He is risen!

posted at 6:00 am on April 24, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus’ body. Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they were on their way to the tomb and they asked each other, “Who will roll the stone away from the entrance of the tomb?”

But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away.  As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed.

“Don’t be alarmed,” he said. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.’” — Mark 16 1-7

I’d like to share with you a story from an earlier Easter, when Marcia and I had been married a little over a year.  This is really Marcia’s story, and she tells it well at Patheos, where she has a weekly column that I headline here each Friday evening.  When Marcia and I first got married, her health took a turn for the worse after several months, and by our first Christmas it was clear that she would need to get a kidney transplant sooner than either of us expected.  Before I had a chance to complete my testing to be a donor, though, Marcia and I received a call that a cadaver donor has been found:

About 4 a.m. on April 16, 1995, our phone rang, waking us from a sound sleep. Since Ed was the manager of a 24/7 alarm call center at the time, this wasn’t unusual; he always needed to be available, so the phone would often ring in the middle of the night.

But this time was different. I heard Ed say, “Hi Marnya!” with surprise in his voice. She was the transplant coordinator at St. Joseph’s hospital in Orange County, California. My first thought was why was she calling at this hour? Then I woke up as though I had been doused with cold water; there was a transplant available, for me, and we needed to come up to the hospital to check in as soon as possible. I was instantly out of bed with nerves jangling. Ed packed some things while I took a very quick shower, and he called his dad to come to stay with our young son.

As we drove up to the hospital Ed said to me, “The sunrise is beautiful!” The sun was just coming up—it was sunrise on Easter Sunday morning! Tears sprang to my eyes as the significance of what Ed said struck me. It was as if the Lord was telling me not to be afraid, and that it was all going to be okay; He had everything in His hands, and it was Resurrection day!

Needless to say, that timing touched us deeply, and not a year goes by that we don’t think of the Resurrection in personal as well as general spiritual terms.  Even though that kidney has long since stopped functioning, we have never stopped appreciating the gift of life that one family made from death in the midst of their sorrow and despair.  Today, we celebrate our Lord who gave us an everlasting gift of eternal life through his own suffering and death, so that despair itself cannot prevail.

We wish all our readers a happy and blessed Easter Sunday.

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air



Trackback URL


massrighty on April 25, 2011 at 12:53 PM


Those are all good things you’ve done, and I’m not saying we shouldn’t do those things, but why would they be a waste of time even IF the story of Jesus wasn’t true?

With or without religion, those things never change. We STILL try to find ways to lift up our fellow man. We STILL try to figure out how to live with one another. We still try to be empathic and caring for our fellow man.

The way that we know that religion is redundant to life is that there are good christians, mormons, muslims, hindus, and there are bad ones as well. No religion holds a monopoly on good acts or deeds or people. To me, the existence of people who are good or bad is not based on the religion they happen to believe in. It’s because they make a conscious choice to be so, well that plus good (or bad) upbringing and a myriad of other factors that make up life as we know it.

The bible is simply put, a snapshot in history of the morals and ethics that those people held to be important to their life and wellbeing. Scapegoating was a common thing in those days and the Jesus story is nothing more than a poetic play on that ancient practice. Heap the sins of the tribe onto a goat and drive it from the village to be sacrificed to remove those bad omens and demons that may haunt the people at that time. Jesus comes down to save us by sacrificing himself and taking all our sins onto his shoulders and carry that “burden” for us? We’ve obviously outgrown this type of thinking in this day and age and if someone were to try to sacrifice someone I would consider it my moral duty to try to stop it. If that puts me on the side of the devil then so be it. As to why it’s even needed in the first place (sacrifice for humanity’s original sin)… Well… That’s the root of the problem with the psyche of humanity today. Let’s start it all off (life) by telling our children that they are sinful and unclean before this imaginary being we call god, let’s be negative and tear people down instead of being positive and building them up.

I’m sorry, I may have said this before, but I have the hardest time believing that the creator of the entire cosmos had to put on a meat suit to masquerade as a human for 30 something years. So this deity could undergo some form of blood ritual sacrifice JUST so the other 2/3 of his triune self could then, and only then, get over it and forgive us lowly humans for not living up to an impossible standard of perfection.

Further, this deities forgiveness is contingent on believing in revelations and miracles that ONLY happened in the ancient past. ANY god that will only reveal “himself” in the ancient past should not be surprised, nor upset, that large numbers of people don’t believe in him today.

A humorous forum entry I came across the other day…

I’m a detective working a major murder case. As far as cases go, this case is as open-and-shut as it could get. The physical evidence is overwhelming, the scene of the crime is littered with forensic evidence that all points to one suspect. The victim’s blood is on his clothes and in his car, the murder weapon was owned by him, and residue from firing the gun was found on the suspect’s hand. The suspect had been seen in the area by many witnesses, entering the premises before the gunshots were heard and left afterwards. The answering machine of the victim had shown that the suspect had left a number of threatening messages including detailing how the victim was to be killed that matched the crime scene.

At trial, I was brought in to testify. I detailed the evidence above, talked about the evidence and how it was obtained. I argued about how it all pointed to the one subject, the quality and amount of evidence was so overwhelming that beyond all reasonable doubt the defendant was the killer. Then the defense lawyer cross-examined me.

“Are you an atheist?” he asked.
“I don’t see the relevance of that.” I responded.
“It’s important in your assessment of the evidence. Are you an atheist?”
“I am.”
“So is it fair to say that in your world-view you only consider natural causes?”
“That’s a fair assessment.”
“Do you consider only natural causes in your line of work?”
“They’re the only causes I can consider.”
“What you’re saying is that when making the case against my client, you didn’t consider the supernatural?”
“I did not.”
“So how can you say it was my client, when you won’t consider that this was a supernatural event?”
“The evidence against your client is overwhelming, as I demonstrated before.”
“You did nothing of the sort, you presented no evidence against my client.”
“I presented many different lines of evidence that all showed the same account.”
“What you presented relied on your philosophical world-view.”
“It doesn’t matter what I believe, the suspect had the victim’s blood on his clothing. The DNA matched.”
“But did you consider that DNA analysis matched because demons interfered with the equipment?”
“I did not.”
“And did you consider that the witnesses who place my client at the scene were in-fact under demonic possession?”
“I did not.”
“And what about the voice analysis on the answering machine?”
“That was done in collaboration with the phone company and using the latest pattern recognition software that showed the harmonic frequencies on the tape matched the suspect, and the call was made from his phone.”
“Again you’re only considering natural causes. How do you know that wasn’t Satan on the tape, and that Satan didn’t modify the computer system to show my clients records?”
“I can’t know that.”
“Precisely. And when you say that the suspect’s gun was the murder weapon, did you think about God creating the gun ex nihilo to match what your forensics said?”
“I did not consider that.”
“In other words, you have no evidence against my client.”
“I have plenty of evidence.”
“As we’ve established, it’s only evidence when interpreted within your philosophical world-view. You have no case against my client, only your religious fervour to remain an atheist.”

