MY SOUL SHALL HAVE NO PLEASURE IN HIM

Thank you so much for the chance of adressing you.

My name is Paul and I've been viewing your website for about six years and your format is very impressive. I will be upfront with you I am a follower of Jesus Christ and I have belonged to Him for the last ten years.

I've read a lot of your articles and the many different comments of those post here. Of course we are both at odds with each other theologically, however I do respect your sincerity and your logical way of thinking. I will not aproach you and your fellow Exchrists as some Christians do.

I won't blast in here saying "I will pray for all of you" if I do happen to pray for any of you I don't need to tell you that. From reading your writings I see you do understand the essentials of Biblical Chriistianity. The problems I do have with the site is that a lot of the testimonies and the posts seem more emotionilly driven then analytically.

I do blame moderm churches for giving wrong views of following Jesus. Many say "try Jesus" and He'll give you a happy life, a fulfilled marraige, a good job and other empty promisies. I am not saying your testimony, but must of the ones I read are people looking for self fulfilling lives in Jesus, and He never promised this. He said to deny your whole life, take up your cross(be willing to die) and follow Him. I would rather they all say this is not for them instead of using these things to say God isn't real.

Then when some try to act logical they bring up things like "look at all the killing in the Old testiment" but all that proves is that one disagrees with God's actions, but you can't use that to say God dose not exist. Using examples like the spanish inqusitions, the crusades and the holocaust to prove Christianity isn't true is kind of pointless, because it depends on the angle you are looking at from. When I view these events I see the evil of the Roman Catholic church and I remember the Apostle Peter said about false teachers "through them the Way of Truth shall be evil spoken of." What also bothers me is that the posters act as if there no good and rational counter arguments to their views, and acting as though only a complete idiot would follow Christ.

I just want you to know that none of this is out of anger, I used to be an athiest and a lot of my present friends are athiests. I can assure you that my conversion to Christ was not emotional, but years of probing through all the world's religions, world views and philosophies and of course God's sovreign grace.

I encourge all my christian friend to read your site and understand how an exchristian thinks, though I don't think there is such a thing as an exchristian, I believe everyone on this site is sincere and was very close to the things of Chist, but it's those who endure to the end that are true christians, as hebrews 10:38-39 says "NOW THE JUST SHALL LIVE BY FAITH: BUT IF ANY MAN DRAW BACK, MY SOUL SHALL HAVE NO PLEASURE IN HIM. BUT WE ARE NOT OF THEM WHO DRAW BACK UNTO PERDITION: BUT OF THEM THAT BELIEVE TO THE SAVING OF THE SOUL." I would like to hear from you on these things and I thank you for your time.

57 comments:

SpaceMonk said...

Blessed are the destroyers of false hope, for they are the true Messiahs - Cursed are the god-adorers, for they shall be shorn sheep!

Anonymous said...

Hi Paul. I'm glad that your beliefs about Christ work for you. I couldn't get Christianity to work for me, for reasons that are likely irrelevant to you. I still have anger in me that I often attribute to abuse from Christians, but I try not to celebrate the offences or dress my feelings up with logic. I wanted Christianity to work for me and I'm not yet over all my disappointment. But I'm getting there. May the way you walk continue to have meaning for you.

Anonymous said...

Finally, a "true christian" has posted to this site! It's so nice to know you guys exist! (hehe)

Maybe you can answer a question for me--an ex-christian, by the way, not necessarily an athiest, but getting close: I am puzzled about this whole "burning in the lake of fire" for all eternity thing. As far as I am aware, our physical bodies rot away after death. That means no more eyes, ears, nerve endings, skin, etc. Yet, in hell we're going to burn forever. How is this possible? What kind of new physical body would withstand constant burning for eternity? Will we be like Superman--alive but impenetrable?

You sound like a well-informed person, can you help to demystify this for me?

Steven Bently said...

Just to be honest with you Paul, it does not sound like you've read very much information posted on this website.

Like most all christians I know, if anything that anyone says, if does not back up scripture or come from a preacher, whatever is said, it has absolutely no merrit or validitity to the christian, it does not matter how logical it may seem or appear, if it does not come from within the Bible or a preacher, it is regarded as total rubbish to a Christian.

Paul you are so brainwashed, because you've allowed it to happen to you, it has nothing to do with truth or proof, it has all to do with Paul, and had you been raised in Iraq, you would be a full fledged Muslim right now, and you can sit there and deny this fact all day long but Paul has found his religion and No one or No thing that anyone says to Paul, is going to change Paul's mind as long as he lives.

Paul you've lost all communication with the logical realistic world, so just enjoy the rest of your life living in the Jesus mind fog and religion.

I'm sure you go around all day long playing hymns and repeating scripture in your head, and you're wondering what you can do next to make someone think that you're a good little Christian.

I used to do the same thing, and now people wonder why I do not shower them with praise and gifts to make them think that I am a good little Christian, I used to go to peoples houses and work and they would try to pay me, But No!!! I would not take any money, I wanted them to think I was a good little Christian, what a friggin fool I was! I quit people pleasing over 15 years ago.

Thats all Christians are, is people pleasers, God pleasers, Jesus pleasers, preacher pleasers.

Jesus was a people pleaser, thats why he was so willing to die, either to please God or his ignorant followers.

The same with you Paul, grow up and quit people pleasing, but you do not want to.

Anonymous said...

We point to the atrocities and absurdities of the Bible to demonstrate that the God that Christianity claims to adore, the one that is "all loving, all knowing, all good, etc" is a self-contradiction, the existence of whom is indeed, entirely disproved by your own holy book. The best a Christian can do, is to pervert the very meanings of the words 'love,' 'good,' etc. beyond all recognition when discussing their object of worship. A-la: "Just because you don't LIKE that God is psychopathically bloodthirsty, and murders and tortures and entraps and toys with people, doesn't mean he isn't a being of Perfect Goodness and Love! You are just too puny to recognize Perfect Goodness and Love when you see it!"

We just don't feel the need, to smoke what you smoke when you read the Bible, is that ok?

If you think the Roman Catholics got it wrong, then maybe you could also start by not feverishly quoting that silly book of fantasy they pulled together and edited for your enjoyment. Maybe start looking a little harder into the stuff they decided you should never get your hands on, because you'll realize all that 'other' fiction about Jesus by 'other' disciples is equally as credible as your own precious book. The Catholics just did a good job of homogenizing and keeping out the diverse, conflicting theological opinions about Jesus throughout the earliest Christian communities, so they alone could dispense the "approved" doctrine.

Maybe look a little bit into why the Jews have no reason whatsoever to believe this 'Jesus' hero Christians are all gaga about was any kind of messiah. I think I'll believe a Jew before I'll believe some flushed and excited Christian who claims to have superior knowledge of what is really meant by "Messiah," and Messianic prophecy, in Judaism.

http://www.messiahtruth.com/response.html

Also, take a good long look at the other Jesuses, as well as all the virgin-born gods / god-men of salvation that the major cultures prior to and during Jesus' time were literally swimming in. Jesus is just another 2000 year old pagan salvation-hero legend, competing with all the others that were already around, and made to the order of the day. Your religion is only now big and special because Roman-Catholic Christianity was officialized by an Emporer long ago, won the power game, and took it upon itself to make sure dissenters were destroyed.

Maybe look at a few little facts, just for kicks, and put aside YOUR emotional addiction for awhile.

http://home.earthlink.net/~pgwhacker/ChristianOrigins/

Unknown said...

Hi Paul,

Thank you for not "blasting in here", to borrow your phrasing. It does get tiresome. All the same, being a pretentious windbag comes naturally to me, so I have a few comments. :)

"The problems I do have with the site is that a lot of the testimonies and the posts seem more emotionilly driven then analytically."

Without a doubt many of the testimonies are emotional. There is often a feeling of frustration, pain, and a sense of loss that accompanies the casting off of once firmly held beliefs. It's never easy to do, regardless of what brought a person to this point.

That does not, however, mean that critical analysis or rational thinking is absent. Perhaps you are zeroing in on the emotional aspects in order to reconcile our choice to your worldview? After all, from the Christian's point-of-view those who leave the faith do so out of rebellion or dissatisfaction with the lifestyle (both emotional ideas).

"I do blame moderm churches for giving wrong views of following Jesus."

I'm sure you do. Like nearly every Christian visitor, you have the sense that the denizens of this site have simply not experienced "true" Christianity. As long as you have lurked, surely you must realize how ridiculous that sounds to us.

When I joined the army, we were informed that basic training wasn't the "real" army. During my first tour overseas, I was informed that this wasn't the "real" army either. From assignment to assignment, I never found anyone who considered their present location to be the "real" army. The point is that what one considered to be the "real" army was a subjective matter and never clearly defined.

It's the same with Christianity. Since all sects and denominations are based on the convoluted text of the Bible mixed with a variety of traditions, they all get it right, and none of them do. It is this paradox that makes the claim of "true" Christianity appear foolish.

"...when some try to act logical they bring up things like "look at all the killing in the Old testiment" but all that proves is that one disagrees with God's actions..."

It's very easy to question the morality of God's actions in the OT. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the bloodthirsty nature of your God as depicted therein.

