ARCHIVES:

Posts in this section were archived prior to February 2010. For more recent posts, go to the HOME PAGE.

Archived Articles

10/16/2007                                                                                       View Comments

The Violent Heritage of Christianty

© 2007 by Tim Simmons

The recent insistence by Midwest Painter that nowhere in the Bible are Christians commanded to kill non-Christians has prompted me to do a bit of typing. I’ve already known about most of what I’ve dug up here but I thought I might try to put just SOME of the evidence in one post that Christianity has a bloody heritage not entirely unconnected to its holy scripture. My belief was that the Bible did command violence under certain circumstances but a wholesale command to kill anyone who was not already a Christian clearly is absent from the New Testament writings but IS depicted as historical events and direct commands from god in many places of the Old Testament.

Can we establish a link between the Bible and violence perpetrated by those who profess to be Christians? I think the answer to this one must be a resounding YES!

I will post a few quick things first then some links to some articles on the web in case anyone wants to browse them.

I’d first like to make the observation that the Old Testament is part of every Christian's Bible and they love to quote from it - when it suits them. But the OT law is still in force and binding on all Christians today.

The Old Testament was considered binding by Jesus and he even explicitly said as much in the following verses.

Matthew 5:17-19

17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. [meaning, keep the laws just like every other Jew was supposed to do]

18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

19Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus says he did not come to nullify the law. Plain and simple. He also says that the law will not become nullified until heaven and earth are destroyed and ALL things are accomplished. Sorry, Christians, you are breaking God’s commandments each and every day if you wear clothes that are part cotton and part polyester.

Another place concerning the law being in effect per Jesus is Matthew 15.

1Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying,

2Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.

3But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

4For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

5But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;

6And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

This is why I frame the post in terms of the Bible as a whole rather than limit myself to the New Testament. I believe I'm correct when I say that most Christians accept the Old Testament as being true and the word of God and as I’ve just shown above, the OT commandments (laws) are STILL in effect per Jesus. So any objection that Old Testament versus are not admissible are automatically nullified.

The Devil Made Me Do It!

Where would a Christian get any idea to harm someone just by reading the Bible – a message supposedly from an all-loving god?

Let me take a peek at just a few places from the Old Testament that MIGHT give someone an idea or two and then I will post a few thoughts on some NT passages.

Dig Through The Ditches And Burn Through The Witches

There is no telling how many people were murdered (mostly women who were burned alive in public) for being a witch in the last 3000 years. Hundreds? Thousands? I have no idea how many but why would we single out this particular person over any other? The answer lies in the Bible.

    Deuteronomy 18:10
    There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch.

    1 Samuel 15:23
    For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.

And then the clincher…

But let’s not leave out the male witches (wizards), either.

    Leviticus 20:27
    A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them.

And one from the NT just to show that witchcraft was still considered a sinful thing during the formation of Christianity about 800 years later.

Galatians 5:19-21

19Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,

20Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,

21Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

The real issue here wasn’t that witches were in cahoots with Satan or doing harmful things (in fact, they were doing exactly the same as the prophets only just not consulting god) but that Yahweh was a jealous god and anyone consulting OTHER spirits besides him were singled out as horrible sinners and were to be killed. I don’t know about you but this sounds like a command to do violence against someone who isn’t “one of us”.

If being a witch was so abhorrent to god (even above pedophilia which is not mentioned at all), then why wouldn’t it still be abhorrent to god today – especially since the law is still in effect per Jesus?

This, of course, is part of the cause for the witch hunts and witch burnings. But this couldn’t happen in this day and age in America, right?

The West Memphis Three:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=JrFna6GeAn8

In 1993, three young boys convicted of murdering three younger boys and the conviction hinged on Damien Echol’s involvement/knowledge of the occult and the type of music he and two other boys listened to. What chance did a young boy with knowledge of the occult and listening to Metallica have in a small, Bible-belt town when the prosecution assumed the murders were by a Satanic cult even before any arrests were made and in spite of the forensic evidence that it was a crime of extreme violence and hate and not any controlled ritualistic murder? Also view on youtube two HBO documentaries on this called “Paradise Lost…” and the sequel. Echols is now on death row. Watch these vids on youtube and get sick and pissed off at the double tragedy in which Christian beliefs played the biggest part in the wrongful convictions of three innocent BOYS.

Talk back and I’ll Send Ya Straight To Heaven!

I’m glad I didn’t grow up as an Israelite during the reign of Josiah. Basically, this is when most of the Old Testament was written/edited. 7th century BCE. I remember being whipped with a belt (until welps formed that took days to go away) and a switch (same song, different verse) for disobeying my parents but I think they were too lenient according to the following commands given by god.

Exodus 21:17
And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.

Exodus 21:15
And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.

Ouch! Sort of makes being grounded for a week seem wimpy, doesn’t it?

No, no violence commanded in those verses.

So, according to the Bible, Christians should kill their children if they hit them or curse them. Gee, if Christians were to kill their own children for such a small sin as hitting them, what do you think they’d do to a stranger? A stranger that was an… unbeliever to boot?

Do a search for “put to death” from any online KJV Bible and you’ll find plenty of peaceful commandments from God. Here’s one I also find a bit odd when I think about all of the really bad things you could do instead.

Three different times God wants to kill anyone who works on the sabbath.

  1. Exodus 31:14
    Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.
    Exodus 31:13-15
    (in Context) Exodus 31 (Whole Chapter)
  2. Exodus 31:15
    Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.
    Exodus 31:14-16
    (in Context) Exodus 31 (Whole Chapter)
  3. Exodus 35:2
    Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death.

An even more interesting law is this one.

Deuteronomy 22:11
Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together.

So, if my underwear was a mix of cotton and wool… I’d probably be stoned to death. It was more important to avoid mixing garment materials than to forbid a sin such as pedophilia, I guess.

With countless “put to death” commands in the law, what do you think was going on then? Do you think it may have created a tad bit of precedence for future followers of Yahweh? Christians, too?

Obviously, god was much more concerned about the ingredients of clothes than protecting children. Which brings me to the God-sanctioned slaughter of babies.

We can also see instances of God sanctioning the wholesale slaughter of several nations (including women, children and livestock) in Deuteronomy. This was done because God had promised some land to his chosen people and he had to take out the resident inhabitants first.

Deuteronomy 2:24-35

24Rise ye up, take your journey, and pass over the river Arnon: behold, I have given into thine hand Sihon the Amorite, king of Heshbon, and his land: begin to possess it, and contend with him in battle.

25This day will I begin to put the dread of thee and the fear of thee upon the nations that are under the whole heaven, who shall hear report of thee, and shall tremble, and be in anguish because of thee.

26And I sent messengers out of the wilderness of Kedemoth unto Sihon king of Heshbon with words of peace, saying,

27Let me pass through thy land: I will go along by the high way, I will neither turn unto the right hand nor to the left.

28Thou shalt sell me meat for money, that I may eat; and give me water for money, that I may drink: only I will pass through on my feet;

29(As the children of Esau which dwell in Seir, and the Moabites which dwell in Ar, did unto me;) until I shall pass over Jordan into the land which the LORD our God giveth us.

30But Sihon king of Heshbon would not let us pass by him: for the LORD thy God hardened his spirit, and made his heart obstinate, that he might deliver him into thy hand, as appeareth this day.

31And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have begun to give Sihon and his land before thee: begin to possess, that thou mayest inherit his land.

32Then Sihon came out against us, he and all his people, to fight at Jahaz.

33And the LORD our God delivered him before us; and we smote him, and his sons, and all his people.

34And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain:

35Only the cattle we took for a prey unto ourselves, and the spoil of the cities which we took.

This same type of slaughter happens a few more times in Deuteronomy with similar results. All the men, women and children were murdered so that the Israelites could have some land to inherit. This sounds a lot like God-commanded violence to me.

A similar thing happens to the Amalekites. God commands the Israelites to kill them all and they do. But the reason is that the Amalekites’ ancestors from 400 years earlier ambushed some Israelites and killed them. So, God decided to kill innocent Amalekites to make up for it. Men, women and children.

1st Samuel 15:2-3

2This is what the LORD Almighty says: 'I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. 3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy [a] everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.'

I can’t imagine a more loving and forgiving god. Not to mention just, since he’s murdering people who had nothing to do with the original crime.

Many more instances of God commanding murder could be cited but for me, this is enough. On to the New Testament.

Violent Influences Found In The New Testament

Did Jesus always promote peace and love? Could any of his words or actions be used as justification for violence?

Matthew 10:34-37

34"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn
" 'a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her motherinlaw—
36a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.'[e
]

37"Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me;

This doesn’t sound much like the Jesus we’re accustomed to hearing about. If Jesus came to bring division, as he says here, then would some use this to justify use of the sword?

Luke takes the “love me more” part and changes it to actual hate for the parents.

Luke 14:26
"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple.

Not much peace and love for your kin there, I guess. But perhaps it’s all just hyperbole. Even so, the point is that these passages give rise to justified violence – they open the door, if you will, to those who are looking for a nod of okay from god.


If You’ve Got Demons, You’re Not Getting Enough Exorcise.

The New Testament is full with the idea that demons or evil spirits could enter a person's body and possess them. This concept has also contributed to the persecution of those who acted differently or even those who had diseases such as epilepsy. Many mothers kill their children because they thought they were possessed and killing them would send them to heaven.

...during his evaluation in March that the voice she was hearing was benign at first -- 'but as the evening went on, she said the nature of the voice became sinister and threatening,' Watson said. 'The voice told her that her children were in danger. It was the devil or a demon, telling her she had to kill them in order to prevent something worse happening to them.' After Kukla allegedly stabbed her children, along with three dogs and a pet mouse, she sat outside her trailer and 'waited for a vehicle to take her to hell,' Watson testified. Watson said he reached his determination of Kukla's insanity based on tests he administered, along with other witnesses who saw Kukla apparently talking to someone who wasn't there.

http://www.expertwitnessblog.com/2007/09/forensic_pathology_expert_witn.html

Did the religion of love and peace cause her to hear demons and go insane? Was Satan actively working on her?

Many parents have killed their own children for religious reasons.

Another famous recent case is that of Andrea Yates.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Yates

She killed her five kids and in 2006 was acquitted by reason of insanity. I agree than a mother that kills her five children because she thought they would go to hell before getting saved due to raising them wrong is definitely insane.

Then there’s the offshoot problems such as Catholic celibacy which of course contributed to the molestation of countless young children throughout history. Any week in the news you can find a pastor of some church arrested for molesting some child. Is there a connection with Christianity? Just coincidence?

Many other cases of Christians doing bad things could be cited but the point is that false beliefs often give birth to other false beliefs – and horrible actions.

Hey, We’re Only Asking!

The Inquisition. Are you a Christian? No? I’m sorry but we’ll need to relieve you of your head. This is so well known I’ll just point you to the link near bottom of page.

Crusades? Another peaceful chapter in the life of a religion based on peace. See the link near the bottom of the page.

Another source for the justification of violence by the Church is Augustine of Hippo.

Augustine of Hippo (St. Augustine)

Just War theory is a doctrine which holds that a conflict can meet the criteria of philosophical, religious or political justice, provided it follows certain conditions. The doctrine of the just war has its foundations in ancient Greek society and was first developed in the Christian tradition by Augustine in Civitas Dei, The City of God, in reaction to the absolutist pacifist strain of Christian ethics based on the doctrine of "Turn the other cheek" espoused by Jesus of Nazareth (Matthew 5:38-48).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_war

Sounds a lot like jihad and holy war to me. War is always just after it’s begun.

Unsurprisingly, crusades era preachers and writers seized on Augustine's popular reputation during the middle ages and cited his works in reference to the crusading movement as a justification for calling of violence in defense of the Holy Land and the eastern Christian empire of Byzantium. Cambridge Historian Jonathan Riley-Smith, for example, notes that crusades preachers turned...