At that point I got up from the witness stand and punched the lawyer.
“You assaulted me!”
“No I didn’t.”
“I saw you punch me.”
“That’s a powerful demon tricking you.”
“Other people saw you punch me.”
“That’s the powerful demon tricking them too.”
“I have bruising on my face.”
“That’s just angels having a party.”
“My blood is on your hand.”
“That’s not your blood, as my DNA analysis machine will show – if it comes back as your blood it just means a demon is messing with the results.”
“But you’re an atheist, you don’t believe in any of that.”

SauerKraut537 on April 25, 2011 at 1:26 PM

I have the hardest time believing that the creator of the entire cosmos had to put on a meat suit to masquerade as a human for 30 something years.

SauerKraut537 on April 25, 2011 at 1:26 PM

“and the Word became Flesh and dwelt among us.” (John 1:14)

You may have heard this story before:

The Geese in the Snowstorm

There was once a man who didn’t believe in the incarnation or the spiritual meaning of Christmas, and was skeptical about God. He and his family lived in a farm community. His wife was a devout believer and diligently raised her children in her faith. He sometimes gave her a hard time about her faith and mocked her religious observance of Christmas.

One snowy Christmas eve she was taking the kids to the Christmas eve service at church. She pleaded with him to come, but he firmly refused. He ridiculed the idea of the incarnation of Christ and dismissed it as nonsense. “Why would God lower himself and become a human like us?! It’s such a ridiculous story!” he said. So she and the children left for church while he stayed home.

After they left, the winds grew stronger and the snow turned into a blizzard. As he looked out the window, all he saw was a blinding snowstorm. He sat down to relax before the fire for the evening.

Then he heard a loud thump, something hitting against the window. And another thump. He looked outside but couldn’t see. So he ventured outside to see. In the field near his house he saw, of all the strangest things, a flock of geese! They were apparently flying to look for a warmer area down south, but got caught in the snow storm. The snow had became too blinding and violent for the geese to fly or see their way. They were lost and stranded on his farm, with no food or shelter. They just fluttered their wings and flew around in circles around the field blindly and aimlessly. He had compassion for them and wanted to help them. He thought to himself, “The barn would be a great place for them to stay! It’s warm and safe; surely they could spend the night and wait out the storm.”

So he walked over to the barn and opened the barn doors for them. He waited, watching them, hoping they would notice the open doors and go inside. But they just fluttered around aimlessly and didn’t notice the barn or realize what it could mean for them. He started whistling and calling to them. Nothing. He shouted, jumped up and down, waved his arms. They didn’t pay attention. He moved closer toward them to get their attention, but they just moved away from him out of fear.

He went into the house and came back out with some bread, broke it up, and made a bread trail leading to the barn. They still didn’t catch on.

Starting to get frustrated, he went over and tried to shoo them, run after them, and chase them toward the barn. They only got scared and scattered into every direction except toward the barn.

None of his attempts to get them into the barn succeeded. Nothing he did could get them to go into the barn where there was warmth, safety, and shelter; nothing he did could make them enter the one place where they could survive.
Feeling totally frustrated, he exclaimed, “Why don’t they listen to me! Why don’t they follow me! What’s wrong with them! Can’t they see this is the only place where they can survive the storm! How can I possibly get them into the one place to save them!”

He thought for a moment and realized that they just won’t follow a human. He said to himself, “How can I possibly save them? The only way would be for me to become like those geese. If only I could become like one of them! Then I could show them the way! Then I could save them! They would follow me, not fear me. They would trust me, and I would lead them to safety.”

He stood silently for a moment as the words that he just said reverberated back to himself in his mind:
“If only I could become like one of them — then I could show them the way — then I could save them.”
He thought about his words, and remembered what he said to his wife:

“Why would God want to be like us? That’s so ridiculous!”
Something clicked in his mind as he put these two together. It was like a revelation, and he began to understand the incarnation.

We were like the geese — blind, gone astray, perishing. God became like us so He could show us the way and make a way available to save us. That is the meaning of Christmas, he realized in his heart.

As the winds and blinding snow abated, his heart became quiet and pondered this epiphany. He understood what Christmas was all about. He knew why Christ had to come. Suddenly years of doubt and disbelief were shattered, as he humbly and tearfully bowed down in the snow, and embraced the true meaning of Christmas.

Elisa on April 25, 2011 at 8:52 PM

I’m not saying a god doesn’t exist, just that all the ones that have been proposed so far aren’t it.

SauerKraut537 on April 24, 2011 at 10:11 PM

You cannot know for certain Christianity isn’t true, so may I suggest you say, “just that all the ones that have been proposed so far DON’T SEEM TO ME like they are it” or “don’t ring true TO ME.”

“Aren’t it” is an opinion, to which you are certainly entitled. But it is not a fact.

Just because you do not understand something (yet), doesn’t mean it isn’t true. No matter how smart a person you may be and no matter how many times you have read the Bible.

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways my ways, says the LORD.
As high as the heavens are above the earth, so high are my ways above your ways and my thoughts above your thoughts.” (Isaiah 55:8-9)

We yearn to understand everything about God, but that is not possible right now. He is God. We aren’t.

It all seems tricky to you because you do not believe. I understand that. But be patient and sincerely and humbly persevere in pray for the gift of faith and be patient.

You don’t have to believe right now. But maybe if you stop denying so loudly, you might hear Him in the whispers and understand a little bit more.

May God bless you.

Elisa on April 25, 2011 at 8:54 PM

To say Christianity isn’t true because you do not understand some things or can’t explain some things about Christianity would be the same thing as a Christian saying that Christianity must be true because there are some miracles we can’t explain.

