A God No One Really Believes Exists?

A while back I posted on why I don’t think anyone today really believes that God, exactly as depicted in the Bible, exists. In the Bible, God doesn’t hesitate to show off, demonstrating power by sending fire from heaven, parting seas, bringing darkness at midday, and so on. Today, religious believers who claim to believe in the same God and take the Bible literally expect to get a parking spot to open up, not that a new one miraculously be painted for them by angels.

I thought of this when I saw this cartoon by Wulff Morgenthaler, which Arni Zachariassen linked to:

The problem is perhaps neither that God is not serious, but that God (or whatever term one may prefer to use to refer to transcendent, ultimate reality) is not as depicted in the Bible. I suspect that deep down, most people, most religious believers, know that to be the case, but feel as though it is appropriate to pay lip service to the Biblical depiction of God, or suppress and deny what they think or suspect or fear might be the case.

But human thinking about God has always been changing, and we see a small measure of it even within the pages of the Bible, which provide evidence of development from an idea of God defeating a sea monster to create, to creating by forming matter, to creating simply by speaking with nothing offering opposition.

It is thus, in one sense, perfectly Biblical for our ideas of God to change. Ironic as it might seem, it might be perfectly Biblical to not think of God in Biblical terms.

  • Alex A Dalton

    “God doesn’t hesitate to show off, demonstrating power by sending fire from heaven, parting seas, bringing darkness at midday, and so on…”

    The problem I see with this line of argument is that the Bible itself doesn’t seem to indicate that God will do these kinds of miracles often. They are rare within the Bible, and occur less and less as we get more distant from their original occurence. The main message to the community is not that they are to request or expect these sorts of things, but that they are to think back and *remember* when God acted in these foundational ways.

    Believing everything about the Biblical God, in no way entails belief in God continuing to perpetuate any aspect of such activity, unless the Bible explicitly tells us he will do so. So all in all, I think its obvious your argument fails.

    • http://www.patheos.com/community/exploringourmatrix/ James F. McGrath

      Alex, do you think that the Biblical authors themselves might have  acknowledged that they did not expect God to do the sorts of things described in the stories they told – that those sorts of things have always been the stuff of story rather than personal experience?

      The impression I get from the Bible is that there would normally be prophets and men of God around, the sorts of figures associated with miracles, and in the New Testament, the proclamation of the Gospel message is confirmed with signs and wonders. And so there are at least some parts of the Biblical tradition that seem to encourage readers to expect the same sorts of things to occur in their own experience.

      But at any rate, I am not so much offering an argument as making an observation about what I think many today believe and do not believe, and encouraging people to be honest about their perspective.

      • Alex A Dalton

        James: Alex, do you think that the Biblical authors themselves might have
         acknowledged that they did not expect God to do the sorts of things
        described in the stories they told – that those sorts of things have
        always been the stuff of story rather than personal experience?

        Alex: James, I think I tend to feel less comfortable speculating about what other people might think than you do. I usually don’t have intuitions like the following: “I suspect that deep down, most people, most religious believers, know that to be the case…”. If you have such intuitions, and can’t really justify them, you might just be assuming that you yourself are so correct, others must “deep down” agree with you. I tend to think, from reading your posts, that you jump to conclusions, overgeneralize, etc.

        James: The
        impression I get from the Bible is that there would normally be
        prophets and men of God around, the sorts of figures associated with
        miracles, and in the New Testament, the proclamation of the Gospel
        message is confirmed with signs and wonders. And so there are at least
        some parts of the Biblical tradition that seem to encourage readers to
        expect the same sorts of things to occur in their own experience.

        Alex: Firstly, not all biblical prophets performed great signs and wonders. And of the ones that did perform miracles or signs, we see a great variation in the scope and scale. Secondly, there are circumstances in the Bible, with regards to the faith of a whole town, where the Son of God Himself cannot even perform miracles. So there are really just so many options open for the Biblical believer here. Another aspect is that the entire Bible really testifies to a narrow range of miraculous activity on the part of God. He chooses one nation in time and space to share these sacred scriptures with, co-inhabit a sacred space with, save through such extreme signs/wonders, etc. He raises his son from the dead and he only appears to very few people, most of whom are already believers. One could make the case opposite of yours from the same scriptures.

        James: And so there are at least
        some parts of the Biblical tradition that seem to encourage readers to
        expect the same sorts of things to occur in their own experience.

