It's a free video and well worth watching.

have you ever posted anything about a mudmotor on this mudmotor site?

Yes, quite a bit more than ranger actually. I even helped ranger when he first joined and was asking questions about what boat would go best with his LT. Not sure what bearing this has on the discussions in the politics forum, I have a mud boat and have as much of a right to express my opinion here as anyone. Don't like it, don't read it, pretty simple. Why would you open a thread started by me if you don't want to read what I post? For that matter if I bother you that much, click the foe button. At any rate stop whining like a little girl.

Who's butt hurt? I answered his question and asked him a follow up question.

Back on topic, did you watch the video?

geez a simple question and you go off on a rant. Little uptight much? Been catching any crawfish lately?

It was a long day...

I caught a couple buckets worth this summer, they are under several inches of ice now though so I'm done till the spring. I just found out that I can get a commercial license for them and run as many traps as I want, so I may need to buy a few more buckets for next season.

Idacraw-

I watched your clip. Wow, that is pretty lame and pretty easy to debunk.

For starters, this is the "politics" forum. the clip I posted was about "politics", capitalism, communism, socialism, the constitution....

Your clip is about religion, not politics.

Within seconds, your clip takes a real turn to stupidity, when it tries to portray Charles Manson as a Christian. You will not see any Christians today, or any day holding up the likes of Charlie Manson, Jim Jones, or any of these nuts as "Christian". One only has to read the Bible and see how these criminal nuts were not in line with Bible truth. We also know that the Bible warns us about "false Christs" and fakes.

The narrator makes all manner of claims that are not true, concerning the Bible, early Christians, Paul.. Paul met just after his conversion with James, Peter, and other disciples. he even correct Peter later on. If you want some history on the early church, try reading the Foxes Book of Martyrs.

Try again, this was pretty lame.

And you are wrong, I am perfectly fine with people viewing this. It is not anything that would shake the faith of a true Christian, but does give one a window into the hatred foolishness of atheists.

I give you credit Ranger...you watched it.

I saw Idacraw posted it and figured it wasn't worth my time to watch it.

I spend more time reading liberal news than any other source. I read the Huffington Post daily. I read opposing views on all manner of things. This little clip is a joke.

I hope folks do watch this clip, and learn something.

To not believe in something, atheists go long and far to try to teach about that in which they do not believe.

I do not believe in Buddha, but I do not dedicate my life trying to prove to Buddhist that Buddha is not real.

You will notice that atheists do not waste their time on Buddhism, Hindu religion, Islam.... They go after Christianity. They know it to be the one true and real religion, and it is the one that scares them. They know that one day they will stand before a Holy God, and they are terrified by that thought, thus they try to make it go away.

You will also notice that folks like Idacraw are always real quick to jump in and defend a false religion like Islam. He knows Islam to be an enemy of our constitution, so the enemy of his enemy becomes his friend.

Idacraw,,,you cannot argue rangers truth's....

You can only try to misslead, and missguide. Personally, i think you are way over your head. Just my observation...

I have argued and refuted most of rangers "truths". Most of you are to naive to see that though, and like ranger pointed out most here aren't that bright. You continue to take what ranger says as whole truth without question and never strive to verify those facts for yourself. This is what is fundamentally wrong with this country, people like you are content to be spoon fed your opinions and never stop to ask questions. You should question everything, and believe nothing at face value.

Ranger, I don't believe for a second that you actually watched the whole video, you might have made it 10 minutes. You continue to try and separate christianity from christians who give it a bad name, it just doesn't work like that. You can't pick and choose who is really a christian when they themselves declare that they are a christian. Hitler described himself as a christian too, but I doubt most people know that little tidbit of history as it doesn't jive to well with the rest of christianity. And once again, if there where buddists, muslims, jews, or any other religion on here I would point out that they are false as well, but since christianity is the base religion here that is what I point out.

Watch the whole thing, you might learn something if you were capable of rational thought.

And I will give you something to ponder while you scramble for more of your bible truths. You disregard all other religions besides your own as false and claim yours is the "one true and real religion". This means that you are almost as much of an atheist as I am, only I don't believe in one more god than you. The same logic you use to discount all other religions is the same I use to discount yours.

Idacraw- Yes, I watched the clip, and will sit down and watch it again, and take notes to come back with a whole lot more of why it is a bunch of bunk.

I think your problem, is that you are not exactly sure of what a Christian is or is not. You do not just get to willy nilly decide all of the worlds more notorious bad guys are Christians.

"Christian" is a Bible term, thus gets a Bible definition. It was first used when the Apostle Paul gave his testimony to King Agrippa. Agrippa told Paul that because of that testimony, that he was almost persuaded to become a Christian himself. Christian being a follower of Christ. You can use the term Christian, Born Again, Saved, Converted.... it all means the same thing. It is a human being that sees themselves as a sinner, unworthy (Rom 3:23) of going to heaven on their own, thus accepting the sacrifice on the Cross by Jesus as that which saves. Once saved, Christians are not perfect, but Jesus said that he knows his sheep, and his sheep hear his voice. We are also told that we will know Christians by their fruit. By the way they live their lives, it will be evident that they are Christians. Christians are saved by Grace, and nothing else. The book of James claims that a true Christian will have "works", but the works do not save, the Grace does.

So, let us take a look at a few folks you claim as Christian. Charlie Manson is a good place to start. For one, Charlie did not claim to be a Christian, he claimed to be Christ. Christ being God in the flesh. So, if we know a thimble full of Bible, we know that when Christ comes back again, he is going to come as a King. There will be a trumpet blast, the dead in Christ shall rise, the living Christians will meet Christ in the air, and will be taken out of this world. Seven years later, Christ will come back, his feet will hit the mount of Olives, and he will reign for a thousand years from the Temple in Jerusalem.

