39 Responses to “Jesus and Bigfoot”

1. sasquatch responds: May 9th, 2008 at 5:19 am

   Sad. “He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.” (John 1:10)

2. noobfun responds: May 9th, 2008 at 7:35 am

   that explains why bigfoots so elusive he just runs off over the closest river/lake and hides. The same way jesus used to cheat at water polo, sneaky bigfoot.

   nice to see buddy christ making an appearance a much more fitting version of a friendly caring jesus then the usual crucifixion images.

3. greywolf responds: May 9th, 2008 at 8:27 am

   There are many things in this old world that we don’t understand or know about. There are many things I think God does not want us to know…..for our own good! We will some day answer the questions about Christ and per haps Bigfoot ..in time.

4. Amdusias responds: May 9th, 2008 at 9:00 am

   Wow. I have never had an off-the-cuff comment become a headline before. That will teach me to keep my snide comments to myself. Well played Loren. LOL

   **looking at shoes**

5. Digger44 responds: May 9th, 2008 at 9:40 am

   It’s just sad that this site hit an all new low.

6. planettom responds: May 9th, 2008 at 10:57 am

   Digger44, this is all just “tongue-in-cheek”.
   What would Jesus do? He would probably be laughing after reading this one.

7. Amdusias responds: May 9th, 2008 at 11:16 am

   My original post was just pointing out how easy it is to make connections, then defend them. If we start defending hacks that put out bigfoot info, then we deserve the derision we get as a group. We should endorse our advocates with great care.

   An example of making connections to support a theory, in just a few minutes, consider that the show Gilligan’s Island. It was clearly a vehicle promoting the religion of the ancient Greeks and Romans.

   All of the primary seven phillosophical “God-Planets” are clearly represented, and quite overtly.

   Mr. Howell - The Sun represented by the metal gold
   Mrs. Howell - The Moon the flighty consort of the sun (Waxing and waining)
   Mary Anne - Clearly Saturn as a farm girl, earth fecundity and crops fall under her domain.
   Ginger - Venus
   Professor - Clearly Mercury in his erudite aspect
   Skipper - A military man, is clearly Mars with subtexts of Posiedon

   That just leaves Gilligan. Jupiter. Jupitarian symbolism is repleat with heroes that had a bungling bafoon aspect. From Nordic Thor to Herculese. Jupiter was the King of the Gods, and king of the planets, and it was after all….Gilligan’s Island.

   That is just 10 minutes of work, and it tracks very well. Now imagine I had two hours to kill, and some books on Jesus and the bloodline. Connections do not mean “truth”. That was my point of the comment of linking DiVinci to Six Million Dollar Man….Clearly Sandy Duncan is here to usher in the new age…..

8. gridbug responds: May 9th, 2008 at 11:23 am

   God is simply a stuffed animal for adults. At least with Sasquatch there’s physical trace evidence available, not to mention a workable metric for the possibility of their existence. With the Christian Diety phenomena, not so much. Unless you want to count the odd grilled cheese sandwich and/or tortilla.

   And no one has ever gone to war in the name of Bigfoot. Looking at you, Mister pResident.

   That being said, I actually do respect all viewpoints. It’s too large a universe for any one answer. I suspect the truth will fall somewhere in between. If, of course, we every really learn that truth at all.

9. Artist responds: May 9th, 2008 at 11:29 am

   Oh Brother…

10. HOOSIERHUNTER responds: May 9th, 2008 at 11:34 am

    there’s a term I’ve seen before called “matrixing” in which someone sees patterns in things that aren’t really there. The seeing of Madonna or Jesus in a potato chip or some such silliness. Looks like that got taken to extreme here.

11. Amdusias responds: May 9th, 2008 at 12:04 pm

    Gridbug,

    Why? Why attack?
    I want to know what religion has done, other than put an infrastructure in place allowing three civilizations to invent the zero, enabling math which arguabley led to the A-bomb….what has religion done to make you attack, in places where nobody asked? A stuffed animal? Do you attack other stuffed animals on site? “Teddy, you are nothing but a Jesus for babies! Nya!”

12. thatericn responds: May 9th, 2008 at 12:16 pm

    Hello all, and especially Loren,

    This topic came close to “jumping the shark,” but worthy of a few comments.

    “Bearded Bigfoots” seem to come from either a misunderstanding of the accounts of sightings, or in the case of TV and movie depictions, a refusal to spend the money for the higher-end makeup and prosthetics needed to present a more… authentic… image of Sasquatch.

    Cheesy statues and other images of Jesus sure make one more understanding of the old Byzantine Iconoclasm movement, and the Islamic prohibition of depicting holy figures in visual art. Artists trying to “keep it real” for the “average person” often end up making things that look more like mockery than reverence or evangelism.

    Finally, I would encourage fellow believers not to anchor any part of their faith on relics like the Shroud of Turin. Any artifact proven to be genuine and/or miraculous should be viewed as a blessing, but still as “gravy.” The danger is over-selling such an artifact and having it debunked.

