Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Meet God's Fraud Squad

PATRICK WHITE

From Thursday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 9:33 AM EDT 04/10/07

When they saw their flocks being fleeced and dispirited, a priest and a minister took action. Now they're spreading the word on how to spot swindlers who see religious groups as easy prey ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Bill Needle from Canada writes: All religion is fraud.
  2. mini wheat from Toronto Area, Canada writes: Good article. Now, if only they could be caught and actually see jail time in Canada. In the US, 350 year sentences.
  3. Aumharan G from Canada writes: Bill Needle from Canada writes: All religion is fraud.

    Amen to that
  4. Dave a Conservative from Ottawa, Canada writes: All atheists are a fraud.
  5. Richard Head from Dildo, NFLD, Canada writes: Dave a Conservative. Good comeback! Absolutely brilliant! So let me get this straight, those of us who don't succumb to these silly little cults in which there has been absolutely no underlying proof in their teachings are a fraud. Riiiiiiight. I'm afraid that in this instance the proof is in the pudding. Those individuals who associate themselves with cults are obviously easy prey for any other fraud.
  6. Boomer AB from Canada writes: Like most lefties Bill, Richard, et al believe in diversity of thought, provided you agree with them. Nothing says tolerance and acceptance like ' if you don't agree with me you are a misguided retard'.
  7. Robert Maher from Canada writes: Both believers and non-believers are frauds. Only agnostics are truly perceptive, and sometimes I doubt that too.
  8. Bonnie Lass from Canada writes: (rolling my eyes at the previous comments)...come on you guys. Do we HAVE to resort to bashing each other's faith or lack thereof? The point of the story is that certain groups are being targeted for scams, and that 2 men have decided to do something about it. I say good for them!
  9. Green Canada from Edmonton, Canada writes: Actually Boomer the statement that 'all religions are fraud' is based in reason and analytical thought, whereas 'all atheists are frauds' is an unreasoned retort. never let facts get in the way of ideology or faith though hey.
  10. Alexander The Great from Canada writes: I think the frauds in this case are the one's that don't truly believe. The corner stone of most religions in Love...Godly love...and the one that decides to steal form innocent people is an atheist...one without Godly love
  11. Michael Bartlett from Ottawa, writes: These men are doing admirable work, I hope that they will stress in their presentaations that people who keep quiet in the desparate hope to get their money back are permitting the fraud to continue. Any chance of repayment will only come from the perpetrators bilking further victims. Silence in this situation is tacit complicity.
  12. fred robster from Canada writes: There's an easy way to tell if a person is a religious fraud:

    1) they tell you how religious they are;
    2) they want to take your money - whether for investment or for 'God's works';
    3) 100% certainty they're a fraud if they're doing it on television.

    'A fool and his money...'
  13. Boomer AB from Canada writes: Don't confuse facts with opinion Green. As I stated on the blog yesterday, Secular Humanists hold to beliefs every bit as dogmatic as anything you will find in any 'holy book'. Fact is something you can prove. I can't prove God exists; you can't prove he doesn't. Yet you state my belief is opinion and yours is fact. Seems like a stalemate to me.
  14. Interested Observer from Vancouver, Canada writes: I lay awake at night and wonder if there is a DOG - dyslexic agnostic
  15. Dave a Conservative from Ottawa, Canada writes: Glad to see I started some discussion :)

    Next:

    Dion is a fraud!
  16. Dave a Conservative from Ottawa, Canada writes: Back to the article:

    I'm glad to see these guys are doing something about the fraudsters who ply on those who are most susceptible (ie. seniors).
  17. F Rioux from Canada writes: I dont want to take on you, I respect your opinion and religious belief but thats not how it work. Pragmatism thinking accept what can be proved or demonstrated for true, others phenomenon can be called false or uncertain. If we accept what have not been proved for thuth then we open the door to all kind nonsense, like taking for thuth that the Santa-Claus or aliens exist.
  18. The Iconoclast from Canada writes: Pat Robertson, GWB, Ted Haggard are all very religious people that truly show the real meaning of Godly love.
  19. Thumb Sucker from Toronto, Canada writes: Whether it this or the Nigerian 419 scams, these people deserve to have their money taken. It is only the stupid and greedy who fall for these tricks.
  20. Dave a Conservative from Ottawa, Canada writes: Next:

    All G&M posters are frauds :-)

    (due to most be politically paid party hacks!)
  21. Aumharan G from Canada writes: Dave a Conservative from Ottawa, Canada writes: Next:

    All G&M posters are frauds :-)

    (due to most be politically paid party hacks!)