Speaking only for myself, I have yet to see a persuasive argument that sufficiently justifies many of God's bloodier crimes. Blaming the victim is the most popular among Christians. Are you numbered among the "blame the victim" crowd?

"Using examples like the spanish inqusitions[sic], the crusades and the holocaust to prove Christianity isn't true is kind of pointless, because it depends on the angle you are looking at from."

It's not to prove Christianity isn't true, but that it is wrong and dangerous. Religions in general - Christianity included - have caused more bloodshed and suffering than nearly all secular ideologies combined.

"What also bothers me is that the posters act as if there no good and rational counter arguments to their views, and acting as though only a complete idiot would follow Christ."

It's easy to proceed as if there are no good counter arguments because experience has shown that there are none. If you feel there are good and rational counter arguments to our views, why don't you post them?

As to the second part of your statement, that's unfortunately true. There are plenty of otherwise rational, competent, intelligent, and well-meaning folks who share your faith. But, based on the content of the majority of posts here by Christian authors, this reaction is perhaps understandable?

"I can assure you that my conversion to Christ was not emotional, but years of probing through all the world's religions, world views and philosophies and of course God's sovreign[sic] grace."

After studying the world's religions, you settled on Christianity as the path for you. Great! If it feeds your need for comfort and makes you a better person, fine. If it makes you into a judgmental, hateful, ill-informed bigot, however...well, I'm sure you know how well that would go over here.

Frankly, to me there is no logical, rational reason to follow Christ that doesn't involve an emotional component. From a purely logical, analytical, and rational standpoint Christianity just doesn't hold water. Even the phrase "God's sovereign grace" is laden with emotion. But I'm curious, and if you have examples please share them.

"I encourge all my christian friend to read your site and understand how an exchristian thinks..."

Good! Maybe some of them will seek answers, if they read with open minds.

Ok, I'm done sounding off.

Unknown said...

Damn, Brigid! Tell us how you REALLY feel, baby!


Love and kisses...

Anonymous said...

Hi Paul. Sweet arguement, truly, but god essentially negates himself.

In general, for him to be god, we accept the following description.

1. God is all knowing
2. God is all loving
3. God is all powerful

These points are balabored both in the NT and by most Christian groups.

It's utter bullshit; the three points cannot peacefully co-exist when we take the history of humanity into account.

It is virtually impossible for god to be all loving, because he allows so much suffering and pain in the world. If he was all loving, wouldn't that mean that he wouldn't want anyone to suffer? Instead, he murdered his own son! And hey, if he's all powerful, why does he allow things to suck so much and for people to be so mean? Why does he allow such atrocities to take place in his name? If he loves us, why does he want so many of us to burn for all eternity in a place we hear he created? Well, maybe he can't fix these things. Whoa, that means he's not all powerful! Well, maybe he doesn't know about them . . . oops, no, that negates him being all knowing.

I can hear the rumblings of the free will argument.

Piss on it.

If god is all knowing, all powerful, and all loving, then there is no such thing as free will. If he is all powerful, he guides the path of your life. Even if he did give you choices, however, he's all knowing, and therefore knows what you will choose. He could save you, with his all-lovingness, but he would rather stand aside and watch you continue on your merry way. Why did this all powerful, all loving, all knowing guy create you to be so fucked up that you will burn for all eternity?

'Cause if there is a god, he's a hateful, paranoid, cruel, bi-polar, schitzoid asshole who gains pleasure from seeing the very people he has created spend eternity in misery, waiting eagerly to see if anyone will get into his sooper secret special club, and ha ha on all the morons he gets burn until they're crispy-fried.

Yeah, can I please believe in that dick?

Have you heard of Occam's Razor? It's the proposition that the simplest solution is often the correct solution.

What makes sense? The existence of the above-mentioned Universal Psychopath, or that there is no god?

And frankly, I would rather burn that worship something so fundamentally cruel and hateful.

And as for Christians who say that the Inqusitions and the Crusades were all a Roman Catholic thing, that does not excuse your religion. Catholics are Christians, period. And Christians have just as cheerily condemned their fellow humans to death. Remember all those Puritans who escaped England to escape religious persecution? What was that, Mr. Native American?

Salem Witch Trials.

Jonestown.

Branch Dividians.

Westboro Basptist Church.

All Christians, Christians, Christians! So lay off the fucking Catholic church.

Anonymous said...

If there's no such thing as an ex-Christian then there's also no such thing as an ex-atheist -- you're just rebelling against reality. Why do you turn your back on logic and reason? It's easier to believe in a fantasy world than take the real consequences for your actions. (See how annoying it is when people insist their worldview is really yours too?)

I personally point to the OT atrocities as proof that biblegod is not worth worshipping, and that he is human rather than deity. When people behave that way they get the electric chair, for the good of society. When God acts that way you fall on your knees. Scary.

Anonymous said...

^^I won't blast in here saying "I will pray for all of you" if I do happen to pray for any of you I don't need to tell you that.^^


Thanks for telling us that.
:>(

Anonymous said...

The Bible god 'exists' in the minds of the believers. The word believe is a word with 'lie' in the middle of it. With facts, faith is no longer needed. Never forget, when you pray to a god it's known as prayer, when a god speaks to you, it's schizophrenia.Those who consider themselves 'true Christians' must lie to themselves that the supernatural (ie:that which is not natural and which does not exist in the natural world)exists in the form of God,Satan(you must also have faith that he exists too), Angels, Devils as well as things which are contrary to the laws of nature are a rule of faith. A 'true' Christian must believe too that the findings of archaeology are null and void, that prehistoric man's bones are really monkeys, that the mustard seed is the smallest seed, that a little wine is the answer to the ills of man, that 'laying on of hands' and prayer cures all and is all the medical assistance one needs and that to receive it is an article of non-belief in a god's power, that one does not need a 'witch doctor' such as a medical doctor or pharmacist and his medicines, that a woman must not wear cosmetics and must cover her head at all times as many 'true' Muslims do even today, that a Woman is worth less than a man and a whole host of self lying of the findings of rational minds that encompass science, medicine and psychology/psychiatry which obviate the need for the fantasies of religious beliefs. It is religions such as Christianity that need a defense, not the honest rational thinking and conclusions of modern unbelievers.

Welcome to ExChristian.net, keep coming back because it works to cure irrational thinking and beliefs!

Anonymous said...

YOU SAY: "I would rather they all say this is not for them instead of using these things to say God isn't real. "

Why should non-Christians oblige you by putting themselves in your neat little apologetic stereotypes? I mean, I know this is how the Bible explains unconversion, but obviously, we don't believe the Bible otherwise we would be cowering before a sadistic Biblegod too, get it?

YOU SAY: "all that proves is that one disagrees with God's actions, but you can't use that to say God dose not exist. "

Or, they may conclude that the Bible is an unreliable piece of evidence for the Black Spider that does the things the Bible says he does.

YOU SAY: "When I view these events I see the evil of the Roman Catholic church."

The speed with which Christians turn on and eat eachother, denouncing them as not TrueBelievers* is always breathtaking to behold. Of course, when you postulate that Christians are somehow more virtuous then non-Christians, contrary evidence forces the observer to place more and more BibleBots into the "Not true Christian" category. What a pleasant community of moral growth.

YOU SAY: "and of course God's sovreign grace."

Oh great, a Calvinist in our midst. Does somebody have the rabies vaccine or straight jacket?

Anonymous said...

Paul, doesn't your bible tell you that lying is a "sin"? From the way you write, I would think that you have at least some basic intelligence so lack of comprehension can't be the problem. Therefore, I have to conclude that when you claim you've been following this site for years and that you see that most members left christianity for emotional reasons, you're engaging in deliberate falsehood.

I've been following this site for only about three months, but it was evident to me from Day 1 that most of the people here who identify themselves as exchristians left the cult after much analytic thought, research, study, and self-examination -- just the opposite of emotionalism. Of course, that doesn't mean they cannot or should not get emotional when recounting the abuses they suffered previously while they were christians, or in discussing the harm that christianity continues to inflict.

You indicate that you became a christian after conducting a similar process of study and logical thought, which I find equally hard to believe (and I find that statement about you "belonging" to Jesus kind of creepy, to be honest). But, if there's any truth to your comments, please explain how you made a RATIONAL decision to become a christian. That means providing a reason other than saying something like you believe because the bible tells you so, or because of the feeling (EMOTION) you get from being a member-in-good-standing with jesus, or just that you believe based on "faith." I want rational, analytical evidence to convince me that you're right and we're wrong. The ball's in your court.

Anonymous said...

Paul,

It is so great to hear another voice of passion and incredible intellectual reasoning. I've been an atheist since I was 14 but your words convinced me that I really want to open my heart to let Jesus in. I feel filled with the Holy Spirit!

After reading your testimony, I went and got my Bible and started reading. Boy, what a great book! My heart is filled with pity for the poor atheists here that will surely burn in the lake of everlasting fire.

I do have a question for you though, you mentioned that The Roman Catholic church is not the true way to God. This made me think that some of the other thousands of denominations might not be the path to our Lord either. How do I determine which one is right? I'm pretty confused and overwhelmed. I'd appreciate some help from you.