        Alex: There are so many Christians (and non-Christians) that believe they have experienced miracles in their lives. So I’m not sure (apart from the sea splitting type) that their is even your perceived deficit of miracles from the vantage point of the modern believer. Step outside of your box and read Keener’s 2 volumes on miracles – please. People all over the world are experiencing what they interpret to be answers to prayers, visits and divine protection from angels, visions of God and Christ, visions of heaven, visions of deceased relatives, etc. They write best-selling books about it. In fact, the volume of information on this subject is overwhelming. And note – I’m not vouching for any of it. Judge it case by case however you want, and at the end a life spent doing it, you’ll have barely scratched the surface. Just saying that, if anything, there is too much of this stuff, not too little.

        • http://www.patheos.com/community/exploringourmatrix/ James F. McGrath

          Alex, the way I see things now is a result of me stepping outside the box. I became a born-again Christian in a Pentecostal church, which in its previous building apparently had crutches and a wheelchair hanging on the wall. I attended a missionary Bible college where I had plenty of opportunities to hear cross-cultural stories of miracles. And when it comes to healings, I am not at all suggesting that people do not recover from illnesses, sometimes in extraordinary ways. But the Bible on the whole gives me the impression that there is a consistent view that rather remarkable actions by God and his angels are simply part of the way the world works. The disciples are rebuked for their eagerness to destroy those who rejected Jesus, not for thinking that something akin to what allegedly happened in Elijah’s time ought to also be expected in theirs.

        • Anonymous

          Alex, has it ever occurred to you that there is little to no evidence that the world of the Bible, with it’s talking snakes, talking donkeys, seas parting, ax heads floating, virgin births, resurrections from the dead and other crazy things, is any more real than the world of Harry Potter, The Green Lantern, or Conan the Barbarian?  Now, are there true messages in these movies and the Bible? Of course.  

          But don’t you think all of these extraordinary claims and miracles, which you amazingly say are rare in the Bible (again, just what Bible are you reading?), might be an indication that we are not be dealing with literal historical accounts?

          And no, I’m not saying that there is NO accurate historical information in the Bible, and that all the characters in it are mythical.  I believe there was a historical Jesus.  As for characters such as Abraham and Moses, I’m not so sure. In fact, I’m starting to find it more and more doubtful that they existed. If I’m wrong to have those doubts, I’m sure James will correct me. 

    • Anonymous

      Alex, what are you talking about?  What Bible are you reading? Is it Thomas Jefferson’s Bible?  One of the reasons I find the Bible so hard to believe is because so much of it is filled with implausible events.  These events are all over the Bible!  And James is right on target.  There is little to no indication that these miracles were only for a certain time period.  If one were to read the Bible and didn’t grasp the reality of our natural world, he or she would get the impression that there is no reason why the kinds of miracles described in the Bible can not happen today.  

      So, again, James assessment of the Bible is accurate. It is your argument that fails. 

      • Alex A Dalton

         Mikail, re: talking snakes and other mythology. I think we should be open to the fact that God teaches in non-literal means. If you look at how Jesus taught, most of his methods are non-literal (parable, hyperbole, proverb, etc.).

        • Anonymous

          Alex, I’m glad you’ve had positive changes in your life, but your subjective experience is not proof that your particular religious belief system is true.  Do you realize that mormons, Taoists, followers of the Nation of Islam and devotees of other religions could say the same things about their religion and how it has changed their life for the better that you are saying about yours?  Do you believe their experiences are real?  Do you think their religion is true?  Why is your experience real and theirs is false?  On what basis do you make such a judgment?

          Also, regarding this statement by you: “re: talking snakes and other mythology. I think we should be open to the fact that God teaches in non-literal means. If you look at how Jesus taught, most of his methods are non-literal (parable, hyperbole, proverb, etc.).”

          The problem with your argument is that the Bible does not present events such as talking snakes and talking donkeys as mere parables.  They are presented as real events that we are supposed to believe really happened.  There is absolutely NO indication that these are supposed to be taken as metaphors or parables.  There is no warrant for your conclusion. Quit being dishonest and torturing the text in order to make it fit your agenda. 