    Best wishes to all

13. gridbug responds: May 9th, 2008 at 1:12 pm

    Hi Amdusias. The problem with the argument for the existence of God/Jesus etc is that the believer’s creed is purely faith based. There is NO actual evidence that such beings exist outside of theology. Religion for religion’s sake is at best a security blanket for those who feel they need such a thing. At worst, religion is a control mechanism exploited by those who have a decidedly immoral desire to exert their influence and maintain authority to achieve certain goals.

    With Bigfoot, we have actual physical data (granted, to various degrees of credulity) that can be studied and analyzed. There are remarkable parallels between the Christian mythos and the belief in unknown cryptospecies, but like I said in my original post, there’s simply not enough data to conclusively support the actual, factual, for sure and for real existence of either. Folks are gonna believe whatever they want, and for some it’s all about comfort and the need to know that something somewhere is guiding all and that there’s a greater, mystical purpose behind all things. For some, it’s God. For others, it’s The Force. The underlying tenet that there’s a unifying energy to the universe is fundamentally correct. It’s when you start applying specifics to the who/what/why of that energy that problems develop and we’re forced to endure the “my God is better than your God” nonsense.

    It’s a safe bet that Bigfoot/Sasquatch isn’t hindered by theological problems, in much the same way that other cultures both past and present have no concept of “The One True God” etc ad nauseum. And again, I must assert that when the ruler of the free world expresses in public that “God” told him to wage war in the Middle East, we have no choice but to assume that either A) he’s a raving madman suffering delusions of grandeur (smirk) and is therefore sullying the good name of The Creator, or that B) this same Heavenly Overseer really DID order the edict that the armies of the West must march on the Middle East, sowing death and destruction in their wake.

    Either way, no one wins.

    Which brings us back to the beginning. Faith. Love it or hate it, use it or abuse it, good, bad, or indifferent, it’s a constant. You’re gonna believe what you want to believe, and more power to you. There’s a lot to be said for diversity, just as there’s a lot to be said for singular-mindedness. There is no “all is good/all is bad”. Everything is part of everything else, and I personally can’t buy into the idea that there’s some sort of master plan afoot perpetrated by a grandfatherly cloud rider who’s content to sit by and casually observe the horrors waged upon mankind in his name.

    It’s that’s God, then I’m sticking with the Sasquatch.

    Thanks for listening!

14. red_pill_junkie responds: May 9th, 2008 at 1:16 pm

    There’s a brand new ring of hell, being prepared just for you Loren!

15. semillama responds: May 9th, 2008 at 1:26 pm

    Any Subgenius could tell you about the link between Sasquatch and Jesus, especially the Fightin’ Jesus!

16. SOCALcryptid responds: May 9th, 2008 at 1:40 pm

    I did not comment on the related post from 5/7/08 because of all the bashing that was going on. So it starts again on this post. Before it gets out of hand I would like to point something out. We all come to this site with a common goal. To find the truth about cryptids. What makes this country beautiful is that no matter what our religion, if any, political views etc., we can separate this and come together with one goal in mind. To find the truth. It is simple and easy. So before you bash someone for being something you are not remember that this is America and in this country no matter what you may believe we can still work together on finding the truth. I have plenty of relatives, friends, and co workers that do not have the same faith or political views that I have. Do I bash them for it? No. Do I work on common goals with them? Yes.

17. cryptidsrus responds: May 9th, 2008 at 2:56 pm

    SOCALcryptid:

    Could not have said better myself.

    Amdusias:

    That planetary comparison to Gilligan’s Island was cool!!!
    I’d never thought about that before!!!

    Gridbug:

    God a “stuffed animal for adults?”
    I haven’t attended church for years and consider myself more spiritual than religious, but to me, that comment takes it a bit too far.
    God cannot be “proved”—one can accept it only by “faith”—Ok, I can accept that—even that means we cannot discuss the probability of some sort of transcendental reality? Of a higher intelligence?
    And isn’t it better for people to have belief in something rather than nothing?
    Another question—has it ever occurred to people that maybe what you and other peple are rejecting is what You Think is “God” , not what it it actually Could Be?. Are you rejecting the Christian version of God?
    Maybe the Hindu God?
    Buddhist version?
    Even New Age?
    All of those aforementioned “Gods” are very different from each other—so what are you and other people really rejecting?
    God could be a presence—could be a light—could be the universe (Pantheism, anyone?).
    God does not have to be an old man out of the Sistine Chapel ceiling. I would say what people reject is their Idea of what something is, not what it actually coulbe.
    I believe in evolution—but what facilitated the evolution?
    Chance?
    Or something else?
    Think about it.
    Sorry if this veers off topic, or is too long, but I was responding to the flow of the conversation (which is great, by the way).
    Great thread, Loren!!!
    I’m through with my two cents. I’ll take the meds now.

18. PhotoExpert responds: May 9th, 2008 at 4:08 pm

    Hold on a minute. Sorry, I had to go and get my 15 foot pole because when I saw this post, I said to myself–”I’m not going to touch that post with a 10 foot pole!”