...to scholars for justification of Christian violence and Gregory VII had found in Anselm of
Lucca a partisan who, through a careful reading of the Fathers, above all St. Augustine of
Hippo, would build a convincing case for Christian violence as something which could be
commanded by God, was at the disposal of the Church and would, when properly used, be
an expression of Christian love.(1)

http://www.crusades-encyclopedia.com/augustineofhippo.html

With the instruments of power now in their hands, Christians-even Augustine himself-felt the need to call on the state to punish heretics, to take civil action against those who were not following the truth. They wanted to bring to completion the Christianization of the world, at least of the Roman world. The standard of conduct in this world would not be as radical as it had been for the Donatists or for the earlier followers of Tertullian, but would ensure that the culture would gradually be Christianized. No longer would the radical discontinuity be required of "the ordinary Christian" in the "ordinary church."

http://www.osb.org/aba/2004/proceedings/ReneMcGraw.html


With regard to being drafted into a war, most all the early church fathers spoke right up and used Jesus’ “turn the other cheek” motif in an attempt to avoid being enlisted as a soldier (with possible dire consequences).

http://rachelstanton.wordpress.com/2007/01/21/the-early-church-on-violence/

But with regard to heretics (those who believed differently), we see copious amounts of writings by all the fathers against heretics. The undercurrent is one of hatred while the surface tone sometimes matches what you’d expect from a “loving” Christian but to my knowledge, no church father ever advised killing heretics outright. But it eventually became the standard modus operandi of the church.

… the case of the scholar and humanist Giordano Bruno was not the last execution for heresy. The most famous heretic is of course Joan of Arc, who was later cleared of all charges after her death and eventually made a saint. Heresy remained an officially punishable offense in Roman Catholic nations until the late 18th century. In Spain, heretics were prosecuted and punished during the Counter-Enlightenment movement of the restoration of the monarchy there after the Napoleonic Era.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heresy

A list of some of the people burned or otherwise murdered for not believing exactly as the orthodox Christians did or for not being Christian at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_burned_as_heretics

More reading…

Early Christianity:

http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/christian/blfaq_viol_early.htm

http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/christian/blfaq_viol_crusades.htm

http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/christian/blfaq_viol_inquisition.htm

Modern Christianity:

http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/christian/blfaq_viol_reformation.htm

http://atheism.about.com/od/christianityviolence/a/witches.htm

http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/christian/blfaq_viol_holocaust.htm

Modern America:

http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/christian/blfaq_viol_gays.htm

http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/christian/blfaq_viol_abortion.htm

http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/christian/blfaq_viol_wicca.htm

Christian terrorism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism

This topic could encompass several books but can anyone read this entire post (which really just hints at the horrors) and truly say that Judaism/Christianity has not caused untold suffering in the world for the last 3000 years?

There may not be a command in the New Testament telling Christians to kill non-Christians but it’s clear to me that Christianity, the supposed light shining in the darkness, has a heritage of violence, bloodshed and needless human suffering. I am glad I am no longer a Christian.

Tim

109 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hi Tim, Just wanted to thank you for posting this.

SpaceMonk said...

Thanks Tim.
Don't forget Revelation 19 though, where Christ himself leads a holy army to slaughter his enemies until even the birds are sick of eating their flesh, so that he can then rule the world with a rod of iron.

Shouldn't we follow Christ's example...?

ryan said...

I thought, after that fine post, that I could add something. This is from a site called Truth Be Known, maintained by Archarya S. At the bottom of the front page, click on "Victims of the Christian Faith". It makes edifying reading, if you can keep your corn flakes down.

And I just finished her book titled The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold . The section about the christ fable derived from pre-existent myth is just hilarious.

El Buda Riendo said...

You know what the sad thing is, Tim and everyone? The sad thing is that there are countless Xtians who see NO NEED for a biblical basis for their emotional and psychological violence against those that they don't like. Whenever a Xtian in my experience has acted like an asshole, they have always sniveled about being 'only human'... I guess the super-powered UberGhostie that is supposed to be omnipotent 'god' is unable to keep these morons from acting like idiots to one another and the rest of us. Funny how 'god' and his power VANISH as soon as a Xtian's personal agenda is under attack. Then it turns into the same nasty, gossipy man-centered shit that we all deal with, 'god' or not.

All talk, no walk, as usual. Yawn.

Anonymous said...

apart from the purely biased rendering of what Christians are like. I found the article confusing and couldnt recognize the gruesome dipiction of what must be an obviouly evil group of people known as Christian with what I saw for myself when I was down in Lousiana after the hurricane doing relief work. Practically all I saw down there helping was Christians and college kids. Even here where I live the most helpfull community service groups are Christian.

but if we are taking the purely broad view. I will hold up the 2000 year history of Christianity against the roughly 100 year history of atheist communism and its brutality. At least there are many examples in history of Christianity lived lovingly faithfully and peacefully. There isnt a single healthy atheist society to boast of. Wonder why?

Lorena said...

"I found the article confusing"

But of course you found it confusing. Only those of use who've read the Bible from cover to cover a few times can follow.

A modicum of intelligence is also required, which you seem to suffer a severe lack of.

.:webmaster:. said...

Anony,

There are quite a few healthy atheistic countries. Perhaps you should educate yourself. You can start here: The Largest Atheist / Agnostic Populations.

Personally, I would never want to live in either a religious theocracy or an authoritarian state. History shows that both alternatives result in the brutal murder and subjugation of large masses of humanity. No, when it comes to autocratic rule, I’m against it – no matter what flavor.

If theocracy is allowed to ascend to the throne again, you can be sure we’ll be plunged into another superstitious dark age.

But fortunately there isn’t an either/or, black/white choice here. We have more choices than theocracy or communist regime. We have the choice of having a secular republic (modern democracy), which is what we do have today. We have freedom of religion, but religion is not free to dictate government policy. And the government is restrained from taking control over matters of conscience. It’s a delicate dance, to be sure, and as far as history is concerned, this form of society is a brand new experiment. Hopefully neither superstition nor autocratic rule will regain their positions and we will be wise enough to maintain the middle road of secular government.

ryan said...

First of all, the xians that you are referring to are, by comparison, a mild bunch of moderates, modified and tempered by secular influences. The other side are the fruitcakes who blame Katrina on gay rights, pornography and abortion. Historically speaking, xians have been an ignorant and bloodthirsty gang of zealots.Without that secular influence, nothing would have changed.

I have known good Unitarians, Quakers, Catholics,Jews,Socialists, and members of the NRA. I have nothing against anyone following some creed or set of convictions. That is their business.

However.........if all xians were as meek as lambs and as pretty as the blessed virgin, I would not be a xian. If all atheists were as cruel as Bugsy Segal and as ugly as scorpions, I would still be an atheist.

And in response to your last line: show me a theocracy to be proud of

Anonymous said...

Of course, some of the sickest dictatorships in world history have been officially atheistic.

And of course atheistic scientists (Dawkins assures us most scientists are atheists) have filled the world with nuclear weapons that could destroy civilization in an afternoon.

After all, fundies may talk about the end of the world...atheistic scientists have made it possible.

ryan said...

I wish to follow up on the Webmaster's fine post.

In many countries in Europe, abortion is freely available, likewise porn and prostitution, and gays and lesbians enjoy equal rights. And in these countries, there is less crime; less violence; less heart attacks; less ulcers; less suicide; less mental illnes; longer life spans and lower infant morality. The stats are available. Contact the World Health Organization or UNESCO. Your congressman can give the the addresses, email and phone numbers.

anonymous, try to get it through your head that an "atheist" is not merely someone with jackboots and an armband. We are ordinary people living ordinary lives. It is your ilk that has been led to think that anyone who fails to love jesus must be a sociopath.

ryan said...

And do not forget that there are a shitload of fundies who want a nuclear war so bad they can smell it. They want to start Armageddon to hasten the second coming of jesus.

You have said that shit here before, and my reply was almost word for word what you see above.

And let me remind you that the aforementioned fundies are the ones who claim to be following a loving god........something like Hitler claimed. What is the difference between a xian and a nazi?

Jason said...

Jesus says he did not come to nullify the law. Plain and simple. He also says that the law will not become nullified until heaven and earth are destroyed and ALL things are accomplished. Sorry, Christians, you are breaking God’s commandments each and every day if you wear clothes that are part cotton and part polyester.

Boy, your dishonesty and ignorance are blatantly evident right there. You claim Matthew 5:17 means for Christians to "keep the laws just like every other Jew was supposed to do." Wrong, wrong, wrong. Read it again: "I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." BUT TO FULFILL. No body but Jesus was able to fulfill the Law, which is why they needed blood sacrifices. Jesus fulfilled the Law perfectly and sinlessly and he became the perfect blood sacrifice for all time. What this means is that we fulfill the Law through him, so we don't need to try to meet all the ritualistic standards that people needed to meet before Jesus. So now I'm sure you're thinking, "Well, I guess that means you can just sin all you want and not worry about going to Hell." Not true. Jesus did not do this so that we could just sin willy-nilly. He summed it up in Matthew 22: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind," and "Love your neighbor as yourself." He also spoke often of people turning away from their sins.

[Hey, I also liked how you took the unprecedented move of cowardly closing the comments for the post about EF. I guess when you can't beat facts, shut down the discussion, right?]

R. Black said...

Ryan already said what I was thinking, but I will simplify it.

Morality does not dictate truth. It doesn't matter if a person is immoral, they may still be truthful. One person may think that because there is no God, that it is ok to do terrible things. However, another person might think that because there is no God, they no longer have a reason to discriminate against gays, jews,or attend church on sundays, etc etc.

run said...

Jason--or anybody else who wants to discuss this--the ancient jew law was put together by savages and barbarians. It has no place among civilized people. It has no place in civilized discourse. It is not binding on us, not because jesus paid off some sort of metaphysical debt, but because it is superstitious nonsense. It was meant for a tribe of ignorant towel-heads, and should have died out with them.

And jason, when you continue to talk about sin and blood, you are still under that law. Grow up and get off your knees. You are not under jew law, and never have been.

And now, fellow infidels, I must run along. See you maybe tomorrow.

ryan said...

Sorry, that name should be ryan, not run. Running is what I must do.

fjell said...

Tim Simmons wrote: God commands the Israelites to kill them all and they do. But the reason is that the Amalekites’ ancestors from 400 years earlier ambushed some Israelites and killed them. So, God decided to kill innocent Amalekites to make up for it.

This would be like God deciding to wipe out the entirety of modern-day America for the wholesale slaughter of the "Indians" hundreds of years ago. Wonder how fair the current population of American Christians would find this.

fjell

.:webmaster:. said...

Jason,

If Jesus "paid the price" then why do I still need to pay some price? I mean, if Jesus fulfilled the law, then why do I still need to fulfill any of the law? If a debt is paid, then it is paid, right? If the judge orders me to pay $100 for a speeding ticket, and someone comes up and pays the ticket, then I'm free of the ticket, right? I don't have to beg and plead for forgiveness anymore, because the debt is paid. I'm completely absolved. In fact, the judge doesn't forgive me: the debt is paid! If the judge forgave the debt, then no one would have to pay.

But in Christianity, the debt isn't really paid at all. I have to repent and pray and accept the free gift and study to shew (KJV) myself approved and work out my salvation with fear and trembling and be sincere and seek the Lord and... Well, the rules vary from church to church.

So, you counter with saying I'm not saved by works but that I show my salvation by my works. Still, if the sin-debt of humanity has already been paid so no one has to do ritualistic religious stuff to pay, then the debt is paid, right?

Lorena said...

Jason,

You said something that was a stepping stone in my de-conversion from Christianity:

"No body but Jesus was able to fulfill the Law"

Says, who? Gospels that were written from 40-to-100 years after Jesus died?

Gospels that were written by people who mythologized the man Jesus, much in the same way as the pagans had done with many of their gods?

The lie that Jesus was without sin is one of the worst lies of Christianity.

redtail said...