Charlie did not quite do it that way. He lived a corrupt immoral life as a drug induced hippie, having sex with lots of woman, men, and he orchestrated murder in the purpose to start a race war. Pretty evident by his life that he as not a Christian, but he was a cult leader. We can say the same for Jim Jones. he may have used a Bible, but if you read what he wrote and said, he despised the Bible, and said as much. He was praised by democrats, so that puts him far from Bible truth right there. Jimmy Carter's wife even visited Jones. Jones also had one half billion dollars that he wanted sent to the Soviet Union, a nation that literally killed Christians. Jones also a cult leader had his followers commit mass suicide. I have read the Bible cover to cover a number of times over, and have not found those verses on mass suicide. If I run a across them, I will let you know.

Let us move on to Hitler. Once again, look at what he said, who he followed, and his life. he was a follower of Nietzsche (who wrote God is Dead). Hitler allowed religion, but it was not Bible based, but was a warped view that aligned with his nationalisms. he also praised Islam as a better religion that Christianity. The Bible tells us clearly that Jews are Gods chosen people, and Genesis eleven tells us that God blesses those tha bless the Jews, and curses those that curst the Jews. Hitler saw to the execution of six million Jews. When one looks at Hitler’s life, it is clear that he was anti Bible in just about every way.

One can look at folks in history that claimed to be Christian, examine their writings, and their life, and it can be pretty clear of their Christianity. Robert E Lee would be one of such people, so would Jonathan Edwards, John Wesley, and good old Tony Dungy.

I can not pick and choose who is Christian and who is not, but I can examine the Bible and look at the person. Jimmy Carter often times get credited as being very religious (which he may be), but I see nothing Christian about him. He (in his own words) claimed the Bible not to be the word of God. That kind of shoots Christianity out of the water for him. He supported abortion, gay rights, and welfare.... all things that are clearly against Bible truth. Even Obama declared in his first election that he was a Christian, but I can look at how he governs, and he comes out against Bible truth on every topic. One can even go to YouTube, and watch Obama make fun of Bible.

One is not a Christen because the declared it, went to a certain church, lives a good life, because grandma was a Baptist, because someone dunked them in City water, or because the live by a certain set of do and don’ts. One is a Christian, because they were saved by Grace, and attempts to follow Christ, using the Bible as the guide to do just that.

Those of you that have an interest in this topic, should watch the film, and see how well you can debunk it with your own knowledge of Bible and history. It takes a couple time of watching it and taking notes, to start picking out the big lies and Flemmings false notions.

When you get done, go to this link, and this guy does a pretty good job of blowing the film out of the water.

http://www.answeringinfidels.com/index. ... view&id=87

You can try and use semantics all you want, that does not change anything. Catholics, Methodists, Babtists, Mormons, Lutherans, etc are all different types of denominations that share the same base belief set, Christianity. Ask any of these people what they are and they will say that they are a christian.

I did not willy nilly say these people were chritians, the people themselves described themselves as christians. Despite your claim, Hitler calls himself a christian and said that he was a devote catholic. Just like the Norway attacks in 2011, the person responsible for those acts declared himself a christian and even wrote a 1500 page manifesto detailing his christian beliefs (I posted a video on this very topic with people like you saying that despite his claims he wasn't a christian, but muslim terrorists are muslim, I'll bump it to the top for you in case you missed it). I can see how this would confuse you, you have a narrow field of understanding.

So you are saying that unless a person lives and believes just like you that they are not a christian despite how they feel about themselves and how they perceive the teaching in the bible? Here you go again trying to draw a distinction between a person and their religion if they claim to be from the same sect as you, but lump other religions into the same acts of a single person because you don't share their beliefs. Christians who commit acts of terror are not christians, but muslims who commit acts of terror are muslims despite the fact that these acts are condemned by the leaders of the muslim faith. That makes no sense, but then most things you say here don't really hold up to logical scrutiny.

Idacraw - Your comment "So you are saying that unless a person lives and believes just like you that they are not a christian"


You do not get it, nor do I think you ever will. It is not about me, never was about me, and never will be about me. I am a nothing and a nobody.

Being "Christian" is about Christ, Son of the Living God.

The definition of Christian come from the Bible, not me. Align the person calling themselves "Christian" and see if it aligns with the Bible definition. My definition matters not.

You hate Christianity, thus you attempt to take some of the worst villains in history, and then put the label of Christianity on them. So far, you have used Hitler, Charles Manson, the Norway Killer. Who is next, Jack the Ripper?

We that have read, and know the Bible, know it speaks of false Christs, and people who claim Christianity but are fake. Study the separating of the sheep and goats.

"You are right that Hitler did mention Christianity many times in his writings. He paid Christianity a lot of lip service in Mein Kampf, and he claimed to be a Christian. But Hitler's secretary, Martin Bormann, also declared that "National Socialism [Nazism] and Christianity are irreconcilable" and Hitler didn't squawk too much about it. Similarly, Hermann Rauschning, a Hitler associate, said, "One is either a Christian or a German. You can't be both." In addition, Hitler declared Nazism the state religion and the Bible was replaced by Mein Kampf in the schools. the SS were supposedly forbidden to believe in God--yet the military's belt buckles said "Gott mit uns" ("God is with us")"

"As Hitler grew in power, he made other anti-Christian statements. For example, he was quoted in Hitler: A Study in Tyranny, by Allan Bullock, as saying: "I'll make these damned parsons feel the power of the state in a way they would have never believed possible. For the moment, I am just keeping my eye upon them: if I ever have the slightest suspicion that they are getting dangerous, I will shoot the lot of them. This filthy reptile raises its head whenever there is a sign of weakness in the State, and therefore it must be stamped on. We have no sort of use for a fairy story invented by the Jews."

Breivik listed "Christian" and "conservative" on his Facebook profile. That is about as far as his Christianity went. Remember also that "conservative" in Europe has a different meaning that in the US. Had Breivik listed himself as a Grizzly Bear, it would not make him so. What "Christian" evidence do you see in his life? What Christian church do you see claiming him, condoning his actions, or where did you see that he was trained or instructed via Bible, in leading to his killings. His killings were political not religious.

The Muslims you love to defend so much kill with the backing of the Koran and religious leaders. Killing and even raping non Muslims gets the nod of their mullahs. Terrorist across the Middle East are trained in the Mosques by the leaders of Islam. It is a religion of terror, and always has been. The heads of terror groups are religious leaders.