    Anyway, I do not think that the comparison of the images is way off base. There is some resemblence and the original post by Loren is not inflammatory or meant to be an exercize in thinking, as the right winged post was the other day. Obviously, Loren is just putting a little humor in this post because of the emotional and sometimes overly emotional responses in that latest post. So please, don’t over react emotionally. This is obviously high brow humor and referencing the old post to cool down emotions a bit. Don’t go off on tangents Cryptomundo readers. I get it. I see others get it too, judging by their reactions in this post. So nice job Loren on bringing things back on track and using high brow humor and referencing that most recent post to accomplish it. And yes, as a photographer, there are some similarities between the two. Although I do agree, the Shroud of Turin has not been proven to be the burial cloth of Jesus. As one reader so aptly posted, don’t get caught up in that mistake. Loren is not comparing Jesus to BigFoot here, for those of you that do not get the humor of the post.

    I also have to agree with the comments of Amdusias.

    And gridbug, I have to take issue and disagree with you on your comments because they may be considered offensive by some Christian readers here. Obviously, a man named Jesus of Nazareth, did exist. The things he did or miracles he performed, were witnessed by thousands such as the miracle of the bread and fish when feeding the multitudes. The wedding guests at the feast in Cana would also take issue with you when many of them witnessed the miracle of changing water into wine. And I am sure that the Apostles would disagree with you about the calming of the seas, the miracle of catching the fish when they first met Jesus and the walking on water sighting. Last time I checked, witnesses’ testimony is “evidence”.

    The “evidence” you refer to for the existence of BigFoot is no less credible or more credible than the eyewitness accounts of thousands. In fact, your “evidence” may be less credible. I am sure you were not around when George Washington was President. We don’t have any photos of him, not even a blobsquatch type photo. We can only go by eyewitness accounts and some documents he signed. But since there is no video footage of Washington signing the documents, some may not believe he existed. We have paintings of what Washington looked like and eyewitness accounts and supposedly his wooden teeth. But none of us witnessed that or saw a photo or videotape of that. By your standards of evidence, George Washington did not exist. Washington did not exist and Jesus did not exist by your standards of evidence. Do you believe that Washington existed? Sure, you probably do. So then why not Jesus? I think what you take issue with is that Christians believe Jesus was the Son of God. OK, that’s fine. But don’t subltely knock Christians because of your disbelief. George Washington was President, right? Prove it! And I have to throw out any signatures because I did not see him sign those documents or have video or pictorial evidence of that. No one does. So many believe George Washington was President based on faith and evidence and many Christians believe Jesus was the Son of God based on faith and evidence. Don’t skew the same type of credible evidence to fit your belief or nonbelief system and then apply the same or lower standard of evidence to a scenario you believe in. That’s not objective and goes against all scientific methods.

    So you see, your comments when thought out logically, are offensive to Christians. The only difference is that Christians believe one more piece of evidence that you do not believe in. That evidence for them is the empty tomb and the ressurection of Jesus. Hey, for the sake of argument, let’s just say one does not hold the belief that Jesus was the Son of God. Let’s just say one is a historian. The evidence states that Jesus made appearances after his death. I believe that any human being nailed to a cross after being tortured and then pierced in the side with a sword, has a low probability of survival. But let’s just say that any human undergoing this scenario was witnessed talking to people after their death. I believe a man named Thomas even put his finger into the nail holes in Jesus’ hand. So do we discount all that eyewitness testimony of thousands of people when Jesus was alive and after he died on the cross? And many of the witnesses knew him well and declared it was him that they saw after his death.

    Then why not do the same for George Washington? Let’s discount everything by every eyewitness before the advent of cameras and video. This is basically what you are saying.

    So your argument and post is offensive. It is not only offensive to Christians but probably to historians and those fact seeking individuals wanting truth. So what is your standard of evidence, or at least, what is your standard of evidence before you start ridiculing people with antagonistic posts?

    From a Christian’s point of view, they could argue that there is even more credible evidence for the existence of Jesus than there is for Sasquatch. And they may be right. Because the concrete trace evidence of Sasquatch was not witnessed by people in most cases. They have casts of footprints that they found in the woods. The find hair samples up high on a broken tree branch. DNA evidence comes back as inconclusive at best. They did not see him relieve himself and then collect the scat. They found scat and deemed it BF scat. At least the things Jesus did were witnessed by people, credible people. The Roman government witnessed some of these things and thought it a threat to their power. What more proof do you need for the existence of someone?

    So as Christians here would disagree with you on a spiritual level, I, as a seeker of facts, would disagree with you on a historical and scientific evidential level. There is just as much proof of the existence of Jesus and that he could be the Son of God than there is about BigFoot existing. Maybe more overwhelming proof on the existence of Jesus as the Son of God. As a critical and thinking human being, you would have to prove them both to me by the evidence presented. And that evidence must come under the same scrutiny.

    So it boils down to Christians’ belief or faith, versus your standards of evidence. And both of those can be put into question from what I read of your posts.