Jason...take some advice. You're not going to get anywhere on any of these threads by being an antagonistic JERK.
Sorry WM! I tried to resist but he was seriously pissing me off

fjell said...

redtail said: Jason...take some advice. You're not going to get anywhere on any of these threads by being an antagonistic JERK.

A pertinent point, redtail.

Jason, if you're at all concerned with spreading the "love of Jesus", you're failing. Terribly. But you are succeeding in something - good news, I suppose. It's just that thing is being antagonistic, ad hominem, and petty. Before you jump in with, "Well so are you!" please remember that I don't believe myself to be under any instructions from God to abstain from doing so.

We know you do. And you are letting him down in this. Pathetically. But then, you know you can receive forgiveness for it all with a single prayer, so, I guess, at the end of the day, you can act any way you like, can't you? You might not have Jesus' blessing, but with forgiveness always just a prayer away - even forgiveness for taking advantage of the apparent ease of forgiveness, you really can act like any other prick on the planet (and you do), without much consequence.

But, you obviously know this already.

fjell

Dear Christians said...

This is your god speaking. im sorry for telling ya'll to kill little girls if they were not virgins when married. i was drinking heavily back then. im also sorry for murdering all those "first borns". i had a temper problem back then. and i know i told you to kill folks who worked on sunday, but i've changed my mind. i feel bad about all the bloodshed i've caused. thats why i gave you the new testament. im a rehabilitated god. im about love now. --signed the christian god

winky said...

So god of the bible asked jesus to save him from all his past sins? We should pray that satan get saved too....ha ha ha what a crock of bs.

Anonymous said...

"There isnt a single healthy atheist society to boast of"

How about Japan?

Also, much of Western Europe appears to have significant numbers of atheists and a dearth of Christian fundamentalists. And yet, the crime rates here are structurally lower than in the US...

So... how many healthy religious societies would you say there are?

None spring to mind...

-Leonard

Anonymous said...

webmaster: nice try but there are no healthy athiest based societies like it or not.
The stats you provided were of countries founded on Christian teaching that may have larger than normal atheist populations. Make no mistake countries foundes on the premise that there is no God have all been oppressive.
Nice attempt tho to find countries of Christian origin(and hope noone would notice they were not founded on atheistic philosophy but Christian), and still largely run on Christian ideas and tolerance to hold those countries up as a model of health is mere slight of hand. It only proves how tolerant Christians can be to those who are diffrent from themselves.
Here are some stats on sweden from http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2003/24435.htm it tells a very diffrent story on the so called majority of that country being atheist. here is a quote "Although no reliable statistics are available, it is estimated that 15 to 20 percent of the adult population are atheist."
Seems you stats may be a little self serving along with your interpretation.

Anonymous said...

Nice attempt tho to find countries of Christian origin(and hope noone would notice they were not founded on atheistic philosophy but Christian), and still largely run on Christian ideas and tolerance to hold those countries up as a model of health is mere slight of hand. It only proves how tolerant Christians can be to those who are diffrent from themselves.

should read as follows "and still largely run on Christian ideas and tolerance to hold those countries up as a model of an healthy atheist society is mere slight of hand.

ryan said...

anonymous has been avoiding me, and I do not blame him. Any xian would not want to come within 100 meters of me.

anonymous, I dislike repeating myself, but when dealing with mindless fanatics like you, it is impossible not to. Let me ask you a question: when did god start loving the world? (see john 3:16) Starting with the flood, we see that jewgod hated the world. We read up through the "war stories" and we see a hatred beyond imagining; whole ethic groups wiped out; men; women; children; babies; the jewgod's followers driven by blind rage to exterminate anyone who had their own point of view.

And do not tell me that jewgod destroyed those people because they were "wicked". They were no more "wicked" than any other ancient culture. The half-assed notion that the jews were righteous people out to destroy wickedness is comical. There has never been anything more wicked than the jews and their law.

I do not believe the ot stories. These tales were concocted by the jews, who, having had their collective ass kicked by better people, sat around and imagined for themselves a glorious past. But the point remains: in their perversity, the jews adored their bloodthirsty god. It is to their credit that modern jews repudiated such tales.

Back to the original question: when did god start loving the world? xianity was started by people who had learned the ideas of the Mediterranean world; the ideas of the poets and philosophers. See Plato's Republic . He would have banned the myths about cruel and capricious gods. Under these influences, all of a sudden, jewgod becomes a nice god.

Do not try to give your religion any credit for the civilized countries of Europe. Before the Enlightenment, these assholes were killing off jews, witches, heretics, muslims, and whoever pissed them off. The best thing to happen to Europe was the reformation. xians began to kill each other.

I am proud to be an atheist; one who does not share in the ugly bigotry, vengeance and superstition of the xian. People like me will make the world better.

And by the way. Your disrespect toward the Webmaster is despicable. But then, you're a xian.

boomSLANG said...

Anonymous liar(or person who's never picked up the bible) said:

It only proves how tolerant Christians can be to those who are [different] from themselves.

Um, condoning and promoting the killing of non-christians(deut) is being "tolerant" of those who differ in belief???? LMAO! Yeah, sure pal....you might want to dust off your Holey Babble and actually read it, so in the future you'll have a better understanding of what it is you are actually promoting.

ryan said...

Allow me to follow that up:

anonymous, find me one verse in either the old or new testament that tells us to be tolerant of the beliefs of others. One verse.

The "tolerance" you talk about is a secular value, not a xian value.

Jason said...

Wow, run. Quite the rant, there. If I were to become a skeptical atheist/agnostic, do I get to be an anti-Semitic jerk, too, and not have any other skeptics call me on it?

Jason said...

run... ryan... Whatever.

ryan said...

I am not an anti-semite. It is jew religion I despise, not jews. I know many good, smart jews who have left their religion and wouldn't be caught dead in a synagogue. These people grew up and put away the myths and superstitions of their barbarous past. Why don't you try it, xian? Why don't you try getting off your knees and living like a man for 12 hours?

Anonymous said...

Leonard, Japan may not be Christian but they are very religous. you will find many buddhists shrines all over the country. They are far from being atheist.

Anonymous said...

Ryan, I havent been ignoring you I just had not seen your post. Some things you should keep in mind is that God is not a toy for us to play with and use until we are bored and He is smarter not dumber than we are. All actions have consequences and whether it suits us or not the reason for the destruction was their evilness. Dont overlook His mercy a way was provided out and He did save all that would be saved He cleasned the creation and began again. The same is true today that choice is still available and Jesus is that arc. there is forgiveness and we can be saved but this time there will be no more sin, crying, pain, death or seperation from God we will be restored. The flood shows that this cycle of sin and suffering on earth will end and God has offered a way out. Take it. find a faithfull church, I would recommend a good Catholic Church that is faithful to the Churchs teachings. Your sins are not to big for God to forgive. The day will come and it can be a day of rejoiceing and not fear.

boomSLANG said...

Christian: If I were to become a skeptical atheist/agnostic...

Ironically, you are already 2.99999 out of 3:

1) you're "skeptical" of those who are skeptical of your beliefs; 2) you are "Atheist" in regards to every "God" but your own; 3) you are "Agnostic" because you don't have absolute knowledge that a "God" exists(because if you did, we'd surely have empirical objective/Universal evidence to substantiate that claim by now)

To qualify some things: If "God" is more than just a concept, then "God" is either detectable by means of the same senses with which we determine if anything else exists, or "God" is not detectable at all. If I'm expected to believe that "God" is both physical and metaphysical(beyond physical) in whatever ratio, then I'll expect you to believe that square circles exist, in whatever ratio. 'Deal?

So, knowledge/evidence..or faith/lack of evidence? There's no "in between". Which is it?

ryan said...

That made me fucking sick. You pitiful loser. The stench of sanctity is turning my stomach.

And for your info, numbnuts, I graduated from a catholic college, class of '03 (Saint Joseph's) with a major in philosophy and a minor in religion, and the catholic church is bullshit. Superstition straight out of the fucking dark ages, which is where you belong.

Do not give me that trilling and cooing. It's silly and effeminate.

Jason said...

ExC:

If Jesus "paid the price" then why do I still need to pay some price?

Who said you did? I certainly didn't.

I mean, if Jesus fulfilled the law, then why do I still need to fulfill any of the law?

You equate fulfilling the commandments to love God and love your neighbor as paying a price? If that's the position you're coming from, no wonder who don't understand any of this.

If a debt is paid, then it is paid, right? If the judge orders me to pay $100 for a speeding ticket, and someone comes up and pays the ticket, then I'm free of the ticket, right? I don't have to beg and plead for forgiveness anymore, because the debt is paid. I'm completely absolved. In fact, the judge doesn't forgive me: the debt is paid! If the judge forgave the debt, then no one would have to pay.

Yes, that is exactly right, BUT YOU STILL NEED TO OBEY THE LAW AFTERWARDS. Just because someone stepped in to pay this fine (and let's say they promised to pay any of your future fines, too) doesn't absolve you from ever obeying the law ever again. That's not a perfectly accurate analogy to salvation, but it's good enough.

I mean, look. We have oodles of earthly laws that we need to follow - too many for most average people to fully know. Jesus gave us just two commandments: love God and love your neighbor. Why is that such a burden to you that you would call it "paying a price?"

But in Christianity, the debt isn't really paid at all.

No, it actually is. When you become saved, all your sins - past, present and, yes, future (since we're not perfect) - are forgiven when you honestly and sincerely repent of them.

I have to repent and pray and accept the free gift and study to shew (KJV) myself approved and work out my salvation with fear and trembling and be sincere and seek the Lord and... Well, the rules vary from church to church.

Nice straw man. Those things aren't about paying any debt. They're about following the one whom you have given your life to. To use your court fine analogy above, if someone paid your fines that you could never, ever pay yourself no matter how much money you had, how would you feel about that person? Would you just say "See ya, sucker!" or would you feel indebted to them - that you needed to try to do something to thank or give them something back? It's not about "paying a price." It's about being thankful to and loving the person who has paid our debt in full.

So, you counter with saying I'm not saved by works but that I show my salvation by my works.

You don't show your salvation by your works. Your salvation is shown by your works. That may not seem different, but it is. When you are saved, the works follow naturally. They aren't something you do to show you are saved. They are something you do because your salvation is showing itself.

Still, if the sin-debt of humanity has already been paid so no one has to do ritualistic religious stuff to pay, then the debt is paid, right?

Yes, the debt is paid and following the one who paid your debt (if you accept it) follows naturally. Following and obeying him is not "paying a price."

Anonymous said...

webmaster: confessing our sins to God can be a daunting seemingly impossible task but the weight that is lifted when we are forgiven is amazing and the forgiveness is so much better than the pride that keeps us from asking that Gods love is proved to be the peace that so many proclaim. Its not slavery it freedom. Repentance is only made possible because God is so merciful, so faithful to forgive and God also will not force you to ask to be forgiven you can remain as you are forever if you wish.

Jason said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jason said...

ryan, your hatred will overwhelm you someday. I'm sorry, but if your idea of "living like a man" means being filled with hatred, I'll pass, thanks.

Jason said...

Jason...take some advice. You're not going to get anywhere on any of these threads by being an antagonistic JERK.

So I can only be an "antagonistic JERK" if I'm an unbeliever like, oh, say, ryan?

Anonymous said...

ryan, than you know the church will always be there waiting for you to come home.

fjell said...

Jason said: Wow, r[ya]n. Quite the rant, there. If I were to become a skeptical atheist/agnostic, do I get to be an anti-Semitic jerk, too, and not have any other skeptics call me on it?

No, Jason! You'll be happy to learn that, as a Christian, there's nothing stopping you from being an anti-Semitic jerk right now! Without the slightest alteration in your religious affiliation, you can join the long and proud Christian anti-Semitic tradition!

Click HERE to see what illustrious company you'd have indeed. My, my, even the esteemed Council of Nicaea. What better company could you hope for?

Anonymous said...

ryan and boomslang, it seems you want me to post a bible verse so i will upon ryans request.
Matthew 5:43 "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? 48 You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Jason said...

1) you're "skeptical" of those who are skeptical of your beliefs;

Only if "skeptical" now means knowing you're absolutely wrong.

2) you are "Atheist" in regards to every "God" but your own;

But I believe in God, so I am not an atheist. I don't call people from other religions who don't believe in God atheists. "Atheism" is not believing in one deity out of many others. Atheism is not believing in ANY deities. Please stop trying to redefine the English language.

3) you are "Agnostic" because you don't have absolute knowledge that a "God" exists(because if you did, we'd surely have empirical objective/Universal evidence to substantiate that claim by now)

You REALLY need to learn what all these words you are misusing means. Being agnostic does not mean one does not have absolute knowledge that God exists. Being agnostic means not committing to believing whether or not God exists.

If "God" is more than just a concept, then "God" is either detectable by means of the same senses with which we determine if anything else exists, or "God" is not detectable at all.

Tell me, how do you determine that electro-magnetism exists? You can't see it, smell it, taste it, hear it or feel it. So how do you know it exists?

If I'm expected to believe that "God" is both physical and metaphysical(beyond physical) in whatever ratio,

God is not physical, but He can interact with the physical universe He created.

then I'll expect you to believe that square circles exist, in whatever ratio. 'Deal?

Well, according to other atheists/agnostics I've talked to, God can create square circles. *shrug*

So, knowledge/evidence..or faith/lack of evidence? There's no "in between". Which is it?

Who determined knowledge = evidence and faith = lack of evidence? I have faith in God, but I've also seen evidence of Him. No, not just some feeling, but a very real physical healing of a very painful and potentially crippling affliction a person close to me suffered from (which was diagnosed by a doctor and said to be remedied only by surgery). This person is very sensitive to and acutely affected by pain and there is simply no way the healing is imagined or faked.

boomSLANG said...

..if someone paid your fines that you could never, ever pay yourself no matter how much money you had, how would you feel about that person? Would you just say "See ya, sucker!" or would you feel indebted to them - that you needed to try to do something to thank or give them something back?

Let's take the court analogy a step further, and actually make it accurately correlate to the biblical "salvation":

How about if someone insisted that they pay your court fine without first consulting you, and when you say, "thanks, but no thanks...I'll take responsiblity for myself, because I'm a man of integrity", and then they pull you aside and whisper: "Listen, I want to pay this debt, okay? Accept it, or I'll bash your world in, the very second you set foot out of this court room. 'Deal??"

I'm curious, how should one react in that situation? It's still a "choice", right?

R. Black said...

I can smell electro-magnetism...

.:webmaster:. said...

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but to my knowledge every country known to humankind has begun as theocratic, except for some of the new anti-theistic communism regimes of the last century. Those communist regimes attempted to transfer devotion for mythology to devotion for the state. Godlike powers were ascribed to the state. In other words, communism promoted a religion that worships the state. The countries in which communism was able to advance appears to me to be in direct proportion to the not-so-divine rule of some Christian king, Christian Czar, or a theistic Emperor “god.” The only reason communism was able to gain a foothold was because the Christian government in those countries were severely lacking. In fact, the revolution in the U.S. was a rebellion against God’s soverign representative on Earth: the King of England.

In every case where a dogmatic devotion to theism or statism has been mandated by the government, horrific human suffering has resulted.

Although the U.S. wasn’t founded as a “Christian theocratic nation,” it cannot be denied that U.S was full of Christians, many of which who believed in the divine rule and right of kings. These good Christians turned a blind eye to the slaughter of Native Americans, in part because “Indians” were thought of as nothing more than godless heathens. African Americans were bought and sold for hundreds of years on this continent by Christians who justified slavery using
"Biblical" interpretations.

Only the slow evolution and acceptance of current secular thoughts on law, justice, human rights, etc., has made it possible for non-theists to even express their views. Throughout most of history, anyone who said out loud that they didn’t follow the gods or goddesses of the land was likely to enjoy a very uncomfortable and short lifespan.

Now, let me be clear here. When I use the word theism, I don’t mean Christianity. Theistic rule has been a practice for all of human history – all nations have had official gods or goddesses. This is nothing new. Rulers know that religion unites the masses. Religion has always been used by the ruling classes as a way of controlling the masses. What is new in our day and age (the past few hundred years) is that some countries have abandoned basing their laws and decisions upon religious mythology. This is a brand new turn of events in the history of the world. And the freedoms that we “serfs” enjoy are a direct benefit from this progressive evolution of thought. In those countries still intent on enforcing some form of theism (or statism), terrible tragedy reigns supreme. Again, I don’t advocate statism over theism. I don’t see it as a black/white-either/or choice. I think both theocratic and state-o-cratic rule are terrible alternatives. The move toward secularism is by far the best system yet undertaken. But I don’t think we’re through evolving in this area. We still have a long way to go if we humans hope to survive our own tendency to hate, denigrate and marginalize all those who think differently from the crowd. However, returning to a time when a few Christian aristocrats ruled the great masses of Christian serfs is not a place where anyone today would want to see happen, is it?

And if you’re going to start comparing the numbers of atrocities in communist countries to the numbers of atrocities committed in Christian countries, please be sure to include all 2,000 years of Christian history. And then break down the numbers so that we have percentages of the population involved. In other words, what percentage of the population in various time periods was subjected to an early death at the hands of Christians? How does that percentage compare to the percentage of the population killed by authoritarian non-Christian states? I’ll wager that there isn’t much difference between the two. Dogmatic, authoritarian rule is not the answer, regardless of the “ism.”

Finally, if there really is a magical deity ruling all, why be so overwrought about a paltry minority of people who think religion is silly? I mean, if God be for you, who can be against you? Atheists are obviously a tiny minority on this planet, right? Why not obey your god-man and turn the other cheek when challenged? Why come back with so much visceral, insightful rhetoric? If you say you want “the truth” to be told, then as far as I can tell, there are already hundreds of thousands of Christian websites out there. You, Jason, have one of your own. But I’m not bothering you on your site. Why do you feel compelled to hand on this site? Why come back with so much visceral, insightful rhetoric? What is driving your fear and your anger? Do you Christians even know why you are so upset?

I can tell you why many ex-Christians are upset. Because they realize they've been duped and brainwashed by a stupid cult, wasting time, talent and resources, sometimes for years. It's infuriating.

.:webmaster:. said...

Jason,

Perhaps you should expand your understanding of certain English terms. You seem to be confined to extremely narrow and simplistic definitions, or your are just misinformed.

Click here for the definition of "agnosticism."

Click here for the definition of "atheism."

Be sure to read the entire page for each.

Then, once you've educated yourself, please return to addressing the points in the article. Although your bunny-trailing has been interesting, it implies that you have no answers for the many points above. Is that the problem? You have no counter arguments for the various points in the article?

Anonymous said...

webmaster: and as I originally stated I will gladly hold up 2,000 years of Christian history to the 150 or so years of atheist social history. Christianity has had its low points no one is denying it. The Pope even asked God to forgive the Church for the evils it has caused throughout history but Christianity has also brought an amazing and admirable periods of bueaty and peace and freedom of art and song and learning and faithfullness to God and to our fellow man acts of charity and sacrifice for others. That also cant be denied. Atheist societies have all been ruthless and oppressive. For 150 years of history the body count has been attrocious I guess that is because there were so many Christians that needed to be killed. What a wonderfull world North Korea must be to live in. personally I will take america warts and all.

ryan said...

As for the bible verses I asked you for, anonymous, you have failed to provide them. You xians have an enormous difficulty trying to understand your own bible. Please re-read those verses. Your grasp of scripture is flimsy at best.

About the rain and sun on the just and the unjust: that does not mean that your jewgod tolerates those who do not obey him, or tolerates those who think for themselves. The rain and sun fell on all those who were slaughtered off by the jews, but did your jew god tolerate them?

About the other verses: you can love me and pray for me all you like--the idea disgusts me, but I can't stop you--but in so doing, do you accept me and my atheism?

Now try again. Let me make this more clear. Find a verse that says all ways of life, including atheism , are to be accepted as equally valid. I repeat: tolerance is a secular value, not a xian value. Your kind believes my kind should go to hell. This you call tolerance? Why don't you go to hell, you dirty little bigot?

And as for you jason, let me try to explain manhood to you. A masculine approach to existence involves a certain amount of hate and anger. You need those things to stand up to the shit that other people want to give you. The cruelty and dishonesty of this world can be overwhelming; the stupidity; the ignorance; jesus, boy, you better be able to get pissed and strike back or you're going to get trampled under.

Keep in mind who called who an anti-semite. I know men who would have knocked you flat for that remark. My reaction was kind by comparison.

boomSLANG said...

Only if "skeptical" now means knowing you're absolutely wrong.

Skeptical:

1: Marked by or given to doubt; questioning: a skeptical attitude; skeptical of political promises.

2) Relating to or characteristic of skeptics or skepticism.

Ref: American Heritage.

That's really odd, it appears you are the one doing the "re-defining". To be skeptical is to have doubt. If you doubt my being doubtful of your belief(s), then you have doubt, no doubt? Thus, you are skeptical of my skepticism, thus, you are a "skeptic", by definition.

But I believe in God, so I am not an atheist. I don't call people from other religions who don't believe in God atheists. "Atheism" is not believing in one deity out of many others. Atheism is not believing in ANY deities. Please stop trying to redefine the English language.

No, I'm sorry, I'm not attempting to redefine language. That's why I qualified it with "in regards to". Hence, the "2.9999 out of 3", as oppose to a full 3 for 3. I was making the allowance. It'll be okay.... I'm not calling you an Atheist; I'm merely pointing out that we have similarities, that being, you deny all the "Gods" that I do, minus one. See?...that wasn't so tough to understand, was it?

You REALLY need to learn what all these words you are misusing means. Being agnostic does not mean one does not have absolute knowledge that God exists. Being agnostic means not committing to believing whether or not God exists.

No, no..I'm sorry, "Agnosticism" is not about "belief", it is about "knowledge". It has nothing to do with belief. Let's review, for your benefit:

Agnosticism:

1: The doctrine that certainty about first principles or absolute truth is unattainable and that only perceptual phenomena are objects of exact knowledge.

2: The belief that there can be no proof either that God exists or that God does not exist.

[bold added]

ref: American Heritage

Tell me, how do you determine that electro-magnetism exists? You can't see it, smell it, taste it, hear it or feel it. So how do you know it exists?

How do I know?..because I can watch("see") electromagnetic induction at work, in such things as an AC electric motor. I can test it over and over and over again, and get the same measurable results each and every time. In other words, if I run an AC current through the insulated wire, etc...the motor will work every time, as opposed to arbitrarly deciding when to work, or not.(in case you decide to go where I think you will) = )

boom': "If I'm expected to believe that 'God' is both physical and metaphysical(beyond physical) in whatever ratio, then I'll expect you to believe that square circles exist, in whatever ratio. 'Deal?"

You reply: God is not physical, but He can interact with the physical universe He created.

In other words, "yes"...we have a deal. Then I can expect you to draw me a round square. Waiting.

Well, according to other atheists/agnostics I've talked to, God can create square circles. *shrug*

According to other Theists I talk to, Allah can create a triangular rectangle. Where "faith" is concerned, everybody and anybody who has 'Faith' can be "right". Amazing!

I have faith in God, but I've also seen evidence of Him. No, not just some feeling, but a very real physical healing of a very painful and potentially crippling affliction a person close to me suffered from (which was diagnosed by a doctor and said to be remedied only by surgery). This person is very sensitive to and acutely affected by pain and there is simply no way the healing is imagined or faked.

Let me ask you---if I can provide you with testimonuials of "miraculous healings".... only, in this case, healings proportedly witnessed by Muslims, how much credence would that lend to your believing that Allah is "God"? If your answer is "none", I hopefully needn't say more.

In the mean time, maybe Jesus and Allah can get together and regrow a missing arm or leg.

.:webmaster:. said...

Ok Marc,

Marc is the anonymous, refuses-to-honor-all-requests-to-cease-and-desist, fanatical, mystical, Roman Catholic.)

