Snarky? Who are you calling Snarky? I suppose you

are only here to read about Donald Rumsfeld. Hasn't

it occured to you that religion is the driving force

behind these a---oles? This whole terorrism and war

thing ultimately comes down to Religion, Israel and

Jesus, and of course Muhammed who proclaimed that Jesus

misled the people. Take away Moses, Jesus, Muhammed, and

we would only have the weather to discuss.

The best thing to come out of this asinine article which so confidently debunks one pseudohistory for 'twisting' another is the wonderful collection of funny letters by non-Christians (Christianity being the white man's voodoo, except in cases where it's black, red, yellow, etc.) blowing a loud Bronx cheer at the imaginary messiah(s). The high point was the Monty Python quote...the believers that quote lampoons will never get how serious, and lethally accurate, that joke really is.

One snarky non-believing letter after another...it's a miracle!

That's the problem with a prophecy. Someone's gotta make sure it happens.

Judas doesn't do what he does and Jesus is stuck wandering the desert for the rest of his life begging someone to crucify him so he can prove he's the son o' god. I was 10 when I dared posit that to my church elders. I made the mistake of asking why Judas got such a raw deal, because if it hadn't been for him either Jesus wouldn't have been cricified or someone else would have had to rat him out and we'd be sitting through boring sermons about that apostle instead. You'd have thought I was the antichrist. That's when I figured church was just so much hooey, and I've never really looked back.

I saw the NatGeo special. It was funny watching some pro-Jesus freak spouting, "Well, Jesus was preaching the basic message to the masses and the really special stuff to a few select folks." Thanks for just saying, "Most Christians are dumb as a bag of hammers, and your Sunday sermons aren't really the good stuff. We save that for the smart folks."

So. Much. Bullshit.

In the interest of revising the interpretation and

facts contained in the Bible, we are not informed that

a reconstructed and authenticated text is telling us that

in fact Judas was Jesus' closest advisor, and performed

exactly as Jesus requested and desired.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12227925/site/newsweek/

I guess we can now be comfortable that Andrew Lloyd Webber and

Tim Rice got the story right in Jesus Christ Superstar. How come

no one else could figure this out?

Wingspan

My comments are not directly related to this article, which I enjoyed. They are more directed at the delight some take in the "Ah ha!" factor common among those who seek to hold up religion as a canard.

While I understand the desire to stand above one's peers as an intellectual giant, I do find those whose faith allows only for a singularity of wisdom most disturbing.

While I am a Roman Catholic, and believe whole heartedly in the essence of all the crazy little stories that have been passed down through the ages, I do not feel that each word is to be taken as literal fact, even in the gospels.

All of these stories are meant to convey a deeper reality of the universe, and are meant to speak to different people in different ways at different times.

Some people hold that up as proof of falsehood, I simply see it as recognition by God that not all words speak evenly to all people.

To borrow a line from a favorite film, the truth of a religion is not in whether or not God gives his people rain, but in that he should give his people strength in those times when there is no rain. I also feel the point of religion is to give wisdom at times of plenty as well, but that's not in the movie line I'm quoting.

In truth it would mean very little, if there is no God and Jesus were only a story told to give us strength. The notion of God not as a being on a mountain top sitting in judgment, but as a man who walked among us, eat and drank among us, was tempted as we are tempted, and who suffered and died as we do, and who rose again as (we believe) we will one day do, that is the "magic" of Jesus.

At my heart I do not understand atheists, all that not believing all the time, it would seem to me to cause a great crisis for faith. One can for example point out that although the existence of a tool using intelligence can be explained by evolutionary theory, the existence of life can not be explained by any currently held scientific theory. (The notion of organized organic molecules rising from random inorganic compounds is impossible according to the laws of thermodynamics) However, this does not in any way take away from the core belief which (I presume) gives atheists strength when there is no rain, that the mind of man is above all things and can understand even the most arcane mysteries that may exist with out a greater being guiding it.

While it is true that religion has been used to justify incredible amounts of evil in our world over the centuries, can not the same thing be said of Atheism as an ideal of communism in the previous century? Perhaps it is best for all concerned that we look to the good of the various philosophies of mankind and hold these up as the ideal, and allow the darker aspects of each system’s past to be dealt with by its practitioners themselves.

My own religion is surely not without sin, and has in its time cast more than its share of stones; however this is not the fault of Christ, but the fault of the flawed men who struggle to understand that which is beyond them. It is not an excuse simply a reality, and as my church has sought in recent years to ask forgiveness for its sins, it is the hope that all people will in their own time look to their own beliefs pasts and find where they have likewise erred for their hubris. Above all things, pride is the undoing of mans great works.

Trying to prove or disprove the existence of rabble-rousing day laborer who was put to death some 2000 years ago by a state that had little interest at the time in his nature or existence seems a rather pointless exercise; I grant those who chase it their leave to do so. I ask only that before you delight in your own intellectual excellence that you consider showing respect to those whose beliefs you do not understand even as those who do not understand your quest seek to give the same deference to you.

Thank you for your time and consideration of my humble thoughts.

Sincerely

Charles Esser