No it is you who don't get it. I am not defending muslims, I am saying that they are no different from christians. God in the bible advocates murdering children, genocide, and rape. Please tell me how that is different from the muslims.

I would like to see how you debunk the film, but not with the bible, with actual real world accounts and real historical documentation. You know, real evidence. If you can do that, can prove that jesus actually existed, not as a man but as a deity with magical powers that performed miracles such as raising the dead and walking on water, with sources outside of the bible you should do just that and sit back to collect your Nobel Peace Prize.

And don't event try using the known forged documents of Josephus, that has long been proven a hoax.

Idacraw - your comment "collect your Nobel Peace Prize."

I am not looking for a Nobel Peace Prize. As a matter of fact, it is not worth spit anyway. They gave one to Obama, just for showing up. he saw to it that Osama Bin Laden was shot without the ability to surrender, tied a rock to him, and chunked him in the ocean. He used drones to kill an American Citizen. He supports the Murder of thousands of unborn babies a day. He is a first class killer, looking to disarm the American population. I do not wish to have any award that was given to him.



There is no cut and paste that I can do that will make you believe in the Jesus that saved me. There is no historical document that I can show you that will make you believe, there is no science experiment that will give you a shred of belief.

Those few that have come to know Christ through me, did not do so because of me, but was because of what they saw in me, and was in spite of me.

When a man gets to a hard time in his life, where he cannot find answers, it is humbling to have him come to you, and ask "ranger, what is it that you have that makes you different?"

It is my prayer, that one day you find a genuine Christian, and that you can see Christ in that person. You not only disbelieve God, you have a hatred for a God that loves you. I am not sure of your view of your own self worth, but I can tell you this, it is worth a whole lot. When the God of the universe, comes to earth, lives as a man, is tortured and crucified, and just to pay your way to heaven, then the price for you is very high. You receiving that gift is up to you.

Sorry if I could not dazzle you with some amazing new info. The old truth of the Gospel is the best I have. As a matter of fact, it is all I need.

Exactly, there is nothing outside the bible that proves the story of jesus as true. If the stories of his life were true there would be multiple accountings from multiple sources talking about the miracles he performed.

Why are you defending Osama Bin Laden? This just shows how much you hate America when you can condemn the president for taking the life of a known terrorist responsible for the deaths of many innocent citizens.

Did you know that as many as 10-25% of all clinically recognized pregnancies end in miscarriage through no fault of the parents, just natural causes? If you include stillbirths then as many as 1 in 3 pregnancies end in the death of the fetus due to natural, unpreventable causes. If you think that abortion is murder then god must have a huge problem with babies because he kills many more babies per day than all abortion clinics combined.

Since you brought it up, why did jesus need to die for our sins so that we could get into heaven? Why would I need salvation from a sin that I did not commit, and am condemned for by the simple act of being born? And what exactly is the "original sin" that we need to be forgiven for?

And I would like to point out that you said the film is easily debunked, yet you admit that can't debunk the claim that jesus did not exist. It is becoming sad how often you fail to back up your lofty claims.

Not wanting to be apart of this gridlocked debate at all, but I'd like to object one thing then remove myself from the discussion.


"Condemn the the president for taking the life of a known terrorist."

I'm not positive which branch of the military was responsible and I don't want to offend them by assuming it was another branch, but I know DAMN good and well the "leader" of our country didn't stick his neck out and strap up an M16 to go kill the terrorist.

Support the troops and give them credit for what they did. Not what Obama claims he organized and executed.

It was Navy Seal Team 6 that carried out the operation.

I also saw this and thought it relevant to your point about Hitler not being a christian. That is a real quote taken from a real speech given by Hitler. It doesn't matter how you try and use semantics to support who you think is christian or who isn't, all that is required is that the person themselves believes that they are following the words of your god and believe that they are a christian. It is not much of a stretch for Hitler to call himself a christian, the god he believed in was also a fan of genocide, cruelty, and slavery.

Idacraw - you have been busy my friend. It seems you take a whole lot out of context.

Your comment "Why are you defending Osama Bin Laden? " I am not defending OBL, nor was I against his killing. I was pointing out the hypocrisy of the Nobel Peace Prize. They just gave it to Obamma. He had done nothing to actually earn it. After earning it, he ordered the killing of OBL, drone strikes that killed an American citizen, the shooting of Somali pirates, a surge in Afghanistan.... Would they give a Nobel Peace Prize to a Ronald Regan after the wall came down ? Did they give one to the first President Bush after he liberated Kuwait? The whole thing is a joke.

You are really stuck on this whole "Hitler a Christian" thing. Notice that if you study all of Hitler, all of what he said, did, and wrote, it is very easy to see that he used religion when it served him, and his evil purpose. There was nothing Christian about him, and he was evident that he hated the Bible. Once again, he was a follower of Nietzee, who claimed "God is dead". It was all about power, not Christianity.


About this film you seem so enamored with. You use these rules "I would like to see how you debunk the film, but not with the bible". This is ludicrous. The film is all about declaring the Bible wrong or invalid. It is specifically anti Jesus. Our recorded history of Jesus come from the Gospels written my Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John. These histories were then collected as part of the Cannon of Scripture. They are the historical recordings available of the life of Jesus.

The Author of the film wants to declare that the Gospel of Mark was written too long after the life of Jesus to be legit, but he also claims that Jesus never existed?????

Do you find it odd that you claim "Jesus" never even existed (as a man, or as a deity), but the entire free world uses a dating system based and his life and death?

Here is some history from outside the Bible for you -


Keep in mind:

1. There are amazingly few manuscripts of ANY text written during Jesus’ time
2. Historians of this period wrote little about religious figures anyway
3. Jesus was active for a short period of time (just three years)
4. Jesus ministered in a remote corner of the Roman Empire


Thallus (52AD)
Thallus is perhaps the earliest secular writer to mention Jesus and he is so ancient that his writings don’t even exist anymore. But Julius Africanus, writing around 221AD does quote Thallus who had previously tried to explain away the darkness that occurred at the point of Jesus’ crucifixion:

“On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.” (Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)

If only more of Thallus’ record could be found, we would see that every aspect of Jesus’ life could be verified with a non-biblical source. But there are some things we can conclude from this account: Jesus lived, he was crucified, and there was an earthquake and darkness at the point of his crucifixion.

