God.
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:38pm
  For the first 1200 years of the Church’s existence, priests, bishops and 39 popes were married.
  
  You need to learn the difference between dogma, doctrine, and discipline.
  
  http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/peter%E2%80%99s-authority
  Written by: Fr. Dwight Longenecker (a maried priest with 4 children)
  
  Timothy 1 3:15
  if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.
  
  Tell my Squid, how can Paul tell Timothy to the church if Constantine wasn’t born for nearly 300 years.
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:40pm
  How Do We Know It’s the True Church?
  It is rooted in history – The churches that have existed for four or five hundred years can demonstrate this to a degree, but only the Catholic (and Eastern Orthodox) Church has a living link with history that goes back to Roman times—and then, through Judaism, back to the beginning of human history.
  Adaptable – A valid authority system draws on the wisdom of the past to rule properly on the questions of the present.
  Objective – A valid authority transcends all political, economic, and cultural pressures.
  Flexible – For the authority to be valid, however, it cannot rely on abstract principles and objective criteria alone.
  Universal – This source of authority needs to be universal not only geographically, but also chronologically. In other words, it transcends national agendas and limitations, but it also transcends the cultural trends and intellectual fashions of any particular time.
  Local – This universal authority needs to be applied in a particular and local way. An authority that is only universal remains vague, abstract, and disincarnate. For a universal authority system to be valid, it also must be expressed locally.
  Intellectually Challenging – If an authority system is to speak to the complexities of the human situation, then it must be able to hold its own with the philosophical and intellectual experts in every field of human endeavor.
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:41pm
  Accessible to the Uneducated – While the authority system must be intellectually top notch, the religious system must also be accessible to peasants and the illiterate.
  Visible – Those who believe only in the invisible church must conclude that the church they go to doesn’t really matter.
  Invisible – The Church is greater than what we can observe, but the church we observe is also greater than we think.
  Both Human and Divine – An authority that speaks only with a divine voice lacks the authenticity that comes with human experience. On the other hand, a religion that is purely a construct of the human condition is merely a system of good works, religious techniques, or good ideas.
  Built upon the Rock. Some Churches may exercise some of the twelve traits, but only the Catholic Church is able to field all twelve as a foundation for decision-making. When the Catholic Church pronounces on any difficult question, the response is historical, but up to date. It is based on objective principles but applies to specific needs. The Church’s authority transcends space and time, but it is relevant to a particular place and time. The response will be intellectually profound, but expressed in a way that is simple enough for anyone to apply. Finally, it will express truths that are embedded in the human experience, but spring from divine inspiration.
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:41pm
  The Catechism of the Catholic Church says that it is Christ who is infallible, and he grants a measure of his infallibility to his body, the Church. That infallibility is worked out through these twelve traits, but it is expressed most majestically and fully through Christ’s minister of infallibility: one person—the Rock on which the Church is built, Peter and his successors.
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:52pm
  “Although the work is more accurate when dealing with events during Foxe’s time, it is generally not a correct or impartial account of the period, and includes occasional “wilful falsification of evidence”"
  
  Here’s a thought. If you want to find out what the Catholic Churhc teaches, read something written by a Catholic.
  
  Try Catholic.com
  Who knows you might learn something.
  
  Report this comment
- THERAPTURCOMES
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 2:55pm
  BY FAITH
  
  I would never do such a thing but think about your words
  
  I can see you now as Christ leaves the temple after overturning the money lenders carts and running them out by whipping them with corded rope “See, that is how that Hebrews acts”
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 3:01pm
  “It was that catholic church that would kill people for owning a bible and believing Grace through faith plus nothing else”
  
  Historically incorrect
  The church does not teach Grace plus anything
  The Church teaches we are saved by the grace of God.
  
  Faith alone, well that was invented by Luther
  Because the list of canonical books is itself not found in Scripture — as the Ten Commandments or the names of Christ’s Apostles can be found — any list of Scripture, whether Protestant (as in Luther’s shortened canon- what;s tha passage about adding to or subtracting from?) or Catholic (as in the canon of the original Bible that came from the Catholic Church) is from outside the Bible. This is knowledge from a source outside Scripture.
  That makes Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone), upon which all of Protestantism is based, a lie. There are other reasons why Sola Scriptura is untrue, but this is the most obvious one.
  Martin Luther invented two new doctrines (and more!) in the 16th century — Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide (Faith alone). Luther “discovered” Sola Fide while sitting on the privy (toilet) in the monastery tower at Wittenberg. Both these doctrines were unknown to Christians before Luther proclaimed them.
  One myth of the Reformation, among many, is that “uncorrupted Christian doctrine” was “restored” by Protestantism. The fact is, these doctrines had never before been known or taught. They sprang full blown from the mind of Martin Luther.
  Follow the teac
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 3:04pm
  Mass in 155AD
  Description of the mass as it was celebrated in his day.
  “All who dwell in the city or country gather in the same place. The memoir of the apostles and the writings of the prophets are read, as much as time permits. When the reader is finished, he who presides over those gathered admonishes and challenges them to imitate these beautiful things. Then we all rise together and offer prayers for ourselves…and for all others, wherever they may be, so that we may be found righteous by our life and actions and faithful to the commandments, so as to obtain eternal salvation. When the prayers are concluded we exchange the kiss [of peace]. Then someone brings bread and a cup of water and wine mixed together to him who presides over the brethren. He takes them and offers praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and for a considerable time he gives thanks that we have been judged worthy of these gifts. When he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all present give voice to an acclamation by saying: Amen.” When he who presides has given thanks and the people have responded, those whom we call deacons give to those present the ‘eucharisted’ bread, wine and water and take them to those who are absent.” Quoting Justin Martyr “First Apology” pages: 65-67 written: 155AD
  