  • http://triangulations.wordpress.com/ Sabio Lantz

    James, you were doing so well until you started throwing around the term “Biblical”!  :-)

    But “Biblical” is one of those key words that still churns the heart of believers even if they are not believers in a literal or even an inspired Bible.  ”Biblical” is kind of like, as you write, “God” — it persists even though the old meaning of the word has completely evaporated.  I guess that is because folks love to keep the symbols for their club (religion) even though everything else has changed.  Folks love the illusion of continuity and identity.  Problem is, such talk reinforces those who really still do believe in the old God and the infallible Bible.

    Heck, people will still call themselves Vegetarians when they only have fish occasionally and maybe chicken when they go out to restaurants but “I don’t eat red meat.  And I still respect and love animals and am essentially a Vegetarian.”

    You gotta love the way people’s minds work.

    • Gary

      “Heck, people will still call themselves Vegetarians when they only have fish occasionally and maybe chicken when they go out to restaurants but “I don’t eat red meat.”…I think this has to do with mankind’s innate desire for cute and cuddly. You don’t eat “cute”. But you can eat ugly. Even though vegetarian and vegan include no eating chicken and fish. Perhaps this also relates to “good” and “bad. Regarding God and the bible, I sat in a Sunday school class this week that discussed Psalm 91.  It’s filled with “Because you have made the Lord your refuge the Most High your habitation, no evil shall befall you, no scourge come near your tent.” I mentioned that it must refer to the afterlife, since there are a lot of devote people that get hammered by bad things. The teacher didn’t particularly like the comment. Afterwords, I thought that the Psalm, like much of the OT, probably relates to the idea that bad things happen to you only if you deserve it….i.e. you are a leper because you sinned, not because of bad luck. The old “cause and effect” issue. If you have the effect, you must have been the cause. In a simply minded way.

  • Gary

    Meant “devout”….can’t spell worth a darn.

  • http://ofthelove.com/ Keika

    If Heaven were a terrible place to end up in, then I think God would do a better job at stopping bad things from happening to us.  Interestingly, I knew a man who had cheated me out of a lot of money and was on one of those commercial planes that flew into one of the Twin Towers.  Almost 10 years to the day from his sin against me, God had kept him out of heaven.  Or out of Hell for that matter.

  • Alex A Dalton

    James: Alex, the way I see things now is a result of me stepping outside
    the box. I became a born-again Christian in a Pentecostal church, which
    in its previous building apparently had crutches and a wheelchair
    hanging on the wall.

    Alex: LOL, that is kinda funny. I do think when we step out of one box, we step into another though. I was raised Catholic and rejected it at age 9 over the story of Adam and Eve and the problem of incest, lack of dinosaurs in the Bible, etc. One day when I was in high school, out in front of our local library, with all of my friends watching, I debated a priest on the veracity of the Bible – pulling out the Miller/Urey abiogenesis experiment, Australopithecus, and plenty of other stuff I’d learned about in science class. The priest was so mad he was *literally* thumping his Bible, and screaming at me, spit flying from his mouth. Over the years I built up a multitude of arguments against the Catholic faith, but as I matured I saw that some of them were misguided, and though I don’t agree with Catholic theology, I now have a much better understanding of why some do, and a healthy respect for that (and really most theologies). I certainly don’t waste time like I used to, arguing against Catholicism. What is the point? I’m sure there will be plenty of Catholics in heaven alongside me, and we’ll all be learning about how much we got wrong about God.

    James: I attended a missionary Bible college where I had
    plenty of opportunities to hear cross-cultural stories of miracles. And
    when it comes to healings, I am not at all suggesting that people do not
    recover from illnesses, sometimes in extraordinary ways. But the Bible
    on the whole gives me the impression that there is a consistent view
    that rather remarkable actions by God and his angels are simply part of
    the way the world works. The disciples are rebuked for their eagerness
    to destroy those who rejected Jesus, not for thinking that something
    akin to what allegedly happened in Elijah’s time ought to also be
    expected in theirs.

    Alex: James, Jesus rebukes a generation that looks for a sign in order to believe, as wicked and adulterous. I’m not sure how he could make it any more clear that believers should *not* expect great signs and wonders. 

    • Beau Quilter

      Yes, I find that quite convenient on the part of Jesus, especially since that gospel was written after Paul’s letters, and the 2nd century listeners to this gospel were probably looking around and wondering what happened to all the “signs and wonders” that Paul talked about in the letter to the Romans.