    Including yourself...your handle just says it all. Yes I know all us non-believers are going to rot in hell, be cursed, be responsible for gods wrath on earth i.e. terrorism, earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, and famine...etc
  22. Lung Hacker from Canada writes: I'm pretty sure both sides have made themselves look ignorant and close-minded in this discussion. Congrats, everyone!
  23. Jonathan B from Waterloo, Canada writes: People don't have much of a sense of humour these days, do they?
  24. Mia Pinion from Toronto, Canada writes: There are frauds everywhere, in all races, religions, cultures, political groups, economic classes, education levels... etc...

    However the ones that prey on those who trust them are the worst scoundrels.
    In religious circles- these monsters use God as a tool to prosper themselves, using religious guilt tactics to sway the prey into their control.

    THINK FOR YOURSELF- and think once more before trusting anyone that says 'trust me!!' ...

    But on the flip side- there are sincere people everywhere, in all races, religions, cultures, political groups, economic classes, education levels... and on and on.

    We must have wisdom to tell the difference.
  25. Alan Wong from Canada writes: Man, most of you anti-religious types gotta relax. You're getting as bad as those religious fanatics you so decry. What, did some priest or minister beat you up and take your lunch money as a kid?

    'Athiesm' is a lot like thiesm - That is, taking a stand on the 'god exists' issue takes Faith; If you have a REAL logical or mathematical proof that god does not exist (or does), please feel free to best some of the greatest thinkers of all time and show us it. You want to only follow logic, be an agnostic. Otherwise you're like the rest of us, yelling at people on a random forum because you're having a bad day at work.

    Keep an open mind, stop hating and look for the sliver lining - You'll feel better for it.
  26. Bernard B from Canada writes: I have found tight religious groups to be rife with not just fraud, but worse yet the multi-level marketing with is just a legalized-ponzi scheme. I was a young 20-something from a working class family (re: not too familiar with investments of any sort) when I was called by an Amway member of our group. A lot of it sounded too good to be true and the general Amway meeting in the city was full of religious folk who were more clueless than I was. Despite my lack of business sense I was rather good at math and it didn't add up. The person who originally called me was pretty ticked off when i told her I wasn't interested and asked that if I knew anybody with 'Ambition' to contact her. Without commenting too much on religion, much of local religious culture attributes being a Christian with being trustworthy and I think that is where the problem occurs. The moral of this: Be more cynical. I am actual quite grateful for this experience. I also understand the reluctance to say anything. The Amway members years on were no better off (except having 2 years worth of toilet paper in the house) but still just waiting for the break through and constantly trying to get people to join under them.
  27. Bernard B from Canada writes: Alan Wong, why I don't want to be a part of an off-topic rant, you miss the point. Atheism says 'I don't believe in God'. We have nothing to prove. Atheism technically means 'without theism' or 'without theistic belief'. The absence of something is not a thing unto itself. I do agree that that some atheists often acquire the same traits as religious folk who have to make themselves heard (and some for good reason in support of secular policy. Note: not anti-religious policy) , but for the most part we often have just left it behind and moved on. I the one feel better not thinking that a loving god wants to subject me to terrible pain.
  28. Mark H from Columbus, IN, United States writes: Alan Wong - you made the same comment, almost verbatim, that I've made on here several times.

    No one listens....be prepared for a bunch of hate from the 'We hate God' crowd.
  29. Bernard B from Canada writes: Sorry for the typos in my last post; in the middle of a few things.
  30. Harvey Mushman from cambridge, Canada writes: 'Religious groups as easy prey'...lol...whod'a thunk it eh?
  31. Johnathyn Winters from Canada writes: Some religious groups are easy prey not all ... there are alot of groups of believers who are smart, savy and creative. They are doing good and are making a significant and positive impact on the lives of many people in canada.
    Question is what are you doing to make other peoples lives more significant and better than when you first met them ... other than saying hi and smiling.
  32. stand up mimi from Canada writes: Lee Turner: Thanks for a perfect example of cynicism. The article actually states that the priest and minister are paid by the BC Securities Commission, who welcome their work, and are not funded by the 'donations of the faithful.'
  33. Lee Turner from Regent Park, Canada writes: Well, I'm starting a rapture messenger service. I'll be one of the 'left behind', as I am decidely not an evangelical christian. For the low low price of 5.99/message, I'll deliver your farewell messages to all the important yet unsaved people in your life. But act now! You never know when the end times will be upon us. Let me know if anyone is interested.