Pliny the Younger (61-113AD)
Early Christians are also described in secular history. Pliny the Younger, in a letter to the Roman emperor Trajan, describes the lifestyles of early Christians:

“They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food—but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.”

This EARLY description of the first Christians documents several facts: the first Christians believed that Jesus was GOD, the first Christians upheld a high moral code, and these early followers et regularly to worship Jesus.

Suetonius (69-140AD)
Suetonius was a Roman historian and annalist of the Imperial House under the Emperor Hadrian. His writings about Christians describe their treatment under the Emperor Claudius (41-54AD):

“Because the Jews at Rome caused constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus (Christ), he (Claudius) expelled them from the city (Rome).” (Life of Claudius, 25:4)

This expulsion took place in 49AD, and in another work, Suetonius wrote about the fire which destroyed Rome in 64 A.D. under the reign of Nero. Nero blamed the Christians for this fire and he punished Christians severely as a result:

“Nero inflicted punishment on the Christians, a sect given to a new and mischievous religious belief.” (Lives of the Caesars, 26.2)

There is much we can learn from Suetonius as it is related to the life of early Christians. From this very EARLY account, we know that Jesus had an immediate impact on his followers. They believed that Jesus was God enough to withstand the torment and punishment of the Roman Empire. Jesus had a curious and immediate impact on his followers, empowering them to die courageously for what they knew to be true.

Tacitus (56-120AD)
Cornelius Tacitus was known for his analysis and examination of historical documents and is among the most trusted of ancient historians. He was a senator under Emperor Vespasian and was also proconsul of Asia. In his “Annals’ of 116AD, he describes Emperor Nero’s response to the great fire in Rome and Nero’s claim that the Christians were to blame:

“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.”

In this account, Tacitus confirms for us that Jesus lived in Judea, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and had followers who were persecuted for their faith in Christ.

Mara Bar-Serapion (70AD)
Sometime after 70AD, a Syrian philosopher named Mara Bar-Serapion, writing to encourage his son, compared the life and persecution of Jesus with that of other philosophers who were persecuted for their ideas. The fact that Jesus is known to be a real person with this kind of influence is important. As a matter of fact, Mara Bar-Serapion refers to Jesus as the “Wise King”:

“What benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as judgment for their crime. Or, the people of Samos for burning Pythagoras? In one moment their country was covered with sand. Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?…After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these men…The wise king…Lived on in the teachings he enacted.”

From this account, we can add to our understanding of Jesus. We can conclude that Jesus was a wise and influential man who died for his beliefs. We can also conclude that his followers adopted these beliefs and lived lives that reflected them to the world in which they lived.

Phlegon (80-140AD)
In a manner similar to Thallus, Julius Africanus also mentions a historian named Phlegon who wrote a chronicle of history around 140AD. In this history, Phlegon also mentions the darkness surrounding the crucifixion in an effort to explain it:

“Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth to the ninth hour.” (Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)

Phlegon is also mentioned by Origen (an early church theologian and scholar, born in Alexandria):

“Now Phlegon, in the thirteenth or fourteenth book, I think, of his Chronicles, not only ascribed to Jesus a knowledge of future events . . . but also testified that the result corresponded to His predictions.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 14)

“And with regard to the eclipse in the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been crucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place … ” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 33)

“Jesus, while alive, was of no assistance to himself, but that he arose after death, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands had been pierced by nails.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 59)

From these accounts, we can add something to our understand of Jesus and conclude that Jesus had the ability to accurately predict the future, was crucified under the reign of Tiberius Caesar and demonstrated his wounds after he was resurrected!

Lucian of Samosata: (115-200 A.D.)
Lucian was a Greek satirist who spoke sarcastically of Christ and Christians, but in the process, he did affirm that they were real people and never referred to them as fictional characters:

“The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day—the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account….You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property.” (Lucian, The Death of Peregrine. 11-13)

From this account we can add to our description and conclude that Jesus taught about repentance and about the family of God. These teachings were quickly adopted by Jesus’ followers and exhibited to the world around them.

Celsus (175AD)
This is the last hostile ‘pagan’ account we will examine (although there are many other later accounts in history). Celsus was quite hostile to the Gospels, but in his criticism, he unknowingly affirms and reinforces the authors and their content. His writing is extensive and he alludes to 80 different Biblical quotes, confirming their early appearance in history. In addition, he admits that the miracles of Jesus were generally believed in the early 2nd century! Here is a portion of his text:

“Jesus had come from a village in Judea, and was the son of a poor Jewess who gained her living by the work of her own hands. His mother had been turned out of doors by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on being convicted of adultery [with a soldier named Panthéra (i.32)]. Being thus driven away by her husband, and wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, a bastard. Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing. He returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god.”

Celsus admits that Jesus was reportedly born of a virgin, but then argues that this could supernatural account could not be possible and offers the idea that he was a bastard son of a man named Panthera (an idea borrowed from Jews who opposed Jesus at the time). But in writing this account, Celsus does confirm that Jesus had an earthly father who was a carpenter, possessed unusual magical powers and claimed to be God.


