7/30/2005                                                                                       View Comments

Top Ten Reasons Why Christianity Is False

© 2005 Tim Simmons

(10) Irreconcilable Differences
The accounts of Jesus’ death and resurrection as depicted in the gospels are in serious conflict. Furthermore, Jesus’ resurrection appearances were not originally part of the gospel of Mark (the earliest of the four gospels). Mark originally ended at 15:8 with the women running from the tomb frightened. Verses 9-20 were a later addition. What the Christian scholars often overlook is the interesting phenomenon of later gospel manuscripts knowing more details than the earlier ones! This is a clear indication that those details were never part of the original oral and written accounts but were inserted into the later copies.

(9) Been There, Done That
The concepts of heaven, hell, eternal life, etc., all predate Christianity as does a savior-god who died and was resurrected. (See Zoroastrianism, Osiris, Dionysus, etc.)

(8) The Silence of the Lamb
There are no historical writings by any first century historian that mention Jesus by name although there are many writings by early historians about Christians. The two passages in the writings of Josephus that are often waved around as proof Jesus actually lived are clearly forgeries. (See Earl Doherty’s comprehensive work, “Josephus Unbound”, at http://pages.ca.inter.net/~oblio/supp10.htm )

(7) The Making of a Messiah
Almost every miracle and event in Jesus’ life can be found in the Old Testament stories. Here are only a few of them.
a) Feeding the multitudes (2nd Kings 4:42-44, Matthew 14:13-21)
b) Shades of Jonah (Jonah 1:4-6, 15, Mark 4:35-39)
c) Jesus’ dying words (Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34 = Psalm 22:1, Luke 23:46 = Psalm 31:5, John 19:30)
d) Infanticide and one escapes (Exodus 1:22-2:10, Matthew 2:13-18)
e) The king rides on two donkeys at once! (Zechariah 9:9, Matthew 21:2-7)

(6) Jesus Believed the Old Testament
Jesus is depicted as believing the Old Testament verbatim and therefore invalidates himself since much of the Old Testament can be shown to be false.

(5) What Prophecies?
Jesus is not foreshadowed in the Old Testament (messianic prophecies were
not messianic prophecies!)
a) Whom they pierced (John 19:34-37, Zechariah 12:10-14,13:1-3)
b) Out of Egypt (Matthew 2:14-15, Hosea 11:1-2)
c) Rachel weeping (Matthew 2:17-18, Jeremiah 31:15-17)
d) Speaking in parables (Matthew 13:35, Psalms 78:2)
e) Nazarene nowhere in there (Matthew 2:23)
f) What third day prophecy? (Luke 18:31-33, Luke 24:46, 1st Corinthians
15:3-4)
g) Bethlehem was a man (Matthew 2:3-6, Micah 5:2, 1st Chronicles 4:4)
h) Virgin birth: a sign to Ahaz (Matthew 1:20-23, Isaiah 7 and 8)
i) Thirty pieces of silver (Matthew 26:15, Matthew 27:9-10, Zechariah 11:12-13)

(4) A Sign To Ahaz
Isaiah 7's virgin (or young maiden) birth is not a prophecy about a coming
messiah. Period. It was a sign to Ahaz (that a boy, not a girl, would be born of the young woman) which already happened during Ahaz’s lifetime. This makes the authors of the virgin birth gospels (Matthew and Luke) in error! Paul never mentions the supposed virgin birth of Jesus or any prophesies regarding it. Bible scholars tell us that Paul probably never even heard of the virgin birth story in relation to Jesus. The earliest known Christian writings, the letters of Paul and the gospel of Mark, say nothing of it. It is a later development in the Jesus legend as the early Christians attempted to convert the Romans and Greeks. Anyone who was anyone in those cultures was born of a virgin. Julius Caesar, Hercules, Plato, and many other notables, both historical and mythical, were said to be born of virgins. It had to happen to Jesus too, eventually, if the Christians were to gain converts in the Greco-Roman world.

(3) Broken Promise, Failed Prophecy: What’s the Difference?
Jesus promised to return from heaven within the lifetimes of his
listeners – he never did. (Matthew 16:27-28, Matthew 24:34, Matthew 25:13, Matthew 10:23)

(2) The Severed Line
The Messiah was to be of the lineage of David yet Jesus was born of a
virgin! (Isaiah 9:6-7, Jeremiah 23:5-6, Zechariah 13:1, Matthew 1:1,20-24, 9:27, 12:3, 23, 15:22, 20:29-31, 21:9, 15, Mark 12:35, Luke 1:27-33, John 7:42, Romans 1:1-3, 1st Timothy 2:8, Revelation 5:5, 22:16, Matthew 1:18-25, Luke 1:26-38, Jeremiah 36:27-31)

And the number 1 reason why Christianity is false…

(1) Jesus Sinned
Jesus sinned by making himself unclean when he touched the leper and dead
girl (a violation of Levitical law which all Jews were under. Jesus himself
agreed he was under the law.) (Ezekiel 44:25-27,Lev 13:1-8, Lev 5:2-6, Num
5:1-3, Num 19:11, Matt 9:23-26, Matthew 8:2-4)

127 comments:

boomSLANG said...

"First, I'll point out how lame your arguments are, then I'll tell you the only real reason that Christianity is false."

Okay, please enlighten us further.....so, you're either, A) a non-Christian who is pro-Jesus(?), but yet, a person who has deduced the same conclusion that non-believers deduce....e.g. "Christianity is false"; or B) a person who really DOES believe that Christianity is the "one Truth", yet, you won't admit it on this "cheezy" website, because of course, you'd look like a complete idiot because of the fact that you just put a lot of energy into refuting somebody elses non-Christian arguments, but at the same time, you, yourself, have deduced that "Christianity is false".

Nice "change up"....maybe you should pitch, instead of bat? lol

Jim Arvo said...

Anony ended with "Ahhhhhhh. I love the smell of napalm in the morning. My job here is done."

Such arrogance is usually the harbinger of fallacious arguments, and Anonymous did not disappoint. Let's go through them...

10. Anony: "You're assuming the 4 records have to match exactly in order to be true,..." That's a straw man. Please point to someone making this claim. You can't, because it's absurd. What skeptics claim is that the discrepancies are *substantive*, and indicate redacting of previous stories, which makes them fundamentally incompatible on some points. The late addition of the ending of Mark was one such attempt to harmonize stories that exhibited a fundamental conflict.

9. Anony: "...It could just as easily be argued that God/Jesus used this motif to underline the fact that he is superior to all other gods." Just as easily? Then let's hear you articulate that argument. Let's hear why god would chose to follow numerous motifs of more ancient religions, such as being born of a divine-human union in humble circumstances (e.g. in a cave or a stable), being celebrated by "wise men", escaping the slaughter of innocents, spreading his message via a small cadre of disciples, being brutally put to death, rising again, etc. etc. What was the wisdom of following this same pattern, and even adopting more ancient monikers, such as "the light", "the lamb", etc. How does that show that Jesus was in any way superior? (Are you going to use C. S. Lewis's "true myth" apologetics?)

8. Anony: "If no references to a man from historians in his century disproves the man’s existence,..." Stop there. That's another straw man. Please point to somebody who claims that this *disproves* the existence of Jesus. Why do you misrepresent what is being said? Is it to create an easy target, perhaps? Anony: "There were people living in his century who were certain of his existence (to the point of martyrdom)..." There were people who were also certain of the existence of Hercules and other mythical figures. Interestingly, there are numerous examples of mythical figures who were "invented" roughly a generation after their purported deaths. Such is the nature of myths. As for the martyrs, much of what you claim is probably apocryphal. Which martyrs, specifically, do you have in mind, what do you claim they died for, and what is your evidence for your claim? That which is not apocryphal does not argue directly for the *existence* of Jesus, but for the existence of *believers*. Yet, there have always been ardent believers (even to the point of martyrdom) in clearly fictitious ideas.

7. Anony: "Duh. ...those stories are there to prove Jesus was the Messiah. (Whether they actually prove that is another point, but they certainly don't DISPROVE anything.)" Showing that the stories are of midrashic origin does two things: 1) It removes one of the most prevalent arguments *for* the existence and divinity of Jesus, and 2) it demonstrates that very large and crucial elements of the story were INVENTED. If the central themes are undermined, then how much credibility does the rest of the story have?

6. Anony: "...You're implying that Jesus believed the Old Testament like a slobbering fundamentalist..." Another straw man. Can't hit those targets unless you pump them up with absurd extrapolation, can you? The gospel writers have Jesus make numerous claims that the old testament in still in effect: Matt 5:18 "For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled." While there are clearly also verses to the contrary, there is little doubt that the Jesus character supported, observed, and believed in the basic tenets of the Jewish scripture. To the extent that that scripture can be shown to consist of inconsistent, absurd, or plagiarized stories (e.g. Noah's flood), it also undermines the veractiy of the Jesus character.

5. Anony: "Learn something about ancient literature. In the Jewish mind, a “genuine” prophecy was hidden within another story -- that's what made them prophecies: they could be taken out of context and applied to a completely different situation." No, you are confusing midrash with prophecy. The practice of midrash consisted of "mining" scripture for verses that could be put to different uses. While those uses sometimes included prophecy, it was much broader than that. But what undermines your argument here is that the Jews did not recognize the prophecies that the Christians claimed, and in almost all cases have cogent arguments for why they ARE NOT prophecies, midrash or not. Furthermore, the very-clearly articulated messianic prophecies that the Jews DID recognize where NOT FULFILLED by Jesus, hence the invention of the non-scriptural idea of the second coming.

4. Anony: "...prophecies in ancient literature were intended to be pulled out of context." You are essentially taking the "dual meaning" position; i.e. that multiple meanings were hidden within the text. What evidence do you have for that? Just because there was an established practice to mine such verses (e.g. midrash), that in itself does not mean that they were true prophecies. The more parsimonious explanation is that it was nothing more than a ploy to extract more meaning than was actually present. Anony: "If this verse doesn't really apply to Jesus, it means that Matthew and Luke were in error, but errors are to be expected in a document written by humans decades after the fact, as well as the introduction of certain myths." And your point is....

3. Anony: "Here's where textual critics always screw themselves...." And here's where you're going to introduce another straw man. Anony: "They point out this quote like it was reported that night on the evening news,..." See! Anony: "...But the gospels were written decades (at least) after the death of Jesus, and probably after the death of the apostles whose names they bear...." Yes, and... Anony: "...Now think about this for a minute, because you’ve totally screwed yourself." Here comes another straw man. Anony: "Why would a document written in the second century include a verse that seems to nullify everything (i.e. that Jesus will return in the lifetimes of his listeners)?" Because it was part of an older oral or written tradition; elements of one or more already-existing stories, perhaps about Jesus, and perhaps about other hero figures. Anony: "...In fact, these verses are among the strongest arguments that the gospels were in fact written just a few years after the death of Jesus,..." Not at all. They could have been written arbitrarily long after the purported event by weaving together various stories that existed in oral form. Anony: "...UNLESS these words were intended to have an allegorical meaning. Oooh, now that's a stretch, trying to imagine Jesus saying something non-literal." Another straw man. Nobody is insisting that everything be taken literally; but at the same time, statements should be afforded their clear and direct meaning whenever possible, rather than imposing obscure interpretations or fanciful word meanings.

2. Anony: "Duh again. Mary was a descendant of David also. Mary and Joseph both would have been." What do you base that on? Why is the ancestry of Jesus spelled out in great detail but not that of Mary? Anony: "Actually, however, it can be argued that the Old Testament never specifies a literal bloodline connection." That's an old argument. It's not credible because it runs counter to Jewish tradition.

1. Anony: "If breaking the OT law was a sin, then Jesus sinned more than twice. He obliterated it on several occasions...." The gospel writer also have him defending the Old Testament law, so you can pick your verses and take whatever stand you please on this. From my perspective, the entire question as to whether Jesus was envisioned by the Paul and the gospel writers as completely abolishing the old law or not is murky, so I will not argue this one way or the other.

Anonymous said...

@Jim, much better argument the second time around, sir. I think we could go round and round about some of my alleged straw men, but your thoughts were much better articulated than the original post. I still don't agree with you, of course, but I found your answers interesting.

@boomslang: I was unintentionally vague in my closing. To be clear, I am pro-Jesus, but I don't think following his teachings has anything to do with "accepting him in your heart" or being traditionally Christian. I don't think he came to establish a new religion. Most Christians would emphatically say that I am not one, yet I find inspiration and comfort in many of Jesus' teachings.

I think it's a shame that so many ex-Christians rightly get disgusted with the church and religion, and then reject also the one who shared their indignation.

This is a good topic. I'd like to hear more from you guys about it.

Dano said...

Jim Arvo wrote:
Anony ended with "Ahhhhhhh. I love the smell of napalm in the morning. My job here is done."

Such arrogance is usually the harbinger of fallacious arguments, and Anonymous did not disappoint. Let's go through them...

Dan says: I agree with you Jim. All through his post he was assuming an air of intellectual superiority to contributors on this site, and I kept getting the feeling that he was self massaging his ego. This behavior always seems strange to me, especially when these people are so intent on being anonymous. I suspect, in this particular example though that he is just not smart enough to figure out how to come up with a screen name.

I will admit that I was expecting something from him that would give some indication that he had read more than one or two contributors to this site, but about half way through his post I came to the conclusion that his only purpose was to try to convince himself that he is as smart as he thinks he is.

After you so thoroughly destroyed his attempt at stroking his own ego, I feel a little sorry for him.

I will be the first to admit that I am no scholar, but I know one when I see one, and I have seen at least a hundred on this site who I would put my money on, if pitted against THIS anonymous.
Dan (Ex Christian sympathizer)

Jim Arvo said...

Anony said "@Jim, much better argument the second time around, sir. I think we could go round and round about some of my alleged straw men, but your thoughts were much better articulated than the original post. I still don't agree with you, of course, but I found your answers interesting."

That was a very mature reply. Thank you. I'll take that over napalm any day. :-)

boomSLANG said...

Anonymous said: "I was unintentionally vague in my closing."