Both definitive statements that do not prove themselves to someone with the opposite belief. You cannot prove Christianity is not true and I cannot prove to you that it is.

And yes, there are miracles still today.

Elisa on April 25, 2011 at 8:58 PM

SauerKraut537 on April 25, 2011 at 12:15 PM


God hates nobody. God loves all, even you, even me. He doesn’t keep people out of His heaven. People choose not to join him. You are a defendant at trial who, with the offer of ultimate mercy placed within reach, demands instead justice. You want what’s yours. But, being the creation of a Creator, what is yours in only what He has provided you. None of it is yours. None of it is mine. None of it is ours. It is all about whether we choose to give Him any of our love. If we do, He is waiting with open arms to bring us to his Paradise. If we do not, he sadly allows us to exist without Him.

In the “court” I considered earlier, the verdict is already in. According to Romans 3, nobody is without guilt under the law. But God, through His Son, has provided Mercy to everybody. Everybody. Some simply decide they don’t want His mercy, they want instead justice. God grants each persons wish in this regard. I sincerely hope you come to realize that only by choosing His mercy will your afterlife have joy. Choose justice, and your eternity will be your payment for your own deeds.

Every soul chooses. Choose wisely.

Freelancer on April 25, 2011 at 10:15 PM

Elisa on April 25, 2011 at 8:52 PM

Using scripture to prove what is written in the scripture isn’t the way it works. There is no proof that the Christian god is any more true than there is for a Muslim to claim to proof of Allah, or a Hindu for the god Vishnu, or Hatdatsisi, etc…

These gods that are followed are nothing more than people taking poetry and fiction and playing make believe. You’re pulling it out of your ass just like they did way back when.

The first religions were primitive by any definition. For reasons of limited population, communication, and plain old geography, they never grew to be anything other than a local concern. But religions mutate in time and grow in sophistication as each generation of holy men learn what works and what doesn’t. What makes people obedient and what causes rebellion. What ideas people can easily escape, and which will haunt them until they HAVE to pray just to stop the nagging fear.

When populations grew due to the slow but steady growth of knowledge, as if confronted by a bumper harvest, the religions went into an arms race with each other. From gods of wind and thunder and sea… The threats, incentives, and claims of power escalate until every dominant organized religion has a god that is all-powerful, all-loving, all-seeing, and words like “infinity” and “eternity” are deployed cheaply, while all other words are open to abuse until they mean EXACTLY what the religions want them to mean.

Every time someone has a numinous or transcendent moment, religion steals it simply by saying, “Ahh, you had a religious experience.”, or “You’ve experienced god!”.

To turn your words back on you… You can’t know with 100% certainty that Christianity is the right choice. You just can’t, and no matter how much you pray about it or meditate on it, you’ll just never know. All the little moments where you “feel” his presence, etc… Those are physical manifestations of your own body reacting to your thoughts and other stimuli. We work ourselves up into a tizzy all the time, we meditate ourselves into calmness. Those are physical processes and are NOT to be confused with anything spiritual or supernatural. It’s not “another realm” coming into our own and making itself known. It’s your mind doing all of the imagining.

Our brains are susceptible to all manner of delusions and tricks of the mind. We can hear a fifth voice in a quartet of singers. We have blind spots in our eyes and optical illusions galore trick us on a daily basis.

Faith robs us of truth. The grounds for recommending belief are that it is true. You make a fundamental mistake if you fail to accept it. We can’t claim truth without justification, and we can’t claim justification unless our evidence rules out the alternatives. If we can’t judge between alternatives, then it doesn’t make any sense to insist that one of them is true and the others are mistaken. Faith is justification-less belief so faith precludes any claims to truth.

Reason is the set of cognitive capacities that make it possible for us to seek out evidence, sift through it, and draw conclusions. Our reasoning capacities are the only tools we have for separating reality from fantasy, fact from fiction, justified belief from nonsense. Once we abandon reason and evidence, there are no principled, coherent, non-prejudicial grounds on which to prefer one god over another. How many supernatural hypotheses are out there for your consideration? How many gods vying for your faith? Is the only game in town from the church you grew up in?

On what basis will you decide to opt for one and not the others?

SauerKraut537 on April 25, 2011 at 11:10 PM

Some simply decide they don’t want His mercy, they want instead justice. God grants each persons wish in this regard. I sincerely hope you come to realize that only by choosing His mercy will your afterlife have joy. Choose justice, and your eternity will be your payment for your own deeds.

Every soul chooses. Choose wisely.

Freelancer on April 25, 2011 at 10:15 PM

Some simply choose to no longer believe it because they don’t believe they are responsible for the actions of others. I wasn’t there in the garden of eden when the fictional Eve decided to listen to a talking snake, possessed by the devil that god himself chose to create, just like he created the tree that produced fruit that was never to be eaten. Sounds like a setup to me, like he wished it to happen.

The myth of original sin seeks to replace our greatest attribute, our rationality and understanding, with faith. The myth of original sin takes our inherent desire to know and understand the world through our senses and with our minds and declares that we are evil, debased, fallen because of our curiosity and our desire to know. Our most basic human desire and our most powerful means of knowing about ourselves and the World is therefore BAD. At the same time, our redemption from our fallen state, our salvation from our mortal sin is to have Faith in an unseen, unknown, empirically obscured entity known as God. To have Faith, is therefore GOOD.

Since God is unseen, unknown and empirically obscured, how do we know what to have Faith in?
Have Faith in what his Agents tell us about Him.

How do they know what his Will is?
Have Faith because they have received Revelations from Him (or ARE Him).

How do we know that they’re telling the truth?
Have Faith.

How do we know that they’re accurately reporting what His will is?
Have Faith.

How do we explain the fact that a lot of what you say is inconsistent?

How do we explain the fact that a lot of what you say is inconsistent with our observations of the world?

What is truly ironic is that while Faith is a perfectly valid salve for any and all inconsistencies, errors, inaccuracies and unexplainable or irreconcilable problems within a given belief structure, Faith in OTHER belief structures is wholly invalid. Christians, Jews, Muslims all extol the virtues of Faith. When asked why they do not believe in the belief systems advocated by others, however, what do they cite? Evidence of inconsistencies, errors, inaccuracies, unexplainable or irreconcilable problems within that belief structure and deviations from their own belief structure. In other words, THEY CITE EVIDENCE! They appeal to REASON! They reject OTHER FAITHS based on evidence and reason, yet fail to apply the same standard to their own.