    Now I will agree with you on two things you stated here.

    There are those that call themselves Christians that would use religion for power in an immoral way to gain authority. However, by definition, they would not be Christians. They would only be calling themselves Christians. I am sure Christians here would back me up or any atheist that says that, based on the definition of a Christian.

    Secondly, I would agree with you about the people that see the image of Jesus in grilled cheese–they are a little “enthusiastic” or “nuts” as I like to call them. We see eye to eye there.

    But respectfully, your comments are biased. They are biased towards your perception of life as it exists. You implement your argument and standards of evidence as they apply to a situation you want them to apply to. But you change the standards of evidence if they do not apply to your beliefs. That is where it becomes not only offensive to Christian readers here at Cryptomundo but to factual seekers of the truth, like myself and probably to atheists using scientific methods of discovery. You slant or taint the evidence when you change the rules of gathering data when applying it to different things. You become inconsistent and try to make the evidence fit into the experimental observations when it is favorable to an outcome you like. When that evidence is credible and does not favor the outcome you would like or perceive, you say it is not credible. That is the problem you have and need to correct. The standard of evidence should be applied evenly and objectively to every experiment or case study. You clearly did not do that. I had to point that out.

    Thank you for sharing your ideas. And although I would say you posted civilly, I would not say you posted without bias and that your posts were probably offensive to several readers here at Cryptomundo who happen to be Christians. Because as a seeker of factual truth, I felt that they were offensive for another reason. But since I am a sympathetic and empathetic person, I put myself in the shoes of a Christian and found your post even more antagonistic and offensive than just a scientific reader.

    What I did not see is Christians knocking you! As a scientific believer of fact, I guess they left that up to someone else. So I stepped in to add my two cents. Feel free to respond as respectfully as I have with you here, gridbug.

19. PhotoExpert responds: May 9th, 2008 at 4:19 pm

    “What?”, is right, Loren. LOL Hold on a minute. Sorry, I had to go and get my 15 foot pole because when I saw this post, I said to myself–”I’m not going to touch that post with a 10 foot pole!”

    Anyway, I do not think that the comparison of the images is way off base. There is some resemblence and the original post by Loren is not inflammatory or meant to be an exercize in thinking, as the right winged post was the other day. Obviously, Loren is just putting a little humor in this post because of the emotional and sometimes overly emotional responses in that latest post. So please, don’t over react emotionally. This is obviously high brow humor and referencing the old post to cool down emotions a bit. Don’t go off on tangents Cryptomundo readers. I get it. I see others get it too, judging by their reactions in this post. So nice job Loren on bringing things back on track and using high brow humor and referencing that most recent post to accomplish it. And yes, as a photographer, there are some similarities between the two. Although I do agree, the Shroud of Turin has not been proven to be the burial cloth of Jesus. As one reader so aptly posted, don’t get caught up in that mistake. Loren is not comparing Jesus to BigFoot here, for those of you that do not get the humor of the post.

    I also have to agree with the comments of Amdusias.

    And gridbug, I have to take issue and disagree with you on your comments because they may be considered offensive by some Christian readers here. Obviously, a man named Jesus of Nazareth, did exist. The things he did or miracles he performed, were witnessed by thousands such as the miracle of the bread and fish when feeding the multitudes. The wedding guests at the feast in Cana would also take issue with you when many of them witnessed the miracle of changing water into wine. And I am sure that the Apostles would disagree with you about the calming of the seas, the miracle of catching the fish when they first met Jesus and the walking on water sighting. Last time I checked, witnesses’ testimony is “evidence”.

    The “evidence” you refer to for the existence of BigFoot is no less credible or more credible than the eyewitness accounts of thousands. In fact, your “evidence” may be less credible. I am sure you were not around when George Washington was President. We don’t have any photos of him, not even a blobsquatch type photo. We can only go by eyewitness accounts and some documents he signed. But since there is no video footage of Washington signing the documents, some may not believe he existed. We have paintings of what Washington looked like and eyewitness accounts and supposedly his wooden teeth. But none of us witnessed that or saw a photo or videotape of that. By your standards of evidence, George Washington did not exist. Washington did not exist and Jesus did not exist by your standards of evidence. Do you believe that Washington existed? Sure, you probably do. So then why not Jesus? I think what you take issue with is that Christians believe Jesus was the Son of God. OK, that’s fine. But don’t subltely knock Christians because of your disbelief. George Washington was President, right? Prove it! And I have to throw out any signatures because I did not see him sign those documents or have video or pictorial evidence of that. No one does. So many believe George Washington was President based on faith and evidence and many Christians believe Jesus was the Son of God based on faith and evidence. Don’t skew the same type of credible evidence to fit your belief or nonbelief system and then apply the same or lower standard of evidence to a scenario you believe in. That’s not objective and goes against all scientific methods.