No, it's not necessarily that you were vague, it's that your conclusion seemed to conflict with your own argument. But more to the point, you came across like 99.9999% of the Christians who stumble in here.....interestingly, the same people from whom you seemingly disassociate yourself---yet, your demeanor and approach is EXACTLY the same---that being, that you act like you possess some kind of "special knowledge" that none of us Ex-Christians do, and that those "people who claim to be Christians" are misinterpreting Jesus' message(s), therefore, "they are a religion".

Anonymous: "To be clear, I am pro-Jesus, but I don't think following his teachings has anything to do with 'accepting him in your heart' or being traditionally Christian."

Like I just said---you have your OWN thoughts as to why you think that the way YOU follow Jesus' teachings is the "right" way. Well, no shit...everybody who is "pro-Jesus" does. This is proof positive that the Holy Bible is one big subjective "grab-bag". On the other hand, Anonymous, if you think that the church's teachings of Jesus are distorted and/or corrupt, I'm all ears as to what you think the "real" teachings are, and to how you arrived at your conclusion, especially since there is ZERO first-hand sources to go by.

Anonymous: "I don't think he came to establish a new religion. Most Christians would emphatically say that I am not one, yet I find inspiration and comfort in many of Jesus' teachings."

Sure, and again, you can pick and choose Jesus' alleged teachings "buffet style" and find your OWN inspiration in them. So what? Please provide OBJECTIVE reasoning that what inspires YOU is something that should UNIVERSALLY inspire all of humanity. Until you do, I'll just be inspired by humanity.

Dave8 said...

Anonymous: "I think it's a shame that so many ex-Christians rightly get disgusted with the church and religion, and then reject also the one who shared their indignation."

Is religion the product of the indignant ones' teachings, or... is the indignant one, the product of religious teaching?

Here's a hint; religion may have been the product of the indignant ones' teachings (if he lived), at the time he would have walked the earth... From his death, forward to today, the "indignant one" has been painted by religiously rabid clergy, competing emperors, politicians, etc., etc.

There no longer exists a "real christian", as there no longer exists a non-biased, semi-objective guide of the indignant one, to follow. The indignant one "died" in all aspects, from physical to philosophical/theological, the day he in theory was crucified. As a matter of fact, claiming that the person being presented as "indignant" is based on the "faith" one places in the words in a book, written by anonymous authors for the most part.

Who's to say they were indignant, one claim is just as good as another - unless someone has a first hand account. The early Roman Church, knew this, and swear that their roots go all the way back to St. Peter, so obviously they have the most accurate religion, promoting the most accurate view of the "indignant" one - Roman Catholicism.

Its a shame, that many christians or non-christians believe they can actually "know" the nature and nurture of a person in great detail, who in theory lived two thousand years ago. A self-claimed christians' faith, fully relies on the number of subjective fingerprints that have had access to modify, manipulate, and alter their bible. The stronger the claim of "faith", the stronger the conviction one must have in anonymous/unknown authors to portray ancient events in a perfectly "objective" manner.

Ockham's razor comes to mind, the fewer links between a premise and a conclusion, the stronger the claim. The most accurate knowledge/conclusion, therefore, comes from no statement, but from direct observation of a persons' acts, as a person "is" what they do. Therefore, one who lived at T-0 (T=time of "indignant ones'" birth) would of course have the most accurate assessment, those who lived T+2000 without one personal observation, and the mass of humanity over that period who have had the ability to "influence" that information, totally renders the biblical statements effete.

Anonymous said...

First, I'm no scholar.

Second, I don't know why I was accused of building straw men when I merely echoed what the original poster said and responded to it.

He said, for example, the exclusion of Jesus from first history books is a proof (or reason) that Christianity is false. He said that Matthew 10:23 et al proves that Christianity is false. I wasn't building straw men, I just pointed out how these (and the others) don't prove that at all. If the original poster DIDN'T say that these 10 ten reasons prove xty is false, then I must have misread the content and misunderstood the reason for his reasons.

Third, it's interesting that boomslang tries to identify me as a Christian simply because I challenged some irresponsible thinking. I will say it again plainly: I'm not a Christian, not a member of the church.

Fourth, I'm not sure where I indicated that I have "special knowledge." I certainly don't. I just pointed out that the above 10 reasons aren't all that convincing.

Fifth, you're right: the Bible is something of a grab bag with nuggets of wisdom along side some really weird stuff. What do you expect from ancient litature? I think rational 21st century adults ought to be able to discern the difference and keep those things that remain useful, and over look the rest.

Sixth, yes I take my religion buffet style, just like I take everything else. I choose political candidates not because I agree 100% with them, but because he/she resonates with me on issues most important to me.

My wife isn't 100% perfect, but I married her because her greatest values are my greatest values and I chose to be with her because there are things about her that I love, even though there are things about her that aren't perfect.

This applies to everything. All of life is a buffet. In every area we pick and choose according to what we like or what we at least understand. So it makes sense that we would choose our teachers the same way, buffet style.

Boomslang said, "Please provide OBJECTIVE reasoning that what inspires YOU is something that should UNIVERSALLY inspire all of humanity."

You're asking me to do something I never offered to do or set out to do. Neither am I willing to try. I'm not an evangelist or an apologist. I'm not trying to get anyone to accept Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior. And I'm not trying to prove anything about him.

Be inspired by whoever you want. If anyone were to ask me what I like about Jesus (or Marcus Aurelius or Francis of
Assisi) I would tell them, but it's everyone's own choice as to who they'll like. If you ask me why I like Mexican food, I'll tell you, but I can't tell you objectively why everyone on the planet should love Mexican food. That never was my point about Jesus, so I'm not sure why you're asking me to say it.

My original post was that the "top ten reasons why Christianity is false" is a poorly designed and weakly constructed presentation. It's full of holes and flaws. There are reasons not to be a Christian, but at least nine of his top ten aren't them.

So back to square one. The top ten reasons the original poster gave as proofs that Christianity is false -- the reasons are weak and full of holes. If you think they're good reasons, then argue them. Support them. Back them up. If you think reason #2 is solid evidence against Christianity, say so.

You guys can attack me all you want. Have at it if you makes you feel good.

But the real question is, can you honestly support the original top ten list as credible "proofs" that Christianity is false? If you read them with the eyes of a skeptic, do they really ring true?

Finally, the reason I remain anonymous is that I find "anti" people scary. Anti people often end up bombing abortion clinics and tall buildings and dragging people to their death and tying them to fence posts and leaving them to die -- so whenever someone defines themselves exclusively by what they're against, I approach with caution.

Whether I'm anonymous or not doesn't change the fact that the top ten list is iffy. Hate me, despise me, mock me, ridicule me blah blah blah, but I don't think anyone can, with intellectual honesty, support this original top ten list as a credible document of proof that Christianity is false.

Dano said...

The problem with Jesus and what he taught is, that it simply does not work in the real world. It is impossible to love everybody, and if you try you are a fool.

Everything Jesus taught is based on the assumption that there is a just and caring God that looks out for the Human race, and he will cause fairness, and love to prevail. All of the evidence demonstrates just the opposite.

Millions of humans suffer and die every day without one shred of evidence that their God is looking out for them!

The strongest, and most ruthless, rule over the weak and timid.

The attractive and smart people are more successful in every endeavor than the ugly dumb ones.

Those who spend their lives praying to God for help, don't achieve nearly as much as those who help themselves.

Why would you want to forgive the pervert that raped and killed you child?

Jesus thought he was something special, but all it ever did for him is to get him killed. This event, if it actually happened or not, did spawn yet another religion, along the lines of other religions that preceded it, but all of the evidence shows that the three part Jesus God is just as impotent as all of the other mythological Gods who preceded it.
Dan (Who jus calls em as I sees em)

Jim Arvo said...

Anonymous: "...I don't know why I was accused of building straw men when I merely echoed what the original poster said and responded to it."

Here are some examples of the straw men you erected, to refresh your memory:

1) Anony: "You're assuming the 4 records have to match exactly in order to be true,..."

No such assumption was made or implied. Hence, you attack a non-existent and absurd argument, which is also known as a "straw man."

2) Anony: "If no references to a man from historians in his century disproves the man’s existence,..."

No such assertion was made explicitly, although I grant you that you could argue that something close to that was implied by the title of the post. However, the more reasonable reading would be that having no contemporaneous accounts is reason for serious doubt. (More on that point below.)

3) Anony: "...You're implying that Jesus believed the Old Testament like a slobbering fundamentalist..."

No such implication was made or implied. Where did this "slobbering" buisness come from? Can you please point to a sentence in the original post that comes anywhere near that? What was the purpose of inserting such ridiculous paraphrasings?

So, I disagree that you were "merely echoing" what was in the original post. If you had inserted direct quotes, and replied to those, I think you would have found them much more difficult to attack than your outlandish characterizations of them (which, I presume, is precisely why you characterized them in such a way).

Anony: "He said, for example, the exclusion of Jesus from first history books is a proof (or reason) that Christianity is false."

No, he said "There are no historical writings by any first century historian that mention Jesus by name...", which is absolutely true is you discount the highly suspect passage in Josephus. He did not say "history books" in general, nor did he use the word "proof".

Anony: "He said that Matthew 10:23 et al proves that Christianity is false."

He points out that Jesus purportedly makes a statement that is false on the face of it. If he were truly god, I'd expect his statements to be accurate, wouldn't you?

Anony: "...If the original poster DIDN'T say that these 10 ten reasons prove xty is false, then I must have misread the content and misunderstood the reason for his reasons."

The original poster never once used the word "prove", and used the word "proof" exactly once; here is the exact sentence in which that word appears: "The two passages in the writings of Josephus that are often waved around as proof Jesus actually lived are clearly forgeries." So, I guess you misread it then. Now, it is true that the very title of the piece uses the word "false" with regard to Christianity, which is also repeated in the conclusion. To say that something is "false" could be construed as asserting that it can be (or has been) "proven" untrue. However, if one simply interprets that as a strong statement about how dubious and doubtful the entire enterprise is, then I see no problem whatsoever with the reasons arrayed by the original poster.

Anony: "But the real question is, can you honestly support the original top ten list as credible 'proofs' that Christianity is false? If you read them with the eyes of a skeptic, do they really ring true?"

They are not "proofs", they are problems that cast serious doubt on Christianity. As it is impossible, even in principle, to definitively prove or disprove anything in history, I think it's absurd to couch this entire discussion in such absolute terms. And, yes, the problems listed above certainly do cast Christianity into serious doubt.

Anony: "Finally, the reason I remain anonymous is that I find 'anti' people scary. Anti people often end up bombing abortion clinics and tall buildings and dragging people to their death and tying them to fence posts and leaving them to die..."

You just described religious zealots, which I presume is not what you meant by "anti" people. As for fearing us, I think we can make a fairly compelling case for why it is the religious zealots who should be feared, not us. Just look at the number of ugly threats that are made in these discussions; the vast majority of them are from believers; I'd put it easily above 80%.

Anony: "...so whenever someone defines themselves exclusively by what they're against, I approach with caution."

That's another absurd straw man. NOBODY here *defines* themselves in terms of what they are against; certainly none of the regulars here. That seems like nothing more than a abrasive slur on your part.

As for posting anonymously, there is a difference between being called "Anonymous" and posting anonymously. If you select "Other" you can *still* be anonymous, but you need not be called "Anonymous", which would help to distinguish you from hundreds of others. If you intend to participate in a dialog, you *really* need to have a unique tag that will bind your posts together and allow people to address you (while you maintain your anonymity if you wish).

Dano said...

I am not so much AGAINST religious belief as I am FOR those people with exceptional intellectual capacity, to come to the realization that there is no "Bogy Man that is gonna getcha,"if they question the tenets of a particular belief.

There are many people who may not be better off without the unquestioning faith that a good, all knowing, all powerful, being is up there in the sky, watching everything we do. There are those who are so dense that if they freed their minds from their belief in angels, demons, saints and miracles, sin, and such, and if they didn't have someone to tell them what to believe, they would be totally adrift.

On the other hand, I believe that there are too many highly intelligent people who are shackled by the fear of retribution from a God that was instilled into them in their youth, and will never be "All that they can be" We don't need any more people on this planet who are willing to kill or condemn others just because they believe their version of God is better than someone else's version.

There was a time not too long ago in this country, when if you came to the logical conclusion that there was no such thing as, "Grace, Blessings, miracles, Angels, Demons, Saints, Prophets, Spirits, Ghosts, Virgin Births, saved and unsaved, Prayer", and voiced those opinions, you would be a total outcast, or even tortured and killed, but today the only thing we have to fear for speaking our minds is "fear itself."

To reiterate my opening statement, I want people who have intellectual talent to realize that they should question everything. Whatever gave you that talent, will not be insulted, slighted, or disappointed, if you THINK, but it may be, if you DON'T!
Dan (Agnostic, humanist, Anti-Ageist)

Anonymous No More said...

If "Ten Reasons Why" doesn't intend to prove something, then I must not understand anything about language. I think in any other context if someone said to me "here are ten reasons why such and such" -- I would pretty much take that as an attempt to prove something. So maybe it's just me.

I agree you with wholeheartedly that it is impossible, even in principle, to definitively prove or disprove anything in history.

I would go further to say that these ten reasons don't present a covincing case to even lean in its direction. While some (even most) of his statements are true and accurate, they don't disprove Christianity. Oops. I said a variation of proof again. I mean, while some of the statments are true, they're not necessarily valid reasons for concluding Christianity is false.

I am glad to hear that people at this website don't define themselves by what they're against. For some reason, the name of the site and graphic of Calvin pissing on the Jesus fish and the title of the post gave me that impression that the site might be populated by people who are basically against xty.

As for you Mr. Arvo, you don't miss a thing. You picked up on every sloppy thing I said, and while I am certain that you (or anyone) couldn't convincly defend the original 10 point post, you certainly siezed every weakness in my argument. I wish I could get your feedback on everything, frankly.

I said in my original post (which has mysteriously disappeared) that this was like batting practice for me. So maybe I've loosened up my swing a little bit now.

boomSLANG said...

Anon-no more,

I'm finding it a bit hard to see any cohesion in your posts from one to the next. You storm in here saying "duh" this and "duh" that, and that this site's "cheezy" and how the original post "doesn't prove" this, or that. Then, later you said that you're not a Christian or part of a religion, but yet, Jesus "inspires you". Later still, you proceeded to make blanketed assumptions by comparing the ex-christian position to that of fundamentalist extremists, yet, you are "not Christian" yourself. WTF?

Anon-no more, you have hammered home the point that you don't think that the original post proves christianity is false. Okay----so what? Honestly, what do you care?...you are "not a Christian"; you are "not religious"; you are only "inspired" by Jesus' teachings. Good for you. Okay, so IF your Jesus existed, he certainly was no "Son of God", right? Well?...RIGHT??? My point is, if Jesus existed but was not of a "Divine" nature, why would you take issue with people who are NOT inspired by "some dude" that you happen to like?

Now's your chance, Anon...come clean and tell the class---why do we "need" Jesus?....why do we need HIM, as opposed to Mohammad, Budda, or Ra? Why would you care if we say "Christianity is false" or how we arrive at that conclusion, while you claim that you're "not a Christian"? Can you stop be evasive and please answer these pointed questions?

Anonymous no more said...

Boomslang: Now's your chance, Anon...come clean and tell the class---why do we "need" Jesus?....Can you stop be evasive and please answer these pointed questions?


You just don't get it Boom. I'm not being evasive. I just don't have the answer to your question.

I do want to congratulate you for getting my point that the original post didn't accomplish what it set out to do. Now let me see if I can hammer home this next point for you.

You said, if Jesus existed but was not of a "Divine" nature, why would you take issue with people who are NOT inspired by "some dude" that you happen to like?

I don't know that I have ever taken issue with anyone for not being inspired by Jesus or any other spiritual teacher. Be inspired by whoever you like. Or not. If you think the Sermon on the Mount is all bullshit, that's your right. Think whatever you want.

I took issue with (oh yikes here I go again) the top ten reason because they are weak, shallow, full of holes and intellectually dishonest.

Now, if you can further support the top ten list, strengthen it a little bit, fill in some of the holes, then I would be interested to read anything you have to say about it. But you may as well give up now on the idea that I'm going to convince you, or even try to convince you, of something I myself don't believe. I don't know how to make it any plainer than that.

boomSLANG said...

Wow, direct questions completely ignored. What a shocker. lol!

Hmmmm, how can I...?...? okay, how's this---right now I don't give a rat's ass about the "Top Ten Reasons" why some other guy thinks Christianity is false, okay? I mean, regardless of the "why"---the poster thinks Christianity is false......so can we not use that as a diversion for a few seconds? Great. lol

Anon-no more: "If you think the Sermon on the Mount is all bullshit, that's your right. *Think whatever you want."

Hey, wait a minute... do you want us ex-christians to "think whatever" we want?....or does our methodology for deducing that something is "false" have to pass your criteria? Which is it? Surely you wouldn't care how an ex-christian would arrive at the conclusion that Santa Claus is false, would you?...as long as there is no critical thinking adult who believes that it is "true", would be the important part.

Still waiting on answers to some direct questions, if you're up to it:

1)Was the Sermon on the Mount bullshit?
2)Was/is Jesus the "Son of God"?
3)If "yes" on 1 and/or 2, do you have objective evidence supporting your conclusions?

Waiting.

anonymous no more said...

For crying out loud, boomslang, what's the matter with you? You can't be this thick. I don't know why this is so difficult for you to understand.

I'm sticking to my main point (a comment on the orginal post)and you call it a diversion? WTF? There is no diversion, boom. This is the point, the top ten list, it's the reason for my post.

I answered your questions in previous posts, but since it wasn't the answer you seem to be fishing for, you accused me of ignoring them.

So here's a yet another reply. I'm typing slow this time to help you understand.

There's a difference between opinion and fact. What one thinks of the sermon on the mount is opinion. The top ten reasons are presented as empirical statements and are therefore judged by a more objective criteria. Do you honestly not understand the difference?

Let me see if I can explain this a little further. If you said "George Washington is my favorite president." That's an opinion and you're entitled to it. But if you said, "George Washington is the best president ever because he signed the emancipation proclamation." That would be a statement (erroneous) of "fact" and subject to challenge.

The original poster said, basically, "here are ten reasons why Christianity is false," and stated not ten opinions but ten "facts" -- and mis-stated and misrepresented a few of them at that. Or at least maybe he did. I challenged the statements, arvo came back with a pretty good response, and I believe if he was inclined to do so we could bounce those ten items aound and debate them and maybe each of us come to a stronger conclusion. Maybe.

And that's the main point here, pal. It's not a diversion. This is the topic.

As for the three questions you ended your post with, they have nothing to do with the point of my original post, but nevertheless, I will entertain your curiosity.

1. Was the sermon on the mount bullshit?
You realize, of course, that you're asking for my opinion. And here it is: My opinon is that it isn't. I rather enjoy reading it. But just to make sure you understand: it's my opinion. I could talk at length about it, which parts I think are practical, which parts I find most helpful, which parts appear to be impossible, blah blah blah -- but it's my opinion. It's no different than discussing what movies I enjoy or what toppings I prefer on my pizza.

2. Was/Is Jesus the Son of God?
I'm flattered that you think I know the answer to this timeless question, but I'm afraid I'll have to demur. I'm sure this answer will really annoy you, but my answer to your question is I don't know. I imagine it's not the answer you're looking for, but I have been clear on this from the beginning.

3. If "yes" on 1 and/or 2, do you have objective evidence supporting your conclusions?
Again, you don't seem to understand that presenting objective evidence as to why I personally enjoy the Sermon on the Mount is as impossible as presenting objective as to why I like pizza. It's an opinion, so there's no objective evidence.

And since my answer for 2 is "I don't know" then clearly I don't have objective evidence. But neither do I believe that objective evidence exists, so you might as well have asked me to flap my arms and fly -- both are equally impossible.

Now a final point about your coment about your "hey wait a minute" paragraph. I don't care how you come to your conclusions. If you want to believe (to use the above example) that George Washington signed the emancipation proclamation, go ahead. But if you post it on an open forum, someone is likely to challenge it.

By posting his top ten reasons, the poster opened these "reasons" for debate. And, as I think I may have mentioned in a previous post (wait while I scroll up to double check...)these reasons are weak and full of holes. They need to be strengthened or further supported, and some of them, perhaps, need to be completely abandoned. And if anyone wants to discuss the top ten list, I'm all ears.

In the meantime, boom, I'll hang loose and wait for you to tell me how my interest in discussing the topic of the original post is really a diversionary tactic to avoid your questions.

freeman said...

Aah! To say that the sermon on the mount happened is only an opinion!
Why argue over the meaning of something that has an incredible high probability of never having occurred!

Anonymoose noah moor said...

As has been stated previously in this section, it is impossible to prove or disprove anything in history. So regardless of whether or not the sermon on the mount "happened" -- it somehow made it to print and the print version contains (in my opinion) some fascinating teaching that someone came up with. Was it Jesus who came up with it? There's more evidence for yes than no. But it's an interesting question to consider.

freeman said...

There is no credible evidence for jesus. If you think I am wrong, please state your evidence for the record.

Interesting things in the bible, absolutely. The worst work of fiction ever written. Jesus spoke these words, prove it!

boomSLANG said...

Anon-no more,

Firstly, as I stated before, it was the approach on your original post(which has strangely dissappeared) that peaked/peaks my curiosity. Why?...because most, if not ALL of the time that someone stumbles in here and starts foaming at the mouth about how this or that isn't "proof" of this or that deity's non-existance, well, they are most assuredly a proponent of a particular deity/faith.....in this case, the one in question is the three-in-one Father/ghost/son "Trinity" known as Jesus Christ. Additionally, the second "red flag" was/is the fact that you are insistant that you are NOT a "Christian", so I thought it odd that you would go through so much fuss over someone else saying that Christianity is false, regardless of how they arrived there(opinion or NOT). So okay...' got it---you are "pro-Jesus" but anti-Christianity. Understood. lol

Moving on--- I fully know the difference between "fact" and "opinion"; "subjective" and "objective", so you can lose the condescending edge, because frankly, it makes you look more like one of those...::eh em::.. people who you insist you're not...::wink::

Lastly--and since you brought up George Washington---yes, of course I agree on with you on what you said about deducing whether he was a good president blah blah blah as being an "opinion", notwithstanding, with George, there are text-books FULL of biographical information, along with hand-written letters by the man himself, not-to-mention the people who *knew* him DURING his life. So in other words, yes, whether he was a good president is opinion, BUT, whether he epmirically existed, and was a President of the United States is NOT opinion, it is fact...unlike the existance and alleged achievements of certain deities we "know".

Hopefully this clears it up, and we can fight Christianity hand-in-hand now. lol

Dano said...

I think it would be interesting to look at the sermon on the mount and critique it's relevance to the real world, and the value of the advice that this so called Jesus was supposedly to have come up with.

I don't know about others, but he seems to be saying that this life is not worth living, and we should let people walk all over us and even kill us because this will insure us a shot in a better life in another place, when we die. It kinda smacks of a "Death cult"

If Jesus had a "Blog," what would people be saying to him today? Would he write paragraph upon paragraph trying to defend stuff like "Turn the other cheek," and "Give them your cloak also"?
Dan (Who thinks Jesus may have been just a nice guy but deluded)

.:webmaster:. said...

I like the Sermon on the Plain better.

.:webmaster:. said...

A few more nice little words from God on Sex. God never changes, except when he changes:

DEUTERONOMY 22:13-21
If it is discovered that a bride is not a virgin, the Bible demands that she be executed by stoning immediately.

DEUTERONOMY 22:22
If a married person has sex with someone else's husband or wife, the Bible commands that both adulterers be stoned to death.

MARK 10:1-12
Divorce is strictly forbidden in both Testaments, as is remarriage of anyone who has been divorced.

LEVITICUS 18:19
The Bible forbids a married couple from having sexual intercourse during a woman's period. If they disobey, both shall be executed.

MARK 12:18-27
If a man dies childless, his widow is ordered by biblical law to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir.

DEUTERONOMY 25:11-12
If a man gets into a fight with another man and his wife seeks to rescue her husband by grabbing the enemy's genitals, her hand shall be cut off and no pity shall be shown her.

Dano said...

If God had sex with Mary to get his son Jesus, does that make Mary the common law wife of God, and does that insure that Joseph is cooking in hell? I don't know if I am up to understanding all of the filth in the bible!
Dan ( Who admits to being guilty of lust and fornication, and adultery, and..........................during her period, but not one of the other things)

freeman said...

Dano,
That means that both god and Mary should have been stoned to death for having sex outside of marriage! lol

anonymous again said...

Well, I've given up on finding intelligent life on this forum. I had hoped some ex-Christians could offer something a little more substantial than Mary being the common law of God and "God doesn't change except when he changes." What I've discovered here is not an intellectual foundation for leaving or outgrowing Christianity, but instead a sophomoric mentality that looks for stupid things anything that will help them discredit Christianity. Know what the word obtuse means? Read your posts.

So, I guess I'll move on. I was really hoping to find a good discussion here. Something that would objectively support the abandonment of Christianity.

Oh well.

By the way, reply to this post if you want, but I won't read it. I won't be back.

Anonymous said...

If there is a God, or Gods, and it/they want us to know it exists, I am absolutely sure this God/Gods would see that each and every human being know the truth without allowing them to be skeptical, confused, and unsure as humans constantly are. We should not be having arguments over whether a religion is true or not. That alone tells me that all religions are false.

When God (if there really is one) wants us to know about him/her/it, no one will be in doubt because God will reveal itself in such a way, that no one will be able to say, "I don't believe."

So, until then, I will remain an agnostic.



So, the truth is, God doesn't want us to know..i.e., if there really is a God.



It's that simple.

.:webmaster:. said...

To annonytroll: When Christians start to lose an argument they often resort to insults to distract or change the subject. Ignoring the insult is sometimes difficult, but there are a few Bible verses that may help get the discussion back on track. Remind that Christian of these verses:

Proverbs 12:16, "A fool is quick-tempered"

Luke 22:65, “And they threw all sorts of terrible insults at him.”

James 1:26, “If anyone considers himself religious and yet does not keep a tight rein on his tongue, he deceives himself and his religion is worthless.”—

.:webmaster:. said...

The link for that last comment.

Dano said...

anonymous again wrote:
"Well, I've given up on finding intelligent life on this forum. I had hoped some ex-Christians could offer something a little more substantial than Mary being the common law of God and "God doesn't change except when he changes." What I've discovered here is not an intellectual foundation for leaving or outgrowing Christianity, but instead a sophomoric mentality that looks for stupid things anything that will help them discredit Christianity. Know what the word obtuse means? Read your posts.
So, I guess I'll move on. I was really hoping to find a good discussion here. Something that would objectively support the abandonment of Christianity.
Oh well.
By the way, reply to this post if you want, but I won't read it. I won't be back"

Dano speaketh to anonymous again: You site two small examples of attempts at humor for your reason for not coming back, and ignore gazillions of pages of scholarly posts.

You will be back. It's just that the fear of learning the truth prohibits you from an honest search for it. When you gather up your courage again, you will be back. (If you do some more reading, you will discover that a lot of "Good, "Real Christians", threaten us with "I won't be back, and I wont read what you have to say) Sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "I can't hear you", may seem like the most appropriate thing for the faithful to do, because of all the threats, and warnings in the bible about listening to unbelievers, but it is this intrinsic escape proof design of religious cults, that makes those who do escape, so angry after wasting so many years of their lives and giving so much money.

You have all of the earmarks of a person who calls himself a Christian, maybe, maybe not, but you can't possibly be so "obtuse" that you are willing to give up your search for reasons for abandoning a belief in a mythology, when practically everything in religious books like the bible is laughable in light of what 21st century man has learned.
Dan ( On the lower end of the "obtuseness" scale, but can smell a member of the "Christian Cult" from a mile away)

Dano said...

Dano said:
You site two small examples of ..........................

He should have said: You cite two small examples of........................

cite
One entry found for cite.
Main Entry: cite
Pronunciation: 'sIt
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): cit·ed; cit·ing
Etymology: Middle French citer to cite, summon, from Latin citare to put in motion, rouse, summon, from frequentative of ciEre to stir, move -- more at -KINESIS
1 : to call upon officially or authoritatively to appear (as before a court)
2 : to quote by way of example, authority, or proof
3 a : to refer to; especially : to mention formally in commendation or praise b : to name in a citation
4 : to bring forward or call to another's attention especially as an example, proof, or precedent

Dan ( It's very lonly here in Obtuseville.)

Anonymous said...

If you truely believe what you are talking about, you truely grieve the heart of a God who love you. Christianity is a belief but one that is solidifird in faith not what is seen. Fight against the tide all you want but you will be singing a different story when the trumpet sounds. Oh wait you do not believe in that either. From this web site I get a confliction of what it is you do not believe:
1. No God
2. No Jesus
3. or both
As for me and my house, WE WILL SERVE THE LORD! and do so in faith with gladness. Beleive in what you will but please believe in something.

Christian_01 said...

ok... do all of you guys realize what you are argueling about. I was researching reasons for christisnity for a project.. i am a christian.. and i came across this site and decided to read it just to see what some other people's opinions are. And you guys are all absolutely missing the point of christianity and everything.. it's disgusting. first of all.. why would there be a web site to try to prove that christianity is wrong? who do you think you are to try to prove that... and what if your wrong.. have you considered the consequences? I didnt read all of your comments, only the first few... scrolled down a bit and read some things argueing that God and mary were not virgins... so i just scrolled to the bottom.. and thankyou to whoever left that last comment.. there is still some sanity in this world!
what you guys argueing against christianity dont understand is that christianity is not all about proof, or solid evidence that its real.. I believ in God and trust Him with all my heart soul and mind, but no.. i dont have complete proof that Jesus was real... I dont have complete proof that God created heaven and earth and i dont have proof that the Bible is 100% correct. But thats not what being a christian is all about... christianity is based on faith. In Romans 10:8 (ASV), the Bible is called "the word of faith" and in chapter 10 it says “Whoever believes in him will not be disappointed.” it does not say whoever has proof that Jesus existed will not be disappointed.. it says whoever believes... Christians and non christians alike should not be argueing about hings in the Bible that dont matter. We spend so much of our time argueing about the little things with people who have hardened hearts towards God. Christians get nowhere doing that, it is God alone who can change a man's heart. now this is the one and only post i'll make on this site... i just had to say something because i was truelly disappointed in what u are trying to do.. you have your beliefs, i have mine... who do you think you are that u can try to change mine? it is not your place to do it, so please.. keep your opinions to yourself from now on... And may God be with you, I will remember you in my prayers to the God who truely cares.
Abby <><

boomSLANG said...

Illiterate Christian who accidentally fumbled their way on to a website that's clearly titled "EX-Christian" had this to say:

"you have your beliefs, i have mine... who do you think you are that u can try to change mine? it is not your place to do it...so please, keep your opinions to yourself from now on."

Are you f%cking serious? Take your brainwashed apologetic little ass outta here. Seriously, I could eat a bowl of Alpha-Bits and shit out a better argument for your bastard son-of-a god. Get lost. SCRAM! Shoo! BEAT IT!....go play with Barbie's Country Camper!

lol

J. C. Samuelson said...

Oi!

Abby,

My young friend, you really need to learn to think before you speak/type. And learn to use punctuation, sentence structure, and a spell checker at a minimum.

But moving on...

"ok... do all of you guys realize what you are argueling about."

Yes. However, it seems to have escaped you that we wouldn't be arguing but for the Christians who come here trying to prove something.

"I was researching reasons for christisnity for a project.. i am a christian.. and i came across this site and decided to read it just to see what some other people's opinions are."

It's commendable that you wanted to find other opinions. Unfortunately, what you write further in your post gives away the fact that you have not read the site. You read - more than likely - this one post and made a snap judgment.

"And you guys are all absolutely missing the point of christianity and everything.. it's disgusting."

No, actually we do understand Christianity quite well given that nearly all of the regulars on this site were Christians for many years before giving it up.

It is you that doesn't understand the point of this site.

"first of all.. why would there be a web site to try to prove that christianity is wrong? who do you think you are to try to prove that..."

First of all, this site is not dedicated to proving Christianity is wrong. It is dedicated to providing support and information to EX-Christians.

As for who we think we are, exactly who do you think you are to ask this question? Have you travelled a mile in our shoes? Didn't think so.

However, since we're on the subject (and you're really willing to explore Christianity, both pro and con) you could actually read the articles, letters, and posts on this site and become better informed. You might also visit Infidels.org. The link takes you to the section particular to Christianity. It might be a good start. Also, The Skeptic's Annotated Bible is useful when compared along with your own copy.

"and what if your wrong.. have you considered the consequences?"

Ah, yes. Pascal's Wager and the threat of your imaginary Hell.

Are you saying we should believe simply out of fear? That doesn't exactly sound like the faith the Bible talks about (see here and here). Are you aware that in Romans 14:23 Christians are told that "whatsoever is not of faith is sin"?

"I didnt read all of your comments, only the first few..."

That's quite obvious.

"...scrolled down a bit and read some things argueing that God and mary were not virgins... so i just scrolled to the bottom.."

That's not how one does proper research when trying to learn anything.

"...and thankyou to whoever left that last comment.. there is still some sanity in this world!"

Not everyone in the world will agree with you, Abby. Saying that everyone who doesn't is insane (or implying it as you did here) won't get you very far at all.

While we're on the subject, doesn't Paul remind you in Romans 12:18 to live peaceably with all men?

In any case, researching something (as you claim) with the conclusion already fixed in your mind is called having bias.

"what you guys argueing against christianity dont understand is that christianity is not all about proof, or solid evidence that its real.."

Actually, we understand very well that Christians aren't very discerning in the evidence department.

"I believ in God and trust Him with all my heart soul and mind, but no.. i dont have complete proof that Jesus was real... I dont have complete proof that God created heaven and earth and i dont have proof that the Bible is 100% correct."

Thanks for your honesty. However, doesn't this mean you should at least consider that your religion might be false?

"christianity is based on faith."

Which most of us here have rejected.

"Christians and non christians alike should not be argueing about hings in the Bible that dont matter."

I couldn't agree more. So, the reason for your post was...

"We spend so much of our time argueing about the little things with people who have hardened hearts towards God. Christians get nowhere doing that,"

You're right. Christians get nowhere arguing their point-of-view.

"now this is the one and only post i'll make on this site..."

Ok. But I hope you'll read more of it all the same.

"who do you think you are that u can try to change mine? it is not your place to do it, so please.. keep your opinions to yourself from now on..."

You are the visitor here. We did not come to your door, you came to ours. You are free to ignore this site and never come again if you like, but we have every right to voice our opinions here. Who do you think you are telling us we don't have a right to our opinions, eh?

Go grow up.

"And may God be with you, I will remember you in my prayers to the God who truely cares."

No thanks.

Dano said...

Christian_01 wrote:
" And may God be with you, I will remember you in my prayers to the God who truely cares"
Abby <><
posted: 6/13/2006 11:56 AM EST  

Dan to, ABBY!
I was thinking the same thing just the other day when I saw the millions of starving people, and mothers with starving babies in their arms, who were made refugees by ruthless soldiers of an African dictator, and are now being raped and mutilated on a daily basis.

Also when I read about the millions of people who were tortured and then burned at the stake during the "Dark Ages."

I was totally overwhelmed by these examples of Gods love for his creations! Every time I see a child born with two heads or with spinabifada, or any of the thousands of horrible diseases that he blesses people with, I think of Gods love and it almost makes me cry with joy!

Dan (Realist. It's your hell, you go there!)

Dave said...

I have been a christian for thirty years and grew up in the church. Over the years, I have learned that many in the church use the scriptures to control,dominate and abuse others. After many years of searching and looking at my own family of origin, I found that most of my hurt was from my well-intentioned but wounded and dysfunctional family and not the Word of God. Although it was used inappropriately. I have since become a christian counselor and have helped many out of their pain and hurt from abuse. What I hear from these articles is that same kind of hurt and pain I experienced when I was growing up. I hope and pray that you will look a little deeper into your soul and see the abuse that makes you so angry. God loves you and has a enormous amount of grace. Paul was a persecutor of the church but when Christ touched his soul and spirit, he became the strongest advocate for the cause of Christ. God bless you as you seek his truth.

Pollywannacracker said...

....::Yawn::....

Vinod said...

I belonged to Hindu family before I gave my life to Christ. I was a young boy then, still studying in high school in IX Standard and I had two more years to graduate from high school. I was studying in a boarding School and had rare opportunity to come out of School campus to meet my relatives who lived in the city. But it was one of those weekends in November 1992, when I got the opportunity to meet my cousin who lived in the city and that was my Dipawali holidays (Dipawali is one of the Hindu’s festival of light). But one day I was discussing with my cousin about religion and he said, "There is only one God and Lord, and He is Jesus Christ." Those really made me interrupts and say, “how that’s possible”? As a matter of fact, even during my High School days, I use to pray to gods of all religion, every evening before going to bed and this was my habitual practice. To me no one religion was greater than the other; I strongly believed that all religion is one. I thought, one was only taking different routes but we all were reaching the same destiny.

To tell you the fact, I never believed Christianity. I never believed and would not believe Christianity as the right pathway to true God, because I had been living among Christians right from my Childhood and had never seen any exemplary Christian, besides, my own Hindu concept of 330 Million gods (Hinduism believe in 330 million gods) never make me feel that my Hindu religion was true. Going to temple had never changed them.


I was too attracted towards Islam those days, because of their concept of one God and I loved the way they would do their Namaz (Their prayer). But while debating with my cousin, I said that the Hindu god like Durga are more powerful than Jesus who died on the cross, since Jesus could not save himself, but my cousin further said that all those gods of Hinduisms are “demons” and only Jesus is Lord. This made me very upset and my first impulse was anger, this almost led us to fight, but when my aunt saw us fighting and disputing on religion, she scolded us and told us that we should not fight on religion being brothers. Then my cousins begin to testify me of the miracles that took place in the recent healing crusades that he had attended. He told me, that blind men were able to see and lame were able to walk in the name of Jesus Christ.


But that event had a great impact in my heart and life. I should say, that even changed my whole course of destiny. There itself I begun to reason, *** “Why do people change their religion (because I had been hearing that some people were getting converted to Christianity”? *** “What is there in Christianity that is not there in Hinduism.”? As a sixteen-year-old boy, I decided that, “I would try to reach the heart of truth,” “I will dig out Christianity.” So, after my weekend was over, I went back to my boarding hostel. On reaching my hostel, I went to a Christian friend of mine and asked him, “Friend, could you please lend me your bible.”? He said, “Sure why not”? Hearing that other friends around us were surprised. I borrowed the Bible that evening and began to read it. As I began to read the Bible, I was shocked to find that Bible spoke of things that were going inside of my heart. Those thoughts of adultery, fornication, dirty thoughts, and unwholesome language were a part of my life and Bible called them SIN. I had never known the true definition of sin until I read the Bible. Bible introduced me to sin, proved me the menace of sin, taught me the destiny of sins and showed me a fail-safe way to get saved from my sins through Jesus Christ. Thoughts of adultery, fornication, and unwholesome language were so much a part of my life, that I never thought that they were wrong; moreover, that is what I saw in the life of my friends and the people around me. But one thing I know, that reading the Bible became interesting all the more. Many times, the sins which I would commit during the day, those same sins I would see in Bible and that made me scarred and I would think, “how does the Bible know all about me.” This went on, as I begin to miss my classes and sit in School Library to read the Bible. My friends were surprised to see me carry a Red Bible in my hand all the time. Some of them asked me, “Why do you carry that Bible.”?


This went on for a period of one month and little more. But I was convinced; that the God of whom Bible talks about is a true God. I thought, “The God of Bible knows everything about me and yet He wants to forgive me.” Following this, my winter vacation commenced in December, and on 13th Dec 1992 (Sunday) I had the opportunity to attend Church with my cousins for the first time. God spoke to me on the first day through the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, His sacrificial death for me. I was so touched by John 19:34, “ And the solder pierces Jesus’ side with spear and blood and water gushed out of His side,” I said in my heart, “ Lord, you have undergone too much for me.” Then the Pastor asked, “Jesus has done so much for you, what have you done for Him?” That me cry within. I said, “Yes Jesus, you have done so much for me but what have I done for you.” My hearts melted and I began attending the Church regular basis and on 25th December 1992, I gave my life to Christ.


Things have never been the same following my acceptance of Jesus Christ. We shared the good new of Jesus Christ with my mother who had been tormented of sickness for 2-3 years. Because of her undetectable throat infection, she could not even swallow water and this had been her condition for years together. We as a family had made all the possible vows to our Hindu gods and had visited the high worship places seeking healing. But, all the so-called Hindu gods, deities, had failed and the Doctors had failed too.


In a state of hopelessness and depression, my Mom said, “I believe in Jesus. All the days of my life I served my gods but they have failed me all this time.” That evening when she shut the room and knelt down in her room to make confession of her sins to Jesus, then Lord Jesus touched her and she received instant healing, Hallelujah! Jesus did not fail us, oh! What a joy, He never fails. Our whole family received Jesus Christ thereafter and got saved. I just praise God who has shown us His enduring mercy, abounding grace and unfailing compassion. Because of His mercy we were not consumed but rather GOT SAVED in His Son Jesus Christ.

So, this is my life testimony and I can assure you with my life’s innate experience, “You may have failed, but Jesus will never fail. “You may have failed Him but He will never fail you. Come to Jesus and give Him your life, for only the feet of Jesus Christ the Son Of God is the safest place. Amen.

Anonymous said...