    I'm anti-religious. There, I said it. Religion is a man-made instutition and has nothing to do with faith or belief. I'm afraid these two are just interested in making sure others don't hone in on their lucrative racket. How do these two guys make their money? From the donations of the faithful, right? How different is this than the conmen?

    As to the existence question. First define what 'God' is, and what it means. I think you'll find too many definitions. As a panthiestic Taoist, I beleive in the 'God' of Spinoza and Einstein, that the entire Universe and everything in it (yes, us too) are one 'divine' or perfect entity. Thats it. No personal god, no single creator diety.
  34. Dave a Conservative from Ottawa, Canada writes: Auhamaram - lighten up! To coin the phrase - I'm playing the devil's advocate on this.

    As 'Jonathan B from Waterloo, Canada writes: People don't have much of a sense of humour these days, do they?' - exactly my thought. As for my nick, I'm a progressive conservative (note small c).

    Really, if people are ticked off by what's posted on a G&M board it's no wonder that people are eager for a fight over anything.
  35. stand up mimi from Canada writes: Bernard B from Canada writes: 'Without commenting too much on religion, much of local religious culture attributes being a Christian with being trustworthy and I think that is where the problem occurs.'

    Agreed. In many churches it is easy to assume that all fellow members of the congregation are trustworthy, simply because most are. I think it is also easier today to cheat churchgoers than it was 30 years ago because of the large size of many modern churches. In these congregations, people don't necessarily know each other as well as they would in a small church in a smaller community. People tend to move from church to church as well (looking for that 'perfect' community, perhaps?) so it's not unusual to have a lot of new people in one's congregation. Not that that's a bad thing - just that it's harder to really know people well.

    I don't think it's healthy to be cynical, though. I would say be skeptical and wary. And don't be greedy. Deals that seem too good to be true always are.
  36. Steve Not an Alberta Redneck from Calgary, Canada writes: Its funny but whenever the religious right wing wants to spout off, they use the term 'Secular Humanists'. Like a lot of their terminology, its created in well funded think tanks. Recently the arguement was about the meaning of 'cut and run' when any intelligent person knows it was just another RW attempt to obscure their indefensible positions with jargon that has an emotional component to it. It has no meaning and is not derived from anything specific. I can imagine they have a test group hitched up to electrodes while they try these phrases on them. I've a lot of years under my belt and I've never encountered a 'Secular Humanist'. I have however, encountered many intelligent people who prefer to have evidence before they believe something to be true. They like and support the scientific method and generally prove to be difficult to take by the army of swindlers, con artists, marketers and fundementalist preachers out there. This is why this crew hates them so much. In contrast, the types who I have encountered who have taken up christian fundementalism, generally were also the prime targets for these other groups. They base their decisions on who is the smoothest talker (and often best looking) and usually get very defensive when the facts contradict what they have been conned into doing. Its a sad indictment of our society and its educational standards. Of course, John Tory believes the purpose of our educational system is to develop more of these people. Good Conservative voters, I suppose!
  37. Boomer AB from Canada writes: Strike a nerve did I Steve. Me thinks thou dost protest too much.
  38. Lee Turner from Regent Park, Canada writes: Yeah, I'm something of a cynic. I question everything I am told from so-called authorities. Don't you? Why not? How can you know what 'Truth' is if you don't contemplate the meaning and decide for yourself? Hey, If you want to believe that some old man telling you what 'god' is, and directly experiencing 'divinity' are the same thing... well good luck with that. Now, I am not saying I have directly experienced 'divinity' but I certainly know that someone telling me a thing is so, does not mean it is. We can ramdomly look at passages from the bible, and come up with many meanings. Why are we supposed to blindly trust another's interpretation instead of discovering the meaning ourselves, because we are told (by other men, no less) that some know the way or the meaning, and anyone who does not follow this way is wrong? I can go get ordained on the internet in a few minutes, does that instantly make my opinions on religion truth?

    So, tell me, how did these clergymen make a living at being clergymen prior to being paid by the BC Securities Commission?
  39. The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: Faith is like a tiny bit of insanity.
    To believe some of the things that people believe you have to deny the truth all around you.
    People who are easy to give up at a certain point, shut down their powers of reasoning and capitulate to a priest, minister or other religious person are the reason con artists go after them. It's why they're called sheep.
    Heaven is a state of mind.
  40. Robert Lepage from Canada writes: Boomer,

    The onus of providing evidence for the existence of God lies on you. Atheist state there is no god, Agnostics state we cannot know there is a god. In either case, you are the one who claims that God exists, therefore please prove it. Personally, I say that God may or may not exist, so I don't have to do anything related to proving or disproving him. The ball is in your court.