    So you see, your comments when thought out logically, are offensive to Christians. The only difference is that Christians believe one more piece of evidence that you do not believe in. That evidence for them is the empty tomb and the ressurection of Jesus. Hey, for the sake of argument, let’s just say one does not hold the belief that Jesus was the Son of God. Let’s just say one is a historian. The evidence states that Jesus made appearances after his death. I believe that any human being nailed to a cross after being tortured and then pierced in the side with a sword, has a low probability of survival. But let’s just say that any human undergoing this scenario was witnessed talking to people after their death. I believe a man named Thomas even put his finger into the nail holes in Jesus’ hand. So do we discount all that eyewitness testimony of thousands of people when Jesus was alive and after he died on the cross? And many of the witnesses knew him well and declared it was him that they saw after his death.

    Then why not do the same for George Washington? Let’s discount everything by every eyewitness before the advent of cameras and video. This is basically what you are saying.

    So your argument and post is offensive. It is not only offensive to Christians but probably to historians and those fact seeking individuals wanting truth. So what is your standard of evidence, or at least, what is your standard of evidence before you start ridiculing people with antagonistic posts?

    From a Christian’s point of view, they could argue that there is even more credible evidence for the existence of Jesus than there is for Sasquatch. And they may be right. Because the concrete trace evidence of Sasquatch was not witnessed by people in most cases. They have casts of footprints that they found in the woods. The find hair samples up high on a broken tree branch. DNA evidence comes back as inconclusive at best. They did not see him relieve himself and then collect the scat. They found scat and deemed it BF scat. At least the things Jesus did were witnessed by people, credible people. The Roman government witnessed some of these things and thought it a threat to their power. What more proof do you need for the existence of someone?

    So as Christians here would disagree with you on a spiritual level, I, as a seeker of facts, would disagree with you on a historical and scientific evidential level. There is just as much proof of the existence of Jesus and that he could be the Son of God than there is about BigFoot existing. Maybe more overwhelming proof on the existence of Jesus as the Son of God. As a critical and thinking human being, you would have to prove them both to me by the evidence presented. And that evidence must come under the same scrutiny.

    So it boils down to Christians’ belief or faith, versus your standards of evidence. And both of those can be put into question from what I read of your posts.

    Now I will agree with you on two things you stated here.

    There are those that call themselves Christians that would use religion for power in an immoral way to gain authority. However, by definition, they would not be Christians. They would only be calling themselves Christians. I am sure Christians here would back me up or any atheist that says that, based on the definition of a Christian.

    Secondly, I would agree with you about the people that see the image of Jesus in grilled cheese–they are a little “enthusiastic” or “nuts” as I like to call them. We see eye to eye there.

    But respectfully, your comments are biased. They are biased towards your perception of life as it exists. You implement your argument and standards of evidence as they apply to a situation you want them to apply to. But you change the standards of evidence if they do not apply to your beliefs. That is where it becomes not only offensive to Christian readers here at Cryptomundo but to factual seekers of the truth, like myself and probably to atheists using scientific methods of discovery. You slant or taint the evidence when you change the rules of gathering data when applying it to different things. You become inconsistent and try to make the evidence fit into the experimental observations when it is favorable to an outcome you like. When that evidence is credible and does not favor the outcome you would like or perceive, you say it is not credible. That is the problem you have and need to correct. The standard of evidence should be applied evenly and objectively to every experiment or case study. You clearly did not do that. I had to point that out.

    Thank you for sharing your ideas. And although I would say you posted civilly, I would not say you posted without bias and that your posts were probably offensive to several readers here at Cryptomundo who happen to be Christians. Because as a seeker of factual truth, I felt that they were offensive for another reason. But since I am a sympathetic and empathetic person, I put myself in the shoes of a Christian and found your post even more antagonistic and offensive than just a scientific reader.

    What I did not see is Christians knocking you! As a scientific believer of fact, I guess they left that up to someone else. So I stepped in to add my two cents. Feel free to respond as respectfully as I have with you here, gridbug.

    Peace to all!

20. HOOSIERHUNTER responds: May 9th, 2008 at 6:20 pm

    Thank you SOCALcryptid for a thinking man’s approach. I agree. This is a bit like arguing if Bigfoot is a human or an ape. Pretty worthless arguments until we actually find one to study. People shoot back and forth senseless criticism on these topics and it solves nothing. Frankly I don’t give a Mothman’s behind whether or not someone accepts what I believe to be true. I will share what I believe if asked and I won’t argue, especially with those who are vehemently opposed to my beliefs. I would be willing to have civil discourse with them, but I meet few who can do that without trying to shout down my discussion with asinine statements. Suppose I’m wrong, suppose I am clinging to an “adult teddy bear”, I’m a better person for it. But if I’m right–then there are going to be some very surprised people when they die. But that’s not my problem–that’s theirs. I didn’t die on a cross for anyone and I can’t do anything to change their minds. And I won’t waste my time trying to shout them down.