As an outsider, all of their criticisms appear valid and their reasons for rejecting one another’s faiths all appear wholly rational. The problem here is NOT rationality, NOT reason, NOT understanding or our desire to know. The common problem is Faith. The common problem is irrationality.

Which leads, of course, to the old saying ‘When you understand why YOU have rejected all other “Faiths”, you will understand why I have rejected my former religion, and yours.’

SauerKraut537 on April 25, 2011 at 11:26 PM

Using scripture to prove what is written in the scripture isn’t the way it works.”
SauerKraut537 on April 25, 2011 at 11:10 PM

I didn’t do that. I wasn’t trying to PROVE Christianity to you. I was simply explaining why your unbelief and questioning does not UNPROVE Christianity. Reread what I actually said:

To say Christianity isn’t true because you do not understand some things or can’t explain some things about Christianity would be the same thing as a Christian saying that Christianity must be true because there are some miracles we can’t explain.

Both definitive statements that do not prove themselves to someone with the opposite belief. You cannot prove Christianity is not true and I cannot prove to you that it is.

You will not be able to disprove my faith. It was a gift I did not deserve. It has been tested for 50 years. I asked God to prove my faith to me about 15 years ago when I went through a trial and doubts and He did. But I can not prove it to you. It is not simply a “feeling.” Faith should never rely on feelings, because they can be subjective or wrong. It is something I cannot explain to you, an inner knowing that does not come from me. I won’t try to convince you of it. But I know what I know and I have seen His miracles in my life.

Faith does not “rob us of truth.” It is truth. Jesus is truth. And it does not “abandon reason or evidence.”

Could I be wrong? Perhaps. But I don’t think so. I believe with the eyes of faith and only after that leap of faith has God proven it to my mind. Christianity is reasonable and one can come to faith through reason. (Just read St. Thomas Acquinas.) But it can never be proven from reason or evidence or anything else.

My point to you is that you can believe what you want, but you cannot say Christianity is false, because you can’t prove that. You can simply doubt it to a great degree. But you can never know for sure it is false.

Your distorted view of the history of the religions of the world is sad. That God has whispered some of His truth to all the major religions of the world from the earliest times, beginning with the pagans does not disprove Christianity. Perhaps men from all nations for thousands of years share some beliefs means that they are true. Instead of disproving Christianity, it proves that the Holy Spirit spreads an objective truth.

God has written His natural law into the hearts of all men. God made us in His image and has written Himself into our DNA. So men have always had a sense that God existed and a yearning to know Him and understand Him. And God has always from the beginning whispered knowledge of Himself to humanity.

St. Augustine said, “We were made for you, O Lord, and our hearts are restless until they rest in Thee.”

It is more than just a social order or fear of the unknown. Men have a conscience from the moment they are born. Even when no one is looking. Even when it does not benefit them or society. A sacrificial love that animals do not have and that cannot be explained. It is rare and we all fail, but it is there and all men value it and the lucky ones know it’s source.

God had a salvation plan, through the Jews, His chosen people, then through Jesus Christ, Our Savior for all nations. That is why the early pagans and pagans today believed some of the things Christians also believe. Because they are true. The basics.
The Ten Commandments/natural law, right and wrong, good and evil, sin and redemption. A creator God who loves us. Needing to be reconciled with God. Being at peace with God and the universe. Life after death. Hell/eternal punishment, Heaven/eternal reward.

Then God reveals more of Himself to the Jews, then He reveals the fullness of His truth and is even more intimate with all nations through Jesus Christ.

Even before Abraham we see God speaking to Adam, his children, Noah, etc. And St. Paul says, “Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. . . .For when the Gentiles who do not have the law by nature observe the prescriptions of the law, they are a law for themselves even though they do not have the law.” (Romans 1:20 and 2:14)

The Holy Spirit spoke to mankind before Abraham and God still speaks to all men on some level, Christians, Jews, Muslims, pagans. The Jews, then the followers of Christ, His Church, were God’s instruments for salvation and Divine Revelation of His truths, and He used them to convey His Word to ALL mankind. This was His plan of salvation. He increasingly became more and more intimate with His people and revealed deeper truths. But many truths were known by mankind before the Jews and before Christ. Because God always revealed Himself to the mankind in some way and He loves all men, whom He created. He is Father to all, then and now. And God loves all people whom He created.

The Holy Spirit can whisper His truth to men who are in other faiths that also teach untruth, and some of those people can have implicit faith (“a preparation for the Gospel”) that can, in the last moments before death, quietly become explicit faith in Christ, by the grace of Jesus Christ. Jesus can reveal Himself at any moment to any man at His choosing. Only God can read the hearts and minds of man.

But Jesus Christ is “the way, the truth and the life” for all men who will be saved. Even if they do not know Him right now.

Elisa on April 26, 2011 at 12:53 AM

I think I read a quote from you saying there is no proof of the Resurrection.

That is true. No definitive proof, but lots of history from that time that points to it being true and common sense tells us that the first Christians would not act the way they did if they did not believe He rose and there is no other government or institution on earth other than the Church that has survived for 2,000 years with the same beliefs for all those years, built on the prophecy of the Jewish faith that was thousands of years before that. But it’s not enough for you. I understand.

I hesitate to bring up the Shroud of Turin. Because it is not proof of anything. But mostly because my faith does not rest on it and nobody’s faith should. (The Church has made no formal statement on the Shroud’s authenticity.) It could be disproven tomorrow. But I’ve followed it closely for over 30 years and the more it is investigated by science, the more intriguing it gets. Even the faulty carbon dating in the 1980’s, that has been dismissed as wrong, brought up some interesting facts.

But the most interesting thing to me about the Shroud is its blood type and the matching head cloth. And any honest and inquisitive person, including you, would have to be intrigued by this.

John 20:3-8: “So Peter and the other disciple went out and came to the tomb. They both ran, but the other disciple ran faster than Peter and arrived at the tomb first; he bent down and saw the burial cloths there, but did not go in. When Simon Peter arrived after him, he went into the tomb and saw the burial cloths there, and the cloth that had covered his head, not with the burial cloths but rolled up in a separate place. Then the other disciple also went in, the one who had arrived at the tomb first, and he saw and believed.”

The following are facts that anyone can look up for themselves.