  Martyr believed; for an early Christian to miss the Sunday Eucharist was unthinkable.
  
  Report this comment
- THERAPTURCOMES
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 3:09pm
  BY FAITH
  
  You will see with your own eyes the resurrection/rapture and when you do take a long hard look around you and see what man made religious systems were left behind. You will see Catholicism front and center leading the satanic church of the 7 year tribulation until the whore that rides the beats is destroyed by the very beats it rides
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 3:10pm
  To the spreaders of lies. I give you the words of Jesus
  “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men.”
  
  “And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it”
  
  “And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever”
  
  Jesus obviously wanted to build His church, he chose 12 men, with Peter as their leader to run this church after His ressurection and promised the Holy Spirit would guide this church until the end of time.
  
  Why do you not believe the words of Jesus?
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 3:16pm
  tell me Rapture
  was Jesus lying or was He just wrong…the gates of hell have prevailed?
  
  Believe in a man made doctrine from 182 years ago, God gave you free will.
  I understand you will not even try to get a Catholic view point on the Catholic Church
  What are you afraid of? If you are right then you should be able to refute everything the Church teaches easily.
  
  The late Archbishop Fulton Sheen once said, “There are not even 100 people in this country who hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they think the Catholic Church to be.”
  
  You would be one of the millions
  
  Report this comment
- ChiRho4Life
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 3:18pm
  @ therapture
  
  Gutenberg was Catholic.
  Jesus said that His follwers would be ridiculed and persecuted…just the same way as you are vilifying the Catholic religion…tells me Catholicism is the right place to be, whereas no other Christian faith tradition is attacked with such vigor.
  Ignatiius of Antioch first coined the term “Catholic Church” in the century before Constantine was even born.
  The word ‘parousia’ (not ‘rapture’, a man-made term) signifies Christ’s return.
  The Catholic Church traces its origins and succession all the way back to St Peter as the first Pope – Christ entrusted St Peter with the keys to the Kingdom (all 266 of them in the last 200 years – see the Vatican website). Where is a list of the sucessors of your religion?
  
  Report this comment
- Witness1974
  Posted on February 6, 2013 at 3:31am
  THERAPTURECOMES: Neither am I a big fan of the Catholic church. However, I have been around long enough to know there are believers in every denomination at various stages of maturity. Not all Catholics will be left behind and not all Baptists will be taken up. The Bride of Christ is composed of true beleivers that God knows by name, not by denomination.
  
  “Now we exhort you brethren, warn those who are unruly, comfort the fainthearted, uphold the weak, be patient with all” (I Thess 5:14).
  
  Report this comment
- THERAPTURCOMES
  Posted on February 6, 2013 at 11:38am
  WITNESS
  
  So tell me, are there real believers in Mormonism? How about SDA, JW Emergent Church? Are there real believers in them?
  
  Report this comment
- Witness1974
  Posted on February 6, 2013 at 3:28pm
  THERAPTURECOMETH: I would hazard a guess that there are believers in all those places, not because of the institutions’ doctrine, but in spite of it. Many are in churches and are ignorant to a large part of what the particular church teaches or are not yet aware of the implications of what is taught there. I don’t think one need be doctrinely perfect to be covered by the righteousness of Christ. Where there is a spark of faith, God will eventually fan it into a flame given enough time. There are true believers in bordellos and drug dens too. If they are true believers God will soon lead them out of the darkness. I don’t know your personal story but I can extrapolate from my own experience and the testimony of Scripture that you were not perfect as soon as you yielded to Christ the first time, neither are you perfect now. I hope you can say with me, “We believe, Lord: help our unbelief!”
  
  Report this comment
RANGER1965
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:27am
Yeppers, those darned peace loving atheists.

Warriors of reason who demand respect, and offer none.

Who faithfully believe in nothing, and claim it’s empiricism.

Who use Science as a club, but don’t know the first thing about it.

Who lambast Christians with the horrors of the Spanish Inquistion, and the Crusades, while forgetting about Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Hitler, and a crowd of Godless leaders whose evil is as thick as thieves.

Atheism is a faith based religion, where you have elevated yourself to godhood.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Cavallo
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:00pm
  Well said! … with the usual caveat that not all non-believers are like these trash. There are some libertarian minded atheists that have no problems with displays of various faiths, and don’t demand compliance with their agnostic or atheist philosophies.
  