21. fmurphy1970 responds: May 9th, 2008 at 6:51 pm

    I don’t remember bigfoot being in the Six Million Dollar Man, and it was probably my favourite show as a kid.
    But did you know there is a Bigfoot Jesus described in the Bible!
    Proverbs 30:4,
    “Who has ascended to heaven and come down? Who has gathered the wind in his fists? Who has wrapped up the waters in a garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and what is his son’s name? Surely you know!”
    Seems God must be a big guy, bigger even than bigfoot?!

22. red_pill_junkie responds: May 9th, 2008 at 7:16 pm

    SOCALcryptid, this is America??

    I always thought this was the World Wide Web, señor
    Enjoy your weekend you guys

23. SOCALcryptid responds: May 9th, 2008 at 8:16 pm

    red_pill_junkie, Do I really have to explain. We both know that people from all over the world can visit this site. My point was as an American. Yea, I should have said as world wide bloggers but some Countries will not let their citizens express freedom of speech. so I guess we are both at a loss. I said what I said to simply make a point. To stop all the unnecessary bashing comments. Was your last comment really necessary.
    HOOSIERHUNTER, Thanks for your comments

24. Blue Mako responds: May 9th, 2008 at 8:44 pm

    I want to know what religion has done, other than put an infrastructure in place allowing three civilizations to invent the zero, enabling math which arguabley led to the A-bomb….what has religion done to make you attack, in places where nobody asked?

    iirc, religion has done at least as much to hinder (or exterminate altogether) knowledge as it has to advance it…

25. Lyndon responds: May 10th, 2008 at 2:23 am

    As an atheist myself, I am highly baffled at some religious zealots I have encountered who smirk and ridicule the idea of sasquatch existing.

    What is more ludicrous and unbelievable? The idea of a rare and elusive flesh and blood ANIMAL, not too far removed from what already know to have existed in the fossil record, managing to avoid being scientifically catalogued, or some supernatural all powerful entity controlling everything and an afterlife which everybody who is good gets to enjoy for ever and ever?

    I know which one seems more ridiculous to me.

26. TaishaMcGee responds: May 10th, 2008 at 5:28 am

    I don’t know about you guys, but I need that action figure…

27. tabo01 responds: May 10th, 2008 at 8:30 am

    I like Gilligan’s Island cast better as the 7 deadly sins. Ginger as lust, Maryanne as envy (had one show on that), Skipper as anger, Gilligan as sloth, the Professor as pride, and the Howells as greed and gluttony. I don’t accept the Shroud of Turin as anything but a good fraud, as burial position was incorrect for Jews of the time.

28. red_pill_junkie responds: May 10th, 2008 at 12:39 pm

    fmurphy1970, I remember that episode, in the end Bigfoot was a robot made by some evil genius.

    SOCALcryptid, I apologize amigo

29. Amdusias responds: May 10th, 2008 at 4:35 pm

    BlueMako responds:
    “iirc, religion has done at least as much to hinder (or exterminate altogether) knowledge as it has to advance it… ”

    Very true. The dark ages were a direct result of people confusing two independent concepts. Spirituality and Government. As a critical thinker I would not in good concience be able to refute that, other than to add, that religion was the scape goat that nobles used to keep surfs (white slaves) and not really the cause of the slavery.

    The worst hate-speech against the spiritually minded is the common statement that all wars are caused by religion. That will have to stay your little secret, as when reviewed by professors at MIT they say that all wars were caused by a disparity of resources, which can be agrivated by cultural differences. In other words, war is always about food, water, land, gold, oil, or slaves. Yes it is easier for somebody to die in suicide attack if they are attacking a member of a different faith, but 911 wasn’t about them getting more Korans here. It was a result of our OIL policy. Our retaliation was not about passing out Bibles. It was about our OIL policy, clearly.

    You see this hate-speech take on new accepted heights recently. There is a group of people that take the iconic “Jesus Fish” put feet on it, and Darwin’s name inside of it. Now if it was just about taking a side, why not use Darwin’s already iconic symbol? Ape evolving into man in 7 phases. We all recognize it. But that isn’t the point is it? It is about being inflamatory, hurtful, and purposly defaming a religious icon. Who really has the high ground there?

    Religion is however as natural to the human condition as sex. Reflection on morals in a spiritual context is a universal constant in every culture, on every contenant, for as far back as we find evidence of the hand of man. Repressing either of those natural impulses seems to make people cranky and call other people names. LOL

30. Amdusias responds: May 10th, 2008 at 4:43 pm

    @RedPillJunky

    Actually you are thinking of the guy who make Maskatron.

    Robo-Bigfoot was created to protect the crash-landed aliens until they could repair their ship and fly home.

31. CryptoHaus_Press responds: May 10th, 2008 at 4:59 pm

    re: sasquatch action figure and wanting it taisha?

    good luck! it can go for upwards of 300 bucks on EBay!

    actually, as i’m completing a book on Bigfoot in Cinema? (plug plug!) it’s worth noting two different actors portrayed Sasquatch in multiple appearances not only on the SIX MILLION DOLLAR MAN but its spin-off THE BIONIC WOMAN (the original, not the horrid current remake).