Besides the Shroud of Turin in Italy, a Church in Oviedo, Spain has a small ancient head/face cloth (called the Sudarium), like the one mentioned in John’s Gospel. While the history of the Shroud can only be definitively traced to the 14th century, the head cloth has been in Spain since 631AD. Histories before that time cannot be independently confirmed.

The markings on these 2 cloths match up. But the most interesting thing to me is the blood types. Both clothes have human male blood samples.

Even though blood typing wasn’t discovered until the beginning of the 20th century, these 2 cloths (head cloth and Shroud) have the same exact blood type, even though they were separated from each other since at least the 7th century.

Also the shared blood type is AB, which is rare worldwide, but the highest concentration of people with it are found in northern Palestine.

Interesting, no? Hard to explain, no?

This link talks about the head cloth in Spain. It also talks about the similarities with the Shroud.


It is from a very good website on the Shroud. Lots of scientific details.


“From the composition of the main stains, it is evident that the man whose face the sudarium covered died in an upright position. The stains consist of one part blood and six parts fluid from a pleural oedema. This liquid collects in the lungs when a crucified person dies of asphyxiation, and if the body subsequently suffers jolting movements, can come out through the nostrils. These are in fact the main stains visible on the sudarium. . .

. . . Jewish tradition demands that if the face of a dead person was in any way disfigured, it should be covered with a cloth to avoid people seeing this unpleasant sight. This would certainly have been the case with Jesus, whose face was covered in blood from the injuries produced by the crown of thorns and swollen from falling and being struck.”

Elisa on April 26, 2011 at 12:57 AM

Elisa on April 26, 2011 at 12:57 AM

Where did you hear that the 1988 carbon dating tests of the shroud were wrong? A Creationist website or some other Christian website? Your information is clearly wrong.

In 1988, a “controversial” radiocarbon dating test was performed on small samples of the shroud. The laboratories at the University of Oxford, the University of Arizona, and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, concurred that the samples they tested dated from the Middle Ages, between 1260 and 1390. Radiocarbon dating isn’t precise to the year, but they can qualify the results using tree rings and other methods… For instance, we know certain buildings were built in certain years and we can test the wood from those buildings (or other objects that can be tested in this manner) and the radiocarbon testing always lands within the range of the year of that aged wood/whatever was tested.

But according to former Nature editor Philip Ball (on the efficacy of the shroud), “it’s fair to say that, despite the seemingly definitive tests in 1988, the status of the Shroud of Turin is murkier than ever. Not least, the nature of the image and how it was fixed on the cloth remain deeply puzzling”.

But in 2000, fragments of a burial shroud from the 1st century were discovered in a tomb near Jerusalem, believed to have belonged to a Jewish high priest or member of the aristocracy. The shroud was composed of a simple two-way weave, unlike the complex weave of the Turin Shroud (something more indicative of cloths made in the middle ages in Europe). Based on this discovery, the researchers stated that the Turin Shroud did not originate from Jesus-era Jerusalem.

You see? You, and I before you, did the same thing. We all look for evidence to meet the criteria of our beliefs. It’s called confirmation bias, or the tendency for people to favor information that confirms their preconceptions or hypotheses regardless of whether the information is true. You might say that I could be guilty of confirmation bias as well but I’ve been on both sides of the debate. I too used to use “evidence” like the shroud to defend my beliefs. I too saw the “witness” of Josephus and Pliny and Tacitus as “evidence” for my beliefs. I KNEW that the stories about Jesus didn’t stand up to scrutiny, and so I did what every other person did. Build up a suite of evidence to back up my beliefs. But let’s be honest… It’s crappy evidence!

There is just no good reason to believe in Christianity or Islam or any of the other religions we have on this planet. The miracle claims of them all are puny when compared with the grandeur and expanse of the universe.

God came down to THIS planet and sacrificed his son for us so that we could know him and be with him in some afterlife? God chose Mohammed, who was sitting in a cave as the BEST “agent” to spread his “word”? It’s a freaking joke! They’re all a freaking joke and have little bearing on whether someone is good or not. If you’re only good because you fear some god, don’t you think he’s gonna know (if he’s all powerful and all knowing as the god of Christianity was explained to me as being), don’t you think he’s gonna know you were only good because you wanted a treat of an afterlife in his “heaven”?

Look, these religions are just stupid when you think on the size of the universe. Our own Milky Way galaxy is home to over 200 billion stars, and there are billions of galaxies that they know about so far (each with billions upon billions of stars of their own).

Hold your thumb up to the night sky at arms length and then KNOW THIS! In the space of your thumbnail held at arms length there are over 3000 galaxies. How many thumbnails does it take just to cover all the space you can see from where you are on the this planet? Now figure all the thumbnails it takes to cover the entire night sky, from earth, in all directions.

You do realize that the Kepler space telescope is a little over half way through it’s mission and it’s mission is to catalog and search for exoplanets, or planets around other stars. At its half way point of searching an area equal to 1/400th the size of our galaxy it has found over 1235 planets around other stars like our own sun (in age and size/type). OF those 1235 planets, 65 of them reside in the habitable zone around their host stars, in other words a distance much like our planet is from our own sun, where water can be predominantly liquid. Of THOSE 65 planets, 6 of them are earth sized and rocky planets.

What are the most abundant elements in the universe pray tell? First is hydrogen, next comes helium, then oxygen, carbon and nitrogen. What is our body made up of mainly? Water right? H2O, two hydrogen and one oxygen molecule. Hey, with the exception being helium, which is chemically inert, our body is in proportion with the most abundant elements in the universe. Kind of cosmic isn’t it? We are water based, carbon based beings, and we match well with the universe.

What does this have to do with anything? It means that life is clearly abundant in the universe. The very fact of our own existence is proof positive that life exists in the universe.

To think that we inherit this entire universe all to ourselves? To think that we are the only life in this universe, on this one little speck of dust in the cosmic realm?

It’s arrogant to think that we’re the only life out there… Knowing that life very likely exists elsewhere (surely not sentient life is everywhere but we will find life someday provided we’re able to get past the self destructive beliefs in boogeymen like Satan and Yahweh/Allah/et al).

The question is this, knowing that life likely exists elsewhere, does Jesus’ sacrifice extend to these poor lost souls, or does god have to put Jesus through a lynching on each and every planet that harbors life out there?