  • http://twitter.com/Verifieddata TEAMVERIFIED✓

    You can also trace in within the Bible how God becomes increasingly more idle in interfering with human activities, from the Old Testament to the NT. He had his own reasons, as part of the overall picture, to be very active in Genesis, Exodus, and *probably most of the OT (*not an expert on the OT). Then, in the NT testament he is of course in physical form as Jesus. So, still involved to a degree, by being actually physically present. As he set the standard to give us a chance to reclaim our place in his kingdom; salvation, and left us the a key tool: the Bible itself which was later written. So, it’s a very clear picture the one that it’s left: follow the plan of salvation, because that’s is the last lifeline act left in the script. Knowing this makes everything else makes sense; why God stopped getting involved some time after we chose to follow Satan in sin. Some might argue that this is a rough plan, and a tough road. Although, at the same time we don’t know the why to many things in creation, why they’re the way they appear, and we see them, etc.. So, it’s a waste of time to even think towards that direction anyway. What we have been presented with is very clear though, and backs itself-up endlessly since written. That’s what’s important! You can’t start planning to build a house if you don’t have the land. The information we have is exactly what we need for what humanity got itself into.

    • Alex A Dalton

       Team – you mentioned “tough road”. I would just like to say that I rejected God at such a young age and  I spent most of my life as a thief, a drug dealer, and I will always be an addict. I barely had a conscience prior to coming to know God. I was a bully as a child and ruined the lives of other children, I was so disrespectful and cruel to my own mother that she had a restraining order put on me, and I spent time in jail for violating it. As an adult, my beautiful wife of 7 years left me due to my cruel demeaning behavior, cold unforgiving nature, addiction to pornography, and neglect. At one point, I was so maddened by the depression I had gotten myself into, I made the call to have myself committed to a mental hospital as I felt I could not deal with the horror of the consequences of my own actions.

      The “tough road” in my life has been my life without God. The devastation and enslavement that sin ultimately brings about in our life, is the tough road. I truly believe Jesus when he says his burden is light, his yoke is easy, and in him, we find rest.

      Even if I find the Bible to be full of myth, symbolism, interpreted incorrectly by every pastor that takes the pulpit, and even challenging ethically with regard to much of the OT, I will always trust it as God’s word in some sense in my life. For over a decade, I have studied the most skeptical historical Jesus scholarship, and yet, my faith still remains that Jesus is my savior. When I picked up the Bible, I was selling cocaine, using drugs constantly, stealing thousands of dollars from my place of employment, etc. – and the fear of God that overcame me as I read the stories of the Bible was the healthiest thing that has ever happened to me.

      • http://twitter.com/Verifieddata Verifieddatᾱ

        Alex: Amen! I am glad to hear that you also have seen the one and only love, true love to humanity and our existence. Despite how the plan may seem, he has both honored and respected us as individual thinkers and still does, and has laid the way for us to find our way back to him.

        I haven’t had all the emotional drain and drama that you had to go through, but like most people I know, that have came back to God (have had to come back), after seeing the other many ugly faces that you weren’t seeing at one time of the lost world we live in, I also saw that I was overlooking a vastly immense picture of what Jesus has brought to the table for us. Everything has been true since you first ever heard the word of God and everything else that you come across only makes everything altogether even make more sense at the same time. It’s awesome! People have to break that barrier, though it’s hard to pick it up with all the evil clouding around you. The world is being heavily distracted from many angles. I really hope it doesn’t have to get much uglier before the time is up for Satan!

  • http://twitter.com/Verifieddata Verifieddatᾱ

    The fact that God is not active after Jesus itself is evidence of the truth of the Bible. We have to follow the plan of salvation, that’s all that was left for us.

    • Anonymous

      “The fact that God is not active after Jesus itself is evidence of the truth of the Bible. We have to follow the plan of salvation, that’s all that was left for us.”

      Huh?!?!?!?!  So the fact that the Bible records all kinds of events that are extremely unlikely to have happened due to what we know about the natural world is proof that all the events in the Bible really happened???  This is nothing short of delusional!

  • Pingback: Verifieddatᾱ

  • Alex A Dalton

    Mikail: Alex, I’m glad you’ve had positive changes in your life, but your
    subjective experience is not proof that your particular religious belief
    system is true. 

    Alex: I think it would be disingenuous of anyone to claim that their own personal subjective experience doesn’t factor in to worldview decisions. And that is all I’m saying here – these things do heavily for me…as for the Taoist, Buddhist, etc. I snipped the rest of the comments on this as I’m not trying to convert anyone with stories of the transformative experience of reading the Bible. Its just part of my own personal justification. Of course everyone feels like their subjective experiences justify their worldview to an extent. And I’d agree that they do.