Jewish Talmud (400-700AD)
While the earliest Talmudic writings of Jewish Rabbis appear in the 5th century, the tradition of these Rabbinic authors indicates that they are faithfully transmitting teachings from the early “Tannaitic” period of the first century BC to the second century AD. There are a number of writings from the Talmud that scholars believe refer to Jesus and many of these writings are said to use code words to describe Jesus (such as “Balaam” or “Ben Stada” or “a certain one”). But let’s be very conservative here. Let’s ONLY look at the passages that refer to Jesus in a more direct way. If we do that, there are still several ancient Talmudic passages we can examine:

“Jesus practiced magic and led Israel astray” (b. Sanhedrin 43a; cf. t. Shabbat 11.15; b. Shabbat 104b)

“Rabbi Hisda (d. 309) said that Rabbi Jeremiah bar Abba said, ‘What is that which is written, ‘No evil will befall you, nor shall any plague come near your house’? (Psalm 91:10)… ‘No evil will befall you’ (means) that evil dreams and evil thoughts will not tempt you; ‘nor shall any plague come near your house’ (means) that you will not have a son or a disciple who burns his food like Jesus of Nazareth.” (b. Sanhedrin 103a; cf. b. Berakhot 17b)

“Our rabbis have taught that Jesus had five disciples: Matthai, Nakai, Nezer, Buni and Todah. They brought Matthai to (to trial). He said, ‘Must Matthai be killed? For it is written, ‘When (mathai) shall I come and appear before God?’” (Psalm 92:2) They said to him, “Yes Matthai must be killed, for it is written, ‘When (mathai) he dies his name will perish’” (Psalm 41:5). They brought Nakai. He said to them, “Must Nakai be killed? For it is written, “The innocent (naqi) and the righteous will not slay’” (Exodus 23:7). They said to him, “Yes, Nakai must be kille, for it is written, ‘In secret places he slays the innocent (naqi)’” (Psalm 10:8). (b. Sanhedrin 43a; the passage continues in a similar way for Nezer, Buni and Todah)

And this, perhaps the most famous of Talmudic passages about Jesus:

“It was taught: On the day before the Passover they hanged Jesus. A herald went before him for forty days (proclaiming), “He will be stoned, because he practiced magic and enticed Israel to go astray. Let anyone who knows anything in his favor come forward and plead for him.” But nothing was found in his favor, and they hanged him on the day before the Passover. (b. Sanhedrin 43a)

From just these passages that mention Jesus by name, we can conclude that Jesus had magical powers, led the Jews away from their beliefs, had disciples who were martyred for their faith (one of whom was named Matthai), and was executed on the day before the Passover.

The Toledot Yeshu (1000AD)
The Toledot Yeshu is a medieval Jewish retelling of the life of Jesus. It is completely anti-Christian, to be sure. There are many versions of these ‘retellings’, and as part of the transmitted oral and written tradition of the Jews, we can presume their original place in antiquity, dating back to the time of Jesus’ first appearance as an influential leader who was drawing Jews away from their faith in the Law. The Toledot Yeshu contains a determined effort to explain away the miracles of Jesus, and to deny the virgin birth. In some places, the text is quite vicious, but it does confirm many elements of the New Testament writings. Let’s take a look at a portion of the text (Jesus is refered to as ‘Yehoshua’):