SauerKraut537 on April 26, 2011 at 2:22 AM

Elisa on April 26, 2011 at 12:53 AM

If I can’t know something is false or true, it’s worth being discarded and deemed as useless.

You don’t need a religion to know right from wrong.

Jesus sacrifice is useless and meaningless. There is no original sin that I’m guilty of, and which prohibits me from being in a gods presence (if he exists).

God having a chosen people implies that he has an unchosen people doesn’t it? Isn’t that exclusive and tribal? Isn’t your god just a tribal god?

You should go watch a speech/sermon by Bishop John Shelby Spong to learn a little bit more about your tribal god. He still believes in Christianity, but he’s on the right path.

God, if he exists, isn’t a Christian (thus your beliefs are useless and invalidated). God isn’t a Muslim (thus their beliefs are invalidated). God isn’t a Mormon, or a Catholic, or a Jain.

God, if he exists, is just god.

If you truly believe that god is jsut god, then drop your beliefs about him and just live your life in a good fashion. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you… A morality that is not exclusive to Judaism or Christianity by the way. The Analects of Confucius expressed the same sentiment about a thousand years before Rabbi Hillel first mouthed the words in ancient Israel, and even more before Jesus uttered the words again.

You’ll never get it Elisa, until you apply the same standards to your own religion that you do to every other religion on this planet.

You’ll never get it Elisa, until you realize that religions only serve to divide us.

Religion is superfluous to existence.

SauerKraut537 on April 26, 2011 at 2:50 AM


Bishop Spong on “God in the 21st Century”


if the link doesn’t paste, go search for God in the 21st Century on Youtube.

SauerKraut537 on April 26, 2011 at 3:03 AM

I don’t think you are really reading what I am saying, but instead are reading into it some other conversation you are having.

Again, I did not present the shroud of Turin as “EVIDENCE” of anything. I clearly said that and said that no one should base their faith on something like this. I presented it as something intriguing that any honest and inquisitive person would not dismiss.

I also did not question carbon dating itself in general. If you investigate further, you will see that virtually all scientists today dismiss the 1980’s carbon dating of the Shroud as false, because they took the sample from a corner which had later repair work done on it. In fact, the 3 labs had 3 different pieces of the sample and they each came up with 3 different date ranges that were close to each other, but varied by about half a century each.

Further analysis by scientists, who initially were not believers in the shroud’s authenticity, discovered that the repair work undid the threads and intricately weaved the new pieces into it. This is an ancient technique used to repair cloths. So each piece progressively had more newer cloth threads in it mixed with older cloth. The interesting part is that the lab with the piece furthest from the actual Shroud had the latest dating and the piece closest to the Shroud had the earliest dating. Which would be consistent with the authenticity of the Shroud.

And of course there could be bacterial residue that could affect dating.

When the initial faulty carbon dating results came out, I dismissed the Shroud as false and it did not bother me in the least. But later, the results were discovered to be false.

I think you need to investigate the Shroud and the head cloth in Spain more closely before you dismiss it. Not looking for proof of the resurrection, but to open your mind to something that has no known explanation, to give you pause and not dismiss the resurrection. To be open to its possibility. Again, not as proof.

Because if you are honest and inquisitive, you would concede these facts are interesting, that even though blood typing wasn’t discovered until the beginning of the 20th century, these 2 cloths (head cloth and Shroud) have the same exact blood type, even though they were separated from each other since at least the 7th century.

Also the shared blood type is AB, which is rare worldwide, but the highest concentration of people with it are found in northern Palestine.

The idea is not to be good because we “fear some god,” the Christian belief is to be good because we LOVE the one true God and we have love in our hearts for our neighbor. Fear can motivate one to be good and can progress someone to eventually truly love God, but on its own it is meaningless when it comes to salvation.

And what separates Christianity from all the other ancient and pagan religions is that in those religions man had to sacrifice himself for a god, but in Christianity God sacrifices Himself for the man He lovingly created. Christianity stands alone in this.

If you think that the complexity and vastness of the universe or the idea that there MAY be some form of life (even intelligent life) somewhere else is supposed to prove there is no God or make me doubt Christianity, I’m afraid it does the opposite. God created angels and God created humans (in His image and likeness.) The Bible doesn’t say that God did not create anything else. And if any other being He lovingly created needed salvation, then I imagine He would save them, as well. But perhaps they did not fall, such as the good angels who never sinned. This really isn’t hard. lol

And we do not “know” that life exists somewhere else. We think it MAY and it may only be one or two planets or none. You are taking leaps in your conclusions. Again, you have not proven Christianity is false and I am saying you cannot make definitive statements that it is false. All you can say is that you think it is false or that you are unconvinced to a great degree. And I haven’t tried to prove to you that it is true, because no person can prove God.

As to your other points.

If you can’t prove something is true or false, you do not “dismiss it,” but remain open to it’s possibility. Because it could be true. That is simple logic.

Some may not need a religion to know right from wrong, but how do you know where they got that inner knowing? Maybe it was written on their hearts directly from God or taught by a society made up of people who recognize God.

Aside from original sin, is there personal sin? Did you never sin, so you don’t need a Savior?

God having a chosen people did not mean He loved them more. It meant that they were the vehicle He used in His salvation plan to save all mankind. God used a man (Abraham) which then became a family, then a tribe, then a nation. From that nation came the Savior of all nations. There was no favoritism. In fact, the Jews were held to a higher standard because they had God’s truth revealed to them, which they repeatedly failed and were exiled and punished for and later reconciled with God after repentance. The Old Testament shows this repeatedly. Sin, exile, return. It is a microcosm of what all men do and still do today.

Your logic is faulty when you say that if God exists He is not a “Muslim, a Mormon, or a Catholic, or a Jain.” There could very well be a belief system here on earth that is the fullness of revealed truth. What we know for sure is that the truth cannot be a combination of all the belief systems in the world, because they teach different things from each other. So the truth cannot contradict itself. No, it would have to be one particular belief system. Either one already known and revealed or one still unknown. And Christianity could very well be that true belief system. Because you have not disproved it.

And it God does not exist as Christianity says He does, then why are you telling me that I need to “behave in a good fashion?” How do you know this mysterious god you think exists wants us to be good? Maybe it doesn’t care if we are good or bad?

What revealed truth do you use as YOUR BASIS to say that this god wants me to be good?