    Anyways, here's a little fun:

    Consider the premise that God is all powerful. Then we can ask the questions:
    If God is all powerful, can he create a rock so heavy that even he cannot lift it?

    A nice contradiction which highlights the impossibility of the existence of God given the premise: he cannot be all powerful. Since the definition of God is that he is all powerful, we have thus demonstrate that he cannot be all powerful. Ergo, he is not all powerful and thus not God by our definition.

    I suppose you support intelligent design as well?
  41. The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: The first game of baseball is recorded in the bible...
    In the Beginning...
    get it, in the big inning.
    Every one a gem.
  42. j boland from United States writes: Steve says 'I've a lot of years under my belt and I've never encountered a 'Secular Humanist'. I have however, encountered many intelligent people who prefer to have evidence before they believe something to be true.'

    Would that kind of belief be something like 'there was once absolutely nothing and then that nothing acted upon itself to produce the universe as we know it?' Something like that? Thought so.
  43. Bernard B from Canada writes: Hi 'stand up mimi', I guess that's what I meant. I think I subconsciously took the 'be more cynical' from Bill Maher.
  44. Boomer AB from Canada writes: Robert Lepage-you can't prove he doesn't exist, nor I that he does. If he doesn't exist prove it. And that Jean Chretain 'The proof is the proof, therefore it is proven' gobbledeegook ain't gonna cut it. I have no onus to prove it to you, nor you to me. Don't be so full of yourself, and get off your high horse. I thought you guys were the 'every thing is relative' crowd.
  45. Boomer AB from Canada writes: Oh, and if you mean do I think we are all here from some weird stroke of luck, no I don't.
  46. John Sledzi from Toronto, Canada writes: Judging by these commentaires atheism seems to be a guy thing - having an explanation for everything that is. Instead of baby Mozart music the male of the species should have to listen to Ah Sweet Mystery of Life in his cradle.
  47. j boland from United States writes: Robert says 'A nice contradiction which highlights the impossibility of the existence of God given the premise: he cannot be all powerful. Since the definition of God is that he is all powerful, we have thus demonstrate that he cannot be all powerful. Ergo, he is not all powerful and thus not God by our definition.'

    This little fun is cute but meaningless and of course demonstrates only that the mind is a terrible thing to waste. Robert has a long way to go if he really considers this silliness to be thinking.

    An all powerful being by definition cannot create something that is more powerful than all powerful. God would have then created a new 'god' to take over the title. The false premise of the proposition wipes out the ergo. Ergo, Robert, strike three and you're out! Next batter up.
  48. The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: Luck is relative.
  49. The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: Sledzi
    It's because women don't write on these blogs very often. The blogs are a guy thing.
    It could be true, however, that women are more superstitious than guys, Sylvia Brown has more female followers than male.
  50. Cynical libertarian from Canada writes: Religion is based on fraud and deception in order to control people.

    Lets hope these two guys don't dig too deep!
  51. Boomer AB from Canada writes: Libertarian-sounds like a good definition for socialsim. It's a religion too, only they won't admit it.
  52. Gill Bates from Wroxton SK, Canada writes: An average day at the office. Just three or four posts and the discussion sinks to the Joe Six Pack level.

    Religious fraudsters are no better or worse than other fraudsters. All fraudsters pick a target audience with a weakness they can exploit. The common factor in all frauds is creating a trust with your victim.