“In the year 3671 (in Jewish reckonging, it being ca 90 B.C.) in the days of King Jannaeus, a great misfortune befell Israel, when there arose a certain disreputable man of the tribe of Judah, whose name was Joseph Pandera. He lived at Bethlehem, in Judah. Near his house dwelt a widow and her lovely and chaste daughter named Miriam. Miriam was betrothed to Yohanan, of the royal house of David, a man learned in the Torah and God-fearing. At the close of a certain Sabbath, Joseph Pandera, attractive and like a warrior in appearance, having gazed lustfully upon Miriam, knocked upon the door of her room and betrayed her by pretending that he was her betrothed husband, Yohanan. Even so, she was amazed at this improper conduct and submitted only against her will. Thereafter, when Yohanan came to her, Miriam expressed astonishment at behavior so foreign to his character. It was thus that they both came to know the crime of Joseph Pandera and the terrible mistake on the part of Miriam… Miriam gave birth to a son and named him Yehoshua, after her brother. This name later deteriorated to Yeshu (“Yeshu” is the Jewish “name” for Jesus. It means “May His Name Be Blotted Out”). On the eighth day he was circumcised. When he was old enough the lad was taken by Miriam to the house of study to be instructed in the Jewish tradition. One day Yeshu walked in front of the Sages with his head uncovered, showing shameful disrespect. At this, the discussion arose as to whether this behavior did not truly indicate that Yeshu was an illegitimate child and the son of a niddah. Moreover, the story tells that while the rabbis were discussing the Tractate Nezikin, he gave his own impudent interpretation of the law and in an ensuing debate he held that Moses could not be the greatest of the prophets if he had to receive counsel from Jethro. This led to further inquiry as to the antecedents of Yeshu, and it was discovered through Rabban Shimeon ben Shetah that he was the illegitimate son of Joseph Pandera. Miriam admitted it. After this became known, it was necessary for Yeshu to flee to Upper Galilee. After King Jannaeus, his wife Helene ruled over all Israel. In the Temple was to be found the Foundation Stone on which were engraven the letters of God’s Ineffable Name. Whoever learned the secret of the Name and its use would be able to do whatever he wished. Therefore, the Sages took measures so that no one should gain this knowledge. Lions of brass were bound to two iron pillars at the gate of the place of burnt offerings. Should anyone enter and learn the Name, when he left the lions would roar at him and immediately the valuable secret would be forgotten. Yeshu came and learned the letters of the Name; he wrote them upon the parchment which he placed in an open cut on his thigh and then drew the flesh over the parchment. As he left, the lions roared and he forgot the secret. But when he came to his house he reopened the cut in his flesh with a knife an lifted out the writing. Then he remembered and obtained the use of the letters. He gathered about himself three hundred and ten young men of Israel and accused those who spoke ill of his birth of being people who desired greatness and power for themselves. Yeshu proclaimed, “I am the Messiah; and concerning me Isaiah prophesied and said, ‘Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.’” He quoted other messianic texts, insisting, “David my ancestor prophesied concerning me: ‘The Lord said to me, thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee.’” The insurgents with him replied that if Yeshu was the Messiah he should give them a convincing sign. They therefore, brought to him a lame man, who had never walked. Yeshu spoke over the man the letters of the Ineffable Name, and the leper was healed. Thereupon, they worshipped him as the Messiah, Son of the Highest. When word of these happenings came to Jerusalem, the Sanhedrin decided to bring about the capture of Yeshu. They sent messengers, Annanui and Ahaziah, who, pretending to be his disciples, said that they brought him an invitation from the leaders of Jerusalem to visit them. Yeshu consented on condition the members of the Sanhedrin receive him as a lord. He started out toward Jerusalem and, arriving at Knob, acquired an ass on which he rode into Jerusalem, as a fulfillment of the prophecy of Zechariah. The Sages bound him and led him before Queen Helene, with the accusation: “This man is a sorcerer and entices everyone.” Yeshu replied, “The prophets long ago prophesied my coming: ‘And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse,’ and I am he; but as for them, Scripture says ‘Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly.’” Queen Helene asked the Sages: “What he says, is it in your Torah?” They replied: “It is in our Torah, but it is not applicable to him, for it is in Scripture: ‘And that prophet which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.’ He has not fulfilled the signs and conditions of the Messiah.” Yeshu spoke up: “Madam, I am the Messiah and I revive the dead.” A dead body was brought in; he pronounced the letters of the Ineffable Name and the corpse came to life. The Queen was greatly moved and said: “This is a true sign.” She reprimanded the Sages and sent them humiliated from her presence. Yeshu’s dissident followers increased and there was controversy in Israel. Yeshu went to Upper Galilee. the Sages came before the Queen, complaining that Yeshu practiced sorcery and was leading everyone astray. Therefore she sent Annanui and Ahaziah to fetch him. The found him in Upper Galilee, proclaiming himself the Son of God. When they tried to take him there was a struggle, but Yeshu said to the men of Upper Galilee: “Wage no battle.” He would prove himself by the power which came to him from his Father in heaven. He spoke the Ineffable Name over the birds of clay and they flew into the air. He spoke the same letters over a millstone that had been placed upon the waters. He sat in it and it floated like a boat. When they saw this the people marveled. At the behest of Yeshu, the emissaries departed and reported these wonders to the Queen. She trembled with astonishment. Then the Sages selected a man named Judah Iskarioto and brought him to the Sanctuary where he learned the letters of the Ineffable Name as Yeshu had done. When Yeshu was summoned before the queen, this time there were present also the Sages and Judah Iskarioto. Yeshu said: “It is spoken of me, ‘I will ascend into heaven.’” He lifted his arms like the wings of an eagle and he flew between heaven and earth, to the amazement of everyone…Yeshu was seized. His head was covered with a garment and he was smitten with pomegranate staves; but he could do nothing, for he no longer had the Ineffable Name. Yeshu was taken prisoner to the synagogue of Tiberias, and they bound him to a pillar. To allay his thirst they gave him vinegar to drink. On his head they set a crown of thorns. There was strife and wrangling between the elders and the unrestrained followers of Yeshu, as a result of which the followers escaped with Yeshu to the region of Antioch; there Yeshu remained until the eve of the Passover. Yeshu then resolved to go the Temple to acquire again the secret of the Name. That year the Passover came on a Sabbath day. On the eve of the Passover, Yeshu, accompanied by his disciples, came to Jerusalem riding upon an ass. Many bowed down before him. He entered the Temple with his three hundred and ten followers. One of them, Judah Iskarioto apprised the Sages that Yeshu was to be found in the Temple, that the disciples had taken a vow by the Ten Commandments not to reveal his identity but that he would point him out by bowing to him. So it was done and Yeshu was seized. Asked his name, he replied to the question by several times giving the names Mattai, Nakki, Buni, Netzer, each time with a verse quoted by him and a counter-verse by the Sages. Yeshu was put to death on the sixth hour on the eve of the Passover and of the Sabbath. When they tried to hang him on a tree it broke, for when he had possessed the power he had pronounced by the Ineffable Name that no tree should hold him. He had failed to pronounce the prohibition over the carob-stalk, for it was a plant more than a tree, and on it he was hanged until the hour for afternoon prayer, for it is written in Scripture, “His body shall not remain all night upon the tree.” They buried him outside the city. On the first day of the week his bold followers came to Queen Helene with the report that he who was slain was truly the Messiah and that he was not in his grave; he had ascended to heaven as he prophesied. Diligent search was made and he was not found in the grave where he had been buried. A gardener had taken him from the grave and had brought him into his garden and buried him in the sand over which the waters flowed into the garden. Queen Helene demanded, on threat of a severe penalty, that the body of Yeshu be shown to her within a period of three days. There was a great distress. When the keeper of the garden saw Rabbi Tanhuma walking in the field and lamenting over the ultimatum of the Queen, the gardener related what he had done, in order that Yeshu’s followers should not steal the body and then claim that he had ascended into heaven. The Sages removed the body, tied it to the tail of a horse and transported it to the Queen, with the words, “This is Yeshu who is said to have ascended to heaven.” Realizing that Yeshu was a false prophet who enticed the people and led them astray, she mocked the followers but praised the Sages.

Now in spite of the fact that the ancient Jews who wrote this did their best to argue for another interpretation of the Life of Jesus, they did make several claims here about Jesus. This passage, along with several others from the Toledot tradition, confirms that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, healed the lame, said that Isaiah foretold of his life, was worshipped as God, arrested by the Jews, beaten with rods, given vinegar to drink, wore a crown of thorns, rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, was betrayed by a man named Judah Iskarioto, and had followers who claimed he was resurrected and ascended, leaving an empty tomb!

The Whoville books (as you spoke of) have but one author.

The Bible has over 40 authors, over a couple thousand years of time, and unlike any other religion has fulfilled prophecy, such as Jesus, and the re-forming of the nation of Israel.

Matthew. Mark, Luke, and John all wrote eye witness accounts. You want to discredit these, as you know these are the four we have.

Why is it that the entire free world uses the B.C. and A.D. method of recording time? It is based on the birth and death of Jesus.

You can't just wish Jesus away.

I like how make up the little rules to your debate, then declare yourself the winner based on some cheesy little film.

How about the false prophet Muhammad, did he exist, or do you wish him away also?

