Oh, for gods sake! Liars for Jesus?

What are the chances the president of a (UK) university atheists society would respond to a Christian who mentions Jesus with the reply:

”Who’s Jesus?”

And no, I am not making this up.


You can take a guess who the Christian is if you like and I’ll provide a link!



54 thoughts on “Oh, for gods sake! Liars for Jesus?

  1. Not sure about the context of HOW this question was framed, to WHO, WHAT the point was, WHY it was asked, but there is a good chance the atheist in question did not respond, and there is an equal chance he did respond.

    So what’s your point?


        1. Then the implication should be straightforward.
          You are more than welcome to follow the link I provided KIA and go listen for yourself.
          As I said to Mike, when I asked him for more details he refused to allow comments out of moderation and, as is his wont, shut down dialogue including one his usual derogatory and dismissive one liners.


          1. It appears Robertson employed a strategic and smart (while seeming sarcastic) usage of a question to draw out a person’s own understanding, or lack thereof, a common tool when talking to someone who thinks they know but are clueless.

            Example: If you were talking to a young know-it-all punk picture taker with Kodak Instamatic in hand, and he is lecturing you not knowing you have 40 years of F-stop experience…………..you may ask him: ‘Ansel Adams? who is he?’ to make your point about his own buffoonery.

            But Robertsons reply to you is pretty fair, and he stood behind every word he said. Of course I believe he is reciting what actually happened.


          2. Did you actually listen to what he said on the video?
            Robertson was giving the talk.
            The President of the Atheist society asked what he believed and when he mentioned the name of Jesus Robertson claimed the Atheist asked, ”Who’s Jesus?”

            As this was part of a Christian evangelical outreach program why would the President of a University Atheist Society be in the audience if he did not know who the character Jesus was?
            Just pause for a moment and take that in.
            He is an atheist. You do know what an atheist is, yes?


          3. My comprehension skills are well above average doug. I know what Robertson allegedly said. I understand what the President allegedly said. I know what point you are making.

            In the context of said discussion, I reiterate as if someone in Germany who was well aware of American politics asked: ‘Who is Trump?’

            Until you know the motive of such questions, you will not see what I am telling you.

            I could well ask: Who is DeGrasse Tyson? Point made. To me, he is a clown. To others he is well respected. And my assessment of his circus antics are irrelevant to others who adore him.


          4. It appears that you did not listen to the video.
            Or perhaps you played it but did not actually listen to what Robertson said.
            Either way, Robertson’s response regarding his inability to find a (suitable ) book and then the pompous remark that this was why he wrote Magnificent Obsession is simply ridiculous.


          5. See ark, that’s your trouble, you assume things. I DID listen to the interview, and I take him at his word as to WHY he wrote something.

            Therefore, you could possibly be simply misinformed as to his motives as well. I am aware of thousands of books regarding topics that I could never recommend. So what.


          6. You seem to be missing the point.
            An atheist is someone who does not believe in gods, based on the complete lack of evidence for same.
            In context, we are dealing with a talk by Robertson about the Christian god.
            So, it would be fair to assert that the President of the Sterling University ATHEIST society in a traditional culturally Christian country would be fully aware who the Christian god is.
            Otherwise, why be an atheist?
            Therefore, Mike’s suggestion that the Pres. may have been facetious and instead of asking: ”Who’s Jesus,” in fact said, ”Whose Jesus?”

            However, again, in context, if he was being facetious the more likely response would have been ‘Which Jesus (are you referring to).’
            You will have also noted that Robertson claimed the President also said:
            ”Okay you’ve destroyed my atheism , what do you believe?”

            Either the Pres. was being sarcastic and Robertson simply has zero sense of humour and was unable to pick up on this. He misheard, or he is simply telling Porky Pies.


          7. Not a bad response, but may I correct your assumption of a time held fallacy? ‘An atheist……………..based on a complete lack of evidence…………..’

            Of course you must say and adhere to this, but more properly, may I with all candor say ‘an atheist merely does not like the evidence already submitted.’

            There is no shortage of evidence. Can I refer to the plumb line and the level as twin witnesses?


          8. You can say whatever you like, but there is no evidence.
            But this is moving off on a tangent.

            So do you accept that the likelihood of the question by Pres. being genuine (sincere) is remote and that Robertson either misheard or is stretching the truth somewhat to make his point?


          9. I, unlike others, give people the road, and take them at their word; if I was in the room I could give a better opinion.

            But as you know, there are many many shades of gray/grey. None better, just different.


          10. Question for CS: My comprehension skills are well above average — Why do you feel you must “validate” your personal abilities?

            Liked by 2 people

          11. Ark, as usual when apologists get caught in a lie or a mistake, they never admit they were wrong. They double down or shut down. Anything but admit they were wrong. His job depends on it

            Liked by 1 person

          12. It was so funny that he said he could not find one (suitable) book about Jesus and this was why he wrote Magnificent Obsession.
            I mean …. really?
            Even Oscar Pistorious sounded more convincing.

            Liked by 1 person

    1. John, is there really an equal chance that the apologist “made up” the response in question? Are you admitting that apologists are at least equally likely to make stuff up in service of defending the gospel? That’s what Ark’s post was about

      Liked by 1 person

          1. For what it’s worth I have sent an email to the President of the Students Union at Stirling asking for details about the Pres. of the Atheist Society (which does not feature on the university’s list of Clubs and Societies, oddly enough – unless I missed it)

            Liked by 1 person

          2. I’ll publish whatever response I get it, even if it turns out Stirling University’s Atheist Society President is the Ayatollah Khomeini hiding out incognito, you have my word.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. Or perhaps Robertson may have heard him wrong and jumped the gun.
            Instead of him hearing “who’s Jesus” as who is, maybe the person said Whose Jesus, as in “which Jesus concept of the thousands of different ideas if who Jesus was… Maybe a way to break the lock. Maybe Robertson just heard him or her wrongly.

            Liked by 1 person

          4. This is possible, and more likely. However, I am still inclined to suspect that Robertson is stretching the truth to try to make a point.
            You saw his snide reply to me , yes?

            Liked by 1 person

        1. LOL… still missing the point and the link to further context and explanation. 😖

          Ark, after 8 empty comments I think it’s obvious that ColorfulSprinkles either…

          A) is too lazy or too childishly passive-aggressive, just trying to irritate you and waste everyone’s time, or…

          B) is truly too dense to think, analyze, and ask appropriate relevant questions above a 9th-grade level.

          I think we all know it’s all of the above.

          Liked by 2 people

  2. You did at least manage to send your inquiry to Stirling and not to Sterling, Ark?
    For what it’s worth, I don’t find the idea of the President of a University society being ignorant of a basic fact — like Christianity having something to do with Jesus — at all surprising. Many societies are vanishingly small and office bearers are more often appointed for their willingness than they are for their acumen.


    1. I am inclined to believe you would probably ask for evidence of the claims Robertson continually makes.
      It would be cruel but I do so enjoy seeing them dribble and mumble incoherently.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. That’s a good Jesus. Ensures every one eats.
        There is a Gabriel Jesus who plays for some football team, I don’t know which. Keeps people entertained. That’s a good Jesus

        Liked by 2 people

  3. That would be one either (a) uneducated or (b) too predictably sarcastic atheist. Then again, subtleties are often lost on the converted so one may justifiably shelve a few IQ points and hammer the jugular.

    (Jesus whom, anyway?)

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I understand that if you go to (say) Brazil, there are oodles of Jesuses all over the place. So other than rhetoric it could well be a case of identifying an individual … a real individual.

      I also understand that in Finland and other such Scandinavian places there is no shortage of Thors everywhere too …

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s