    All religion is nonsense and no, I don't need to prove god doesn't exist. That's a logical absurdity which many people can't grasp.
  53. The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: J Boland, do we Canadians go into your country and make pitiful debate suggestions that there is no god?
    Americans are so messed up by their own government and media it's a wonder they can even function as regular humans anymore.
    Religion is a tool to subjugate the meek.
    He's got twenty million dollars int his heavenly bank account....
    There's a big difference between kneeling down and bending over.
  54. Boomer AB from Canada writes: Bill-you don't need to 'cause you can't. I always get a kick out of people that say to me 'prove that God exists'. When I tell them I can't, but they can't prove that he doesn't, they always retort 'I don't have to'. Their intellectual dishonesty is always lost on them.
  55. Boomer AB from Canada writes: Bubble you must living in that same bubble Jack Layton is. Given how FUBARed TO is I wouldn't be chunkin' rocks.
  56. The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: Albertans and Americans, like two peas in a pod
    or bookends.
  57. j boland from United States writes: Given the state of human knowledge, the decision of rational thinking people as to origins is to come down on the theism side. The alternate is to reject the obvious for a variety of unrelated reasons, often to support a preferred life view that is more convenient for one's life style, or, as is often the case, to reject the idea of a God because they find their own fathers to be despicable. The so-called agnostic person tends to be one who also has trouble in chosing between chocolate and vanilla ice cream or is so unsure of himself that he takes no positions of substance on anything.
  58. Boomer AB from Canada writes: And TO is Garden of Eden unto itself. I had to laugh at Mayor Miller getting a council, mostly staffed by lefty do-gooders, to tell him if the city is using it's money wisely. And bets that they tell him increase social spending.
  59. Confucious Smith from Canada writes: The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: The first game of baseball is recorded in the bible...
    In the Beginning...
    get it, in the big inning.
    Every one a gem.

    Your mother must be so proud of you.
  60. Confucious Smith from Canada writes: Robert Lepage from Canada writes: '...Consider the premise that God is all powerful. Then we can ask the questions: If God is all powerful, can he create a rock so heavy that even he cannot lift it?...'

    Yea, you're quite a thinking kind of guy.
  61. The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: J Boland
    I made a decision that there is no god
    My mom would be angry if she knew my point of view.

    Confusions, you didn't like my joke?
    Hail mary full of grace
    Hit the devil in the face!
    I guess God's pretty comfy these days with the state of the world? I'm assuming you guys are praying all the time, s'up?
  62. The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: I believe in God, can't be proven
    I believe in Aliens can't be proven
    I believe in politicians, they exist but their honesty can never be proven
    I believe I can leave my physical body at night and enter other peoples bodies, prove I can't.

    And can someone tell me which religion I should join, I've been thinking either Catholic or Anglican and I don't know which one would provide me with the best contacts.
  63. Gill Bates from Wroxton SK, Canada writes: 'Bill-you don't need to 'cause you can't. I always get a kick out of people that say to me 'prove that God exists'. When I tell them I can't, but they can't prove that he doesn't, they always retort 'I don't have to'. Their intellectual dishonesty is always lost on them'

    You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You can't prove a negative, that is logically impossible. However, that doesn't faze you since you have no grasp of logic, so any discussion with you is futile.
  64. Cyrus Ofpersia from Canada writes: Gad the fundamentalism of people. You can tell a religious bigot--whether theistic, atheistic, or agnostic--by the blind contempt he levels at anybody who disagrees with him. We see plenty of that dull, close minded stuff on these boards.

    The worst, of course, are among those who believe themselves to be the most tolerant and open minded. The type has become a cliche these days.

    Clearly, very intelligent people, most of them good and thoughtful people, live among all three groups--theists, atheists, and agnostics.

    The person most singularly responsible for the abolishment of the evil called slavery was William Wilberforce, a brilliant English parliamentarian. He pursued that worthy goal very self-consciously in the name of the Christian god. That apparently makes him a fraud according to some of the worthies here.
  65. Michael Peters from Toronto, Canada writes: Where did my post on Benny Hinn and the Catholic church go? Can some one tell my what offended them so?
  66. Boomer AB from Canada writes: Nor can you Bill-hence it's intellectualy dishonest to ask someone else to prove a negative and give them grief because they can't. That's why the argument always ends with "I don't have to". Funny, that's the same line my 3 year old uses. You can always tell when a lefty isn't winning an argument; they start getting snotty and stamping their feet.
  67. Michael Peters from Toronto, Canada writes: Cyrus Ofpersia - with regards to God and slavery - which "Christian god (sic)" would that be; the Old Testament God, or the New Testament God? Funny that this God, who is supposedly the same , the "alpha and omega" has a different opinion on slavery as the centuries wore on...
  68. The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: God died a long time ago
    Bertram Russell proved it mathematically when he was trying to prove gods existence.
    Religion is a good thing for most people, reality does have it's drawbacks and it's a more difficult life to live when you don't have the assuredness of going to some existential place but it fits for people who are rational.
  69. stand up mimi from Canada writes: Lee Turner - I think it's mostly an issue of semantics. To me, someone who questions what they are told is a skeptic, not a cynic. Skepticism is healthy (yes, even in Christian circles). One who assumes everyone is a liar and a cheat is a cynic, and there is no more critical thought involved in that than there is in believing everything you're told.
  70. Robert Lepage from Canada writes: Boomer:
    "That's why the argument always ends with "I don't have to". Funny, that's the same line my 3 year old uses"

    Oddly enough, it's also the same line you used...

    boland:
    "Robert has a long way to go if he really considers this silliness to be thinking. "

    j boland, I would love to agree with you, but there is a slight problem you see, and that is you have no concept of infinity (or anything related to theology, as is apparent in your discussions). I typically reserve my actual arguments to people who can understand them, but so far, this is beyond your realm of comprehension.