When you study this topic, you find that the majority of historians (even the non-Christian) ones believe that Jesus did exist. Historians that call Jesus a myth are a tiny minority.

Not big on quoting wickepedia, but they have a pretty good write up on the matter.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

Below is a paragraph or two on the subject.


The term "Christ myth theory" is an umbrella term that applies to a range of arguments that in one way or another question the authenticity of the existence of Jesus or the essential elements of his life as described in the Christian gospels.[106][107][108][109] Among the variants of the Jesus myth theory, the notion that Jesus never existed has little scholarly support, and although some modern scholars adhere to it, they remain a distinct minority; virtually all scholars involved with historical Jesus research believe that his existence can be established.[5][110][111]

The beginnings of the formal denial of the existence of Jesus can be traced to late 18th-century France, and the works of Constantin-Volney and Charles Dupuis.[112] Although in Dialogue with Trypho, the second century Christian writer Justin Martyr wrote of a discussion about "Christ" with Trypho, most scholars agree that Trypho is a fictional character invented by Justin for his literary apologetic goals.[113][114][115]

In 1835, the methodical writings of David Friedrich Strauss caused an uproar in Europe, and Strauss became known as the founder of Christ myth theory, his approach having been influenced by the epistemological views of Leibniz and Spinoza.[105][116] Strauss did not deny the existence of Jesus, but believed that very few facts could be known about him and characterized the miraculous accounts in the gospels as "mythical".[116][117][118] By the beginning of the 20th century, Arthur Drews, William B. Smith and John M. Robertson became the most recognized proponents of the Christ myth theory.[112][119] In the 20th century, scholars such as professor of German language G. A. Wells, Swedish professor of English language Alvar Ellegård, and philosopher and theologian Robert M. Price produced a number of arguments to support the Christ myth theory.

One element of the criticism presented by Jesus myth theorists are arguments from silence that rely on the lack of first century, non-Christian sources about Jesus.[120][121] An example is that in Embassy to Gaius (c. 40 AD), Philo criticized the brutality of Pontius Pilate but did not name Jesus as an example of Pilate's cruelty.[122] Van Voorst states that in the year 40 Christians were not a significant group and Philo never mentions them at all, so he likely had no need to mention their founder.[122] Evans states that if Christianity had not survived beyond the first century, Jews would not have even bothered to mention it in the Midrash.[123]

Virtually all scholars accept the existence of Jesus, but differ on the accuracy of the details of his life within the biblical narratives.[1][124] The Christ myth theory is still being debated in the 21st century, with Graham Stanton stating in 2002 that the most thorough analysis of the theory had been by G. A. Wells.[125] But Wells' book Did Jesus Exist? was criticized by James D.G. Dunn in his book The Evidence for Jesus.[126] And the debates continue, e.g. Wells changed his views over time and while he used to argue that there was no historical evidence supporting the existence of Jesus, he later modified his position, and in his later book The Jesus Myth accepted the possible existence of Jesus based on historical sources, although still disputing the gospel portrayals of his life.[127][128][129][130] Robert Van Voorst states that among "New Testament scholars and historians the theory of the non-existence of Jesus remains effectively dead as a scholarly question

rangerp.....CARRY ON my brother you make our heavenly father proud!!!!!!!

Quoting Wikipedia now, you are getting desperate.

You keep saying that the bible has fulfilled prophecies, big deal it was written after many of the prophecies were supposed to happen. Maybe I should write a book about the civil war and predict a winner then I could be a prophet like jesus.

Didn't the bible also predict that Tyre would never be rebuilt, last I checked the city of Tyre was a real city in the world today. But I guess it is ok for a prophet such as jesus to get one wrong every now and then.

Where is the proof for the destroyed cities and great floods from the bible? If they really happened such a short time ago there would be ample proof, but guess what other than the bible there is nothing that says these happened. I am not sure how you don't get it, the bible is not adequate proof the the stories in the bible are true. Without other sources to verify they are nothing but fairy tales, which is what they are. But I suppose that talking snakes and donkeys just don't want to talk to people any more right?

I mentioned two prophecies. Isaiah (740 BC) and Psalms were written hundreds of years prior to the birth of Jesus as part of the Torah. Both book prophesied Jesus.

I also mentioned the fulfilled prophecies (over ten of them) when Israel became a nation in 1948. My King James version was translated in 1611, so you can hardly say that these prophecies were written after the events happened.

I checked the Hymnal from the church I attend. There are 463 songs, and all of them about Jesus.

Wow, I do not think any one person other than Jesus has that many songs, all writen and sung around the world, and in so many places and languages, and all to glorify and worship Jesus. That is pretty amazing.

You know who else made a lot of correct prophetic predictions? Ms. Cleo. You remember her, the "call me now for your free reading" lady. Do you know how her predictions came true? She made them as vague as possible so that when something even remotely close to the predictions happened the people foolish enough to trust her would claim is a miracle and sing her praise. Nostradamus did the same thing. There is an old saying, you will always find what you are looking for. The bible is no different, the claimed prophecies are so vague that all it takes is for a fool to look for an event close to what was described then run screaming to the mountain tops praising the sweet baby jesus.

Funny that you didn't address the failed prophecy of Tyre, not really I figured you wouldn't. Your book is full of lies and contradictions that goes along with a book of fiction written by different people. You claim that all the authors prove the bible is true, when in reality it proves it a lie. If the book is inspired by god then there should be only continuity between all the authors, but there isn't, there are many contradictions that show it for what it is, lies believed by fools who are afraid of the natural world and need a god to explain the thunder.

[sarcasm] And wow, christians wrote songs about jesus, he must be real then. [sarcasm]

Luckily today is Sunday, you should pray for guidance and answers because you are sucking wind right now.

Since you seem to like musical trivia, did you know that 92% of the top 10 hit songs since 1959 have been about sex? I didn't do the math but that is a whole lot of songs written and sung all around the world in many different languages all to glorify sex. Amazing.