One thing that I was so pleased to read in the Bible is that God can change his mind. The flood was an important event. All those men women and children were such sinners they deserved drowning, but God in his infinite grace for humanity restored us from Noah's loins. The other place where God changed his mind was when he went from the Old Testament to the New Testament. Praise be to God. Salvation is at hand.

My conversion to the ways of God has made me realize how sad it is that the people on this site are doomed to an everlasting death by fire. Contrast that with trillions of years of harp music and worshipping our God and I'm sure you know that salvation is the only way to go.

Now that my heart is filled with the love of God, of his only son and of the spirit - I can speak to others with the knowledge that if I can only save but one soul my work is done.

OK here goes...

Alright all you atheist fuckers, God loves your sorry asses and is waiting patiently for your worship. Down on your knees!

Brigid - honey you better shape up and fly right. God doesn't have any use for foul mouthed bitches like you. I know this because I am filled with the spirit. Praise Jesus!

Patricia you too are on a one way trip to toastville. God is everything, everywhere and he knows what you're doing. You'd better be nice and not naughty or you will be struck down.

All you atheists are surely going to roast in Hell unless you get down on your fucking knees and spend the rest of your days kissing God's holy ass. I have accepted Jesus Christ as my personal Lord and saviour and I will be laughing at you from heaven where I will be listening to harp music and kissing God's - I mean worshipping our loving God.

Yours in Christ - LambOGod (Formerly BoyGod666)

Ian said...

Paul, I admire your honesty and how you use your mind and rational thought when commenting on non-christians here on this website. If someone comes in rambling about how we know Jesus is real but we don't want to admit it, how we'll all burn, how we were never true christians, etc. my mind pretty much wanders. But when someone comes in here and intelligantly and calmly discusses things, that's different.

I do agree with you that, what I think, real christianity is about self-improvement. Of taking up your own cross and leaving all that does not work for you as an individual behind. Christianity should not be about sitting down and letting Jesus wait on you hand and foot. It should be about getting up, and walking the path with Jesus walking beside you.

My own beliefs is that we are here on earth to grow, evolve, and become better individuals. It's about self-growth and self-evolution into a higher and grander vision of who you are. You do that by exploring, questioning, experimenting, learning, and finding a path that works for you.

If christianity is that path for you, then use it. My path is individual spirituality. Christianity does not work for me, but apparently it works for you.

As long as you are seeking to grow and evolve as an individual, then that's fine. If a system of belief is playing to your ego, then perhaps it isn't working for you.

Anonymous said...

I really want to thank you guys for posting my comments, and gratefull everyone voiced in. Please understand that I don't think I am so cleaver I can convert anyone here. I know that as a christian will come off as being proud and arrogant. I do think you guys are pretty cool. When I read your posts on different subjects I can see your intellect. I certinly didn't mean that all the members here argue emotionlly. I don't know if you would all except this line of reasoning, but I trully believe that God has structured the universe in such a way that an athiest in a purely logical and scientific way argue for thier view. I believe also He has provided enough evidence a person could by reason, faith and love turn to God. Not by "blind faith" but a humble trust in the God of Scripture through the natural revelation of creation and the special revelation of Holy Writ. I also understand from the Bible that God does not invade our physical universe in such a way that the athiest is trapted to admit God's existence. According to Isaiah 45:15 God hides Himself to those that reject Him it reads "VERILY THOU AET A GOD THAT HIDEST THYSELF, O GOD OF ISREAL, THE SAVIOUR." I am not qouting this because you believe it's true, but I think you can see the possibility. There is a sceptical magazine that comes out every two months I believe, and I try my best to read it everytime. These guys are very smart and their writing is exelent, and they can give you very well executedreasons why they don't beleave in God. However I think one can debate any position well, though thier proposal is false. I will go out on a limb before you my friends and say that there is a good argument for the God of the Bible. Now, are there problems in the Bible? Yes, but not in the way of absolute contradictions, falsehoods or deception. A problem in itself is not false, it just needs to be worked out, like a geomotree problem. I believe there is good evidence to assume that many Old testament books predicted what we have witnessed in ancient history, some will retort back that these book were writted after the fact, but the case can be made that they not. Again I believe God has let both sides to decide for themselves(just remember many history critics believe divine revelation is impossible anyway and that fuels thier arguments). Someone made the point that if
I was raised in a muslem country I would argue for Islam. The only problem with this is when my family lovingly invited me to Christianity I fully rejected it. The way I judge a religion like Islam is to go right to the founder. I don't decide Islam is wrong the some people do by bringing up terrorizm and the missdeeds of the followers. I look at the man himself. Mohammed most likely had epilepsy, he had private experiences a cave without any witnesses, he himself thought at first it was all demonic, then his wife and sister in law convinced him it was
God, mohammed got most of his imformation from travelling jews and christians and confused Biblical events in the process, he did no miracles or fulfulling prophices to establish his claims. I did this with all religions and they all fell short. Someone said jewish position on the Messiah is more convincing then my position. Please understand that christianity is not a gentile religion, John the baptist, Mary, joseph, anna, simeon, elizabeth, zachariah, the 12 apostles, the 70 disciples, the thousans during Jesus' ministry, the 500 hundred at His Resurrection, the 120 at the upper room, the 3,000 at pentecoast, the 5,000 after that and all the christians in the first years of the church were all jewish! Many were Pharasies, sadducess, priests, zealots, hellenists, poor, rich, and every class of jews. They were from Jerusalem, all Israel and other nations. They all had jewish teaching and upbringing and turn to Jesus as Messiah. You must understand that moderm judaism is not pure Old testament Hebrewism. Today's judaism is rabbinic/pharasaic/talmudic judaism and the same judaism of Moses. Though moderm jews hold in high view the hebrew scriptures the TALMUD is what a lot thier central beliefs come from. THey even say that jews who don't except the talmud as inspired as the Scriptures as heretics, such as the Karaite jews, who have been percecuted by talmudic jews. The scriptures christians hold as messianic were also held by ancient jews as being the same. It was rabbi Rashi in the twelve century who said Isaiah 53 was about Israel, all his conteptaries still saw the messiah there, just not Jesus as the fulfillment. The hebrew Scriptures do not speak against the possibility of a divine/human Messiah, but the talmud dose. the tradition of the elders that Jesus and many jewish teachers spoke against became over time the oral law(talmud). Isaiah the prophet said these people draw nigh to me with thier lips, but thier heart is far from me, they teach the commandments of men. Christianity is incompatble with the talmud, but not the hebrew Bible. I am not saying all this proves christiany, but I think it comes close. Thanks for time and hope to hear your response. your friend paul.

Anonymous said...

1.Lets define God and its attributes: It is omnipotent, omnipresent, omni benevolent and all knowing.

2. The scriptures are the inerrant word of God, written by men inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Questions:

1. The idea of eternal torture and damnation?
2. The need for a salvation plan?
3. Why aren’t the gospels consistent with each other since they were inspired?
4. Is there freewill in heaven?

Attempted answers:

#1. If God has the ability to do whatever it pleases than why can’t it un-create, or cast to another area or realm the souls of the unsaved people. Possibly somewhere that is neutral. Why does it find it necessary to torture these souls for eternity, and what is the benefit? It doesn’t have to if it is omnipotent. The only answer that is plausible is because it wants to, for its own pleasure, if it has to it is not omnipotent, and if it wants to it is not omni benevolent.

#2. If I die with a sin on my soul (unsaved), why can’t I be in the presence of God? If it is impossible for God to be in the presence of sin it is not omnipotent. If it needs a mediator (Jesus) to die for the sins of mankind in order for it to allow them into its presence, than it is bound by an external law. Something that it cannot control, or has any influence over. The sin is more powerful than God. If sin can be in Gods presence, but God cannot be in the presence of sin, God is the weaker of the two.

#3. Many people have tried to explain away the inconsistencies in the gospels. One of the more popular euphemisms is “its like four witnesses to a car accident, they all saw the same thing but just explain it a little different”. The writing of the gospels is not like witnessing a car accident, it is more like taking dictation from a single witness and writing down exactly what is dictated. If the writers of the gospels were free to change what the Holy Spirit had inspired them to write, then the gospels are the inaccurate works of man. If the writers scribed accurately than the Holy Spirit could not recall the events without error, it is not omnipotent.

#4. If there is no evil or sin in heaven, then God has taken away part of our ability to make choices. If we have no other choice but to obey and enjoy worshipping God, then what pleasure does it get out of it? If we choose not to worship then have we sinned? If we cannot choose, then we are no different than a robot. Do we have the ability to remember our life on earth? If we do then we will know about sin, and if we know about sin (the other choice) than sin is present in heaven, at least in thought. If we cannot remember our lives on earth, then what was the purpose, why didn’t it just create heaven to begin with? If the purpose was a test to see if we were worthy, it already knew, if it didn’t than it is not omnipotent.

Your Pal,
Farris

Ian said...