How does a pope's apology make up for hundreds of years of atrocities?

Here's the answer: IT DOESN'T!!!

Oh, and Marc, you missed the point entirely. The reason the U.S. is better than North Korea is because it is not a theocracy or state-ocracy. It is a secular republic.

Thank no-god for America.

If the Pope were running the joint, we'd be right back in the Middle Ages. You can depend on it.

Oh, and I missed your percentages of the population that was killed by Christians. What was it again?

Here's the premise that Marc is putting forth: Christians killed less people than communists have, therefore a flying, un-dead, man-god, who is really his own father in disquise, exists, and loves everyone, but threatens eternal damnation to anyone who thinks he's a myth.

Is that about right?

Anonymous said...

ryan, that verse is just fine. but if you specifically want God to tell you there isnt a hell and our decisions dont matter you wont find it. Death is real and it is coming for everyone and nothing we can do will stop it (Life isnt a game). only One is strong enough to overcome death and He is calling you to heal you from the pain. Your story isnt written and there is always hope, always.

ryan said...

Thank you anonymous for expressing the intolerance that you really practice. I knew I could get it out of you eventually. xian intolerance is terrifying.

Still waiting for that verse.

Anonymous said...

webmaster: The Pope asking for God to forgive the Church was done from the heart and the only right response to a God who is so merciful. The Church is forgiven because God is faithful to forgive where there is true repentence. Any debt that needs to be paid in reperation will be paid by all who are responsible. You will just have to trust God for that. As the parable shows noone will be allowed out of that debt until the last penny is paid. If you mean how can we go back in time and change history we cant no one can all of our sins at any time affect us all in eveytime and it is God we all have to answer to, Sin is real and appalling and deadly we should all seek Gods mercy and committ our lives to Him as His way is never failing. Jesus paid that price and provides the way out His mercy is everlasting.

Jason said...

Click HERE to see what illustrious company you'd have indeed. My, my, even the esteemed Council of Nicaea. What better company could you hope for?

You unquestioningly believe all that even though there's no proof of it provided? Quite the faith you have there.

Jason said...

Thank you anonymous for expressing the intolerance that you really practice. I knew I could get it out of you eventually. xian intolerance is terrifying.

lol! Oh, the irony! The irony! Or is it hypocrisy?

Jason said...

Click here for the definition of "agnosticism."
Click here for the definition of "atheism."


Um... Those are "encyclopedia" entries, not definitions. Definitions of words are found in dictionaries.

Besides, Wikipedia is crap. I've never seen any reputable educator accept it as a proper source for assignments (research, term papers, etc.).

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=agnosticism&x=0&y=0

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=atheism&x=0&y=0

Jason said...

f you doubt my being doubtful of your belief(s), then you have doubt, no doubt? Thus, you are skeptical of my skepticism, thus, you are a "skeptic", by definition.

I don't have doubt about your doubt and I am not skeptical of your skepticism. I have no doubt that you doubt and am not skeptical that you are a skeptic.

boomSLANG said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
boomSLANG said...

Um... Those are "encyclopedia" entries, not definitions. Definitions of words are found in dictionaries.

Um, and notice, um, that, um, the definitions I provided are, um, dictionary entries. Both entries, i.e..for "Agnosticism" and "Atheism, where you used the terms in both cases, were, um, misapplied. In other words, you were in error, and used the terms erroneously in your statements, yet, you chirp the following:

Gosh, I wonder how long before ExC closes this post to comments due to being unable to counter arguments...

"Gosh", in deed. Welcome new member!....to our Agnostic/skeptic's club!

I don't have doubt about your doubt and I am not skeptical of your skepticism. I have no doubt that you doubt and am not skeptical that you are a skeptic.

Let's be clear: My position is that Christianity is false. You, must doubt my position to some degree, or else, we'd agree that's if false. Of course, we certainly know that the latter isn't true... therefore, you are skeptical of my position; therefore, you are a skeptic, therefore, once again, my original statement holds true.

I'm skeptical that you cannot do better than weasle-wording the facts. If I lost you, that's giving you the benefit of the doubt. Can you rise to the occasion?

tick-tock

Jason said...

You, must doubt my position to some degree

Nope. Doubt denotes a belief that it might be wrong or it might be right. I have no such belief regarding atheism. I have no doubts about either my faith or your atheism.

.:webmaster:. said...

Jason,

Since you denigrate Wikipedia, here's the entry from Dictionary.Com.

It supports Boomslang and contradicts your narrow understanding.

Agnosticism

Atheism

Also, check out Reference.Com regarding these words:

Atheism

Agnosticism

Jason. You are becoming quite nasty and are rudely avoiding returning to the subject of the original post. I can assure you that if you continue on in this way, all your posts on both threads will be deleted. Please read the site disclaimer before posting again.

Thanks.

Poltergoost said...

I have to say that I do not remember a time where I have seen so much posting from a bunch of idiot christians on here. These guys must really be getting scared since they are losing the battle against secularism on a daily basis. I guess I would be scared and posting more christian bullshit if I were them also. After all the days of christians having control in this country are numbered.

Let's recap what some of these morons had to say earlier:

ANONYMOUS FUNDY SAID:
"Some things you should keep in mind is that God is not a toy for us to play with and use until we are bored and He is smarter not dumber than we are."

I don't know of anyone who has been playing with God's toy. I thought you christians are the one's who are supposed to be masturbating god, or is it his angels who are suppose to beat him off?

Tell me Dear Anonymous Fundy, did you meet the old man finally? Did he tell you to deliever us those messages personally? Could you please provide us with any pictures of yourself that were taken with god, or perhaps maybe an autograph that he might have signed? Maybe you could provide us with some video tape of god which would really be even better.

Before you mention the bible, sorry pal, that is not evidence. It's "Hear Say".

On a more serious note, as far as "God is not a toy for us to play with and use until we are bored".

Your god is the one who is apparently bored since he sees the need to play games with us, and by providing entertainment for himself which includes things such as bringing bloodshed, wars, and pain on the rest of the world for god's own personal self-agenda. If he does exist he is truly one unfair, selfish asshole S.O.B.

If your god exists, he is a universal criminal. They should bring Jesus back here to earth and put him on trial again as a "Repeat Offender".

FYI, your "Christian God" is not a toy to me, he is simply a joke. A Figment of your imagination.

However, I understand your ignorance dear fundy. Like many other christians, you were taught to believe the bullshit superstition that you now believe. You can't help your own stupidity I understand. So it's really not your fault.

Don't worry my dear fundy friend. If I can get free from "Christian Bondage" so can you. It's like AAA. In your case you have to admit that you are an idiot christian bible beater who is part of a big ass cult.

ANONYMOUS FUNDY SAID:
"The same is true today that choice is still available and Jesus is that arc. there is forgiveness and we can be saved"

Once again, why do I need to be forgiven? I didn't take a bite out of the fruit off of that stupid tree in the garden of eden, nor did I nail your saviour to the cross. I simply did not live back during that time period.

Should I go to prison for Charles Manson's murders, even though I didn't commit them? Perhaps you should also be in prison for Charles Manson's murders dear fundie.

I tell you what, you pay all of my speeding tickets. Hell, everyone should pay for mine and everyone else's speeding tickets, after all we are all guilty of someone else's sin. Oh wait a minute, I'll just ask Jesus to pay for my speeding tickets. After all, Jesus did pay it all.

If anyone needs to be forgiven it's definitely your christian god. He has committed countless murders and crimes against thousands of innocent people. Plus your christian god/Jesus is nothing more than a spiritual con artist, and a liar.

The god who you believe in is also a bigger criminal, thug, and murderer than Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler, David Koresh, Charles Manson, Ted Bundy, and Osama Bin Laden all rolled into one. God is a universal terrorist. You should be ashamed of even defending a known criminal like that.

ANONYMOUS FUNDY SAID:
"but this time there will be no more sin, crying, pain, death or seperation from God we will be restored. The flood shows that this cycle of sin and suffering on earth will end and God has offered a way out."

BLAH! BLAH! BLAH! The same old recycled worn out bullshit is all you have to say. Your breath is staring to stink from quoting so much bullshit. I keep hoping one day this world will grow beyond that type of worn out superstition, however I wouldn't be surprised if 2,000 more years from now there will still be a few idiots around like you that are still saying the old thing over and over again about how Jesus/God is going to do this and that. Talk is cheap and that is all you christians do.

You christians continue to say the same old bullshit over and over again, to a point where your breath is starting to smell like someone took a dump in your mouth since the only thing that comes out of a christians mouth is the same old recycled "Shit".

ANONYMOUS FUNDY SAID:
"find a faithfull church"

You act like none of us have ever been to church or studied the bible. We've studied the bible and been to church. Some of us even taught Sunday School and preached at one time.

The thing you seem to be too stupid to realize is that we found the lies within the bible, and that's why people like myself are no longer a part of the faith, nor do we wish to have anymore to do with it.

As for finding a church, no thanks. I wasted enough time in about 10 different churches over the years. I even tried different denominations, and found that some christians were just dumber than other christians are.

All of that time in church I was wasting time kissing your god's royal ass, are the times that I could've been out bettering my life by making a good living and achieving my dreams, but instead I followed the rules of your stupid fucking bible and wasted many precious years of my life, no thanks to your stupid cultic christian faith.

If I'm mad, it's because of people like you and your stupid fucking faith, and your stupid lame ass bible.

But don't worry things are a lot better for me now than what they were during my years in church and serving Jesus Koresh. My anger comes from being reminded of how the christian faith nearly destroyed my life. I personally hold a lot of these christians responsible, but most of all I hold their God/Jesus responsible because he failed to do the one thing I was taught to do. Rely on God, and be content in him. It never happened. God was never there for me when I needed him the most. I found no comfort in him, and he was no where to be found when I needed him. Your God is at fault. He is guilty as charged.

Several christians have tried so hard over the past couple of years to bring me back to the flock, and they finally gave up. It just kills you assholes to know that people like myself are finding happiness outside of the christian faith. It just kills you people, because if someone is truly happy without Jesus, then it strikes down your belief that it is not possible to be happy without christ. That scares the hell out of you bible beaters. It horrifies you, because it threatens your beliefs.

You bible beating assholes probably hope that people like myself one day fall flat on our faces and have misery in our lives, just so we can help reinforce your faulty belief system. You would rejoice at that wouldn't you? Just to prove your stupid belief system. It ain't gonna happen.

You bible beaters who post on here do not tell others on here what to do. You are apparently too stupid to see that the christian faith did not work for people like myself who posts on here. Why in the hell would I want to waste anymore time in church chasing after a myth only to get no results or find no satsifaction in the end?

Of course you telling us to conform to your beliefs and go to church is what "Christian Neo Nazis" like you do.

ANONYMOUS FUNDY SAID:
"Your sins are not to big for God to forgive. The day will come and it can be a day of rejoiceing and not fear."

Oh yeah, all of you christians have said that for the past 2,000 years. It reminds me of how boring church really was.

I don't owe your God shit, so shut the fuck up asshole. You are a holier than thou son of a bitch.
Just like your arrogant ass heavenly father is. I recommend that you and your god both eat shit.

ANONYMOUS SAID:
"It only proves how tolerant Christians can be to those who are diffrent from themselves."

Ok, how come christians continue to interfere with the rights of the GLBT community, and they continue to stop gay marriage from happening? You call that tolerance? You make me want to puke!

Plus you assholes hate freedom of speech, and you want to censor people. You christians hate real freedom.

Once again, you have failed to make your point. You only make both yourself and your god look more and more stupid by posting on here.

If you want to convince me and others who are non-believers, that you represent the "Real Truth" and Jesus is the way, then I suggest you come up with modern day evidence, instead of a bunch of 2,000 year old "Hear say" Bullshit that a bunch of towel headed sheep molesters wrote 2,000 years ago.

I say God reveals himself, because you stooges for christ are doing a piss poor job doing so.