    Atleast I'm not a seatwarmer.
  71. Cyrus Ofpersia from Canada writes: Michael Peters, you raise a good point. In Wilberforce's case, he understood that his commitment to the person you call the New Testament God necessitated his commitment to social justice.

    As to God's own views changing over time, the Bible makes no apology for that, nor does it pretend to be the rigidly flawless work some conservative Christians insist it must be. (For example, it says the ratio pi equals 3.) It does present a developmental story of increasing social justice and personal responsiblity as it goes along.
  72. Boomer AB from Canada writes: And how exactly does one go about proving God's existance or non-existance mathematically Bubble. Sounds kind of like "the proof is the proof, so it is proven" thing again. Once again, you can't prove He doesn't; I can't prove He prove he does.
  73. Cyrus Ofpersia from Canada writes: Oh my goodness Bubble, please give us the Russell reference. Actually, one of the most disappointing essays I ever read was Russell's "Why I Am Not a Christian." Weak, weak, weak.

    I'd love to see the mathematical proofs for the non existence of God. I wonder if they would be recognizably different from those for the non-existence of unicorns.

    Russell, and his pal Whitehead--who was a Christian--offered no such proofs in the Principia Mathematica, so where did you find Russell's work on the subject?
  74. Michael Peters from Toronto, Canada writes: Cyrus Ofpersia - Indeed, God DOES change His mind, despite the fact that there are several verses in the Bible that claim that God does not: Malachi 3:6, James 1:17, Numbers 23:19. So, which is it?

    Anyone who knows anything about the Bible knows that it is a compilation of writings, written by MEN, put together LONG after various manuscripts were written. The fact that there are so many who beleive that this book is the infalible word of God links directly into this article - people so willing to belive the Bible as fact certainly seem to be more at risk to believe ANYTHING.
  75. The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: Which God are you referring to?
  76. j boland from United States writes: Robert, oh, did you put out an argument? The editors must have zapped it. Try again.
  77. Cyrus Ofpersia from Canada writes: Actually, Michael, the Bible has incomparably the best manuscript support of any ancient document. We have papyrus fragments dating from a little over a century after the events recorded in the New Testament, and thousands of manuscripts that agree in essentials across a broad spectrum of time and geography.

    The Dead Sea Scrolls proved beyond doubt that the Hebrew and Aramaic portions of the Old Testament as we have them now did not change over centuries. This was because the professional scribes were so intent on making sure they got each copy right.

    There are plenty of resources on the subject.

    As to the verses you mention, two have to do with God's unchanging character, and one with his changing his mind--which I did not say the Bible ever denies. But even that one (Numbers) refers only to him keeping his promises.
  78. The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: Cyrus, so the God of the Christian bible is the true King of Kings?
    The one they call Jehovah in Psalms 83:18 of the king James version.
    The bible is at best a beautiful allegory, not to be taken literally.
    The existence of an existential being is a long way from what the bible is.
  79. Cyrus Ofpersia from Canada writes: Sorry Bubble, I don't follow your reasoning. (By the way, there is no such word as "Jehovah". It was created by using the consonants of YHWH, JHWH, and the vowells of adonai.)

    But again, except for you assertion that the Bible is an allegory, I don't follow your point.

    In any event folks, it's supper time where I am.

    Best, to all.
  80. The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: Everyone get your bibles out, it's psalms 83:18
    It names Jehovah. Which is a translation in the King James version of the older name of god Yahweh. I believe Yahweh is Greek.
    Not sure about cyrus's last post but the exit was interesting.
  81. Cyrus Ofpersia from Canada writes: OK, potatoes are in the microwave.

    Bubble, please make your point clear. Who cares what Psalm 83:18 says?

    Yahweh is the approximate sound you get when you try to say JHWH. It is not Greek but Hebrew, and is closely related to the Hebrew verb "to be."