Paul wrote:

"The way I judge a religion like Islam is to go right to the founder. I don't decide Islam is wrong the some people do by bringing up terrorizm and the missdeeds of the followers. I look at the man himself. Mohammed most likely had epilepsy, he had private experiences a cave without any witnesses, he himself thought at first it was all demonic, then his wife and sister in law convinced him it was
God, mohammed got most of his imformation from travelling jews and christians and confused Biblical events in the process, he did no miracles or fulfulling prophices to establish his claims. I did this with all religions and they all fell short."

If I may comment on this...

I don't believe in judging people or things (doesn't the bible say judge not, lest ye be judged? I couldn't help but notice that you say you judge religion). Granted, it's hard not to do it, but I try.

Anyway, your approach of looking at the founder of a faith is an interesting one, and i've done that with Jesus.

Doing a historical search for Jesus (not taking into account the mythology), one can come to the conclusion that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet who believed the end of the world was literally around the corner, and he had a special role to play in ushering it in. He believed it would come within his generation...which it did not.

If one looks at pre-christian figures of religion and belief systems, one can find a number of striking similarities between these godmen. They are usually the son of God, they are here to teach, they are betrayed, die, come back to life, then ascend to heaven, and will come back at a later date. There are lots, and I mean lots, of godmen who share these traits.

Looking over these ancient Godmen, it became apparent to me that the chances of Jesus's followers adapting these beliefs to thier stories about Jesus were very high. Therefore, I have come to the conclusion that an enormous amount of Jesus's life is mythology added on by his followers.

As for your idea about there not being any real problems or contradictions, many, many, many people will not agree with you. For example, is God a sinner? (Exodus 34:14, and Gal 5:19-20). As a person who just looks at the bible without any apologenic ideas, there are contradictions and errors in it.

And as for phrophecy...well, the more I look into it, the less and less credible the prophecy claim becomes. For example, there is a prophecy in Issiah that after Israel has risen again (or something to that matter), lions will eat grass (at least, I think that's what they eat) and children shall stick thier hands into viper nests. Also, Issiah predicts that the river of egypt (the nile) will dry up. Needless to say, it diddn't happen. Most of the prophecies that refer to Jesus were, from my readings, picked at random from parts of the old testamet. Take a look at this page to see how that worked (http://www.whywontgodhealamputees.com/god23.htm).

jimearl said...

Paul, I am a real atheist and would like an apology from you for claiming to be atheist. You are giving us a bad reputation. You never were a "true" atheist or you would still be atheist. Truth is, once you have left the faith, you can't go back. The Wholly Babble says so. I believe it would be prudent for you to come on back and be a "true" atheist for real. Why waste your time on religion? The real world is lot more fun than your fantasy world. Oh, BeJebbers, it's time for me to go home. Have a good weekend.

Unknown said...

Paul,

Thanks for the compliments but is this the same Paul who wrote the original post or someone who picked up the torch? The writing style is much harder to follow and the text contains many more spelling/grammatical errors than in the first post. Spell check works wonders, whoever you are, as does forming paragraphs with coherent themes. But I digress.

"I don't know if you would all except [sic] this line of reasoning, but I trully [sic] believe that God has structured the universe in such a way that an athiest [sic] in a purely logical and scientific way argue for thier [sic] view."

Not to be disrespectful, but I don't know that I can even follow your argument here, much less accept it. Please clarify! Perhaps you meant:

"I don't know if you would all accept this line of reasoning, but I truly believe that God has structured the universe in such a way that an atheist [can] -in a purely logical and scientific way - argue for their view."

If so, it appears you are saying that God structured "logic" and "science" into the universe. Innocuous enough. What idea do you want us to understand?

Or, perhaps you are saying that God structured atheists into the universe for the purpose of posing a logical counter-argument for His existence. Confusing idea, and also mildly offensive. Again, what idea do you want us to understand?

"I believe also He has provided enough evidence [that] a person could by reason, faith and love turn to God."

The fact that millions do turn to God for answers would seem to validate this idea. However, "evidence" has a different meaning to a Christian than it does to a skeptic. Thus, I can't agree to this proposition.

"Not by "blind faith" but a humble trust in the God of Scripture through the natural revelation of creation and the special revelation of Holy Writ."

This is a contradictory statement, though you probably don't see it that way.

What you term as the "natural revelation of creation" has another entirely different (although admittedly incomplete) explanation. Theistic evolution seems to resolve the (false) dichotomy between faith and science, so I will accept without further argument that this is what you mean by not relying on blind faith alone, although I maintain that the mechanisms of evolution do not require deity.

Whether scripture is the result of "special revelation" or not is another matter. This does indeed require blind faith in what is commonly called the "internal evidence" of the Bible itself (see 2 Tim. 3:16 and Mark 13:31 for scripture testimony, here for a defense, and here for a refutation of the idea).

"I also understand from the Bible that God does not invade our physical universe in such a way that the athiest is trapted [sic] [in]to admit[ting] God's existence."

If there is a power that exists beyond space and time, and is in some way responsible for this universal mess, then I would agree that God does not intervene (i.e, such a being would be neutral). Of course, this introduces all sorts of other problems for the Christian that needn't be addressed just now.

"Now, are there problems in the Bible? Yes, but not in the way of absolute contradictions, falsehoods or deception."

See this article for reasons why this statement is wrong. It may not be the best I've seen, but it's the most accessible from where I am right now.

"Please understand that christianity is not a gentile religion, John the baptist, Mary, joseph, anna, simeon, elizabeth, zachariah, the 12 apostles, the 70 disciples, the thousan[d]s during Jesus' ministry, the 500 hundred at His Resurrection, the 120 at the upper room, the 3,000 at pentecoast, the 5,000 after that and all the christians in the first years of the church were all jewish!"

This does not support your argument. It is a fact of history that Christianity did not become popular until the Gentiles became believers. The Jewish people in general did not accept the message of the gospels, or Jesus as their Messiah.

Whether today's Judaism is the same as ancient Judaism is a matter for Jewish scholars, Rabbis, and historians. It has no bearing on the validity of your faith with regard to this discussion.

To be blunt, if this post represents the substance of why you believe there is logical and rational evidence for a belief in God, I'm afraid it doesn't appear to be too convincing.

Anonymous said...

Classic answers to Paul.

Heres a guy who a least tries to make a serious post, although I can see where he was inadequate, and the posters almost uniformly spit on him

Brigid was classic, the anti Jewish cunt.

Paul, these people hate your guts and they hate Christians...don't kid yourself.

We need to work politically to make sure these kind don't get control over us.

We has seen what happens when atheists run a society, my parents escaped, being severly diabled in the process form an atheist inspired dictatorship.

Do not expect any quarter from these people, none will be given.

They are quite serious when they call you a fool and a shit.

But you are quite right there is not a lot of analytic thought, at least in the posts.

This place reeks of hate.

Anonymous said...

Albert, I would also like to know what books -- other than the bible and apologist texts -- Paul read to reach his conclusions ... but don't hold your breath waiting for an honest reply. Several of us have asked him to explain what he means when he claims he became a christian after a process of rational thought and study, but the best he can come up with is "Not by "blind faith" but a humble trust in the God of Scripture through the natural revelation of creation and the special revelation of Holy Writ." Just another way of saying, I believe because I believe. There's nothing there.

Anonymous said...

Hi South.

It wasn't the atheists, I assure you.

An atheist at work who I had had many arguments with tried to destroy me by setting me up.

The truth came out.

He was convicted.

I see the hate shitting diarrhea around here is as fetid as ever.

Now, I don't pretend to be hear to convert anyone, you have made your choices but I just like to let you know that we all know what you would do to us if you got control.

I have satisfaction in knowing no admitted atheist will ever gain political office.

In fact, I am impressed by a guy in this city who outs atheists.

Its hilarious to see them dissemble and try to explain their hate filled irrationality.

Some shit always tries to tell me how open and tolerant atheists are and I always have this site to refer them to.

Keep up the good work, saps.

Don't change a thing.

You are really successful.

Trust me.


























Did you know Hitler was a cocksucker?

Unknown said...

"Heres a guy who a least tries to make a serious post, although I can see where he was inadequate, and the posters almost uniformly spit on him."

You didn't read all the posts, and where you came up with accusations of anti-Semitism, I don't know. The fact of the matter is that Paul's God and the Jewish God are one and the same. Do you disagree?

"Paul, these people hate your guts and they hate Christians...don't kid yourself."

Correction: We don't like Christianity or Christians who dogmatically insist (Paul hasn't, to his credit) that he has possession of the one absolute truth.

Besides, he's already kidding himself. Why stop now?

"We need to work politically to make sure these kind don't get control over us."

Here in the U.S., it is a religious majority that already has control. Yes, we don't like it. Is it likely to change? No.

"We has seen what happens when atheists run a society, my parents escaped, being severly diabled in the process form an atheist inspired dictatorship."

Sorry for your experience. Which country? Perhaps there was more at work than a religious ideology?

Incidentally, humanity is the cause of all of its own ills, regardless of ideology. Perhaps you know of a time in history when religion wasn't responsible for massive bloodshed and suffering?

"But you are quite right there is not a lot of analytic thought, at least in the posts."

Hurl insults all you want, it won't change the truth.

"This place reeks of hate."

It does now. Thanks for nothing.