    Mikail: The
    problem with your argument is that the Bible does not present events
    such as talking snakes and talking donkeys as mere parables.  They are
    presented as real events that we are supposed to believe really
    happened.  There is absolutely NO indication that these are supposed to
    be taken as metaphors or parables. 

    Alex: Right, that’s why Genesis has all the literary earmarks of mythology. Put aside the fact that it was written prior to history as we know it even coming into existence. We are transported to a “Golden Era” where things were perfect and all of creation is sacred space, it is a primordial time, we have highly symbolic elements like the “tree of life”, “tree of knowledge of good and evil”, etc. – and last but not least, we have talking animals – not animals made miraculously to speak, but animals that seem to talk right from the get-go. This is mythology Mikail. I’ve got a multitude of works by Campbell and Eliade four feet away from me on my library shelf. What scholarly works on mythology have you studied? What qualifies you to make genre judgments about ancient texts, and accuse others of being dishonest? Or are you just protective and defensive with regards to your favorite pet arguments against Christianity? Do tell….

    • Anonymous

      Hey Alex, a few things. To which Christianity are you referring?  There’s thousands of them.  Even though I can no longer call myself a Christian in any sense of the word, I’m not a hater of religions or the Christianities.  There’s a pretty wide spectrum in Christianity. Both Fred Phelps and the owner of this blog would call themselves Christians, but they obviously couldn’t be further apart.   Now, when it comes to the evangelical/fundamentalist protestant form of Christianity, which is the particular form of Christianity that I practiced, I tend to have pretty negative views on it. 

      As for mythology in the Bible, your argument isn’t with me. I know most of it is myth.  You’re preaching to the choir here. You need to convince your fellow evangelicals that much of it is myth, because they tend to believe it’s literal history.  Now, I do agree with you that these crazy things we read about are most likely myth for the reasons you listed, but does the Bible itself say that these are myths?  It seems to me that for the most part, maybe not completely, but for the most part, the Bible gives the impression that we are supposed to regard these incredible events as actual history and not the myth that it most likely is.  Oh, and I think James (McGrath, and not the book of James) is accurate when he basically says the Bible in several places gives the impression that God is supposed to work today as he did in the Bible stories.  

      Also, I find it curious that you are so quick to regard these things in genesis as myth, which is the right thing to do, but appear to accept the crazy and incredible events recorded in the gospels as literal history.  Am I right about that? If so, why?  The stuff I read in the gospels are no less wacky than the stuff in Genesis. Like Genesis, it appears to have many myth like qualities. And once again, no, I’m not a mythicist  when it comes to Jesus. Do I believe he was the son of God, that he died for my sins, and then rose from the dead and ascended to heaven? No. But do I believe the gospels in the Bible are based on a real person in history? Yes. 

      • Alex A Dalton

         Mikail – as I suspected, an ex-evangelical. Would you mind answering my questions about who and what you’ve read on myth and/or genre criticism of the Bible? I’m with Burridge (and many others) on the genre of the Gospels. James has not made any case whatsoever for the original claims of this blog post and, if he has, you’ll have to point me to it. Myth is not simply characterized by “crazy” and “incredible” events being reported. You seem to be using a very freethinker-esque non-academic characterization of the term. As I said, I have no problem with God communicating in ways that are highly symbolic. Since I believe Jesus was God’s son, and He primarily communicated in this way himself, I expect this. As far as “literal history”, history in the 1st century was quite different than history now, so you’ll have to define what you even mean by “history”. I think the authors of the gospels were reporting what they saw as the truth about Jesus – now whether or not that includes heavy symbolism, allegory, typological elements, and even some mythical elements – I have no problems there. One way or the other, since I believe the importance is in the truth of the stories, I really don’t care. Myth can be used, often more effectively, to convey the deepest truths about the human condition in storytelling.

        • Anonymous

          As for “myth/genre criticism of the Bible” I don’t know if the people I’ve read would fit under that VERY specific category, but I’ve read the work of several scholars/apologists on why the New Testament is should be taken as literal history. This would include Habermas, Licona, Craig and other apologists.  As a Christian, I was pretty indoctrinated with apologetics. And now, I find their arguments less than convincing for several reasons. 

          And then of course, I’ve read people such as Bart Ehrman, and I’m currently reading a book on Jesus by Dale Allison. As for myth, I should probably make it clear that I don’t believe it’s always a derogatory term, although if you tell your average evangelical/fundamentalist Christian that you think most to all of the Bible is myth, they’ll most likely get pissed.  But my point is that the term myth doesn’t have to be derogatory. Many myths communicate truth, even if the events they describe did not literally happen.  I would definitely put the adam and eve story in this category.  Perhaps you and I agree on more than we originally thought we did. 

          “Since I believe Jesus was God’s son, and He primarily communicated in this way himself, I expect this.”

          OK, now you’re being a little more clear about why you believe what you believe, and I would say that although I believe the gospels are not literal actual history and are very close to myth to myth themselves, I still value the truth communicated in them and find many of the teachings attributed to Jesus, not all, but many of them to be worth emulating in my own life.  I also find the story of man with superpowers  performing miracles, laying down his life for his friends (John) then rising from the dead three days later to be an inspiring and beautiful story that communicates truth I need to hear.  But do I believe it’s actual literal history?  Not anymore.

          • Alex A Dalton

             Mikail wrote: Perhaps you and I agree on more than we originally thought we did.

            Alex: Indeed. And I rather like Allison’s theological and historical views. They have much overlap with my own.

        • Anonymous

          Alex, I’m not a scholar on myth criticism, nor am I a scholar on anything.  But here is the definition of myth from dictionary.com. It says:

          “a traditional or legendary story, usually concerning somebeing or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, especially one that isconcerned with deities or demigods and explains somepractice, rite, or phenomenon of nature.”

          Call me crazy but it’s very hard for me not to see this definition as applying to most to all of the Bible. 

          I also apologize for calling you dishonest earlier. It turns out your being honest. I just disagree with some of your conclusions, but maybe not as many as I thought I did. 

          But if you regard several stories in the Bible as myth, I’m not saying you’re not a Christian, but I do wonder how much of an evangelical you really are, and that’s not meant as a criticism from my perspective.  In my opinion, the less evangelical/fundamentalist, the better.  Notice I said less evangelical/fundamentalist the better and not the less Christian the better.  Christian and Christianity can mean different things depending on who you ask. 

  • Alex A Dalton

    Mikail – there are many definitions of myth, even within the scholarly literature that specializes on the subject. I think the above dictionary definition casts the net a little wide for the purposes of our discussion. For instance, when discussing Genesis, we are actually both using myth as a genre that is in *contrast* to a story that has a determinable basis of fact, whereas the above definition says “with or without”. Someone who accepts Genesis as literal history, could also accept it as mythological in that sense. Depending on how you define myth, mythology and history are not necessarily mutually exclusive and may have much overlap. C. S. Lewis, adopting some of Tolkien’s views, believed the story of Jesus was a type of true myth, and the Bible was full of myths. And note that Lewis is an evangelical icon. I don’t care to label myself with words like “evangelical”, or pledge allegiance to any body of views when my own views are changing constantly based on new experiences and knowledge acquired. These labels are so subjective anyway. To Norm Geisler, Mike Licona is not evangelical enough to be in his club. To a certain skeptic, I’m probably a fundamentalist. To many members of my church, some of my views might be seen as extremely liberal and non-traditional. I think a lot of our views and beliefs are much more nuanced than they appear on the surface. I had previously thought the pastor of my church was about as fundamentalist as one can get. I was shocked to find out that he thought much of the OT was not historical, just based on genre considerations alone. And I think many members of my church would be shocked to learn that he doesn’t think Jonah ever slept within the belly of a sea monster for instance. I will say I think we could all stand to be a little less defensive and at war with those of opposing or different views. Some of the most conservative fundamentalist Christians I know have helped me immeasurably – taught me great truths about God, and helped me overcome enslaving issues in my life. Anyway, I accept your apology completely.

  • Alex A Dalton

    The 2nd century church had all sorts of reports of miraculous activity during their own day, so they probably weren’t looking around wondering that at all.

    • Beau Quilter

      Reports, yes, but witnesses? You do realize that most of the reported “signs and wonders” of the 2nd century weren’t Christian at all, they were pagan.

      If we are to believe the reports, the god Apollo was a much more active miracle worker in the 2nd century than Jesus.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X