I belonged to Hindu family before I gave my life to Christ. I was a young boy then, still studying in high school in IX Standard and I had two more years to graduate from high school. I was studying in a boarding School and had rare opportunity to come out of School campus to meet my relatives who lived in the city. But it was one of those weekends in November 1992, when I got the opportunity to meet my cousin who lived in the city and that was my Dipawali holidays (Dipawali is one of the Hindu’s festival of light). But one day I was discussing with my cousin about religion and he said, "There is only one God and Lord, and He is Jesus Christ." Those really made me interrupts and say, “how that’s possible”? As a matter of fact, even during my High School days, I use to pray to gods of all religion, every evening before going to bed and this was my habitual practice. To me no one religion was greater than the other; I strongly believed that all religion is one. I thought, one was only taking different routes but we all were reaching the same destiny.

To tell you the fact, I never believed Christianity. I never believed and would not believe Christianity as the right pathway to true God, because I had been living among Christians right from my Childhood and had never seen any exemplary Christian, besides, my own Hindu concept of 330 Million gods (Hinduism believe in 330 million gods) never make me feel that my Hindu religion was true. Going to temple had never changed them.


I was too attracted towards Islam those days, because of their concept of one God and I loved the way they would do their Namaz (Their prayer). But while debating with my cousin, I said that the Hindu god like Durga are more powerful than Jesus who died on the cross, since Jesus could not save himself, but my cousin further said that all those gods of Hinduisms are “demons” and only Jesus is Lord. This made me very upset and my first impulse was anger, this almost led us to fight, but when my aunt saw us fighting and disputing on religion, she scolded us and told us that we should not fight on religion being brothers. Then my cousins begin to testify me of the miracles that took place in the recent healing crusades that he had attended. He told me, that blind men were able to see and lame were able to walk in the name of Jesus Christ.


But that event had a great impact in my heart and life. I should say, that even changed my whole course of destiny. There itself I begun to reason, *** “Why do people change their religion (because I had been hearing that some people were getting converted to Christianity”? *** “What is there in Christianity that is not there in Hinduism.”? As a sixteen-year-old boy, I decided that, “I would try to reach the heart of truth,” “I will dig out Christianity.” So, after my weekend was over, I went back to my boarding hostel. On reaching my hostel, I went to a Christian friend of mine and asked him, “Friend, could you please lend me your bible.”? He said, “Sure why not”? Hearing that other friends around us were surprised. I borrowed the Bible that evening and began to read it. As I began to read the Bible, I was shocked to find that Bible spoke of things that were going inside of my heart. Those thoughts of adultery, fornication, dirty thoughts, and unwholesome language were a part of my life and Bible called them SIN. I had never known the true definition of sin until I read the Bible. Bible introduced me to sin, proved me the menace of sin, taught me the destiny of sins and showed me a fail-safe way to get saved from my sins through Jesus Christ. Thoughts of adultery, fornication, and unwholesome language were so much a part of my life, that I never thought that they were wrong; moreover, that is what I saw in the life of my friends and the people around me. But one thing I know, that reading the Bible became interesting all the more. Many times, the sins which I would commit during the day, those same sins I would see in Bible and that made me scarred and I would think, “how does the Bible know all about me.” This went on, as I begin to miss my classes and sit in School Library to read the Bible. My friends were surprised to see me carry a Red Bible in my hand all the time. Some of them asked me, “Why do you carry that Bible.”?


This went on for a period of one month and little more. But I was convinced; that the God of whom Bible talks about is a true God. I thought, “The God of Bible knows everything about me and yet He wants to forgive me.” Following this, my winter vacation commenced in December, and on 13th Dec 1992 (Sunday) I had the opportunity to attend Church with my cousins for the first time. God spoke to me on the first day through the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, His sacrificial death for me. I was so touched by John 19:34, “ And the solder pierces Jesus’ side with spear and blood and water gushed out of His side,” I said in my heart, “ Lord, you have undergone too much for me.” Then the Pastor asked, “Jesus has done so much for you, what have you done for Him?” That me cry within. I said, “Yes Jesus, you have done so much for me but what have I done for you.” My hearts melted and I began attending the Church regular basis and on 25th December 1992, I gave my life to Christ.


Things have never been the same following my acceptance of Jesus Christ. We shared the good new of Jesus Christ with my mother who had been tormented of sickness for 2-3 years. Because of her undetectable throat infection, she could not even swallow water and this had been her condition for years together. We as a family had made all the possible vows to our Hindu gods and had visited the high worship places seeking healing. But, all the so-called Hindu gods, deities, had failed and the Doctors had failed too.


In a state of hopelessness and depression, my Mom said, “I believe in Jesus. All the days of my life I served my gods but they have failed me all this time.” That evening when she shut the room and knelt down in her room to make confession of her sins to Jesus, then Lord Jesus touched her and she received instant healing, Hallelujah! Jesus did not fail us, oh! What a joy, He never fails. Our whole family received Jesus Christ thereafter and got saved. I just praise God who has shown us His enduring mercy, abounding grace and unfailing compassion. Because of His mercy we were not consumed but rather GOT SAVED in His Son Jesus Christ.

So, this is my life testimony and I can assure you with my life’s innate experience, “You may have failed, but Jesus will never fail. “You may have failed Him but He will never fail you. Come to Jesus and give Him your life, for only the feet of Jesus Christ the Son Of God is the safest place. Amen.

Anonymous said...

I am a christian and am not at all hurt after reading all kind of nonnsense that is written. All I feel is Pity on you. Wish you could know the truth.

The scripture occurence which you quoted about Jesus both in new testament and old testament, in itself is a clear evidence that the birth of Jesus Christ and the incidents of Jesus Christ was no accident. All of those were already prophesied by the Prophets...and its so wonderful to know that, they were later fulfilled in the life of Jesus and your own scripture quotations prove that....

Another truth, which I want to tell you is...IF JESUS WAS FALSE.... 60% of Global population would not have beleive Jesus Christ. No wonder, Christians are the largest group of people today in the world....are all these fools...either theres something wrong with you or with the christians in knowing the truth...however i can believe that one person like you can talk like idiot and the large sect cant be guided and misguided like fools.

take care
Marvin

J. C. Samuelson said...

"No wonder, Christians are the largest group of people today in the world....are all these fools...either theres something wrong with you or with the christians in knowing the truth..."

Those who believed in a flat earth at one time vastly outnumbered those who believed it to be round. Does this mean they were right? No.

Public opinion does not indicate the truth of a proposition.

The 2.1 billion Christians in the world are not all fools, or even entirely foolish, but they all believe in one foolish proposition. They believe that an untestable, unknowable, all-powerful invisible entity created the universe decided to write a book just for them.

If someone were to say to you that a certain brand of coffee had been shown to enable humans to fly, would you believe it? Of course not. You'd quite reasonably ask for evidence. What if you found out that a majority of the world's population believed the claims about the coffee? Would that be convincing, or would you still want to see some hard evidence? What if you decided to try this brand of coffee, and found that it didn't work that way for you? What if you asked some of your believing friends and found out they had never actually flown as a result of drinking the coffee either? What would you think of the rest of the population who still believed the claims? Is it safe to say you'd think they were being foolish, at least about this one thing?

J. C. Samuelson said...

"Then my cousins begin to testify me of the miracles that took place in the recent healing crusades that he had attended. He told me, that blind men were able to see and lame were able to walk in the name of Jesus Christ."

It's truly unfortunate that carnival hucksters like Benny Hinn and his ilk are able to roam the globe taking advantage of impressionable minds. The lack of critical thought exercised by a majority of believers, at least in this one area, is deplorable.

The wizard is behind the curtain...

RubySera said...

I read through most of the comments and made notes as I went. Here it is from various parts of the thread:

Originally Posted by Jim, 08.23.2005,

Don't think I'm completely clueless though, I wasn't always a Christian. I've never been an "ex" Christian, but I've been a "non" Christian. Not the same, I know but not exact opposites either.
************
I disagree very strongly. If you are presently a Christian your pre-Christian life cannot begin to compare with the ex-Christian’s life. It’s about as opposite as a person walking toward the front door is opposite from a person walking out the back door. For the pre, Christianity is an untried option while for the ex it is the disillusionment of empty promises. Not sure how you can get more opposite than that. The only “same” thing about the pre and ex is the absence of Christian belief.

posted: 5/01/2006 Anonymoose noah moor wrote:
As has been stated previously in this section, it is impossible to prove or disprove anything in history. So regardless of whether or not the sermon on the mount "happened" -- it somehow made it to print and the print version contains (in my opinion) some fascinating teaching that someone came up with. Was it Jesus who came up with it? There's more evidence for yes than no. But it's an interesting question to consider.
***************
Jesus mostly repeated what the Greek philosophers had been preaching for centuries. He just gave it a Jewish twist and put it into the Jewish context.

posted: 5/02/2006 webmaster wrote:

MARK 12:18-27
If a man dies childless, his widow is ordered by biblical law to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir.
***************
I looked it up and that is not what it says. It says all the men died after being married to her and not leaving a child. She did not have to have sex with each in turn. I question whether this was a real case or a hypothetical case brought to test Jesus.

.:webmaster:. said...

Ruby, to marry your brother's wife is a command in the law of Moses: Deuteronomy 25:5-10. The story in Mark is an example of a family who obeyed the law to the extreme.

It is still commanded in the Bible, BTW.

Christian said...

who ever says they are an exchristian was never one to start with

.:webmaster:. said...

That's too easy, Christian.

I guess you'd also say that any who leave the Islamic faith for the Christian faith were never Muslims to begin with? And, any atheists that become Christians were never atheists to begin with. Or anyone who has a sex change was never a man or woman to begin with?

Sounds to me like you just can't tell what anyone really is, at least in your mind.

Then again, you may have a point. If you think that being a Christian includes some magical spiritual transformation, then no one on earth is a Christian. Any claims at possessing an indwelling Holy Ghost is pure fantasy.

Now, if being a Christian means “believing in Jesus,” then lots of people here were once Christian. Many here believed the whole enchilada. Some, like me, believed for decades.

If you'd like to think rationally for just a few minutes, you'd understand that people change their minds about things. Changing your mind about Christianity is no different from changing your mind about anything.

Oh, but in your defense, I have to admit that I used to say the same thing to people who left Christianity. I must have said at least a thousand times that "They weren't real Christians." It's embarrassing how stupid I was.

Anonymous said...

Jesus is 100% real!!!!!!!!!there is no reason to doubt him!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! may god bless you......

boomSLANG said...

Steven?..is that you, lad?

Shaheir said...

Christianity is a gay, retarted, and did I mean a bullshit of a religon. "They say that they believe in one god while the go gay buy worshipping the damn trinity. I am muslim, a religon which does believes in JESUS, but as a prophet. THE REASON WHY christians worship jesus is that because that idiot paul wanted to attract romans and greeks who already worshipped man-gods to christianity. I am only a warner and if you don't want become BBQ in hell, become a muslim and believe in ISLAM the true religon

Jim Arvo said...

Hello shaheir,

Thanks for the post. I've been warning the visiting Christians for quite a while that they are in big trouble if Allah is the one true god. According to the Koran, all "people of the Book" (meaning Christians and Jews) are destined for an eternity in Hell, being scalded by boiling water and worse, is that right? According to Islam, is it not a terrible blasphemy to assert that god had become a man (let alone part of a trinity)?

Finally, would you please give your perspective on "Pascal's Wager"? That is, the assertion that if you believe in the Christian god and you are wrong, you lose nothing, but if you fail to believe and you are wrong, then you burn in Hell--therefore, you should believe in the Christian (triune) god.

Thanks!

Warnepiece said...

Shaheir,

Go post this tripe on the Ex-Muslim website.

The qur’an is as much a load of bullshit as the bible.

…and Mohammed blows camels!

Anonymous said...

I wonder if people still believe 'Jesus' was born on December 25th and raised on the third day (Easter)...

Anonymous said...

I would like to tell the author of this website, while I commend the fact he is standing for something he believes in, there are two grossly misrepresented facts in the "Top Ten Reasons Why Christianity is False." The Vikings and various tribes of middle eastern nomads made mentions of a 'teacher' or 'miracle worker' that can be validated by carbon dating of their records. So, you might want to remove that claim as it is false. Also, Jesus was not 'unclean' by healing the 'Leper and dead girl.' Jesus, while living in Old Testament times, was not part of God's law, or Old Testament as you refer to it as, so by 'touching a Leper' and a 'dead girl' that does not make him 'unclean.' It just means he didn't follow every detail of the Jewish Law, which in many ways was/is very un-Godly from a biblical standpoint. You might also want to remove this one as well, as the author is deceiving it's readers. Good luck standing for what you do.

Anonymous said...

I would like to tell the author of this website, while I commend the fact he is standing for something he believes in, there are two grossly misrepresented facts in the "Top Ten Reasons Why Christianity is False." The Vikings and various tribes of middle eastern nomads made mentions of a 'teacher' or 'miracle worker' that can be validated by carbon dating of their records. So, you might want to remove that claim as it is false. Also, Jesus was not 'unclean' by healing the 'Leper and dead girl.' Jesus, while living in Old Testament times, was not part of the Jewish law, or Old Testament as you refer to it as, so by 'touching a Leper' and a 'dead girl' that does not make him 'unclean.' It just means he didn't follow every detail of the Jewish Law, which in many ways was/is very un-Godly from a biblical standpoint. You might also want to remove this one as well, as the author is deceiving it's readers. Good luck standing for what you do.

Zacharia said...

Scotty: "The Vikings and various tribes of middle eastern nomads made mentions of a 'teacher' or 'miracle worker' that can be validated by carbon dating of their records."

Uh, please provide the Nordic evidence you feel is worthy of supporting "Jesus", by name, and region. Obviously, there are many thousands of teachers and miracle workers that have walked this earth, just ask a Catholic.

And, since you assume the role of knowledgeable Slavic/Nordic language, why don't you present a cogent argument regarding what the Vikings considered to be "wise", and "miraculous". Most Christians can't even read their mis-translated bible... and then, they want to wander off into an extinct language, and derive meaning.