Unknown said...

Oh. It's a troll nevermind.

Ian said...

"It wasn't the atheists, I assure you.

An atheist at work who I had had many arguments with tried to destroy me by setting me up.

The truth came out.

He was convicted.

I see the hate shitting diarrhea around here is as fetid as ever.

Now, I don't pretend to be hear to convert anyone, you have made your choices but I just like to let you know that we all know what you would do to us if you got control.

I have satisfaction in knowing no admitted atheist will ever gain political office.

In fact, I am impressed by a guy in this city who outs atheists.

Its hilarious to see them dissemble and try to explain their hate filled irrationality.

Some shit always tries to tell me how open and tolerant atheists are and I always have this site to refer them to.

Keep up the good work, saps.

Don't change a thing.

You are really successful.

Trust me.
"

Well, there are always nice atheists and not-nice atheists. Keep in mind that there are nice christians and not-nice christians.

The big question is, do you want to be a nice individual, or a not-nice individual? The nice individuals usually, in my experience, get more respect. And besides, it's nice to be nice, no matter what you believe in.

Jim Arvo said...

Goldie: "Now, I don't pretend to be hear to convert anyone, you have made your choices but I just like to let you know that we all know what you would do to us if you got control."

As I've said many times, if I "got control", I'd urge you to get some counseling. Seriously.

Anonymous said...

Why We Hate Jews

Part 1: Introduction and Judaism
Sermon Notes of Pastor Mark Downey

"I could have titled this message "The Truth About Jews", but I don't think it would have hit the same nerve. At this point, some people may think I've got a lot of nerve talking about God's Chosen People. The point of this message, however, is that if people knew the truth about jews, they would hate them just as I do, and would be committing 'hate speech' by rejecting the idea that jews are God's Chosen People. God has chosen jews to fulfill a role, but it is the complete opposite of what they purportedly represent. What they represent is the evil and wickedness of an antichrist nature in the world. They are perpetually engaged in damage control from generation to generation, if they are not being purged en masse from an entire country. Through their efforts, darkness covers the earth. Jews are a dead end for this planet."

http://www.kinsmanredeemer.com/WhyWeHateJews.htm

Anonymous said...

Did you know Hitler was a cocksucker?

I guess that means you are all wet, there EG, tell us, what's hitler's breath smell like?

Anonymous said...

Wow! There are some serious sickos in here! And it ain't the atheists.

Anonymous said...

Oh, boo-hoo-hoo = (

...Like, I had an argument at work...::sniff, sniff::..with one of those stupid atheist people...::sniff, sniff::...y' know?.. those stupid people?.. the ones who don't believe in magic?...::sniff, sniff::...yeah, them! Well......well, just for that!....ALL atheists are dumb dumbs who hate everything! STUPID ATHEISTS! Oh, and BTW, I'm telling all my christian friends to come here to see the intolerance!.....BOTH OF THEM!

ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Goldie doesn't mean atheists anyway, he means people who don't believe exactly what he does. Not all of us are atheists on here.

"I have satisfaction in knowing no admitted atheist will ever gain political office."

Yeah, cuz the current Christian in office is doing a fabulous job. The country is becoming Christian and stupid, just like you want. Dark Ages, here we come! Better brush up on your Chinese.

Anonymous said...

Yes, my parents escaped from a country run by followers of dead in atheist philosophy.

They died when I was young and I was raised by my uncle, who WAS an atheist.

He is dead now, and he knows better.

This piece of shit was an alcoholic intellectual with a library of about 2500 atheist books, which constiture my inheritance.

I acutually started reading this stuff, and realized what brain dead hate puke it was.

The old bastard had atheist meeting in the basement every Saturday night...they called themselves "freethinkers" and drank and afterwards he beat my aunt and raped her.

Like clockwork.

He spouted a lot of Nietzsche, and I get some of my best quotes from that syphillitic fucker.

But now I have the basement, and from here I post to the world uncer many names.

For my name is really Legion.

Anonymous said...

Coming over the loud speaker at the Wayward Jew Sanitorium!

ATTENTION!!! ATTENTION!!! Looney Alert!!! Looney Alert!!!

Someone has removed the vent cover leading into the main duct system with a fingernail file again!!!

It's Emanual Goldstein Again!!! he's headed to the computer room as always, and he'll soon be logged on to the
ex-chritian site, and he'll post some ignorant rubbish as always, he imagines he talks to imaginary friends in the sky and he hates Atheists, but he loves Christians, even if they cut both of his grandma's arms off, he would still love all Christians, but do not let an Atheist say they do not believe in his imaginary friends, he would like to kill all Atheists.

Ok Emanual, it's time to return back to the pink rubber room, here's your silly putty and string, stay off the freaking computer, you fool!!!

Anonymous said...

You said this....
"The problems I do have with the site is that a lot of the testimonies and the posts seem more emotionilly driven then analytically"

You went on later to quote scripture "NOW THE JUST SHALL LIVE BY FAITH".

Tell me where the "faith" of followers and "emotions" of posts differ in respect to both sides?

I found Christianity based on emotion and the analytic. I left it based on the same exact way. You ask me to join based on emotions "faith" and not the errors of the bible chain letter or actions of man. I became a "Christian" because of a "witness". A witness that testified to the love of Gahd in his heart. I knew of no love before. I said OK. I want this love. Now that I see there is no love in the people of God or a loving god based on the faith I took in the people as a naive person in crisis, I now have a right to give a verdict to the non-truth of the witness.

I got sucked in by 99% emotion. I left under 99% emotion at first, but now turned it into 99% analytic.

I was lied to and left the fold. I then came to wonder why and then studies every side of the issue as to why things went badly. I came to understand that the people are bad. If there were a god, it would certainly understand why I would leave and not believe.

Again, I had no proof when I joined and faith only. It took the same faith to leave and evidence over time as to why. You can't tell me to not look at man because that is the person who told me about his god. It's the same as telling to not look at the suicide bomber and to Allah only.

Faith and truth can't co-exist. Faith is used when facts of truth are unattainable. These the ways of trickery.

You live your faith on emotion and you tell me I can't live mine unless it's your way.

Anonymous said...

We were brought up to hate - and we do - By Nonie Darwish

"In school in Gaza, I learned hate, vengeance and retaliation. Peace was never an option, as it was considered a sign of defeat and weakness. At school we sang songs with verses calling Jews "dogs" (in Arab culture, dogs are considered unclean).

Criticism and questioning were forbidden. When I did either of these, I was told: "Muslims cannot love the enemies of God, and those who do will get no mercy in hell." As a young woman, I visited a Christian friend in Cairo during Friday prayers, and we both heard the verbal attacks on Christians and Jews from the loudspeakers outside the mosque. They said: "May God destroy the infidels and the Jews, the enemies of God. We are not to befriend them or make treaties with them." We heard worshippers respond "Amen".

My friend looked scared; I was ashamed. That was when I first realised that something was very wrong in the way my religion was taught and practised. Sadly, the way I was raised was not unique. Hundreds of millions of other Muslims also have been raised with the same hatred of the West and Israel as a way to distract from the failings of their leaders. Things have not changed since I was a little girl in the 1950s."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/02/12/do1205.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2006/02/12/ixop.html

Anonymous said...

EG: "For my name is really Legion."

Legion or Lesion.

Lesion: "A lump or abscess that may be caused by injury or disease, such as cancer."

ourcuddles.com/glossary.htm

Lesion it is.

Anonymous said...

Jews Hating on Jews - The Bull Calf God El, vs The "True God" YHWH.

Antisemitism Against Messianic Judaism And Messianic Jews

"Anti-semitism is not just an accusation Jews can hurl at Gentiles. It is also found among Jews themselves. And what of Anti-Gentileism from Jews which is nearly the basis of Pharisee-Talmudism?

Anti-Semitism may have been born in Egypt when the Jews became enslaved there after staying to long in a pagan land and not moving where God really wanted them.

An examination of the Old Testament in the fighting between the ten north tribes and the two south tribes seems to be Jewish anti-Semitism of Jew against Jew. The Jews who followed the pagan religion of Baal and cow worship, hated the true God worshipers in the southern tribes of Judah and Benjamin. This amounted to the seed of David tribe vs the northern ten tribes under non-Davidic usurpers and evil kings. The hatred was rooted in political and theological differences of theocracy vs humanism. That hatred continues down to today against Christian Messianism."

http://jesus-messiah.com/studies/persecution.html

Steven Bently said...

How can anyone claim a religious title after writing about a God and it's followers condoning of hatred and the murder of other
religious sects?

It would seem that only man is capible of Hatred and Murder but attributes it to a God for their own selfish reasons, not to make humanity look so bad itself.

I think that the Event of Evil fromh Hatred could not be from any loving God as both often and openly and frequently displayed in the Bible and Qu'ran, this plainly shows anyone with dab of logic and common sense that the teachings of the Bible and Qu'ran are plainly false and it is disguised as being Holy, therefore the Malice of Evil in men's minds are the sole author's of both books.

I carry no titles, and make no claims, I am a human being, no different than any other human being, when we are born, there are no titles, no stamps, no creeds, no beliefs in any Gods.