    Andre the Giant was the first thespian to play the cybernetic squatch while Ted Cassidy donned the suit (presumably with some costume tightening after Andre vacated it and the role?) afterwards for BIONIC WOMAN.

    not that, you know, it has anything per se to do with Jesus and Bigfoot looking alike, although the depicted picture of Andre as Bigfoot does bear more of a resemblance imho than the Ted version. i think it’s the weird glowing eyes of Andre (contact lens, btw) and the hair; it DOES bear a lot of similiarity to the Shroud image, albeit broader in the facial structure.

    i’m surprised no Christians have commented upon the possibility Bigfoot was Goliath in Biblical texts. or that, you know, some of the recent sightings of Bigfoot are apocalyptic End Times type “signs” of the Second Coming. or even that it’s possible Bigfoot walks on water, which might explain why so many reports have the cryptid near major waterways.

    a final note of INTENDED HUMOR: Jesus was not so grim as many modern-day Christians. he walked with the poorest, the diseased, the dispossed and the possessed, not the “conservatives” of his era. else, he’d been a right-wing equivalent 2,000 years ago of tax collector, temple follower, etc.

    or, does anyone truly think Mary M. as prostitute was a NeoCon? or that lepers were voting for Roman Empirism over Judean self-rule? or that simple fishermen were believers in Orthodox Judaism and temple taxes when they themselves could barely eat? if so, how come these folks gave up so much to be followers of Christ? families? home towns? etc.?

    most of the values Right Wing types espouse — guns, property and discrimination against anyone not white, er, right enough — go so far against what Christ preached one can honestly say the current religious Evangelical movement of Riches and Power are closer to ancient Jewish Torah in tone and atonement than the New Testament.

    did Jesus say: “My gun over my dead body” or… “Turn the other cheek”?

    did Jesus say: “You damn liberals will burn in hell” or… “He who is without sin, cast the first stone”? (or vote, to paraphrase)

    did Jesus say: “Empower yourself through wealth and make tons of dough on your religious beliefs” or… “Give unto Ceaser what is Ceaser’s, and give unto God what is God’s”?

    did Jesus say: “Hate and persecute thy neighbor who’s a bit different than yourself, because, you know, that’s God’s way” or… “Love thy neighbor”?

    did Jesus say: “Demonrats deserve Barak O’Damna because they’re Godless and caused 9-11″ or… “Better the log in your own eye than the splinter in your neighbor’s”?

    born again-type right wing Christians need to “lighten up.” Jesus said to dance, not lecture. He said to partake of the celebration of life, not condemn. he drank wine. he rescued street walkers. he was a man of the people, not a Temple Elder. and certainly no right wing supporter of the Roman Legions who were enslaving his people.

    a radical reinterpretation? nope. it’s all there, historically.

    IF you’re interested, of course, in the true Jesus as he existed by reported evidence and texts and scrolls and not in the Catholic Church’s “reformed” versions, which stripped away all but 4 testaments and rewrote the religion to fit Constantine’s political needs (most Christians will have no clue of what I just wrote nor its meaning; that’s the problem with accepting all you are taught with faith and refusing to critically examine what you are taught and why).

    Did Jesus say: “Take everything you are told as Gospel” or… “God gave you brains. Use them”?

32. Amdusias responds: May 10th, 2008 at 6:45 pm

    @Crypto_Haus_Press

    Nice post.

    I haven’t seen many Christians here being hurtful or hateful though, so the Christians on this board seem to fall in line with what you are saying. It also makes sense when we see who is not following that phillosophy. Not a Christian myself, but I really hate seeing a group actively persicuted. I have seen mostly “Please don’t speak for us, then judge us by what you just put in our mouths” type posts.

    On guns, I interrupted the rape of my sister by three young males in the parking lot 1992 Indiana State Fair with mine. 911 records the ending of many tragic stories. Ted Kennedy’s car has killed more people than any of my guns. And cars, not guns, are destroying the earth. I would be hard pressed to find a friend NOT injured by a car. I would be hard pressed to find a friend that HAS been injured by a gun. The math there is pretty clear for me. Park your car and I will turn in my guns. Really! That would be quite an equitable trade for the future of the planet.

33. SOCALcryptid responds: May 10th, 2008 at 8:15 pm

    CryptoHaus_Press, In your comment you mentioned some may think Goliath could be a sasquatch. In the book of Genesis chapter 25:24-34, it talks about two brothers Jacob and Easu. Easu was covered in red hair and was a man of the woods. Some think that he could have been a sasquatch. I do not find this to be true nor do many others. This subject was brought up in a sasquatch documentary. I think you may find this interesting.

    Red_Pill_Junkie, gracias hermano

    Cryptidsrus, Thanks. I often agree with your informative comments. When we do not we still treat eachother with respect. Thanks again.

34. gridbug responds: May 11th, 2008 at 3:14 am

    Great discussion!