Scotty: "So, you might want to remove that claim as it is false."

Sure, as soon as you learn to speak a Norse language, and you correctly interpret a passage specifically indicating what the term "wise", and "miracle" are... won't hold my breath. Perhaps, you can phone a friend who lives along the Nordic track, who understands their culture.

Scotty: "Also, Jesus was not 'unclean' by healing the 'Leper and dead girl.' Jesus, while living in Old Testament times, was not part of the Jewish law, or Old Testament as you refer to it as, so by 'touching a Leper' and a 'dead girl' that does not make him 'unclean.' It just means he didn't follow every detail of the Jewish Law, which in many ways was/is very un-Godly from a biblical standpoint."

If Jesus didn't abide by the Old Testament or Jewish Law, then he wasn't the Jewish Messiah. Thus, he was a false prophet, and a weaver of dreams and false signs. So, take your pick of contradiction.

Astreja said...

Scotty, I read some Icelandic and some Old Norse. I am also of Scandinavian descent and consider the Æsir and Vanir to be my ancestors.

Please identify these Norse references to a "miracle worker" so I can check them out myself in the original languages. I have a strong suspicion that this particular teacher is not Jesus, but a member of my own family.

Anonymous said...

testing

rhinotrailer said...

guys, you are making a big big mistake.
Jesus died for you, he loves you
i am only 13 and i have already had several experiances with god

for example, one of my friends got diagnosed with a really rare form of leukemiea
the doctors said that he was going to die within the month
we prayed and prayed and he lived
he he got better and is living now.
the docters said that it was a miracle that he lived



that is a god thing
so dint give me the "god isnt real crap cause it is not true. JESUS SAVES and u better believe it

Astreja said...

Rhinotrailer, have you ever heard of "spontaneous remission"? It happens frequently with cancer patients. Remission after treatment is quite common, and nowadays leukemia has a fairly good survival rate. I worked for several years with a survivor of Hodgkin's Lymphoma, and at last report this person was still doing quite well.

I am happy to hear that your friend is feeling better, and hope that his good health continues.

However, I would be much more impressed if your god decided to heal spinal cord injuries, restore limbs to amputees, and find a cure for AIDS. As I don't see that happening any time soon, I choose to put my trust in science and medicine rather than in ancient books.

Please take a moment to thank the many hard-working doctors, nurses, clinical staff and cancer researchers... Not just your god.

Anonymous said...

Good evening fellow ex-Christians! Wow, first of all I am pleased to have wandered onto this website. I was born into a strict Christian family and bought it hook, line, and sinker up until college. I questioned my faith toward the end of my freshman year and my Christian "friends" turned their back on me. I dabbled in Judaism for 3 years afterward 'cause I couldn't quite make the split from god, but 8 years later I am finally confident enough to say I am an atheist! It is funny how I have to hide this fact from the people I work with because saying that you are an atheist around them is almost as bad as being a child rapist. I am looking forward to posting again on the site!
-Tim
PS: I will ign back on with a username once I get a google account....

Anonymous said...

I must admit there was a little disjointedness in the original "Top Ten" that I had a hard time following, so I have developed my own list of reasons why I reject Christianity (and religion altogether for that matter). It is clear from the archeological record that humans are not unique in the animal kingdom in the sense that we evolved from "lesser" parent species just like any other living being on Earth. It makes no sense that god would be sitting around waiting for us to attain consciousness to finally reveal himself to us. Did he reveal himself to Neanderthals? They were nearly as intelligent as us. If god is the author of reason, and the Bible is his literal words and teachings, then there shouldn't be any historical or factual flaws in the Bible. Yet so much from referencing the "four corners of the earth" to describing a natural occurance as menstruation (which god must have created, right?) as something disgusting and sinful doesn't seem to fit into reason. Anyone who studies the history of the Council of Nicea will see that very little spiritual inspiration went into deciding what was god's word and what wasn't. Christianity is no different than Greek or Roman mythology; it's a good read but it is simply just a story.

Bryan said...

Since you were so eager to share with us your side, do not be unwise as to not listen to another view. Here you go --

10)Most of the gospels were written 50 years after the actual event took place. Look back into history, differences happen.
9.) Christianity is the only "religion" that has no start date tagged onto it. Any other conceptions of heaven, hell, eternal life, etc are all from the origional.
8.) Cant really proove wrong, im not a historian
7.) The bible is full of "parallels" or preceeding events to allude to a coming event, or vis versa. This was intentional of new testiment writers, who, being good "talmid" new the torah front and back before they turned 12, would know about. Jewish writers love this kind of parallel. They would know what they were reading about when they read it.
6.) The old testiment is false?
5.) I dont even know what your talking about. Try to re phrase, and Ill get back to you.
4.)Nice history lesson... but translation errors are bound to occur, no matter what. There are multiple translations of many languages. In facts hebrew, which much of the new testiment was written in, has no vowels in the writting, making errors common.
3.) This statement, along with a lot more, is in reference to a broader sense. The "Church" for example, was not in reference to a building of people, but as a group of people, continued to this day.
2.) I remember learning something about this in Bible class at school, but at 3 am, im not about to be digging through my old note, although i should, for your case... call it laziness, but also remember that Jesus was in descendance from Joseph, who was just one of many descendants. To grasp the emmencety(sp?), run through some of the geneologies in Leviticus.
1.) Jesus wasnt big on tradition. He ate with lepors, as well as saving the woman, who should have been stoned for adultery, by saying, "Let he who has no sin cast the first stone." One of his big "campaigns" was to end tradtition that had gotten so out of hand, for example, you couldnt spit in the dirt on the sabbath, because it would make mud, which is considered work.

So there you go, Ill be back to check on this for any responding comments.

Glenn said...

" This is a shame, for people to hold to such views. Christianity is the best and only hope in my life, and Jesus Christ is that hope. No one can ever disprove the bible, is the best book-seller in history and undergoes the most attacks. I wonder why? Maybe it's because it's true. Sorry. No maybe involved. It is true. No opinion can change it, mine, or anyone else's. I pray for all the unbelievers, that they will believe on him who died for all of us. Read Ephesians 4, i like that chapter. May God's truth always prevail."

Anonymous said...

For the believer, no explanation is necessary. For the athiest, no explanation is possible.

Arthur_of_Old said...

Unfortunately, you prove what is known, that God will have mercy on whom he will have mercy and whom he hardens he will harden. You are no different than Pharoah. The only reason any believe is becasue God's spirit enters them by the payment made on the cross. He did become unclean and sin, but he did no sin. He is God and in the flesh was tempted. Yet in spirit he remained clean. You, if you remain in your condition will see Jesus and will bow~forever. Yet, you shall be placed in seperation from the one you have denied. Your life is not yours. You are owned. You have no power over it nor how it behaves. Try to do something apart that is considered to be good. Forgive someone that hates you and keeps running you into the ground. Do good to them, if you can. I can assure you you do not have one ounce of spirit to do that. None nada, zip. Although you would agree that it would be a very forgiving spirit to do that. But, can you???
Actually, it is impossible for you to even contemplate that.


Pretty story you have written. Place in the file of fiction though. You will be asked about your thoughts regarding it by Him who you say is a liar and unequal in His way. Jesus shall judge all, including me and you.

All know that there is an eternal God to whom they must answer. Some be in ignorance of whom by not knowing the Bible. You like all of us, do not want Him to be our God. Yet according to Isaiah 63, whom he loves he fights against to submit them to himself. He, obviously is not dealing with you, yet. Be warned though, what you sow you reap. God is not mocked nor devalued by your unbelief. He is and there is no other. You speak what you do not know, and as a fool
screams on the corner like the broken vessels they are, you yell at all. None are right but you.I think you would be wiser to just to be quiet, wait and see. Better that than to provoke Him to anger and judgement of your foolish rants. Take heed, take heed. You may be on the edge of destruction. I say this for your good and not to dishonor. I am as Romans 3. No better than you ooor any other.

You say Jesus of Nazareth is a liar and untrue. If he is not God no thing will hinder you, but if I speak the truth, you will see His hand move. He might even save you. He may even love you. Wow, love someone who hates Him. However, that is how good God is. We, how sad, are not. Due to Eve's transgression and Adam's defiance we are in this pit. Ask Him to reveal himself to you. If you dare, or are you afraid He Will answer.

Anonymous said...

Jesus not prophesied in the Bible? What do you make of the passage in the Old Testament where the Hebrews are being bitten by poisonous snakes and are dying until they look up and see an IDOL of a bronze snake on a stick being held up by Moses? Seems to be a forshadowing of Christ being made sin on the cross in MY book, how about you?

Anonymous said...

I guess everyone is entitled to their opinions. We will all know the truth at the end. I choose to believe in God and Christ. Others chose to believe otherwise.

Exchanging heated words will not change anything. Someone here told a 13 year old that God did not help his friend who had leukemia. That was wrong. God did help that person just like He is helping all others. It is us who decides if we want to be helped. God loves ALL of us. But do you want to recieve it? It is your choice.

Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and opinions but please be careful what you say to a young person here. He was sharing something too.

Thank you

Jim Arvo said...

Hello "Arthur_of_Old",

I hope this is a joke. If so, ha ha, good one. If not, can you please give me some indication that you are willing and able to read and contemplate points of view other than your own? For example, can you accurately paraphrase one or two of the arguments given at the top of the page? If so, I'll be happy to have a discussion with you, as will others here. If you cannot, then discussion is fruitless, no?

By the way, I'll be happy to return the favor if you wish. I think most of us here can accurately paraphrase the arguments of visiting Christians in such a way that they would agree--that is, without distorting the original intent. That should be a fairly straightforward exercise, no? I think I'm going to start imposing this requirement on visiting Christians more often. It may well save a great deal of time.

I'll check back later to see if you really wish to have a discussion.

Anonymous said...

God and Goverment were created by humans because they needed to police their morality.

Anonymous said...

I noticed that the writer of this wasn't quite being truthful when saying Jesus wasn't mentioned in prophecy. For one thing, what does he, or, any of you, make of the passage in the Old Testament where the Hebrews are being bitten by poisonous snakes and are dying until they look up and see a bronze IDOL of a snake on a stick, being held up by Moses? If THAT doesn't forshadow Jesus Christ becoming sin for us on the cross, keeping the sin from killing us when we look to HIM for our Salvation, what does? Oh, and I noticed that Jewish rabbis have no explanation for this passage either.

Bruce Ramsey

Pray4U said...

Don't worry rhinotrailer, They will believe in Jesus one day.
I just hope it’s not after they die.

.:webmaster:. said...

The one clear thing these past few posters have demonstrated is that the Christian cult has plenty of arguments geared specifically for keeping its members from thinking for themselves.

1) If people walk away from Christianity, they were never real Christians.

2) If some people simply don't fall for the line, then God chooses some and hardens others.

3) Gold snakes on a stick is a cryptic and absolutely irrefutable prophesy of a future dead/undead god-man on a stick. I mean, what else could it be? When such things are "explained" as prophesy, then pretty much anything can be counted as prophesy.

I challenge you Christian posters to attend a few Islamic meetings with an open mind. If you do so, you'll quickly discover that their rhetoric sounds eerily similar to yours. They too are absolutely sure they are that their religion is the one and only truth.

They too, have never attempted to think for themselves or honestly examine the roots and history of their religion.

How sad.

.:webmaster:. said...

Another thing I find interesting here is that Christians honestly believe that those human beings who simply don’t believe in magical indivisible deities as they do will be tormented horrifically for all eternity.

What is unbelief, really? It’s a thought crime. I don’t think a god exists; therefore I’m going to be imprisoned and suffer after death. I’ll never be allowed to die, escape, have probation, repent, or in any way reform. No, I’ll endure eternal retribution at the hands of an angry god for all eternity. My crime? Not believing HE exists during the course of my short, mortal life.

Unending, harsh, retributive, punishment for a short lived thought crime. I’ll be made immortal so HE can have me tortured forever. HE will be torturing me for making me exactly the way I am.

Good grief. What a complete asshole your god is. Even Hitler eventually let his victims die. Your god is a sick sadist, who demands total subservient surrender of mind, body and all individuality. And if that surrender and compliance is not offered willingly, then HE will draw his sword and slaughter, slaughter, slaughter.

Christianity is a hideously cruel myth.

Anonymous said...

Objections to your list need not be founded in any religious zeal as the arguments you employ are incredibly weak.

Even the most ardent but, rational aetheist, would say that it is clear in the writings of the Gospels that the account of Jesus portrays him as a Jew who adamantly believed the spirit behind the Old Testament.

He sinned by touching a leper in order to heal that person?

uh huh...

OMG U LOGIK ROXORS JESUS CANT BE TRUE U PROVED IT WITH UR LEET LOGIK!!!

If you wish to debate historical accuracies, by all means. However given that the Gospels are allegedly an inspired text of spiritual truth that road is rather moot.

If people want to be Christians, let them be so.

Being an evengelical "Ex-Christian" backed with zealous, but infantile, arguments doesn't make you seem rationale.

It makes you seem like a bitter and stupid person.

.:webmaster:. said...

If people want to be Christians, let them be so.

Who is stopping them?

It makes you seem like a bitter and stupid person.

That made you seem rude.

If Christians don't like what they read here, they are welcome to click away. No one is forcing them to think for themselves. They have every right to embrace magical thinking and talk to invisible friends all they like. And the regulars here have the right to reject all the Christian nonsense presented.

That OK with you, Bold Anonymous?

Micah Cowan said...

What is unbelief, really? It’s a thought crime.

And not even a voluntary one. My public admission of unbelief came at a time when I did not actually disbelieve in Jesus, but neither did I positively believe in him as a deity. After several months of this unbelief-but-not-disbelief, I needed to confess to my friends, my fellow ministry-workers and myself that I could not continue in this hypocrisy.

It rankled me to know that, if Jesus was "real", I had no control over whether or not I believed in him. I didn't "choose" not to believe in him, I just no longer found the evidence anywhere close to convincing. No matter how desperately I might wish it, I could not "make" myself believe something my reason refused.