  Report this comment
Pnis
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:25am
I agree with the message, but like most atheists, I certainly don’t agree with vandalism. This is no different than the intolerant Christians who vandalize atheist signs and banners.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- 13th Imam
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:56am
  Headline should read “Atheists vandalize”. Just who do you think you are trying to kid? And please prove , with evidence, that church goers vandalized “Atheisim, I Beleive” signs. Dork
  
  Report this comment
- Pnis
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:12pm
  Dork? Really? Anyway, atheist banners are vandalized as a matter of routine. Comments from Christians on the Blaze then generally support said vandalism. Once again, I don’t support vandalism of any kind, nor do any atheists I know. This is most likely the work of dumb teenagers.
  
  Report this comment
- 13th Imam
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:28pm
  Yes Atheist teenagers. Buffalo chips off the old block.
  
  Report this comment
- TERossi
  Posted on February 6, 2013 at 7:48am
  Liberal Fascism 101: hate, attack, blame, lie, deny
  
  Report this comment
- Pnis
  Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:14am
  So, I agree with you that vandalism is wrong, and I say that it is probably teenagers, (because it usually is) and now I’m a fascist? This is why I can’t take you fundies seriously. It’s like dealing with the mentally unstable. There is no room for level headed discussion with you folks.
  
  Report this comment
Locked
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:23am
Very juvenille and mean-spirited. I hope that the vandals are caught, charged, and given a stricter sentence due to attacked a protected class (religious groups)!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Cavallo
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:29am
  Couldn’t they all just find common ground to be friends? Like a hatred of capitalism and a desire for fascist weapons control by the State?
  
  Report this comment
The_Engineer
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:23am
Huh….the brainwashed speak.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
momrules
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:19am
Even if the vandals were caught nothing would happen to them. It was a Christian church and not a mosque.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Lloyd Drako
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:15am
Former altar boys, no doubt.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
biohazard23
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:14am
Ahhhh, the Tolerance Brigade strikes again…. Bless their little hearts.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Beachmastermax
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:13am
Looks like a hate crime to me.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Cavallo
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:33am
  Hate crimes can only be applied to those of certain skin color and political philosophies. Even then it will vary depending on the whims and desires of The State.
  
  Report this comment
FIREANDBRIMSTONE
Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:11am
All religion is brain washing. You either believe their god or you are evil. Its religeous facism.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Beachmastermax
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:14am
  You need to learn not to wory about what other people THINK about you.
  
  Mazlow’s fifth higharchy of need….self actualization.
  
  Report this comment
- RANGER1965
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:18am
  The hypocricy is a foot thick Lol!
  
  Atheist: “Believe in what we believe, (that there is no god), or we’ll persecute you, while screaming that you are persecuting us.”
  
  Report this comment
- IMCHRISTIAN
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:38am
  “We find freedom when we find God: we lose it when we lose Him”
  
  Love not Hate…..Truth not lies……….Freedom not Tyranny”
  
  We have the freedom to believe in God or not and I chose faith in my Lord. Try it you might like it.
  
  Report this comment
- HudsonAvenue
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 11:52am
  People who are fully human are aware that there is some kind of overarching common intelligence. Religion is merely the user interface for people who want to appreciate this entity. People are free to choose their preferred user interface. It is pretty arbitrary.
  
  And by the way, there is no reason for atheists to be benevolent, so you pretty much have to expect malevolence from them.
  
  Report this comment
- Popp40
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:09pm
  @Fireandbrimstone, see the thing about religion and the Bible…God gives you the ability to choose whether or not you believe, you can also choose to believe but not worship. It is you choice….the only thing is if you want eternal life then you have to worship God and do what is right.
  
  Whereas in atheism….you have no choice….you are not allowed to believe in God. Much like liberalism/progressives/democrats you have to believe exactly as they do. As Ranger1965 stated: If you differ in any way, no matter how slight you will be persecuted, while they scream they are the ones being persecuted.
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:36pm
  Hudson, . . . what do you mean, “there is no reason for an atheist to be benevolent”? Are YOU benevolent solely because you’ll get some sort of reward for it when you die? If so, then you are not doing it for the right reason.
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 12:43pm
  Popp, . . . what “choice” is there? You have “people making claims”. Then you have “reality that shows no evidence for the supernatural, but does show natural mechanisms for the world”. So, for some, there isn’t a real “choice”. It is “either believe the myth [look up the definition of that word], or see the world as it is”. And regardless of how many people “know that they know that they know that their god is real”, . . . that doesn’t add to the “god choice”.
  
  I have no care, nor worry, if you believe in your god. None at all. I won’t stand on a street corner with a sign saying that “something bad will happen to you if you don’t believe me”. I won’t be an activist to remove religion from society and private sector. I may post my opinion on forums, but that is hardly “persecution”.
  
  Report this comment
- Bearfoot
  Posted on February 5, 2013 at 1:35pm
  Fireandbrimstone,
  
  Some people need a good brain washing. – 1 Corinthians 6:9-11
  
  The question is; what kind of soap will we use and is it with clean water?
  
  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.