    I guess my thing is that at the end of the day, the cornerstone of the Christian faith is a book that was written ages ago by multiple authors, then translated and rewritten several times, then edited several more times before becoming the Big Book Of Rules To Get Into Heaven. I went to Catholic schools as a youngster, was even an altar boy. But I reached a point where my critical thinking mind got the better of me, and when I realized that there was a whole faith based system derived wholly from a sketchy collection of parables and “first person” heresay, I’d had enough.

    Please, to all Christians and people of faith reading this, don’t mistake my words for derision. I have nothing but respect for the right to believe and worship as one sees fit. It is, after all, what this country was founded on. The freedom to worship part, not the “worship our way” thing. I just simply can’t understand what compels someone to read the Bible and decide to pitch in based on its contents, especially knowing full well that those very words have been manipulated over the centuries to achieve various ends. I don’t believe in the Christian God or the Devil or Heaven or Hell, and I never will. That being said, I’m a very giving and sociable person, a good listener, kind and polite, respectful of my surroundings and the communities in which I find myself. I don’t say this to toot my own horn, only to point out that there are plenty of us who reject the mainstream theology and are still able to live full, contented lives without the “dangling carrot” of Eternal Paradise to guide our actions. I don’t need the Good Book to tell me how to live. I use common sense and common courtesy. And so far it’s gotten me by with flying colors.

    My big problem with the hard-line Christian deal is the complete rejection of Jesus’ basic teachings. It’s been illustrated well a few posts earlier, and it’s totally true. If Jesus were around today, would he really be high-fiving the Bush Cabal and the NeoCons for adhering to his words? Not likely. It’s not that there’s been so much negative, hypocritical stuff done in “God’s Name”, but the basic fact that morality has somehow become synonymous with religion is a crying shame. If you’re going to do the right thing, do it because it IS the right thing, not because some pastor or theologian or political figure tells you that it’s what the Great Spirit in the Sky wants. Anyone who goes forth and performs good deeds in the name of the church because the Bible sez so is being disingenuous at best and delusional at worst. Case in point: the Jesus Camp documentary. How can any forward thinking person in this day and age not watch that and see a clear cut and heartbreaking case of child abuse being committed? A six year old decides that their life is missing something, and doesn’t feel fulfilled until they accept Jesus into their heart. Really? Seriously? A six year old has lived enough to know that they need Jesus to be complete? Stunning.

    Someone also posted that it’s awfully ironic that some Christians refuse to entertain the idea that there may be as yet undiscovered animals that bear relation to us, but at the same time fully embrace the lofty ideologies presented in the Bible. What’s gonna happen when a real live Sasquatch is finally shown to the world? What will those Christians say about his place in God’s plan? Granted, the wack jobs who insist that men rode dinosaurs and that the Grand Canyon was created by Noah’s flood will probably go into catatonic shock, while their more level-headed brethren simply take it in stride and fold it into the overall ambiguity of “what it all means in the greater scheme of things.” And good on them for doing so.

    I’m not sure what else I have to say about this. I think I’ve covered the main points here, combined with my previous posts. Again, no offense to youse Bible reading types. And thanks to those of you who are willing to see past the veil and into the unknown and don’t outright reject the notion that there are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

    Night all!

35. Cashel responds: May 11th, 2008 at 6:44 pm

    gridbug,

    I could tell by your wording in previous comments that you were looking at Christianity through Catholic “glasses“. Let me respectfully be clear that Catholicism is not of the Christian faith. It is a religion based on the words of men, not of the God of the Bible.

    Things such as calling priests, bishops, and popes “father” (Matthew 23:9), rosaries, (Matthew 6:7), praying to idols(Leviticus 26:1), and salvation by works (Ephesians 2:8-9) are clearly spoken against in the Bible.

    The Catholics waged the “Holy War”, not Christians. Christians don’t kill people they disagree with, they correct with patience and understanding.

    I’m not trying to “convert” you or anything, I just wanted to respectfully make sure that the distinction was made.

36. CamperGuy responds: May 11th, 2008 at 8:21 pm

    Amdusias:

    “……Ted Kennedy’s car has killed more people than any of my guns…….”

    best line I’ve seen in a long time. Thanks!

    Hmmm…Maybe Bigfoot is elusive because he never knows where Ted Kennedy will be?

37. Ken Summers responds: May 12th, 2008 at 12:17 am

    Well, they are both “elusive creatures”. People hunt for bigfoot and try to find Jesus.

    I’m not quite sure about the rotten-egg smell. I’ll be sure to comment when I find either one…

38. things-in-the-woods responds: May 12th, 2008 at 1:48 pm

    all very interesting, but i think we are all missing the real discovery here- just put a picture of loren up there next to jesus and the bigfoot and dont tell me you cant see the resemblance- now that is the basis of a radical theory…

39. Loren Coleman responds: May 12th, 2008 at 2:01 pm

    What a completely unorthodox, terrible theory! Outrageous! No basis in fact or fiction! Beyond the limits of comprehension! Out of this world! There is no comparison ever to be made between any living man and Jesus Christ! Blasphemy!

    

Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|Top | Content|