What does the Bible say about this, of course? Only "Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?" [Ro 9:20-21].

Not too terribly reassuring. And so much for the doctrine of "free will" (which, AFAICT, has no scriptural basis whatsoever. Cf. the hardening of Pharaoh's heart; and Saul's forced prophecy and possession by the Holy Spirit [1 Sa 19]).

.:webmaster:. said...

Salient and well said, Micah.

The funny thing about "belief" or "faith" is that it is just a thought, or a feeling, or an opinion, or something along those lines. It's not that I'm actually doing anything, regardless of whether I believe or disbelieve... I just have thoughts about the existence of god and the truth of Christianity, that's all. I wonder why having the correct opinions about Jesus would even matter. I mean, why would a god be so concerned about anyone's opinion (belief) about Jesus or Christianity? What possible advantage could a human opinion about this god make? If HE exists and wants to love me, then HE should love me. Why all this aligning of thoughts and opinions in order to gain HIS affection? Is HE unable to just love his creations unless they have the approved electrical firings going on in their brains?

Christianity is this:

1) Have the correct opinion about Jesus and go to everlasting bliss.

2) Have the incorrect opinion about Jesus and suffer cruel and unusual punishment thorughout all eternity.

Perhaps that's the reason Christians mercilessly hunted and killed heretics for over 1,000 years. Those zealous believers understood that the policing of thoughts and ideas was a central mandate of Christianity.

I'm so glad I can finally think for myself. Thank no-god for setting me free.

wayne pacific said...

Jesus is reported to have said, "Love thy neighbor as thy self." And why would that be? Because your neighbor is yourself!

Don't trip out too much.

Micah Cowan said...

Well, of course most Christians will be quick to point out that it's not about "believing in" Jesus so much as "believing upon" Jesus (following in his footsteps, etc).

But, as the latter is quite impossible without the former, it all ends up about the same, except that even just "[having] the correct opinion about Jesus" is still not quite sufficient to guarantee "[going] to eternal bliss" (as the writer of James is quick to point out).

.:webmaster:. said...

Believe in, believe on, believe upon, have faith in, put your faith on, trust in, place your trust upon... it's all Christianese semantics, really. It all means the same thing. You can be as good as gold, but if you don't have right thoughts about Jesus banging around in your head, you're going to hell. Ghandi, for example, is in hell. The Buddha is in hell. Every single person, no matter what kind of life they lived, if they don't have the correct version of Christian belief in their heads, are in or headed for hell.

In contrast, those who have the correct "belief" about Jesus are headed for heaven, no matter what kind of life they live. The assumption, of course, is that those who really have the correct version of Christianity in their heads will be magically transformed by the Holy Ghost and the renewing of their minds. Those who fail to demonstrate that magical transformation will be admonished to "really get saved" over and over until it finally sticks. Oh, and even if it does stick, you still have to keep repenting. Somehow our evil flesh is more powerful than the third man in the Trinity.

Anonymous said...

For all you Christians out there, think about this.

Your God claims to love every one, and he gave us the power of free will. Do you think it is the will of a 3 year old little girl to die of leukemia? Do you think it is the will for a 20 year old to die in a car accident? And consider if that 20 year old was a Christian, coming home from church one sunday. That shows you how well your false God blesses his followers. And explain to me, why if god loves every one so much, why he only performed miracles in one place? Obviously if he were truly the messiah, he would help the suffering diseases African people. Sounds like he is just a chicken shit to me.

Anonymous said...

Didn't God already do that? The blind seeing, paralyzed walking, etc... he has already proven himself in those manners and people still doubted as he said they would and will in the end times. He also says we should walk by faith not sight.

Anonymous said...

He gave us free wiill not the ability to do whatever we want whenever we want, and he never said life would be fair. Jesus never did anything wrong yet he died in one of the most gruesome ways possible(not fair). Jesus was a man to you know. He came to save us from our sins not travel the globe to play doctor, and I'd like for you to name another single person that affected the world past, present, and future as much as Jesus did.

Astreja said...

It's late, but I've just gotta play with this silliness from the latest Anonymous...

He gave us free wiill not the ability to do whatever we want whenever we want...

Make up your mind. Free will, yes or no?

While you're at it, explain how a god can be omnipotent without negating "free will" by its very existence.

and he never said life would be fair.

No, he probably never said *anything* at all.

Jesus never did anything wrong...

...Except for calling a woman a dog; killing a herd of pigs; lying to his disciples; starting a riot in the temple; wandering off and causing his parents a lot of worry; lying about coming back during the lifetime of his disciples

And if he and his "father" are the same, he also has to answer for the global flood and the genocidal war that wiped out the Amakalite people.

...yet he died in one of the most gruesome ways possible...

You have a *lot* to learn about what the "most gruesome ways possible" actually are, sir or madam. For your information, I myself have suffered pain of longer duration. Don't even think of comparing your mythical god-man to even one of the people in the cancer ward of your local hospital.

He came to save us from our sins...

...The supposed crime committed by the god of the Bible, who set up Adam and Eve to fail by punishing them for something they could not have known to be wrong. They were supposedly punished for eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, remember? How could they have known that disobedience was bad until *after* they ate the fruit?

"Original Sin" is a myth. An extremely destructive, slanderous myth. Stop repeating it.

I'd like for you to name another single person that affected the world past, present, and future as much as Jesus did.

Siddhartha Gautama. Galileo. Sir Isaac Newton. Albert Einstein. I could name hundreds, nay, thousands more.

Glenn said...

First of all i'll say that what Jesus said was true, he never lied once. I read about what people say about his returning. He said that even he or the angels in heaven don't know when he will return, but the Father only. Since we as humans have greed and selfishness in us, unfaithful christians and unbelievers would be doing everything they wanted to until probably about an hour or so before he showed up, then there would be a lot of repentance going on. It's very wise not to give an exact time. How else would the Lord know who was faithful, and watching...and who wasn't? Makes sense to me. And Gautama, Galileo, Newton, or Einstein cannot save your soul for all eternity. Only Jesus Christ has the power and authority to do that. Your education, money, family, or friends won't do any good. Just him.

Astreja said...

Glenn: First of all i'll say that what Jesus said was true, he never lied once.

Jesus on the Second Coming: "Amen, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation." (Matthew 23:36)

"This generation" died over 1900 years ago. Jesus is a no-show. Jesus lied.

How else would the Lord know who was faithful, and watching...and who wasn't? Makes sense to me.

Ah, so you admit that your "Lord" is not actually omniscient, can't see the future, can't see into the hearts of the believers to determine who's a True Believer™.

However, these quotations make somewhat more sense when you consider that they were written by mortal men seeking to control groups of acolytes.

And Gautama, Galileo, Newton, or Einstein cannot save your soul for all eternity.

They don't need to. The soul has not been proven to exist, therefore there is nothing that needs "saving".

The closest we get to eternal life is when the component molecules of our bodies get recycled into new forms of matter. I have no desire to go to your mythical "heaven" and hang out with your neo-Canaanite demon-god Yahweh. I would much, much rather be a dahlia in the garden down the street. And a house sparrow, and then a cat. Or all of the above at the same time, because there are approximately 100,000,000,000,000 molecules in my body. Lots to go around.

Glenn said...

Well, i feel sorry for you, astreja. I really do. You're twisting scripture, he was talking about the pharisees and scribes and the treatment of the prophets. He knows the future, every bit of it. But we have a free will to make choices, to accept his truth or reject it, which is very evident in your case. There is a Heaven, it's the most wonderful place, but only the faithful christians will be there with the Lord. The soul exists, more than you know. And you can't prove it doesn't exist. I pray that you and those like you will turn to Christ before you experience a place that you probably think doesn't exist, but does, and that's a place called Hell.

J. C. Samuelson said...

Glenn,

How else would the Lord know who was faithful, and watching...and who wasn't?

Um, isn't God supposed to be omniscient? Your argument makes no sense from the perspective of an all-knowing, all-powerful deity.

But we have a free will to make choices, to accept his truth or reject it, which is very evident in your case.

Omniscience is incompatible with free will. I would explain, but I'm sure the logic of it would be lost on you.

There is a Heaven, it's the most wonderful place...

Been there, have you?

And you can't prove it doesn't exist

There is no evidence that it does. Stating no belief with respect to something for which there is a lack of evidence is not an extraordinary claim. You, on the other hand, are making an extraordinary claim. Got any evidence for it?

I pray that you and those like you will turn to Christ before you experience a place that you probably think doesn't exist, but does, and that's a place called Hell.

At the end, it all comes down to fear, doesn't it? Believe this or burn. Gotta love those appeals to force.

Anonymous said...

Rhinotrailer, that's great that your friend lived. But just because he lived, doesn't mean God saved him. You know a good example that shows how much God loves everyone? Every 16 seconds a child under 5 years old dies of a easy to cure disease in Africa. How about you get your "all loving" God to save a few of them? Maybe that would be a good step. If anything special happened with your friend, the medicine helped him. Just because your friend had a rare disease and lived, does not constitute or explain the existence of God. And, want to know something ironic? My cousin, who died a few months ago in a car accident, was coming home from Seminary, which is where you go to become a preacher, or a minister, or whatever you call it. That really shows me how much your God loves his followers.

Astreja said...

Glenn:Well, i feel sorry for you, astreja. I really do.

And your naïvété frightens me.

But we have a free will to make choices, to accept his truth or reject it, which is very evident in your case.

Yes. I reject your religion's vicious, sadistic idea of what a god might be. I reject your unproven "truth", which is nothing more than believers parroting the words of an ancient book.

The soul exists, more than you know. And you can't prove it doesn't exist.

I don't need to. You, Glenn, are the one making the claim for something that no one on this planet has ever seen, touched, smelled, heard or otherwise measured.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If you insist on claiming that this intangible "soul" thing exists, you must be the one to offer the proof.

Similarly, if I tell you that an invisible dragon lives in my garage, the burden of proof would then fall upon me. As I'm now the one making the extraordinary claim, you are under no obligation whatsoever to believe in my dragon or to disprove my assertion.

Unfortunately, Glenn, when you resorted to a threat of hellfire you committed the logical fallacy of argumentum ad baculum, or "appeal to force". You weakened your argument rather than strengthening it.

Glenn said...

As usual my words are being twisted into pretzels. Must be a lot of future lawyers on this site. Anyway, a couple of people on here are asking me to do something which has not been done: produce proof of Heaven or the soul, or be discredited for what i say. My argument isn't weakened by bringing up Hell; actually it's a favor to you and the others. By warning you i'm doing you a favor, if i don't warn you then i'm wrong. So i'll warn you anyway out of concern, not hate or arrogance. Back to my earlier topic...how can i produce proof of Heaven or the soul? Can i make my soul jump out of me and stand next to me and have someone take a picture? Or can i go on the space shuttle and try to snap a photo of Heaven? Totally absurd and ludicrous. If you require physical proof, you've missed the point completely. Faith doesn't consist of what's seen, but what isn't. And for the record, i don't follow a demon-god, I follow the TRUE GOD. Yahweh is the jewish name for God, and it's a shame he's blasphemed here so much. I couldn't imagine doing that. To all the other christians who have posted here: Keep it up, have faith, and endure. For the rest, well...the bible says things far better than i ever could, so i'll leave these with you:

1 Corin. ch 1:18
1 Corin. ch 2:14
1 Corin. ch.3:19
2 Corin. ch 4:4
Eph. ch 4: 18
2 Thess. ch 2: 11&12
2 Tim. ch 4:4
Phill. ch 2:11
Heb. ch 9: 27&28
John 12: 48

boomSLANG said...

Glenn,

If it wasn't self-evident---we don't care what the Bible "says", anymore than you care what the Q'ran "says"; what the Book of Mormon "says"; what Dianetics "says", or what Dr Seuss "says".

Bye now.

Astreja said...

Glenn: "My argument isn't weakened by bringing up Hell; actually it's a favor to you and the others."

What on earth makes you think that we haven't heard such words before, Glenn? This is ExChristian.Net, not "neverheardofjesus.com".

By warning you i'm doing you a favor...

No, you are being verbally abusive when you attempt to frighten us into believing. Shame on you.

And this is precisely what I meant by argumentum ad baculum. Threats do not add logical substance to a debate. They merely reveal that you have run out of meaningful arguments and are trying to bully people over to your side.

This rather pathetic trait, shared by innumerable Christian believers (and, in fairness, followers of Islam as well) is one of the primary reasons that I rejected Christianity in the first place.

"Back to my earlier topic...how can i produce proof of Heaven or the soul? Can i make my soul jump out of me and stand next to me and have someone take a picture? Or can i go on the space shuttle and try to snap a photo of Heaven? Totally absurd and ludicrous."

Not absurd at all. If these things actually existed, we *would* have some traces in the physical world.

There are none. None at all. Either your god does not exist, or it is incapable of leaving physical traces in the universe. As I said earlier, your god appears to be woefully impotent in the Real World. You may try to rationalize this away by claiming that unanswered prayers and random disasters and tragedies are part of an unknown Great Plan, but we're not buying that particular argument here.

"Faith doesn't consist of what's seen, but what isn't."

This is an exceedingly dangerous definition, Glenn. Faith that cannot be verified by any physical evidence renders people incapable of distinguishing between reality and fantasy. This, in turn, has caused millions of people to allow their lives to lie fallow as they waited for some magic man in the sky to solve all their problems.

Oh, and "faith" also tends to closely follow one's beliefs regardless of what those beliefs happen to be. If you had grown up in India, you would get the same warm, fuzzy feelings from Vishnu or Hanuman or Ganesha. If you had been raised by a devout family practicing Jodo Shinshu, Amida Butsu would be the name most likely to spring to your lips in a crisis situation.

And guess what? Believers in rival deities get their fair share of the "miracles" too. This could be because people who think positive thoughts tend to take positive actions and therefore reap positive results.

If you really want to live your faith, Glenn, start by discarding the idea of a jealous, punishing god. Then go out and walk the walk: Volunteer at the food bank, help out at the animal shelter, work on a house-building project. Things that make the world a better place.