If there is a evil nature that is representitive of all evil thoughts that are inherent in Humans minds, then evil impeded by man is the sole author of both books and man's own prophesy to destroy himself, will be some day be fulfilled.

When all humans are destroyed by their own actions and beliefs, only then will there be world peace.

Ian said...

To be honest, this is getting quite amusing to me. I wonder where this will go, as it's interesting to see people saying this and that.

What interesting times we all live in.

Edwardtbabinski said...

To requote Ben with a bit of editing, and add some other quotations...

Many of the most cordial Christians either hum hymns or listen to contemporary Christian music, or repeat Scripture in their heads, and wonder what they can do next to make someone think that they're a "good little Christian."

I used to do the same thing, and now people wonder why I do not shower them with praise and gifts to make them think that I am a "good little Christian." I used to go to people's houses and work and they would try to pay me, But No! I would not take a penny, I wanted to emblazon on their brains the idea that I was a "good little Christian." (The "people-pleasing for Christ" part of my life ended over 15 years ago.) That's what many Christians are, people pleasers, God pleasers, Jesus pleasers, preacher pleasers.

Jesus was a people pleaser, thats why he was so willing to die, either to please God or his ignorant followers.

Ben at http://exchristian.net/ [edited by E.T.B.]
____________________________

HOW TO SPOT CHRISTIANS

One Sunday afternoon my cousin and I were eating at a restaurant. He paused, and started pointing at people. “He’s a Christian … He’s a Christian … So is she and she and that other guy.”

I asked how he was so sure.

His reply? “I was a hard-core Evangelical Christian for a few years, remember? It’s not hard to see once you know what to look for. Look for someone who looks like they’re wearing clothes just a little bit nicer than they’re comfortable in, that have a smile on their face. It won’t look like a happy smile, it’ll look kind of contrived and forced, like they’re trying to convince themselves they’re happy and rich.”

Justice McPherson
____________________________

CONVERTED OR ADDICTED?
Psychotherapists will tell you that in dealing with an addict, you have to understand that the person’s primary relationship is with the drug. The drug has the ability to control the addict’s thinking to a remarkable degree, and you must understand that any relationship you may feel with the addict is a distant second to the one they have with their drug. The most devout Evangelical Christians are open and unabashed about this. Their “relationship with Jesus” as they use the term, is the primary relationship in their lives. There is even a scripture that goes something like, “Not unless you hate your mother and father can you be my disciple,” and, “Who are my mother and father? But he who hears and words of God and does them.” Jesus even suggested to one disciple that he ought not return home to help bury a dead family member, instead he ought to “Let the dead bury the dead.” In other words, Evangelicals stress that one’s love for Jesus ought to be so strong that relatively speaking, one’s love for even close family members, must not compare. You may love your mother but you should love Jesus so much more that in comparison it’s like you hate her. Doesn’t this sound an awful lot like a drunk’s love for the bottle?

It may be helpful when trying to have a relationship with a believer to remember that you and their relationship with you means very little to them compared to their need to continue in their thought addiction. In fact “true believers” may happily sacrifice a relationship with their own spouses or children should those family members refuse to convert, or become “unbelievers.” In such cases the “true believer” feels they are making the ultimate sacrifice in “serving God rather than man.”

Evangelical beliefs may promise you comfort, security and power just like the ads for alcohol link its consumption with sexiness, sports activities, and a rippin’ good time, but the promises in both cases often grow sour as the addict grows more hardened and insistent.

Some people have an instant “conversion” to alcoholism. They take their first drink, or have their first good drunk and understand (in the words of a very young alcoholic client I once had) “This (drinking) is what I was put on this world to do.”

For some people their religion is an illness they are trying to recover from and the recovery process is more difficult than recovering from alcoholism.

Saint Vilis at the Yahoo Group, ExitFundyism
____________________________

HOW DIFFERENT ARE MOST “CONVERTED” PEOPLE?
Were it true that a converted man as such is of an entirely different kind from a natural man, there surely ought to be some distinctive radiance. But notoriously there is no such radiance. Converted men as a class are indistinguishable from normal men,

By the very intensity of his fidelity to the paltry ideals with which an inferior intellect may inspire him, a saint can be even more objectionable and damnable than a superficial “carnal” man would be in the same situation.

William James, The Varieties of Religious Experience
____________________________

IS THE HEART OF MAN DECEITFUL ABOVE ALL THINGS AND DESPERATELY WICKED?
According to the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus taught, “If you see a woman and lust after her, I say that you have already committed adultery in your heart.” In other words, even if you don’t commit adultery “in the flesh,” you’ve committed it just by lusting after someone. Now suppose you see someone in need, who could use some cash or a kind word, and you yearn in your heart to give it to them (but for whatever reason are unable to give it to them). Does that mean you have “already committed charity in your heart?” Think about it. If a lust-filled yearning (not the act of sex, but just the yearning), is evidence of how bad the human heart is, then what about the yearnings people feel to help and support one another? Might they not be an indication of goodness in people’s hearts?

Gandhi, the famous Hindu peace-activist, taught that people should seek out what was best in their own religions and hearts. Even Jesus put a positive spin on “the heart” when he taught that “The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart” (Luke 6:45 & Mat. 12:35), and when he taught that people ought to “Love God with all their heart,” (Mat. 22:37). How is that possible if the “heart” is “wicked and deceitful above all things?”

No doubt the “wickedness” of the “heart” as depicted in the book of Jeremiah, chapter 17, verse 9 (“The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked”) applies to some people at some times whenever they act deceitful and wicked, especially when they are at their lowest and weakest points. But to take the book of Jeremiah’s exaggerated ancient Near Eastern way of speaking, and bake it in an oven until it becomes as dry and hard as a brick of dogma, and make that brick a cornerstone of your theology, well, to do that takes a “heart” relatively dry of compassion and fair appraisals of others’ beliefs and actions.

E.T.B.
____________________________

CHRISTIANITY CAN MAGNIFY HARMLESS ACTIONS INTO DEADLY OFFENSES
One of Christianity’s chief offenses is not that it has enlisted the services of bad men, but that it has misdirected the energies of good ones. The kindly, the sensitive, the thoughtful, those who are striving to do their best under its influence, are troubled, and consequently often develop a more or less morbid frame of mind. The biographies of the best men in Christian history offer many melancholy examples of the extent to which they have falsely accused themselves of sins during their “unconverted” state, and the manner in which harmless actions are magnified into deadly offenses.

Chapman Cohen, Essays in Freethinking
____________________________

ON “REVIVALS”
In the days of my youth, ministers depended on revivals to save souls and reform the world. The emotional sermons, the sad singing, the hysterical “Amens,” the hope of heaven, the fear of hell, caused many to lose what little sense they had. In this condition they flocked to the “mourner’s bench”--asked for prayers of the faithful--had strange feelings, prayed, and wept and thought they had been “born again.” Then they would tell their experiences--how wicked they had been, how evil had been their thoughts, their desires, and how good they had suddenly become.

They used to tell the story of an old woman who, in telling her experience, said, “Before I was converted, before I gave my heart to God, I used to lie and steal, but now, thanks to the grace and blood of Jesus Christ, I have quit ‘em both, in a great measure.”

Well, while the cold winter lasted, while the snows fell, the revival went on, but when the winter was over, the boats moved in the harbor again, the wagons rolled, and business started again, most of the converts “backslid” and fell again into their old ways. But the next winter they were on hand again, read to be “born again.” They formed a kind of stock company, playing the same parts every winter and backsliding every spring.

I regard revivals as essentially barbaric. The fire that has to be blown all the time is a poor thing to get warm by. I think they do no good but much harm; they make innocent people think they are guilty, and very mean people think they are good.

Robert Ingersoll, “Why I am An Agnostic”

Jack Kelley, an Evangelical Christian and star reporter with USA Today, resigned in January after admitting he fabricated many of his sensational stories covering war and terrorism. His admission of guilt came after USA Today’s investigative team found major fabrications and plagiarisms in Kelly’s stories. The same Jack Kelley told Christian Reader magazine recently: “God has told me to proclaim truth,” and, he teaches at the World Journalism Institute, whose mission is “presuppositional reporting” from an “unapologetic Christian point of view.”

E.T.B., based on an article in Christianity Today
____________________________

Many Christians who can’t even get members of their own family to agree with them on trifling matters are currently seeking to evangelize the world and tell everyone “what’s what.”

E.T.B.
____________________________

EVANGELICAL EGO-GAMES
An evangelical Christian once told me, “Only Jesus Christ can save man and restore him to his lost state of peace with God, himself and others.” Yeah, sure, and only new Pepsi can make you feel really happy, and only our brand is better than the competition, and only our country is the best country. It is truly amazing to me that people can utter such arrogant nonsense with no humor, no sense of how offensive they are to others, no doubt or trepidation, and no suspicion that they sound exactly like advertisers, con-men and other swindlers. It is really hard to understand such child-like prattling. If I were especially conceited about something (a state I try to avoid, but if I fell into it...), if for instance I decided I had the best garden or the handsomest face in Ireland, I would still retain enough common sense to suspect that I would sound like a conceited fool if I went around telling everybody those opinions. I would have enough tact left, I hope, to satisfy my conceit by dreaming that other people would notice on their own that my garden and/or my face were especially lovely. People who go around innocently and blithely announcing that they belong to the Master Race or the Best Country Club or have the One True Religion seem to have never gotten beyond the kindergarten level of ego-display. Do they have no modesty, no tact, no shame, no adult common sense at all? Do they have any suspicion how silly their conceit sounds to the majority of the nonwhite non-Christian men and women of the world? To me, they seem like little children wearing daddy’s clothes and going around shouting, “Look how grown-up I am! Look at me, me, me!”