    Anyway, we're now a long way from the two pastors in BC.
  82. The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: If religious people weren't so sure of themselves trying to preach to me over the years I wouldn't be as good at debating them I guess.
    They never stay and defend they run looking for more weak souls to bring into the flock.
    Catholic, Protestant, Anglican, Islam, Buddhist, fundamentalist christian, mormons, hutterites, Jews, Russian Orthodox, Muslim, KKK, Spanish inquisitions, pogroms, genocide, canuckistan, libzbollah, It's been quite a couple of weeks for religion.
    The social pool just keeps getting dirtier.
    When it comes to religion you can't be right and you can't be wrong.
  83. The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: My question actually was which God were you referring to in a previous discussion of Bertram Russel?
    There are many gods.
  84. j boland from United States writes: I just took a few minutes to read Russell's "Why I am not a Christian" and I would agree that it is surprisingly weak for one so esteemed for his atheistic tendencies. Not much meat in it.

    Interestingly, I found the most obvious of his arguments to be the one he did not articulate, but it was there, in every line, in every assertion, in every conclusion, namely, "I, Bertrand Russell, am far more intelligent than any of you, and certainly more so than of this 'god' and this 'christ' you hold so dear, and thus take heed that in my proclamation is to be found the truth." It is the classic self adoration of the virulently anti-religious.
  85. The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: Well J Boland Russell couldn't be as smart as you.
    You only took a few minutes to cover a lifetime of religion and mathematics.
    I could have faith in you.
    I am not virulent, I am calmly debating and eating chilli. I have to go soon to a recording studio so wait until I'm gone so you don't have to debate anymore just insult.
  86. Michael Peters from Toronto, Canada writes: Cyrus Ofpersia - I have never denied the the Bible is a great historic work. As you state, there is lots of support for events in the Bible. It is a great story book, no doubt. Leviticus 21:9 says "And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire." Now, since "The Dead Sea Scrolls proved beyond doubt that the Hebrew and Aramaic portions of the Old Testament as we have them now did not change over centuries. This was because the professional scribes were so intent on making sure they got each copy right." - we can be absolutely sure that this indeed one of God's commands, right? We can only hope this one that He has since changed His mind on...
  87. F Rioux from Canada writes: I have a better challenge for you.

    Try to prove an invisible and undetectable Flying Spaghetti Monster, which created the entire universe "after drinking heavily" dont exist.

    Or that giant fuschia moskito that fligh at light speed dont exist.

    Or humm, try to contredict that with the power of my mind I can teleport. I could but I dont do it.

    Or could go on, you cant prove that something dont exist, but if you want to claim that haven or others dogma are real, its on your shoulder that the burden of the proof is.

    Sorry, I need more than a book relating what a prophet may have say that are not verifiable so that I can beleive in those things.

    Why you want an hierarchical and professional group that try to push those idea in church? Why, its needed? Why could it not be just a spirital group that discuss life with no dogma attached if you so need some spirituality.

    I wish someone could convince me someday why religion is needed.
  88. John L. Murlowe from Colony of Vancouver Island, Canada writes: F Rioux from Canada writes:
    I wish someone could convince me someday why religion is needed.
    ----------------------------------------------------------

    It is not religion that is needed, it is God. They are not the same.
  89. Nathan Schroeder from Edmonton, Canada writes: In response to the question "Can god make a rock so big he cannot lift it?" I would recommend checking out this article.
    http://www.gotquestions.org/God-rock-heavy-lift.html
  90. Dave Hasler from Edmonton, Canada writes: Is there a god?? Sure there is and I'm surprised all you great thinkers out there missed it.

    It's so simple really ................. lots of evidence is available.

    Proof there is a god for example: what do many people say for exclaimation - "oh god", what do many people say when they really get into deep water - "god help me" and finally, what are we all going to say when the atheists finally see the err of their beliefs and move toward enlightenment - "thank god". OK atheists, have fun disproving this one.
  91. Gill Bates from Wroxton SK, Canada writes: "Nor can you Bill-hence it's intellectualy dishonest to ask someone else to prove a negative and give them grief because they can't. That's why the argument always ends with "I don't have to". Funny, that's the same line my 3 year old uses. You can always tell when a lefty isn't winning an argument; they start getting snotty and stamping their feet. "

    What part of "you don't know what you're talking about" don't you understand? Again, you have no grasp of logic whatever. When someone like you is losing an argument you inject your three year old. I'm sure you can't resist replying with more irrelevant nonsense. As for me, you're not worth the effort since nothing can penetrate your shield of ignorance.
  92. snow lander from Edmonton, Canada writes: i have a friend who is an agnostic insomniac with dylexia. He stays up all night wondering if there is such thing as dog.