I already said, if you reread what I wrote, I have already recognized the fact that all the major religions of the world from the earliest pagans share some truths with Christianity. Because they are the natural law written on the hearts of men by God. That is what the Church teaches. I love whatever nuggets of truth are in those religions and I pray that the Holy Spirit enlightens all men with the fullness of His truth.

God bless you and all reading here.

Elisa on April 26, 2011 at 10:44 AM


I hear you perfectly well with what you’ve said so far, and I’m not having a conversation with anyone other than with you.

You clearly mentioned the shroud because you want to use it as a piece of evidence. You conveniently provide the caveats that no one should use it as evidence, but why even mention it if not to elicit continued belief in it/Christianity? Your pseudo scientific sleuthing with claims about the parts tested by the scientists in 1988 being “not part” of the real shroud is not pulling the wool over anyone’s eyes…

You claim that virtually all scientists dismiss the radiocarbon dating of the cloth but please provide evidence of this. Everything I find, that isn’t a religious website, says it’s a fake and was manufactured in the middle ages to provide people with more evidence of Christ’s sacrifice. In fact, In 1543 John Calvin, in his Treatise on Relics, wrote of the shroud, which was then at Nice (it was moved to Turin in 1578), “How is it possible that those sacred historians, who carefully related all the miracles that took place at Christ’s death, should have omitted to mention one so remarkable as the likeness of the body of our Lord remaining on its wrapping sheet?” He also noted that, according to St. John, there was one sheet covering Jesus’s body, and a separate cloth covering his head. He then stated that “either St. John is a liar,” or else anyone who promotes such a shroud is “convicted of falsehood and deceit”,

Then you go and claim that the blood found on the cloth was type AB, and let everyone know how rare that blood type is… I take it you mention this because Jesus was a rare type of person? That because the blood was rare, and Jesus is rare, that that somehow lends more credence to the shroud?

All of this talk of the shroud and blood types is EXACTLY what I was talking about… CONFIRMATION BIAS! Sure you ACT objective about it saying that it’s not to be used as proof, but what other reason is there yo bring it up?

The facts are that we humans are good at deceiving ourselves and others. History is replete with examples of forged holy relics and stories. People still to this day sell pieces of the cross that Jesus supposedly died on. They still manufacture relics to match the stories in the bible

People to this day claim that they are the son of god, much like Christ claimed in his day and age. Just look at David Koresh down in Waco. He’s dead now, but he was obviously able to get 74 people to die for him and his beliefs/cult, much like the supposed early followers of Jesus did. It’s EASY to find people who are gullible and impressionable. Self abnegating behavior like religious belief makes one susceptible to all sorts of con artists but get this… Koresh is dead right? But there are still to this day Branch Davidians who believe he was the son of god. Whats to say that in 2000 years enough of his followers have been able to spread the word that he was really the son of god? Does 2000 years

Look, when you only read the words of Christians when you’re researching Christianity, you’re obviously going to walk away with a positive spin on Christianity. If you want to be intellectually honest with yourself, you’re going to have to go one step forward. You’re going to have to actually research what these men have to say and see what the outsiders to the faith say about it.

What you’ll find, is what me and many many people before me have found out, and that is that you’ve been deceived since birth by people who meant well, but ultimately did not have enough information to break free of the curse of faith. Because that’s what faith is, a curse. A curse of not having enough information. Now your mother, your father, your grandfathers and grandmothers… They meant well, none of them knew they were lying to you, but they didn’t have enough information to know any better.

But here’s the good news. YOU DO! You have enough information to break free from the curse of faith. You live in a glorious time where practically anything you want to know is available to you instantly! You don’t have to take things on faith anymore. You can know for sure, right now, what is more probable to be true than not, you just gotta do a little research.

Our society does not have to be imprisoned by a bronze age myth written by primitive people.

We have cell phones, and high definition televisions, and computers now, and the men who gave us these things, the scientists, have doubled the life expectancy of every single one of you. They’ve proven time and time again that they know what they are talking about. You don’t have to take their words on faith. You can see it for yourself on the desk in front of you, in your own living room, outside in your driveway and up in the sky. The proof that these men understand the natural laws od this world, at least better than anyone else, is all around us.

Yet, still the majority of the world believe the words of primitive, bronze aged people instead of their own eyes. Could there be any greater delusion than that?

Luckily, knowledge is to faith what light is to darkness. And the fact that you are reading my words right now means that you already have access to the greatest source of knowledge the world has ever known.

SauerKraut537 on April 26, 2011 at 12:37 PM

but why even mention it if not to elicit continued belief in it/Christianity?

The fact that scientists have no explanation for the Shroud and for its matching the head cloth in Spain is not proof of anything. I already said why I brought it up. Because it should give an honest and inquisitive person pause before they dismiss the resurrection. But, again, the Shroud could be disproven tomorrow, so it should not be a basis for faith. Even if science ever does prove it to be authentic beyond a doubt, because science can make mistakes. As of now, though, I brought up this scientific mystery to show that one should keep an open mind to the resurrection. But this is not evidence that proves anything.

Your pseudo scientific sleuthing with claims about the parts tested by the scientists in 1988 being “not part” of the real shroud is not pulling the wool over anyone’s eyes

lol it is not my sleuthing and it is not “pseudo science.” There have been peer reviews and real scientific research on this. There have been all sorts of tests done on the Shroud from scientists of various beliefs and no beliefs. Anyone can google it themselves if they like. I’m not quoting religious websites.

From your posts, it seems you have googled Wikipedia, but cherry picked what you wanted to quote. I would suggest anyone still reading here that is interested google it themselves and do a thorough investigation themselves.

Here are some excerpts, one immediately following something you posted here.


According to textile expert Mechthild Flury-Lemberg of Hamburg, a seam in the cloth corresponds to a fabric found only at the fortress of Masada near the Dead Sea, which dated to the 1st century. The weaving pattern, 3:1 twill, is consistent with first-century Syrian design, according to the appraisal of Gilbert Raes of the Ghent Institute of Textile Technology in Belgium. Flury-Lemberg stated, “The linen cloth of the Shroud of Turin does not display any weaving or sewing techniques which would speak against its origin as a high-quality product of the textile workers of the first century.”[67]

In 1999, Mark Guscin investigated the relationship between the shroud and the Sudarium of Oviedo, claimed as the cloth that covered the head of Jesus in the Gospel of John[20:6–7] when the empty tomb was discovered. The Sudarium is also reported to have type AB blood stains. Guscin concluded that the two cloths covered the same head at two distinct, but close moments of time. Avinoam Danin (see below) concurred with this analysis, adding that the pollen grains in the Sudarium match those of the shroud.[68] Skeptics criticize the polarized image overlay technique of Guscin and suggest that pollen from Jerusalem could have followed any number of paths to find its way to the sudarium.[69]

In 2002, Aldo Guerreschi and Michele Salcito argued that many of these marks on the fabric of the shroud stem from a much earlier time because the symmetries correspond more to the folding that would have been necessary to store the cloth in a clay jar (like cloth samples at Qumran) than to that necessary to store it in the reliquary that housed it in 1532.