And that's where you and I might actually come to some sort of agreement.

Anonymous said...

What about it all being sun worship, and that all religion is based on such cosmologic ideas? I can't find out enough about this case which seems to destroy the evidence for Christianity, coz I wanna make sure so I can accept or reject Christ as i please and find out the truth.

Anonymous said...

Saat kematian tiba, kehidupan tanpa Tuhan menghasilkan penyesalan selamanya.

Astreja said...

Ah, speaking in tongues.

How does one say "WTF???" in Indonesian?

Anonymous said...

yall are entirely stupid to think that christianity is fake, just wait and youll see the truth, he warned you of this, you should have listened!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

prove it you flippin freak i really like to see you try to because its real!!!!!

Anonymous said...

jessus did not sin okay you need to read the bible and also to learn the truth and quit listening to all these bone heads, just to inform yall, yall are all stupid as can be i mean really pathetic man!!!

AtheistToothFairy said...

Anonymous wrote:
"jessus did not sin.."
---
Of course 'jessus' didn't sin anonymous. It's hard for any mythical storybook creature to actually 'sin' in the real world.

Speaking of 'stupid' though.
Would you mind telling us what educational institution, made you so gosh-darn-'smart'?


ATF (Who wonders if all the mis-spelt words that xtians post here, are really some secret code that only jesus understands?)

Anonymous said...

FUUUUUUUKKKK U CUNNNNTTTTSSS ANNDD ALLL NON BELIEVERS.... JUSTT STFU U ASSHOLE WHICH HAVE NO LIFE, and actually try and get a direction of life u fuking loosers... every1 that criticises CHRIST i HOPE THEY GO TO HELL... U GUYSS ARE SO FUKING LAMMMEE GET A JOB U BUMS

CHRISTT IS THE wAY TO GO!!!

Astreja said...

(runs above post through Her "speaking-in-tongues to English" converter)

Twenty-twenty-twenty four hours to go I wanna be sedated

Hey, cool... He's channeling Joey Ramone!

webmdave said...

The Bible states that we should be careful of calling anyone a fool; However, I am pretty sure that in this case it is justified. If your right then oh well. But if your wrong then I am pretty sure with your deep theological insite you do know where you will end up. Turn or burn my friend. Curious if you are even still alive??? God won't tolerate the butchering and misinterpretation of his word, especially when it is designed to lead people astray. It will be better that a millstone were tied about your neck my friend. Hope you have changed your heart and mind since writing this article.

webmdave said...

"The Bible states that we should be careful of calling anyone a fool; However, I am pretty sure that in this case it is justified"

Hey, thanks for droppin' by and reminding us how "The Bible" is a subjective, contradictory book of nonsense. On the one hand, biblegod says not to call people fools, yet, then we find passages such as, "the fool says in his heart there is no God". Hmmm,' seems it's a "toss-up". And this how you, a believer, can come along and say it is "justified" to call people fools, for no other reason than that you feel like it.

"If your right then oh well.

I think you meant "you're", which is the contraction for "you are". In any event, if I'm right, then you've wasted the only life you'll ever have believing a lie.

"But if your wrong then I am pretty sure with your deep theological insite you do know where you will end up. Turn or burn my friend."

Anyone who threatens me with bodily harm for not believing something isn't worthy of my respect, belief, or worship...and they sure as fu(k ain't my "friend". And this goes for the biblegod you (pretend to) worship.

"God won't tolerate the butchering and misinterpretation of his word.."

You mean, like in your opening statement? You are "pretty sure" about how you interpret "God's Word"? 'NOT good enough.

webmdave said...

What lovely and loving sentiments. "Turn or burn." Wow, I can see Christ is living in YOU!

"Curious if you are even still alive??? God won't tolerate the butchering and misinterpretation of his word"

I got news for you. God doesn't have the power to strike you dead. Jesus is imaginary.

"The Bible states that we should be careful of calling anyone a fool" or maybe god thinks it is okay since Jesus says "You fools". Hard to tell because, as usual, the Bible is in conflict with itself.

I hope you will start using your mind and having a heart and reconsider your abysmal Christian outlook on life.

Oh, and thanks for reading the disclaimer which says no proselytizing. ["What a fool", she says in her heart towards the uncharitable Christian.]

webmdave said...

If god is concerned about the "butchering and misinterpretation of his word" then perhaps He should use some of his omnipotence to create a book that is easy to read and is impossible to misinterpret, instead of having well over 75 different sorts of Bibles in print.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_Bible_translations
With that many books, how the hell can people NOT get something wrong?

And why are there so many different churches with their different interpretations of scripture and doctrine? Can't god give a simplified method of worship instead of allowing over THIRTY THOUSAND different denominations to crop up?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations
Some of those denominations don't even believe in Hell. If I WERE to pick a denomination of Christ-inanity to follow, I would choose one where god wasn't a hateful, unforgiving pyromaniac, unlike your choice of a god who is.

Quite frankly, if you god cannot even get across to people which book he prefers and which method of worship he prefers, then he is pretty much useless, just like you.
So fuck your schizoid, candy-assed, incompetent loser god and fuck you because you are just like him.

webmdave said...

Way to represent your company there, buddy. Are your comments endorsed by HHH Seamless Gutters in Louisiana? If they search for your company's name, do you really want them to see your hate?
Hope you have changed your heart and mind since writing this article.
With feedback like yours, I find that exceedingly unlikely, Billie.

webmdave said...

God won't tolerate butchery of words? Insite? Lol.

I wipe my filthy hind-end with your holy book. Your holy ghost is a sorry whore. Go away.

webmdave said...

"The fool says in his heart that there is no god."

The wise man shouts it from the rooftops, so that ll may benefit from the knowledge!

webmdave said...

hhhseamlessgutters: "Turn or burn my friend."

(The Springy Goddess grabs Her Clue-by-Four™ in both divinely callused hands)

*BEATBEATBEATBEATBEAT* *SMASH* *WHACK*

I hope to Me that I never, ever acquire a 'friend' like you, GutterTroll. You are a disgusting, hateful, superstitious, fear-mongering lunatic.

Oh, and your writing stinks, too. *BONK* It's "If you're right"; there should be a *WHACK* comma between "oh" and "well"; the word is "insight"; and you only need ONE question mark, not triplets.

(rolls some D&D dice and smites HHH's gutter-making machinery with 3d6 Random Equipment Malfunctions)

I look forward to reading of your business's eventual bankruptcy, too. Now b%gger off before I get angry.

webmdave said...

Mr. Seamless Gutter,

You crack me up. You owe your fans a second coming. Please return.

webmdave said...

Mr. Seamless Gutter,

It's not "turn or burn"...It's STOP-DROP-And-ROLL, moron.

webmdave said...

You really think we're better off with people like this breeding?

webmdave said...

The Bible states that we should be careful of calling anyone a fool; However, I am pretty sure that in this case it is justified.

Why yes, you are a fool and calling you one IS completely justified. Thanks for the opportunity. And the laffs.

BTW, I have a real friend (not like you) who was 100% dissatisfied with his seamless gutters and the $hit-for-brains xtian contractor (evidenced by the little fishy on his truck) who installed them.

Hey, do you know the history behind that little fishy symbol? Betcha don't. I'll give you a couple of hints.

(1) The ichthys is yet ANOTHER of the pagan symbols hijacked by christians AND

(2) it has to do with s - e - x.

Happy Reading.

http://www.fistofblog.com/2008/05/29/jesus-vagina/

webmdave said...

Nice. Please don't vote, breed, or go out in public.



(Yeah, I know Anon's comment is OLD, but I just couldn't resist. Hopefully with over-the-top comments like that, he's really a POE -- and I don't mean a Point of Enlightenment ... )

webmdave said...

the facts of genetics mean that the species actually profits by their existence.

You'd have to go quite a way to convince me of that, David. I'd have to see hard evidence.

Then, of course, I'd have to kill myself.

webmdave said...

You know, David, I'd be willing to take the chance - 'cause it's for damn certain we aren't going to survive with them.

webmdave said...

Might I just say, few have given factual evidence against Christianity. A lot of facts have been thrown around, but where is the hard evidence? Where is the official, published proof? If any of you, Christian or not, is interested in learning more about proving or disproving Christianity, might I encourage you to read the book Case for Christ by Lee Strobel. Strobel originally set out to write a book with hard evidence that disproved Christianity, and he found something entirely different. Take a look. Maybe you will find it interesting.

webmdave said...

For your own educational purposes:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/paul_doland/strobel.html

http://atheism.about.com/b/2007/09/27/lee-strobels-case-against-christ-apologetics-backfiring.htm

webmdave said...

Angela R.: "Might I just say, few have given factual evidence against Christianity."

We don't need to prove a negative, Angela. Neither are we obligated to believe idiotic concepts such as Original Sin, Substitutionary Atonement, and people coming back from the dead.

Seriously, Angela: Christianity is simply psychologically damaging mythological tripe until otherwise demonstrated with proper logical rigour. That means *no* personal experiences and *no* Bible quotations -- Just hard facts that any scientist or historian or archeologist can examine and obtain exactly the same results.

webmdave said...

Might I suggest there is quite a bit of factual evidence against Christianity if you read books written by actual scholars and not that drivel published by Christian apogists like Strobel. Try Bart Erhman, Dan Barker, John Loftus.

I have read Strobel and it would be laughable if it were not so dishonest.

webmdave said...

Might I just say, few have given factual evidence against Christianity. A lot of facts have been thrown around, but where is the hard evidence?

Angela,

That is what facts are, evidence!

There are so many facts that demonstrate that xianity is a fraud and a myth and buffetphan has given you some links to take a look at. You should do so, taking the advice to remove the god goggles first.

You see, the onus is upon you to prove your case, as it is you who is making the extraordinary claim that a man can come back from the dead, yet you present no evidence for that claim.

As to strobel's book (it has been a while since I read it), it was written to create an income from the gullible and dressed up as scholarship. If you read it carefully you will discover that he offers no evidence, merely opinion, having first assumed the truth of what he claims to want to prove. That is not how argument works.

I sincerely hope, Angela, that you develop some skills in critical thinking and reasoning. These are the skills that will lead you to the truth that will set you free. Please begin the journey that ends with your escape from the clutches of the money-grubbers who insist upon stealing your tithes, rather than working for a living.

If you need any help in finding the information, just ask - there are people here who know so much and are prepared to share it with you.

Peace,

David

webmdave said...

How can you suggest that Tim should tie a millstone around his neck when you conveniently ignore the fact that your brain is currently set in neutral?

(With apologies to the mythical Jesus for the shameless adaptation of the parable of the speck and the mote.)

The bible tells you to stone a rebellious child to death - have you done so recently?

The bible tells you that bats are birds!

The bible tells you that the value of pi is three - have you tried using that to make a gutter or a car tyre recently?

The only thing on which the bible is an authority is bronze-age ignorance. It has no other discernible merit.

Peace,

David

webmdave said...

Personally, I do not, but sadly the facts of genetics mean that the species actually profits by their existence.

Plus, we are treated to so much sport by them.

;o))

webmdave said...

I cannot remember precisely how it works but, as David B. points out, genetic bottlenecks, which is what would be the result of "culling", or excluding the genes of "undesirables", of whatever nature, are not a good idea. Any form of eugenics, though outwardly sensible and appealing, runs the risk of extinction for the species as the genes which might hold the code for rapid change in the face of environmental change are almost impossible to detect until that change happens.



If, for example, it was decided that being under 5' tall and overweight was undesirable and should be helped to disappear by culling or sterilization, what would happen if being short and fat was merely the expression of only some genes in a group which, in cold a cold climate, also expressed the growth of thick, heat-retaining body hair? Should the "warmists" be wrong, and the 2coldists" of the latter 20th Century be right, and an ice age happen, the elimination of the short and fat would also have eliminated the potential for the adaptive change, brought on by the change in climate, of hair growth. This might result in the extinction of the species. Similar arguments may be made (though I confess to having difficulty forming one, so do not top yourself just yet) for the retention of the "fungigenital gene", should it be found.



Sorry, this field is obviously not my speciality. A little more explanation may be obtained here:



http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/IIID3Bottlenecks.shtml



If I have time I will try checking over my old Genetic Programming notes to see if I can discover the principles we examined 15 years ago, which informed this opinion.



In the meantime, it is still worth trying education to discover whether ignorance or stupidity is at the root of the problem. If it is merely ignorance, these religious nutters can be transformed into useful, contributing members of society. If stupidity, then I do not yet see a solution.



Peace (and long life to you),



David

webmdave said...

I cannot remember precisely how it works but, as David B. points out, genetic bottlenecks, which is what would be the result of "culling", or excluding the genes of "undesirables", of whatever nature, are not a good idea. Any form of eugenics, though outwardly sensible and appealing, runs the risk of extinction for the species as the genes which might hold the code for rapid change in the face of environmental change are almost impossible to detect until that change happens.



If, for example, it was decided that being under 5' tall and overweight was undesirable and should be helped to disappear by culling or sterilization, what would happen if being short and fat was merely the expression of only some genes in a group which, in cold a cold climate, also expressed the growth of thick, heat-retaining body hair? Should the "warmists" be wrong, and the 2coldists" of the latter 20th Century be right, and an ice age happen, the elimination of the short and fat would also have eliminated the potential for the adaptive change, brought on by the change in climate, of hair growth. This might result in the extinction of the species. Similar arguments may be made (though I confess to having difficulty forming one, so do not top yourself just yet) for the retention of the "fungigenital gene", should it be found.



Sorry, this field is obviously not my speciality. A little more explanation may be obtained here:



http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/IIID3Bottlenecks.shtml



If I have time I will try checking over my old Genetic Programming notes to see if I can discover the principles we examined 15 years ago, which informed this opinion.



In the meantime, it is still worth trying education to discover whether ignorance or stupidity is at the root of the problem. If it is merely ignorance, these religious nutters can be transformed into useful, contributing members of society. If stupidity, then I do not yet see a solution.



Peace (and long life to you),



David