If I were god, I would be down right embarassed to have stooges like Marc, Jason, and chicken shit anonymous christian posters who try to make a point on here. If I were god I would fire all of your asses, because you suck at your job when it comes to trying to convert or convince us that "Jesus is the way".

Poltergoost.

boomSLANG said...

Doubt denotes a belief that it might be wrong or it might be right. I have no such belief regarding atheism. I have no doubts about either my faith or your atheism.

Again, let's be forthright, and perfectly clear: Your "faith", and my "Atheism", have nothing to do with absolute certainty. NONE. So, by definition, meaning, a real entry from a real dictionary, we are all "Agnostic" by default. The end. Therefore, the best Jason can do is to doubt my position that there is no divine invisible flying babysitter in the clouds, or anywhere else. Additionally, you also cannot know with certainty that a bazillion other gods do not exist. Thus, at best, you doubt their existence, as well. If I'm wrong, then simple---prove that Zeus, Quetzacoatl, Amon Ra, don't exist at this time.(take your time)

An for extra credit, feel free to address the following "court fine" analogy that I revised to coincide with the biblical concept of "salvation". You know, the one that you previously completely ignored.

boom' "How about if someone insisted that they pay your court fine without first consulting you, and when you say, "thanks, but no thanks...I'll take responsiblity for myself, because I'm a man of integrity", and then they pull you aside and whisper: 'Listen, I want to pay this debt, okay? Accept it, or I'll bash your world in, the very second you set foot out of this court room. 'Deal??' "

'Sound good?

Dave8 said...

Jason: "...Being agnostic means not committing to believing whether or not God exists."

Jason, your belief in what agnosticism is, is wrong, as has been pointed out.

Further, Webster’s "dictionary" in the past years has had thousands of spelling errors, so dictionaries are not perfect.

As well, a "word" in the dictionary, is meaningless without until it is placed into context, which requires knowledge, of historical references, etc.

Let me provide an example;

Theism:
"1. the belief in one God as the creator and ruler of the universe, without rejection of revelation (distinguished from deism).
2. belief in the existence of a god or gods"
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/theist

Now, is it just enough to call you a theist.

If you use definition one to describe yourself, then, obviously you need to give a contextual identity to which God you are attempting to promote for belief, else, you could easily be misidentified as believing in Allah, etc.

If you use definition two to describe yourself, then, obviously you need to figure out how to limit the "number" of gods you believe in, else, I would accept that you believe in the existence of thousands of gods, equally.

So, obviously, you need to give context to a "single word", else, it can be linked to "other words", I like to call words that are linked together, statements, or "sentences", which allow meaningful and accurate communication to occur.

There is the alternative; you don't "have" to communicate with others.

You say that college professors don't allow Wikipedia in their classroom assignments? Interesting, and... which particular University has a standard that says, all departments are restricted from allowing students to use Wikipedia as a source of information?

Now, of course, each professor has their own particular standards, perhaps... you are speaking from the point of view of a professor... is it your professional opinion as a professor, that you would not allow Wikipedia to be used or cited as a reference?

What if you were doing a research paper on "information", or perhaps on "efficient graphic user interfaces" for a software class.

Jason, your inability, apathy, or rejection to understand "context", prevents you from communicating with others, who have a broader understanding of reality, than obviously, yourself. By the way, everything comes down to “knowledge”, in communication… perhaps you can discuss what it means to “know” some-thing, as opposed to “believing” some-thing, or what standard can be used, within a multi-dimensional and changing Universe.

While you are at it, what do you “believe” you “know”, or, is it… what do you “know” that you “believe”… is there a difference? Can you “know” something, and not “believe it”? Can you believe something and not “know it”? Can you “know” something, without placing it into “context”? Does “context” necessarily precede all “knowledge”? Can we ever “form” a question without experiencing the answer?

Well, if you offer any explanation, let me see if I believe what you say, based on what I know… And, what is it about agnosticism and atheism that you “believe” you “know”?

J. C. Samuelson said...

Jason,

You've more than demonstrated your ability to hurl insults and toss claims about. Goading your audience is certainly within your list of skills as well. What we've yet to see is a cogent argument. Something that might persuade someone as to the truth of your proposition.

Incidentally, please read the Site Purpose and Disclaimer. This site isn't for you in the first place.

Read it again: "I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." BUT TO FULFILL. No body but Jesus was able to fulfill the Law, which is why they needed blood sacrifices.

There are a host of issues with this. More than, I think, is appropriate for a blog comment. Let it suffice to say that the logic is horribly twisted in that the Law is not to be destroyed, but Christians believe they're not under it. One can almost here the refrain, "It's more of a guideline, really." Moreover, the concept of God sacrificing Himself to appease Himself is just so absurd that it's worthy of a good belly laugh. There are, of course, complicated arguments to be made regarding even this, but really, is it even necessary?

Who said you did? I certainly didn't.

The price is worship and metaphorically giving your life over to an unseen being who will burn you for an eternity if you don't. It is a threat, pure and simple, over a debt that you bore at birth.

Jesus gave us just two commandments: love God and love your neighbor.

Actually, no. But the answer is complicated.

No, it actually is. When you become saved, all your sins - past, present and, yes, future (since we're not perfect) - are forgiven when you honestly and sincerely repent of them.

By this logic, if you can effectively do no wrong - that is, have no liability for any of your acts before God - then there is no real spiritual reason to follow any law, is there? Even the most honest penitent will sin again and again and again, over and over until death. I'm sure you'd agree. If honest repentance is all that's required, one might as well go commit a murder and, assuming you either evade capture or pay your debt to society in full, you can escape liability merely by honestly saying you're sorry at some point before you die. To God, of course, not the individuals you harmed.

...would you feel indebted to them - that you needed to try to do something to thank or give them something back? It's not about "paying a price." It's about being thankful to and loving the person who has paid our debt in full.

There's a difference between feeling indebted and actually owing that person something in return. Now, if the conditions of the deal are established ahead of time and you accept them, that's another story. For example, if the person paying your debt tells you, "You will accept me as your savior and worship me," and you accept the deal, then you are naturally bound by the deal. However, that's not the deal offered in the Bible. The concept of Original Sin is the deal-breaker.

If the Bible is to be believed, at birth, Jason, you were yoked with guilt. You were not given an option. You didn't have an opportunity to avoid sinning. You were simply guilty. Wrapped in a blanket, completely oblivious to any concept of guilt or even what it means to live, you were found guilty by your God. Then, you grow up a little and find out that you owe God something. You're guilty, and you must pay your debt by accepting and worshipping Jesus. Though this burden may seem light, it is still a burden that you bear. The deal was arranged, Jason, without your consent, without your knowledge, and without your having done anything to deserve the guilt that was laid upon you.

Tell me, how do you determine that electro-magnetism exists? You can't see it, smell it, taste it, hear it or feel it. So how do you know it exists?

If one has the right equipment and the savvy to conduct a simple experiment, you can indirectly observe its effects. It has little to do with actually "seeing" in the narrow sense you're interpreting it. There are many phenomena whose effects we cannot observe directly. However, scientists regularly affirm their existence through repeated testing. Sadly, any effects God might be alleged to have are empirically (and conspicuously) absent.

God is not physical, but He can interact with the physical universe He created.

Ok, then we should see the effects of His alleged interactions, yes? This is, in fact, the premise behind the Intelligent Design movement, and lies behind the above comment concerning empirical verification. Yet nothing has been presented as evidence for design that holds up under scientific scrutiny, due to mistakes in either the hypothesis, the methods, the evidence itself, or the interpretation of the alleged findings.

...a very real physical healing of a very painful and potentially crippling affliction a person close to me suffered from...This person is very sensitive to and acutely affected by pain and there is simply no way the healing is imagined or faked.

I'm glad to hear that your loved one is feeling better. This would be powerful evidence indeed, if it can be verified. Who was the doctor, and were his/her findings published in any peer-reviewed journal? Please understand that claims of this kind are as ubiquitous as hair follicles. I once did a calculation of the rate of miraculous healings at Lourdes, France and found the success rate - assuming every claim had equal validity - was lower than 1%. This is very far below what we'd expect even from chance.

Now, you might argue that the healings in France aren't representative of miracles in general. That's fine, but keep in mind that unless there is a significant percentage of miraculous healings that can be medically verified there won't be much credence given them.

Besides, Wikipedia is crap. I've never seen any reputable educator accept it as a proper source for assignments (research, term papers, etc.).

I'm assuming you're not a "reputable educator," so it seems that this is nothing more than a red herring. In any case, what the authors have done there with the words in question (atheism, agnosticism) is perfectly acceptable and in keeping with conventional wisdom.

The way I see it, if you're willing to answer a couple simple questions, maybe we can have a meaningful dialogue.

1. Can you explain your reasons for rejecting belief in Allah?
2. Can you name at least one book that you've read that offered a view opposite yours?

Jason said...

Hey, here's a question for those of you who think babies are atheists:

Are Christians who fall into a coma suddenly atheists? And when they wake up again, are they suddenly Christians again?

Astreja said...

Anonytroll: "The Pope asking for God to forgive the Church was done from the heart..."

No, I think it was an attempt to save face in a world disgusted by the behaviour of the RCC.

"The Church is forgiven..."

Not by Me, it isn't. I don't give a rat's ass about whether or not some imaginary invisible being "forgave" it. The RCC owes a debt to humanity that it can not and will not repay. I, personally, will settle for nothing less than its bankruptcy and dissolution.

Jason said...

I will say that I do not feel sorry for one christian who gets persecuted. I would say that most persecution of christians is very well deserved.

They deserve persecution for sticking their noses in the the business of other people's lives, and telling others how to live.

If god wants something done, then he can do it himself, since he is almighty. Why in the hell would an almighty god need us lowly humans to carry out his will?

Sounds like God is limited in power if you ask me. His bark is obviously worse than his bite.

If he is so powerful, why feel the need to use humans to do his work?

Halloween said...

Jason asked; "Are Christians who fall into a coma suddenly atheists? And when they wake up again, are they suddenly Christians again?"

An infant is naturally born without knowledge, belief, or ability to declare a position/testimony; therefore, an infant is naturally born a cognitively implicit atheist, based on the qualifier - lack of belief.

In order to declare any "explicit" position, like Christianity (theism) one must be capable of making a claim; continuously - we begin our positions or state of mind, without that capability by nature.

The second a person is not capable of making a "declaration" of their position, they fail to be "identified" by such a position in a present tense. They can be considered something of the past, and "potentially" something of the future... but no one can "know" their position until they wake back up.

Who's to say they won't wake up and declare themselves Satanists.

Again, the difference in position, between an infant and a coma patient, is based on cognitive "potential", which is a requisite to "know" (knowledge) something.

Surely, your inability to answer questions, can't lead you to just throw out smoke flares like this red herring about a coma patient. Go check out a Christian apologetics web page on how to evade direct questions that expose your ignorance.

NoBiblePlease said...

Jason:

"You equate fulfilling the commandments to love God and love your neighbor as paying a price? If that's the position you're coming from, no wonder who don't understand any of this.

...

Yes, that is exactly right, BUT YOU STILL NEED TO OBEY THE LAW AFTERWARDS. Just because someone stepped in to pay this fine (and let's say they promised to pay any of your future fines, too) doesn't absolve you from ever obeying the law ever again. That's not a perfectly accurate analogy to salvation, but it's good enough.
"

Jason, you completely miss the point when it comes to objections to the Christian view of salvation (that is, fundie protestant view; to each church it's own understanding of salvation...)

You claim that your God is love; yet, your God refuses to forget about your sins unless the price is paid in blood. That is not love. That is not mercy. That is not forgiveness. That's trade; give me blood, and I will forget about your sins. When you love someone, you forgive him/her and do not ask anything in return. When you ask for blood (or anything else for that matter) in return, you are not forgiving.
To clarify, let me provide with the following dictionary entry on forgiveness:

for·give:

1. To excuse for a fault or an offense; pardon.
2. To renounce anger or resentment against.
3. To absolve from payment of (a debt, for example).