    :P
  93. Luke P from Vancouver, Canada writes: Boomer AB:

    If you posit that one cannot prove God does not exist, then you must also posit that one cannot prove all other gods (Thor, Vishnu, Amaterasu, Quetzalcoatl, etc.) similarly do not exist. Therefore, the probability of any god existing is exactly equal to the probability of any other god existing (i.e. proving their existence or non-existence is equally unlikely/impossible).

    Personally, I've chosen to cast them all as equally unlikely (infinitesimally so), and have rejected the lot of them. I suppose people who believe in one or the other have access to information I don't :(

    BTW, that has an interesting consequence for agnostics - it's not that you can't know God exists, it's that you can't know which, if any, god exists.
  94. F/A josquin from van, Canada writes: Bonnie lass who writes "Do we HAVE to resort to bashing each other's faith or lack thereof? The point of the story is that certain groups are being targeted for scams,"

    That's right, cause the crooks know they will believe anything. They already proved that, havent' they.

    Anyone willing to go along with religious dogma and god-belief is, at best, a little gullible and at worst, a little----um---stupid.
  95. Winston Churchill from London, Canada writes: Read this one, and then read the article about psychopathic boyfriends. Ten to one that just about all of those who give every belief system a bad name, could be safely placed in the category of 'predators who could seriously score with dumb girls if they wanted to'. Some take advantage of the religious. Some become Bishops. Others rise to high office in the police forces of totalitarian states. The least dangerous variety mostly just want to score. I agree with the comment above: the only reasoned belief is agnosticism -- failure to assume a dogmatic position, one way or the other, on a position you can't establish logically, for whatever reason. I think the religious should be OK with this. Religion, after all, is rooted in faith, not knowledge. Atheists similarly can't KNOW anything. How can you logically disprove somebody else's experience, especially when you don't share it, or have any knowledge of it?
  96. stand up mimi from Canada writes: The Bubble from Toronto, Canada writes: "If religious people weren't so sure of themselves trying to preach to me over the years I wouldn't be as good at debating them I guess."

    You're not that good at debating them, from what I've seen. Sorry, just sayin'.
  97. Cyrus Ofpersia from Canada writes: Michael Peters, that command--hideous as it is--pertained to the community that followed it, not to the world at large. And in practice, the research indicates that the ancient Israelites did not go the whole nine yards with these kinds of rules. Sort of like judges nowadays not squeezing the criminal code dry with every sentencing.

    But, as for God having a bad day when he made that decree, and softening up on things later, I suppose the standard argument is that harsh codes were decreed for the early days of the ancient community in order for it to secure its identity as uniquely monotheistic in contrast to the polytheistic groups around it.

    As the Biblical story develops, however, the code becomes less legalistic and more relational.

    Again, the Bible states that God does change his mind. Moses, for example, convinced God to spare the people when they messed up. The old translation reads, "And the Lord repented of the evil he was going to do," or something close to that. The scribes, if they were up to no good, could have edited that out, but it's in.
  98. David Stanley from montreal, Canada writes: Hagee more than a million dollar salary how is this not fleecing the sheep

    benny hen even worse

    these christians are not christians they are fakes
  99. William Pugsley from Nonsan, Korea, Rep. of writes: If the targeted victims hadn't been affiliated to a religion, the story would read "People victims of fraud" -- non church goers are just people. Atheists and agnostics can be naive and innocent, too. As for the swindlers, some previous comments allude to the idea that they are less cunning, preying on easy targets. How true this is, considering the self describing "sheep" of the church. It's easier to catch a hundred sheep than a hundred cats. But some good came of this crime -- now the Abbotsford pastor can't take his missionary colonialism to Africa which could well do without the church's disastrous effect.
  100. Tu blairy from Richmond, Canada writes: to Richard Head from Dildo, NFLD, Canada: I think you mean, 'the proof of the pudding is in the eating." What does "the proof is in the pudding" mean? There cannot be a God: I haven't found any traces of her in the pudding... I love misquotes.
  101. Vancouver-kingsway Antics-Shy Voter from Canada writes: Desiderata

    " ... Exercise caution in your business affairs; for the world is full of trickery. But let his not blind you to what virtue there is; many persons strive for high ideals; and everywhere life is full of heroism.
    ...
    Therefor