Wikipedia on the carbon dating


Once generally accepted by the scientific community[2] by those who consider the shroud to be inauthentic[3], and by some members of the Catholic Church,[4][5][6][7][8][9] these results have since been questioned in peer-reviewed journals by Raymond Rogers in Thermochimica Acta and by M.Sue Benford and Joseph G. Marino in Chemistry Today. Criticisms have been raised about aspects of the study as doubts were raised regarding the original nature of the sample that was taken for testing, not the quality of the radiocarbon testing itself. . . . .

More realistically, Joseph G. Marino and M. Sue Benford proposed that the sampled area of the cloth may have been unoriginal (none of the sample contained a “stained” area), as almost 60% of the cloth is because of the progressive repairs throughout the centuries. Scholar Raymond Rogers argued, in a 2005 article[10], that the chemical analysis he performed confirmed this hypothesis – as the samples used in the carbon-dating show evident traces of tanning products, likely used by medieval weavers to match the colour of the original weave when performing repairs and backing the shroud for additional protection. Others have also presented supporting evidence in this direction.

Their peer review article also talked about the invisible reweaving technique from medieval times when patching the Shroud, which accounted for the later carbon dating. Where old threads are undone and rewoven with the threads from the newer patch.

I’ve read numerous things in secular newspapers over the years and seen shows on major networks, the BBC and the History Channel.

No scientist have ever proven the Shroud to be a fraud, as you say, and the vast majority of scientists find it an interesting mystery.

Here’s a 5 minute video from NBC’s Today show that I found quickly. I’m not going to waste my time finding everything online about this. There is a lot. Again, anyone can research this for themselves, they don’t have to take my word for it.
Facts are facts.


You also posted what Wikipedia quoted from Calvin. Calvin must have been uniformed. Because there are early Christian legends about images of Christ on cloths, even a full body one and some of only the face, perhaps when the cloth was folded in a frame, which we know it was. But these early writings have never definitively been tied to the Shroud.

Also Calvin must not have known there was a head cloth in Spain. Yes, John’s Gospel said there was a cloth over the body and a head cloth. I’ve already quoted John’s Gospel: “saw the burial cloths there, and the cloth that had covered his head, not with the burial cloths but rolled up in a separate place.” The body cloth may be the Shroud in Turin and the head cloth may be the Sudariam in Oviedo, Spain.

The markings on these 2 cloths match up. But the most interesting thing to me is the blood types. Both clothes have human male blood samples.

Even though blood typing wasn’t discovered until the beginning of the 20th century, these 2 cloths (head cloth and Shroud) have the same exact blood type, even though they were separated from each other since at least the 7th century.

Also the shared blood type is AB, which is rare worldwide, but the highest concentration of people with it are found in northern Palestine.

Then you go and claim that the blood found on the cloth was type AB, and let everyone know how rare that blood type is… I take it you mention this because Jesus was a rare type of person? That because the blood was rare, and Jesus is rare, that that somehow lends more credence to the shroud?

LOL The point about AB being a rare blood type is that it is rare worldwide and rare in medieval Europe, where a skeptic would thing the Shroud was created. But, as I have clearly repeated here, the AB blood type is common in northern Palestine. Where did Jesus come from? Northern Palestine. Am I clear now? The point is that the blood on the Shroud is consistent with someone from Palestine, like Jesus. And not usually found anywhere else in the world.

And a medieval forger would not have known this because blood typing was only discovered in the 20th century.

Plus the forger would have had to have done this before the 7th century, even before medieval times, because the Sudarium has the same rare AB blood type of human male blood.

That is the point. A mysterious coincidence. Something to give a skeptic pause before dismissing the resurrection.

There are definitely false relics and true relics. So far, this one has not been proven a fraud by any scientist and most scientists find it intriguing.

Maybe it makes you feel better to believe that I only read religious things and have never critically examined my beliefs or that I never read contrary things. That way you can dismiss my faith or facts about the Shroud as provincial and ignorant.

As a matter of fact, my mother was not brought up with faith, because her father hated the Church and my grandmother scolded me for giving money to the Church. My father’s side in Spain was very religious though. Truth is important to me and if I thought what I believed was false, I would discard it. That’s just the way I’ve always been. At 6 years old, I pestered my mother for hours until she confirmed my suspicions that Santa didn’t exist. And I was happy to know the truth. Not a bit disappointed.

You don’t know me or what I’ve researched. That I came to a different conclusion than you did, doesn’t mean you’ve studied more about religion than I have or know more. It’s a bit arrogant and certainly condescending of you.

I don’t feel the need to go on Buddhist or atheist Hot Air threads or websites and tell people what they believe is a “joke.”

I am confident in my beliefs and I don’t need you to agree with me, so I don’t have to dismiss or belittle your beliefs or call them a “joke” or a “curse” or compare them with David Koresh’s followers.

Luckily, knowledge is to faith what light is to darkness. And the fact that you are reading my words right now means that you already have access to the greatest source of knowledge the world has ever known.

Faith IS the light in the darkness. And it is the greatest source of knowledge and wisdom I could ever hope for. I thank God for the gift of faith. I truly do understand that without it, belief can be difficult.

Real science never goes against my Catholic faith. Because they are both true. And truth will not contradict itself. Some scientists make mistakes and some people interpret the Bible or science incorrectly. But truth can be found in both.

But science will never and can never prove or disprove God or Christianity.

God bless you and everyone here. I will bow out of this discussion now. I think it’s getting repetitive and out of hand.

Elisa on April 27, 2011 at 3:07 AM

You keep missing the point, but let’s retire as you say.

SauerKraut537 on April 27, 2011 at 1:52 PM