...

Synonyms: forgive, pardon, excuse, condone

These verbs mean to refrain from imposing punishment on an offender or demanding satisfaction for an offense. The first three can be used as conventional ways of offering apology. More strictly, to forgive is to grant pardon without harboring resentment: "Children begin by loving their parents; as they grow older they judge them; sometimes they forgive them" Oscar Wilde.
Pardon more strongly implies release from the liability for or penalty entailed by an offense: After the revolution all political prisoners were pardoned.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/forgive

So, forgive = refrain from demanding satisfaction. Yet, Christianity teaches that blood sacrifice needs to be offered for God's righteous anger to be appeased; so, Christian God demands satisfaction. Again, this is not forgiveness (as shown above), and that is not love. If the Christian God was truly love, he would not ask for blood.
Since he does, it makes every human being potentially more forgiving than him.

This is, I believe, the point webmaster was trying to make.

There are many points to be made on the incoherence (logical, scriptural, denominational and historical) of the fundie protestant christian view of salvation, but since the teaching that God is love is pivotal to each and every of christian denominations, this should do for now....

.:webmaster:. said...

To NoBiblePlease:

That was exactly the point I was attempting to make. But I like your approach to the topic much better. Thanks!

Rational Responder said...

Uh, since when are atheists opposed to violence?

computer said...

Pooltergoost said: If your god exists, he is a universal criminal. They should bring Jesus back here to earth and put him on trial again as a "Repeat Offender".

He was found to be innocent and both you me and every human alive killed Him. Yes I am saying you are mistaken we killed Him with every sin we commit. You seem to be in a lot of pain and you have described God as a murderer yet God came to earth to bring us back to Him in Him there is healing He is the one who will take away that pain. He could have destroyed the whole world at anytime but there He is up on that cross an innocent sacrifice for our sins, it doesnt fit with your description of God. How do you reconcile the difference? Look at the cross there is what God is really like, there is the love and forgiveness we seek. Then look to the risen Christ the power of God to give life He is our hope.

NoBiblePlease said...

computer:

"...but there He is up on that cross an innocent sacrifice for our sins, it doesnt fit with your description of God. How do you reconcile the difference? Look at the cross there is what God is really like, there is the love and forgiveness we seek."

I explained/refuted this just recently.
If you do look at the cross, you see a God that demands blood sacrifice, and no less. There is simply no forgiveness and love in that.

NoBiblePlease said...

computer:

"How do you reconcile the difference?"

Considering what I said in the previous post (incompatibility of love/forgiveness with insistence on blood sacrifice)it is you who has to reconcile the irreconcilable.

.:webmaster:. said...

Marc, or computer, or whatever monikor you are using this time:

If the price has been paid, then no forgiveness is necessary. However, thanks for confirming, once again, that Christianity makes no sense.

And, what about the violent heritage of Christianity? Why are none of you Christian fanatics addressing that? Is it because you have no answer?

NoBiblePlease said...

Tim Simmons:

"The recent insistence by Midwest Painter that nowhere in the Bible are Christians commanded to kill non-Christians has prompted me to do a bit of typing. "

This is one of the funniest claims a Christian can make; they find it important to stress that their God never orders them to kill non-Christians, but the oft-repeated promise of this same God that he will TORTURE non-Christians FOREVER seems to escape them. What was the question again? Oh yeah, "How do you reconcile the difference?"...

Bill said...

I have a question for the Christians. If a Christian becomes brain damaged and forgets that they ever were a Christian, and never claims Christ again before they die, will they go to heaven?

Ryan said...

I have been away from the keyboard for going on 10 hours or more, and have lost track of this thread. I will attempt to respond as best I can.

First, I ask my fellow infidels pardon. I lost my temper when dealing with the sanctified half-wits that wandered in here, and I became so angry that I could hardly think. That isn't really like me, but I confess to a few moments of weakness. I do not need to defend my position. Now and then, I feel I must. That is weakness.

Some of us have gone back and forth defining atheism and agnosticism and so on. That is fine. Having been trained by the theologians of the Society of the Precious Blood, I can bullshit with the best of them. As the saying goes, you can't bullshit the bullshitter.

Whether or not a deity exists is not my concern. If anyone here thinks that there is a god who is going to punish them for some real or fantasy sins, that is their problem. Perhaps they get some masochistic thrill from imagining themselves in hell (see the Webmaster's xian art, and then examine your poor twisted minds.)

My primary difficulty, as best I can remember it, is the assertion that xianity promoted tolerance. That, again, as best as I remember, is when I saw red. I honest to fucking xrist do not see that the religion of the jews, and the religion of their bastard spawn, the xians, has actually promoted tolerance. Tolerance of who? Tolerance for what? I am an athiest, bent on thinking for myself and living my life based on those thoughts. Tell me about any xian principle that supports me in this enterprise, and I will shut up.

And just as an afterthought: count the number of times that paul used the words "liberty" and "freedom". People...........you don't need to canonize 27 more books of the bible to grant people freedom. If you want to free people, shut up.

To anonymous and jason: I have heard your shit before, and let me assure you that my resolve hardens every time. When one smells shit, one covers one's nose. And one of you is a papist; I forget which. Check your history and see how the English church treated the Irish church. xians persecuting xians. Warms my heart.

And to my comrades: again, my apology. My emotions come up like the tide. No excuse.

computer said...

nobible please said: Considering what I said in the previous post (incompatibility of love/forgiveness with insistence on blood sacrifice)it is you who has to reconcile the irreconcilable.

You are looking in the right place just look closer, love/forgiveness and the needed sacrifice are reconciled on the cross in Him. Jesus, God Himself is the sacrifice offered for us for the forgiveness of sins. No greater love is there then that.

Ryan said...

And here I was so proud of myself for anger management. Shit.

computer, WE have to reconcile with the irreconcilable? Have you ever heard of logic? When we encounter two statements which cannot be reconciled, we either give up a statement, or alter it. You are dealing in theological bullshit.

anonymous and jason, I think you just found a friend and ally.

NoBiblePlease said...

computer:

"You are looking in the right place just look closer, love/forgiveness and the needed sacrifice are reconciled on the cross in Him. Jesus, God Himself is the sacrifice offered for us for the forgiveness of sins. No greater love is there then that."

This is both pathetic and insulting. You simply don't care about what other people say, do you? Luckily, I am used to Christians ignoring the truth and facts and parroting lines they were brainwashed to believe in, and I don't get too upset when people like yourself so evidently deny things everyone understand to be true.

Dude, before it's too late and before your entire life is wasted in things no good, understand that forgiveness and demand for compensation are notions radically opposed to each other; they cannot be reconciled, in no way. God can either forgive sins or ask for retribution; it's either mercy or justice; not both. They will always exclude each other.

As far as your claim that "there's no greater love than that"; this is also patently false.

Firstly, as I said before, humans are capable of forgiving without asking for retribution. This makes them more loving then your (idea of ) God who allegedly forgives while in reality does not remiss sins unless you give him some blood.

Secondly, there are monotheistic religions in the world which believe in a God that can and plan to forgive sins to people who believe in him (Judaism, Islam, Sikhism, etc.), and only because they are/were monotheists; there's no blood compensation involved. This makes these religions and the God(s) they believe in more loving and forgiving, and less judgemental than Christianity and its God.

If you read this, please make sure you understand it. Otherwise, if you keep ignoring other people's arguments and keep trying to use some utterly infantile "tactics" (parroting, and more parroting, and then some more) to bring people "back to the fold", be sure that you too will be ignored, because your attitude is insulting, to say the least.

Dave8 said...

Bill: "I have a question for the Christians. If a Christian becomes brain damaged and forgets that they ever were a Christian, and never claims Christ again before they die, will they go to heaven?"

:-) Since it requires "belief" to be a Christian, and many mentally handicapped people can't testify to a belief - I suppose they'll all go to hell as well :-)

computer said...

nobibleplease said: This makes them more loving then your (idea of ) God who allegedly forgives while in reality does not remiss sins unless you give him some blood.

When did God ever ask you to shed your blood?

The cross is more profound than your analysis. Look deep at God offering Himself and His blood for you on the cross. You can even hear Him say "Father forgive them for they know not what they do".

NoBiblePlease said...

computer:

"When did God ever ask you to shed your blood?

The cross is more profound than your analysis. Look deep at God offering Himself and His blood for you on the cross. You can even hear Him say "Father forgive them for they know not what they do"."

It does not really matter whose blood it is; blood is blood; it is a price, a compensation, and it contradicts love and forgiveness no matter who pays it. You could only argue that God made it easier for people to pay the blood price by allowing his son to pay the price instead of them; that would make him a bit more lenient, but that is still payment, NOT forgiveness and NOT love. From whatever angle you look at it, the blood demanding nature of your God does not change; he is obviously incapable of forgiveness.

What Jesus (allegedly) did is not the issue; what matters is why he HAD TO do it. Because of the nature of his father, who is thirsty of blood.

A loving God would forgive our sins without asking anything in return neither from us nor from anyone else.

Therefore, the cross is not profound; it is utterly misleading, incoherent, contradictory and therefore meaningless.

You have no argument to offer, so you behave like a parrot, a
computer even, hoping that people are stupid enough to buy into your broken record rethoric. It ain't gonna happen.

Poltergoost said...

COMPUTER SAID:

"He was found to be innocent and both you me and every human alive killed Him. Yes I am saying you are mistaken we killed Him with every sin we commit."


Ok, computer then you are guilty of sending jews to a gas chamber, you are guilty of the 9/11 attacks, and you are guilty of the Charles Manson murders along with every other crime that has ever been committed in this world.

You are guilty as charged computer, so get ready to face your prison sentence. Because even though you were not there when all of these horrific crimes went down, you are still guilty of all of these crimes.

You are guilty as charged computer.

I honestly cannot believe that you think people living today killed Jesus.

Your loving god has framed innocent humans of a crime that he committed.

You are defintely a computer. A computer that has been programmed by a stupid ignorant bunch of extremist nut jobs.

Once again, it is your god who is at fault, and you are a total dumb ass. Just like your god is.

Poltergoost

Judge Jesus said...

Computer since you are guilty of all of the sins of the world, I hereby sentence you to get screwed up the ass by Jesus for eternity.

Jesus Christ "Porn Star" said...

I have cummed so that they may have porn, and that they may have it more abundantly.

The Christian God said...

Why should I (God) take the blame for my own screw up in the garden of Eden?

I realize that I am a spiritual know it all, and I knew ahead of time that if I placed the serpent (Satan) in the garden that Adam and Eve would not be able to resist the temptation, however I was really bored that day, and I needed some entertainment.

I'll just place the blame on you lowly human beings, because I am GOD, and I can. Plus I require a lot of attention, and I need my massive ego stroked, because I don't have many friends up here in these heavenly skies and things are quiet boring to me.

That's why I created you lowly humans. To provide entertainment for me.

Thanks for confirming the truth Computer. You are a guilty son of a bitch, and don't you ever forget it you little earthling.

As for Marc, and Jason, if you ever get out of line with me, I will piss in your kool aid, and turn it into blood, and cover your body with sores, because I can, and don't you ever forget Marc, Jason, and Computer that you are all guilty of the sins of this world.

You guys just wait until I get a hold of you for what O.J. Simpson did. I hold all of you responsible for his crimes. However, kiss my son's butt and I'll forgive you, or I'll toss you into hell.

Obey me, praise me, and worship me or I will bring plagues upon your land, and curse your livestock.

Don't forget to turn your 10 percent in to your local church this Sunday, or I will curse your finances too. I need your money to accomplish my agenda. Remember that Marc, Jason, and Computer.

THE CHRISTIAN GOD

Poltergoost said...

BADLY PROGRAMMED COMPUTER SAID:
"He is the one who will take away that pain."

He got plenty of chances to do so, and he only ended up adding more pain into my life, so he ran out of chances. Quit defending the spiritual con artist.