There are more amusing things than ego-games, conceit and one-upmanship.Really, there are. I suspect that people stay on that childish level because they have never discovered how interesting and exciting the adult world is.

If one must play ego-games, I still think it would be more polite, and more adult, to play them in the privacy of one’s head. In fact, despite my efforts to be a kind of Buddhist, I do relapse into such ego-games on occasion; but I have enough respect for human intelligence to keep such thoughts to myself. I don’t go around announcing that I have painted the greatest painting of our time; I hope that people will notice that by themselves. Why do the people whose ego-games consist of day-dreaming about being part of the Master Race or the One True Religion not keep that precious secret to themselves, also, and wait for the rest of the human race to notice their blinding superiority?

Robert Anton Wilson

Anonymous said...

Christians Hating Pagans

Okay, ignorant christian Kathi Sharpe on Pagan Occultists @ ExWitch.

"In fact, many adult/experienced pagans dismiss these dabblings as inconsequential. However, we have talked to many people for whom “dabblings” led to an ever-increasing interest. Step by step, they became more and more involved.

Often parents dismiss the first steps as simple teenage angst – certainly less worrisome than green hair or boom-boom music. It should be noted that God’s word doesn’t say anything at all about the color of one’s hair, nor does it speak about musical volume… He does have a lot to say about things that lead our youth further and further astray."

Thus, the further away from the christian god, the more occult or pagan one becomes - something to be rid of.

"The occult practices of today are "dressed up" so that they look both innocent and appealing, and it's easy for someone to get in over their head. It's much easier to deal with the problem before it becomes ingrained."

Beat them over the head early in life, that the christian god, is the "only" true belief system, one can have.

Top Five Signs That Your Teen Is Involved With The Occult

"1. Your child shows signs of rejecting Jesus and/or traditional values. They may refuse to go to church or participate in youth activities."

Introvert = Occultist

"2. While young people often have strange items in their bedrooms, teens who are involved with the occult usually acquire some strange things indeed. Candles, herbs, incense, and essential oils are very common. So are crystals and stones, statues or pictures of mythological beings, fairies, dragons, statues of nude people (usually tasteful), moons, suns, and stars."

Well, the bible, has unicorns, dragons, satyrs, etc., running rampant throughout the pages, I suppose a child should burn that one on the altar as well. Candles? Well, there goes trying to make the room smell nice.

"3. Most young people purchase books to learn more about the Craft. You should carefully peruse the titles and authors of the books they are reading. Some are quite blatantly occult, such as “Teen Witch” by Silver RavenWolf. Other titles seem obscure at first glance, such as “Spiral Dance” by Starhawk. There are also fiction books dealing with this subject matter, such as “Mists of Avalon” by Marion Zimmer Bradley, “The Fifth Sacred Thing” by Starhawk, a series for teens by Ravenwolf, and many, many more. You should also monitor their Internet use, as Pagan information is widely available online. (If you use Internet Explorer, hit "ctrl" and the "h" key, which brings up the history on the left-hand side of the browser. Look through that. All browsers have a similar function.)"

Curiosity = Occultist, using the tools function of the browser to erase all browswer history = priceless

NARNIA. CS Lewis: (christian books) · The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, well, so much for that, throw it out the door also.

"4. While much can be said about the bizarre clothing tastes of American teenagers, Pagan youth often develop a style all their own."

Individuality = Occultist

"5. Most Wiccan teens find out about the occult from a friend or relative (often a same-aged or slightly older cousin). You need to know who their friends are, and if possible, get to know the friends’ parents also. Keep track of where your teen goes, and who they go with. Carefully screen friends and acquaintances for any of the above characteristics."

If frieds, display anything between one to four, then they are Occultists - get rid of the friends.

"http://www.exwitch.org/mambo/content/view/106/36/

So, a few books with unicorns or mythical creatures, a few candles, a sloppy wardrobe, a little individuality and having an introvertive personality targets a child these days for being an Occultist. So, much for curiosity. Parents need ensure all children worship the mythological christian "god", and continuously involve them in the cannibalistic blood ceremony of sunday sacrament. Eat of the body, drink of the blood, etc. If they don't, their evil.

Unknown said...

Wow! This thread certainly got lively after goldie showed up!

Thanks for the tip, south. I posted my response to goldie before I saw that you recognized him/her/it.

It sounds as if he needs 24/7 meds rather than AM or PM.

Anonymous said...

good night to everyone and thanks for all the great posts. However i think we can debate these issues without any antisemitism and other forms of hatred. i do want to make it clear that i wrongfully judging anyone. When Jesus said don't judge he was not referring to correcting spiritual error, but to unlovingly condemning people without offering them hope of repentance. Now the whole argument that the Jesus phenomenom is based on mythologies i believe is very false. True you did have the god mithras it was not until a hundred years after that read about the close similarities. It seems these mystery religions stole ideas after the fact.The pagan myths did not have exact representations of Jesus, because they did not believe in physical, bodily resurrections. Someone will say that There was no true historical Jesus. I do believe there are many proofs for the existence of Jesus, but for all of you i think the best proof would be the Apostle Paul. I am not sure of anyone who denies paul's existence, and the very fact that if Jesus did exist i think paul would the best person to testify of this. Here you have a man that was an exact contemperory of Jesus, served in the temple were Jesus would have been during His finell days, would have known of His death on a roman cross, His burial and news about a resurrection. Paul's hatred for Christ and His followers and the desire to destroy His name, would seem to suggest a believe in his existence as a person. Paul's letters are most likely the earliest new testiment books. In his letters paul mentions Christ's teachings, death, burial, resurrection, ascention and eyewitness that saw Jesus. Even if you don't agree with paul's views i think you have to agree that if paul existed then Jesus existed as a historical figure. love to you all from paul!!!

SpaceMonk said...

Just listen to True Christian Testimonies and you'll realise that converting to christianity in the first place is never based on emotional reasoning...

No, it's all pure logic.
Schizophrenically paranoid logic.

Anonymous said...

sorry to keep troubling you guys but i just want yo clear up some things. i don't hate catholics i just believe they have departed from Biblical christianity and i don't think it's a sin to point that out. I also believe that a lot of human tragedies that were mentioned such as the dark ages, the crusades, the spanish inquesitions and the holocuast were in the power of the popes. Catholic induvisuals have done much good in the world, the institution itself is unbiblical. Some have said i am showing hatred but i am just sharing i thoughts. Some of you have said very harsh things about me but i would never say you judgeing me or showing hatred to me. I know you all love me as a human being, you just don't love my views.I am not antisemtic either, i would give my life for the jewish people or any other people. I just don't see them being faithfull to the hebrew scriptures. You must understand modern jewish rabbis follow the talmud(oral law) so they would never be in the place of being objective about this. However many critical jewish scholars admit that talmudic judaism is not the judaism of moses. hope to talk some more later. love paul

Steven Bently said...

Paul it is so obvious to us here that you are brain-dead, and most of us feel we've wasted our time.

I believe that Jesus existed, yes existed in human form only!

Jesus did not have to die! Who told Jesus that he had to die? God-himself? that is so fantastically sick!

Jesus thought that he was from God, why? Because everyone back then told him he was, remember the three wise men? They were so wise, their wisdom over-shadowed their precious names!

We're talking about over 2000 years ago here Paul, not 2006.

Nothing changed the day Jesus was crucified! Oh you will say yes the world was changed, NO!!! The day Jesus was crucified, there were other people speaking in different languages, all over the world, having babies, and making more babies, toasting to a salute, people laughing, people argueing, people playing, people fishing, people being just people, etc.

You say that the Earth quaked according to your Bible, but it's like God created the whole world in just 6 days, now people, go tell everyone that he did, the same thing for Jesus.

Jesus died on the cross and rose the third day, now people, go tell everyone that he did!

The Jesus crucifixion was not a world event, why not? Like the flood and Noah's Ark scheme, another one of God's pesky evil tricks, was supposedly a world event, that changed the world by eliminating all the wicked hearted people that God allowed to exist, although he could have just changed their hearts, since God is in the heart changing business.

Jesus did not have to die, he thought that he did, because he thought that he was descended from God, only because the people back then, over 2000 years ago, just like you Paul in 2006, wanted to believe he was from a God!!

People sacrificed animals daily to appease God and for atonement for their sins, this went on for thousands of years, and Jesus decided that a human sacrifice would justify sacrificing all those innocent animals, and the ultimate sacrifice a human body would stop the need for God to expect any more innocent animal sacrifices.