Ok I was bored. Just looking at the annual top 10 for the past 53 years, 92% would give you 487 songs about sex. That is probably on the low end and is only looking at songs that made the top 10 lists so there are undoubtedly many more. It seems that sex is more popular than jesus, imagine that. No real surprise though everybody loves sex, the number of people who believe in fairy tales is on the decline.

Idacraw

Once again, this is the “POLITICS" forum, not religion. The topics you are trying to discuss are in no way tied to politics. Some of the political issues we argue may have religious off shoots, but this is not one of them. You are trying to argue the point that Jesus never even existed as a man, let alone as the Son Of God.

When we talked evolution and creation, you used the argument of "most scientists believe" line of reasoning. When we look at your "Jesus as a myth theory" we discover that the majority of historians (secular included) find this theory to be false.


folks debate back and forth on Tyre, and have done so for years. Ezekiel prophesied that the city would be destroyed by many nations, with Nebuchadnezzar leading the charge. Nebuchadnezzar did besiege the city, and later on Alexander the Great destroyed the city. Much of what used to be Tyre is now under water in the Mediterranean.

One can study it from both sides. Here is a link arguing it as a fulfilled prophecy -http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=13&article=1790

Here is a link showing it as a failed prophecy -http://www.theskepticalreview.com/tsrmag/992tyre.html

I take the side that the prophecy was fulfilled. We have a first amendment in this country, and no one is forcing you to believe any religion, and you have the ability to have an alternate view.

First, when the christian forum was started on here several of us non-believers objected and requested a separate atheist forum and were denied by admin on the grounds that the entire rest of the forum was for non-christian discussion. Stop hiding.

Second, religion and politics is very closely tied in this country. A perfect example is one you bring up so much, gay marriage. Nowhere in the constitution or bill of rights does it say that marriage is strictly between a man and a woman, yet religious leaders in this country fight to keep it illegal based solely on religious grounds, basically saying that gays aren't human and have no basic rights. Also your republican senators make asinine comments such as real rape doesn't result in pregnancy and science is the devils tool and scientist will burn in hell, in public speeches mind you. So don't try and say that politics and religion are not tied together when you people vote for whoever shares your religious beliefs. Stop hiding.

Third, I posted this video in response to your pathetic propaganda film that you called me out by name in. The film I provided does a good job of showing christianity for the fraud it is and exposes its core lies. In response you called it a failure and said it was easily debunked by any christian with a knowledge of biblical history. So I asked you to back that up and provide evidence to debunk it, and lo and behold you have failed to do so. Like in all other discussions you make grand claims yet fail to back them up with credible evidence or sources, just like here. You have not been able to refute one single claim from the film, why? Because you can't, there is nothing to prove the bible as true, even the bible contradicts itself. You and your religion are a failure and you know it, now you are trying to run away on the grounds that this isn't a political topic. Stop being a coward and back up your claims, debunk the film. You have a lot of people on here that look up to you, you are letting them down with your failure, they depend on you to be their champion and to fight for truth. Stop trying to run away and debunk the film, not sure what has taken you so long seeing as how easy you said it would be.

Idacraw –

Sorry the mud folks have not given you an atheist forum to talk about...……not sure what you atheist talk, but would be fine with me, if you talk it.

Religion and politics may be tied, but your topics have absolutely nothing to do with politics.

As far as gay marriage; the term is a misnomer. There is no such thing, being the actual definition of the word marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Gays can get married, just like the rest of us. A gay dude can find a woman, and have a marriage. That is what a marriage is. It is like saying you want chocolate milk without the chocolate. That would be just regular old white milk, Takes chocolate and milk to make Chocolate milk, just like it takes a man and woman to have a marriage. My stance on homosexuality go beyond just Bible. I also base it on world history and medical and criminal info. In world history, nations that accept homosexuality as natural, soon after fall. Medically, they make up 2.5% of the population and have 64% of the nation's syphilis, they made up 57% of new HIV cases last year, they have the highest suicide rates, they have higher than average drug and alcohol addiction rates. they commit a third of the nations child molestations, and lesbians have the highest rates of domestic abuse. They are a sick and diseased people that destroy the family. the family is the building block of nations, and homosexuality destroyes nations.

As far as your comment “your republican senators make asinine comments such as real rape doesn't result in pregnancy”. That is not what was said by the politician in Missouri, and is a lie, or a twisting of words. By “real rape”, you are referring to forcible rape. If two sixteen year olds are dating, and having sex (with a age of consent being 17), it is not rape. If their birthdays are separated by one day, and the dude turns 17 the day before her, and they have consensual sex, it would still be considered “statutory rape”, thus being a difference in forcible rape and statutory. In the past, there was a study that claimed that the majority (not all) of these forcible rapes do not result in pregnancy. Latter on, it was shown that this study had some flaws. The senator had quoted this study. Statistically, he was correct in that very few rapes result in pregnancy, and rape is generally not the reason for abortion.

Your quote “The film I provided does a good job of showing Christianity for the fraud it is and exposes its core lies. In response you called it a failure and said it was easily debunked by any Christian with a knowledge of biblical history. So I asked you to back that up and provide evidence to debunk it, and lo and behold you have failed to do so. Like in all other discussions you make grand claims yet fail to back them up with credible evidence or sources, just like here. You have not been able to refute one single claim from the film, why”

Not sure if you ever debated a topic in college or high school, but this aint exactly how it works. You do not get to declare yourself the winner. If you go back and read, I quoted historical facts on both sides of the argument, I showed history outside of the Bible, and I even posted links from the opposite side of the argument. Declaring yourself the winner, and declaring my points invalid is a bit childish. The winner of this debate will be decided by those that read it, and make up their minds based on the material given. I do not need to know the minds of other people. I still stand by my belief that the film was amateurish, hokey, and easy to debunk. If you feel that it is true, and that you won the debate, then that is your prerogative. I am not the thought police.

Your quote “ You have a lot of people on here that look up to you, you are letting them down with your failure”

If people are looking up to me, then they are looking in the wrong direction. I am not worthy to look up to. I do know one that is worthy to look up to, and he never fails. I fail often, and will continue to do so.