BADLY PROGRAMMED COMPUTER SAID:
"He could have destroyed the whole world at anytime but there He is up on that cross an innocent sacrifice for our sins, it doesnt fit with your description of God."

What you say, and the bible says does not fit the "REALITY" of God.

It appears that your "hard drive" has gone bad computer. I think you need to have your memory wiped clean, and be reprogrammed.

I recommend you install a new updated version of the software program, "REALITY XP 2007".

Poltergoost

Reality Killed Jesus Christ Superstar said...

Computer said:

"He could have destroyed the whole world at anytime but there He is up on that cross an innocent sacrifice for our sins, it doesnt fit with your description of God."

Wait a minute! Wait a minute!

I thought Jesus had already ascended up into heaven 2,000 years ago. You just said "There he is up on that cross".

If he's still up on that cross today (2007), I bet his body sure does smell like shit. I sure would hate to imagine what it looks like too.

Computer Programmer said...

Computer Said: You can even hear Him say "Father forgive them for they know not what they do".

You can? I can't hear him?

Is this some type of tape recording from 2,000 years ago, or is there some type of time rupture in space where we can hear Jesus saying that?

Man computer, you must have really good hearing.

Astreja said...

Computer Malfunction: "Yes I am saying you are mistaken we killed Him with every sin we commit."

It's official, then. The Second Coming is off indefinitely because the leading man, uh, god, uh, god-man keeps keeling over dead.

Seriously... That lie about humans killing your god will cost you your faith. You should've quit while you were behind.

Poltergoost said...

Yeah, I think "Computer" does have a malfunction.

He has a "Sintax" error.

Ryan said...

computer, it amuses me that you are taking on the name "computer". Will you soon be calling yourself Mr Spock?

About this nonsense about the blood: Here at St Joseph's, every goddamned room has a crucifix. Every single fucking room on this whole fucking campus, except for the restrooms. I guess that is so we can shit in peace.

Some of these things are close to 100 years old and are quite detailed: the blood drips from the thorns; the hands; the side; the feet. The damned things measure 2 feet by a foot and a half.

There are others, more modern, that show a sanitized little pewter jesus hanging placidly from polished plywood. And then there are the really modern ones that show jesus sort of floating off the cross, arms raised in triumph. Modern catholics are ashamed of their butcher-shop religion and try to act like.......uh......modern catholics.

computer (and I dislike using that word to describe you) have you ever heard a description of crucifixion? It is the worst possible way to die. The worst. Whoever thought up crucifixion was a genius--a bit wierd, maybe--but a genius. The condemned man hung for hours, and sometimes days, before dying, and after death his body was left hanging for the buzzards. And no, he did not wear a little pair of gym shorts.

According to your gospel, your jesus died quickly and was afterward given a civilized burial. Your jesus got off easy. Why didn't your god let him go the whole nine yards? If he really was supposed to be the sacrifice for our sins, it would have made a more fitting spectacle to let him dangle there, ants and flies feeding on his putrid flesh, and buzzards pecking out his eyes. His belly would have burst open, his guts and the contents of his stomach would have splattered to the ground, and eventually his rotting corpse would have slipped off the cross.

But nooooooo.........your jesus died in just a few hours and was given an aristocrat's burial. Any appeal to your suffering jesus falls flat. The little fucker didn't suffer all that much.

The story, of course, is fiction. Whether or not your jesus existed in the first place is a matter of humorous conjecture. We can take that up later. But the story about how jesus and the two thieves hung up there and carried on a converstation is pure fantasy. People enduring crucifixion did not chat with each other.

And now, to the real point of this posting. Excuse me, but I just like to talk. The idea that your all-powerful god had to torture someone in a Roman execution is bullshit. An all-powerful god could not forgive the slightest of our misdemeanors without inflicting torment on someone? How the fuck does that make any sense? So your jesus had to suffer, so god could forgive us, because of breaking a law he made himself, to save us from a hell he made himself? How smart is this?

computer (please think up a new mechanical name for yourself; how about "toaster" or "urinal") I do not believe in god or gods. A god may exist, but I do not give a goddamn. There may be a fortune in gold under this floor. I may be the bastard king of France. Why anyone wants or needs to believe in gods is beyond me. The need to "love" a god is insane. I can put up with stupidity or delusion, but I have no truck with babbling, slobbering, childish nonsense.

The jew law was written up by savages and barbarians. The modern jew, bless his little heart, has spent centuries overcoming his past. Give him a few more centuries and he just might do it. But modern jews do not observe the laws of their primitive ancestors. It is only the xians who continue to take such things seriously. What does that tell us about xians?

jew law is not binding on us. We have not offended some god because we violated jew law, or because some jew ate an apple or two, or because some jew wouldn't bang his sister-in-law, or because some jew married a gentile. Grow the bloody hell up.

computer, you and your kind would do well to outgrow your childish fears and learn to think and conduct yourselves as men. You first need to get off your knees and put away your bibles. Hanging around this place would help a great deal--you would hear the sound of intelligence. Oh yes, intelligence has a definite sound.

And now, having talked too much, I need to run.

Dave8 said...

Computer: "The cross is more profound than your analysis. Look deep at God offering Himself and His blood for you on the cross."

I'm squinting, where should I be looking?

Computer: "You can even hear Him say "Father forgive them for they know not what they do".

I'm listening, where should I direct my attention?

Sounds like someone needs a good de-bugging.

Dave8 said...

Ryan: "Here at St Joseph's, every goddamned room has a crucifix."

Lenny Bruce: "If Jesus had been killed twenty years ago. Catholic school children would be wearing little electric chairs around their necks instead of crosses."

:-)

Ryan said...

Dave, that is one of my all-time favorite quotes. I made my own little joke out of it: "See, I belong to this new religion. There was this jewish guy who died in the gas chamber at San Quentin, see? He was the son of god, and he died for our sins". It's nonsense, but of course that is exactly what the xian religion teaches.

I have pulled my little gag on xians now and then, and their faces go blank and they say nothing. I think they are hearing their bullshit for what it is, probably for the first time in their lives.

NoBiblePlease said...

To additionally expose the meaninglessness of "the cross" and falsity of the Christian claim that their God is love, here are few more comments.

Computer said something that every Christian believes; that here is no grater love than Jesus' love for mankind, because he gave his life for them; there can be no greater love than that, we are told.

But when you take a closer look, you realize that millions of people throughout history, people who only had one life and who weren't immortal nor did have the power to overcome death (like Jesus allegedly did) and bring themselves back to life, sacrificed their precious lives, lives they believed cannot be restored, for some causes they considered worthy or for the sake of some other person(s).

So Jesus' sacrifice is far from unique and special; and it's not even greater that the sacrifice of those ordinary people because Jesus' died for the sins of mankind; ENTIRE mankind; and yet these ordinary people died for the benefit of a far smaller number of people (many times only for one person's benefit). Since it is obviously easier to make a sacrifice when you know that a larger group of people will benefit from it, it can be said that there were people throughout history who loved other groups or individuals more than (or at least as much as) Jesus loved entire mankind.

Dave8 said...

Ryan: "I have pulled my little gag on xians now and then, and their faces go blank and they say nothing. I think they are hearing their bullshit for what it is, probably for the first time in their lives."

Yep, their imagination is likely a much better mental entertainment system; once they watch it play out in reality they don't get the same fix :-)

Anonymous said...

Christianity was violent because humans are violents. Even Christ himself admitted that not all his followers will be peaceful. He also said, "I came wih a sword". [Yes I know he said that those live by the sword will die by the sword] Nothing new here.

Poltergoost said...

ANONYMOUS SAID:
"Christianity was violent because humans are violents."

Not all humans are violent, so don't compare everyone to the humans who are violent. Of course, generalizing everyone together is something most christians seem to do.

As far as certain "Humans" being violent, God made them that way, by allowing the Garden of Eden screwup to happen in the first place.

It's obvious that god never intended for man to have a perfect paradise with perfect peace, or he would've removed Satan in the first place.

God is all about violence. Just look at what all he has allowed to happen in the world since the beginning of time.

All of this has happened all because of the typical worn out excuse that "We are all sinners, and we live in a fallen world", which is pure bullshit.

It's bullshit that a loving god seems to find the need to punish all past, present, and future generations just because of two people eating a fruit off of a stupid tree.

How fucking retarded! What's even worse, is people who are retarded enough to believe it.

Poltergoost.

Tim said...

Jason wrote:

"Boy, your dishonesty and ignorance are blatantly evident right there. You claim Matthew 5:17 means for Christians to "keep the laws just like every other Jew was supposed to do." Wrong, wrong, wrong. Read it again:"

I only copied part but in all your ranting you dishonestly overlooked the most important part of the passage. I'll do you a favor and copy it here.

"17 “Don’t misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose. 18 I tell you the truth, *****until heaven and earth disappear*****, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear until its purpose is achieved. 19 So if you ignore the least commandment and teach others to do the same, you will be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. But anyone who obeys God’s laws and teaches them will be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven."


Correct me if I'm wrong, but earth has not yet disappeared, yes? Or are you posting from some space station and the rest of us are in some artificial environment we don't know about?

So, since that is one of the stipulations in place that has to occur BEFORE the law DOES become void, the law is still in effect.

Go soak your head and do some serious introspection.

Wow, lots of comments. Thanks fer the good ones (and the bad I guess heheheh).

It really isn't a debatable issue so the Christians usually do the switch and bait routine and bring up Stalin/Hitler/Pol etc. Or they use the strawman and claim I'm saying Christians today are bloodthirsty killers. HEHHHE

Tim

Tim said...

"Make no mistake countries foundes on the premise that there is no God have all been oppressive."


LOL!

No country is founded on the concept of atheism. Un-freaking-believable.

Tim

Tim said...

"This is one of the funniest claims a Christian can make; they find it important to stress that their God never orders them to kill non-Christians, but the oft-repeated promise of this same God that he will TORTURE non-Christians FOREVER seems to escape them. What was the question again? Oh yeah, "How do you reconcile the difference?"..."

and

"Don't forget Revelation 19 though, where Christ himself leads a holy army to slaughter his enemies until even the birds are sick of eating their flesh, so that he can then rule the world with a rod of iron."



Yeah, I should have added those in my article but you can only put so much in before you go into brain-fatigue. hehehe

But it's true. Christians don't NEED to kill the infidels. God will torture them unceasingly after the fact.


Tim

Jesus Trek said...

TIM SAID:
"Correct me if I'm wrong, but earth has not yet disappeared, yes? Or are you posting from some space station and the rest of us are in some artificial environment we don't know about"

I think Jason might be from the 24th Century. He is a prophet it would seem. In Jason's Time period Jesus has returned, and he now goes by the name, "Q" and Jesus now looks like John Delancie.

Plus Jason's friend "Computer" sounds like Majel Barrett.

LOL!

Jesus Trek said...

Picture the Story Scene:

Captain Kirk, Mr. Spock, and Dr. McCoy travel back in time to witness the crucifixion of Christ.

JESUS: Forgive them father, for they know not what they do.

MR. SPOCK: Captain, isn't Jesus supposed to be his father also? That is illogical.

CAPTAIN KIRK: Yes, Spock it is. You are witnessing the crucifixion of an ancient cult leader, and you are also witnessing the stupidity of the people who lived back in this time period.

MR. SPOCK: I always said that you humans are irrational, and you have very illogical thinking. Especially when it comes to "Superstition".

CAPTAIN KIRK: Yes Spock, I understand what you mean. They actually believed this garbage about this man on the cross returning one day. They even believed this garbage all the way up through the 21st century.

SPOCK: (Raises eyebrow) Most illogical. How did you people survive all these years?

JESUS: (Calls out on the cross) It is finished!

DR. MCCOY: He's dead Jim!

NARRATION:

Several thousand years later in the year 1947, Jesus attempted to return to Earth. Unfortunately for christians Jesus was killed when his UFO crashed in a desert. His body was recovered, and frozen. It is believed that the body of Jesus Christ is currently being held in "Area 51".

THE END