Anyone notice that after Jesus was crucified the animal sacrifices dropped dramatically? They still do in some places like Haiti, etc.

Why if Jesus's crucification was a worldly event, did not this knowledge, this new information, become standard knowledge all over the world? Just like the flood, God supposedly pre-warned the world of the coming flood, but no one believed God, except Noah the 600 year old drunkard, with such a pure unwicked heart!!

If this all powerful God wanted the world to have knowledge of a personal savior that would save every person with this new knowledge, he would have made it known to the whole world the exact day that the crucifixion took place, it would have been made known to all inhabitants of the world that very day, instead he left this new found knowledge in the hands of mostly Paul the village idiot, Jesus had 12 disciples and he told them to spread the gospel, his gospel, all over the world, if they had seen and witnessed the crucifixion and Jesus coming back from the dead then there would have been 12 books of the Bible from each disciple with the exact same description with a pledge of 100% certainty.

Now we have the gospel of Judas, which plainly shows that Jesus's crucifxion scheme was totally premeditated to look like he was sold out by a non-believer, how
could one out of twelve faithful believers betrayed the one that was hand picked from this all knowing majesty God-Jesus himself?

How come this new found knowledge,*gospel of christ* happened to spring out of the drug and wino capital of the world?

Mind altering drugs, opium, heroin, hashish, cocaine, cannabis, wine was safer to drink than the water, etc.?

How come the Native Americans never wrote a Bible? They only had tobacco, not mind altering, it's only a mind sedative.

How come the word *sin* is only found in religious texts, other than the dictionary, the Native Americans never wrote about sin, why not, because they were not worthy!

Hello Paul!!! Wake Up!!!

Why is not sin written on
everyones face when they are born, since we are born in sin, should we not kill all the babies, since they are not worthy unto God to be brought into this world?

Ok according to the gospel of *fundy Paul* we have Jesus to save them, we bring them into this sinful world by lusting in our hearts, womens's bodies and Jesus is waiting around the corner to christen them and redeem them as soon as they are well *grown-up* enough to understand or accept the gospels.

Ok fundy Paul, we can tell by your responses that you've not read nor absorbed anything anyone has wrote here, nor addressed anything that we have posted, your ability to recognize logic or truth has been successfully removed and you've got the Jesus wheel spinning in your head and the only thing that you can remotely comprehend is the Jesus loves you mind fog, your mind has been infected by the mind virus Jesus loves you, so off you go into the looney bin of the religious mind cult of Jesus the donkey chaser.

Steven Bently said...

P.S. and God also likes the fragrance and aroma of burning flesh. How frigging ridiculous!

Anonymous said...

Saul who became Paul is evidence for Jesus? LMAO
It's more like proof and evidence of mental illness or LSD ingestation.

Anonymous said...

"The pagan myths did not have exact representations of Jesus, because they did not believe in physical, bodily resurrections."

Sorry Paul, wrong again. Egyptians believed in physical bodily resurrection, thousands of years before the time of Jesus. Do some real research, my friend.

Anonymous said...

Hey, xrayman! Like you, I also had an epiphany when I was suddenly struck by the cetainty that christianity is a fairy tale at best and a scam at worse.

It occurred one day during my freshman year in college when I was taking a course on the "History of the Bible." I had never before focused on the vast number of contradictions in the book. I had never before compared what is written in the bible with the folklore of other ancient peoples. Nor did I know about what historical events were transpiring over the many hundreds of years when the books of the bible were being written and compiled together.

When I learned, it was truly a liberating feeling knowing I no longer had to fear a cruel, capricious god and that I was free to live my life as the good person I want to be (not as the fearful, judgemental people many christians are) and to pursue knowledge because, in my opinion, learning is what life is all about.

Anonymous said...

Paul,

Paul may have believed there was a historical Jesus at some point in time, but he never stated at what point in time this Jesus lived. Jesus could have been a mythological creation that was handed down to him. The fact that Paul doesn't repeat the details that are in the Gospels, only the main theological points, shows me those details were made up later, whether Jesus existed or not.

Anonymous said...

Paul Said,
True you did have the god mithras it was not until a hundred years after that read about the close similarities. It seems these mystery religions stole ideas after the fact.


Paul Please explain your theory to me are you saying christianity was plagarised by men thousands of years before it had even existed, how is that possible.

So the stories of gods being born of a virgin,dying and resurrecting, healing the sick etc which have appeared in greek,roman,egyptian,persian mytholiy for thousands of years these where all stolen from christianity.. If this is what you are saying you wont win me back to the church..

Anonymous said...

PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT I AM NOT SAYING MITHRAS DIDN'T EXIST BEFORE THE TIME OF CHRIST, BUT I AM TALKING ABOUT LATER DEVELOPMENTS THAT WERE ADDED TO THE PERSIAN MYTH. I HAVE READ MANY HISTORIANS I DO AGREE WITH THIS. IN THE QURAN MOHAMMAND DID NO MIRACLES, BUT IF YOU READ THE MUSLEM HADITHS IT TALKES ABOUT MOHAMMED AS A NONSTOP MIRACLE WORKER, MOST LIKELY TO COMPETE WITH CHRIST IN THE GOSPELS. ALL THE SUPPOSED VIRGIN BORN, RESURRECTED BEINGS YOU MENTIONED WAS NEVER CLAIMED TO APPEAR TO ANYONE, AND THEY WERE NOT REAL HISTORICAL PERSONS. JESUS WAS REAL AND TESTAMONIES SEEM AT LEAST MORE TRUST WORTHY. LOVE PAUL

Anonymous said...

PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT I AM NOT SAYING MITHRAS DIDN'T EXIST BEFORE THE TIME OF CHRIST, BUT I AM TALKING ABOUT LATER DEVELOPMENTS THAT WERE ADDED TO THE PERSIAN MYTH. I HAVE READ MANY HISTORIANS I DO AGREE WITH THIS. IN THE QURAN MOHAMMAND DID NO MIRACLES, BUT IF YOU READ THE MUSLEM HADITHS IT TALKES ABOUT MOHAMMED AS A NONSTOP MIRACLE WORKER, MOST LIKELY TO COMPETE WITH CHRIST IN THE GOSPELS. ALL THE SUPPOSED VIRGIN BORN, RESURRECTED BEINGS YOU MENTIONED WAS NEVER CLAIMED TO APPEAR TO ANYONE, AND THEY WERE NOT REAL HISTORICAL PERSONS. JESUS WAS REAL AND TESTAMONIES SEEM AT LEAST MORE TRUST WORTHY. LOVE PAUL

Paul,
even if he was a historical man there are just too many of his characteristics which have obviously been taken from older myths, it would be very naive to believe other wise..

When Osiris is said to bring his believers eternal life in Egyptian Heaven, contemplating the unutterable, indescribable glory of God,
we understand that as a myth.

When the sacred rites of Demeter at Eleusis are described as bringing believers happiness in their eternal life, we understand that as a myth. >>


In fact, when ancient writers tell us that in general ancient people believed in eternal life, with the good going to the Elysian Fields and the not so good going to Hades,
we understand that as a myth.

When Vespatian's spittle healed a blind man,
we understand that as a myth.

When Apollonius of Tyana raised a girl from death, we understand that as a myth

When Romulus is described as the Son of God, born of a virgin,
we understand that as a myth.

When Alexander the Great is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal woman,
we understand that as a myth.


When Augustus is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal woman,
we understand that as a myth


When Dionysus is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal woman,
we understand that as a myth


When Scipio Africanus (Scipio Africanus, for Christ's sake) is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal woman,
we understand that as a myth.



So how come when Jesus is described as
the Son of God,
born of a mortal woman,
according to prophecy,
turning water into wine,
raising girls from the dead, and
<-------- healing blind men with his spittle,
and setting it up so His believers got eternal life in Heaven contemplating the unutterable, indescribable glory of God, and off to Hades—er, I mean Hell—for the bad folks...
how come that's not a myth?

And how come, in a culture with all those Sons of God, where miracles were science, where Heaven and Hell and God and eternal life and salvation were in the temples, in the philosophies, in the books, were dancing and howling in street festivals, how come we imagine Jesus and the stories about him developed all on their own, all by themselves, without picking up any of their stuff from the culture they sprang from, the culture full of the same sort of stuff?


anonymous

Anonymous said...

"Then when some try to act logical they bring up things like "look at all the killing in the Old testiment" but all that proves is that one disagrees with God's actions, but you can't use that to say God dose not exist."
Yes but I can use it to prove the xtian God is not the author of my sense of right or wrong. I believe there is a God and that written into our very natures is the ability, however imperfect at times, to know right from wrong. What your God does in the bible is evil, i.e genocide, including the slaughter of babies, and other gems like the doctrine of hell. The person who gives us this sense of revulsion in our conscience cannot be the xtian God.

P.S you come across as the typical bigot who knows everything about nothing. Go and get an education before telling anyone they are not being "analytical"

Roger O'Donnell said...

It's inbteresting that an active Christian sees 'Ex-Christian' testemonies as 'emotional'. I feel exactly the same while reading Christian Testemonies... They're frequently over blown and riddled with emotive rhetoric designed to stir up the faithful.

Pageviews this week: