10 Reasons the Crucifixion Story Makes No Sense

10 Reasons the Crucifixion Story Makes No Sense March 15, 2013

I’m afraid that the crucifixion story doesn’t strike me as that big a deal.

The Christian will say that death by crucifixion was a horrible, humiliating way to die. That the death of Jesus was a tremendous sacrifice, more noble and selfless than a person sacrificing himself for the benefit of a butterfly. And isn’t it worth praising something that gets us into heaven?

Here are ten reasons why I’m unimpressed.

1. Sure death sucks, but why single out this one? Lots of people die. In fact, lots died from crucifixion. The death of one man doesn’t make all the others insignificant. Was Jesus not a man but actually a god? If so, that has yet to be shown.

It’s not like this death is dramatically worse than death today. Crucifixion may no longer be a worry, but cancer is. Six hours of agony on the cross is pretty bad, but so is six months of agony from cancer.

2. What about that whole hell thing? An eternity of torment for even a single person makes Jesus’s agony insignificant by comparison, and it counts for nothing when you consider the billions that are apparently going to hell.

3. Jesus didn’t even die. The absurdity of the story, of course, is the resurrection. If Jesus died, there’s no miraculous resurrection, and if there’s a resurrection, there’s no sacrifice through death. Miracle or sacrifice—you can’t have it both ways. The gospels don’t say that he died for our sins but that he had a rough couple of days for our sins.

4. Taking on the sin vs. removal of sin aren’t symmetric. We didn’t do anything to get original sin. We just inherited it from Adam. So why do we have to do anything to get the redemption? If God demands a sacrifice, he got it. That’s enough. Why the requirement to believe to access the solution?

5. The reason behind the sacrifice—mankind’s original sin—makes no sense. Why blame Adam for a moral lapse that he couldn’t even understand? Remember that he hadn’t yet eaten the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, so who could blame him when he made a moral mistake?

And how can we inherit original sin from Adam? Why blame us for something we didn’t do? That’s not justice, and the Bible agrees:

Parents are not to be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their parents; each will die for their own sin (Deut. 24:16)

6. Jesus made a sacrifice—big deal. Jesus is perfect, so his doing something noble is like water flowing downhill. It’s unremarkable since he’s only acting out his nature. What else would you expect from a perfect being?

But imagine if I sacrificed myself for someone. In the right circumstance, I’d risk my life for a stranger—or at least I hope I would. That kind of sacrifice is very different. A selfish, imperfect man acting against his nature to make the ultimate unselfish sacrifice is far more remarkable than a perfect being acting according to his nature, and yet people make sacrifices for others all the time. So why single out the actions of Jesus? Aren’t everyday noble actions by ordinary people more remarkable and laudable?

7. What is left for God to forgive? The Jesus story says that we’ve sinned against God (a debt). Let’s look at two resolutions to this debt.

(1) God could forgive the debt of sin. You and I are asked to forgive wrongs done against us, so why can’t God? Some Christians say that to forgive would violate God’s sense of justice, but when one person forgives another’s debt, there’s no violation of justice. For unspecified reasons, God doesn’t like this route.

And that leaves (2) where Jesus pays for our sin. But we need to pick 1 or 2, not both. If Jesus paid the debt, there’s no need for God’s forgiveness. There’s no longer anything for God to forgive, since there’s no outstanding debt.

Here’s an everyday example: when I pay off my mortgage, the bank doesn’t in addition forgive my debt. There’s no longer a debt to forgive! Why imagine that God must forgive us after he’s already gotten his payment?

8. The Jesus story isn’t even remarkable within mythology. Jesus’s sacrifice was small compared to the Greek god Prometheus, who stole fire from Olympus and gave it to humanity. Zeus discovered the crime and punished Prometheus by chaining him to a rock so that a vulture could eat his liver. Each night, his liver grew back and the next day the vulture would return, day after agonizing day. The gospel story, where Jesus is crucified once and then pops back into existence several days later, is unimpressive by comparison.

9. The Bible itself rejects God’s savage “justice.” This is the 21st century. Must Iron Age customs persist so that we need a human sacrifice? If God loves us deeply and he wants to forgive us, couldn’t he just … forgive us? That’s how we do it, and that’s the lesson we get from the parable of the Prodigal Son where the father forgives the son even after being wronged by him. If that’s the standard of mercy, why can’t God follow it? Since God is so much greater a being than a human, wouldn’t he be that much more understanding and willing to forgive?

If we were to twist the Prodigal Son parable to match the crucifixion story, the father might demand that the innocent son be flogged to pay for the crime of the prodigal son. Where’s the logic in that?

10. The entire story is incoherent. Let’s try to stumble through the drunken logic behind the Jesus story.

God made mankind imperfect and inherently vulnerable to sin. Living a sinless life is impossible, so hell becomes unavoidable. That is, God creates people knowing for certain that they’re going to deserve eternity in hell when they die. Why create people that he knew would be destined for eternal torment?

But don’t worry—God sacrificed Jesus, one of the persons of God (whatever that means), so mankind could go to heaven instead.

So God sacrificed himself to himself so we could bypass a rule that God made himself and that God deliberately designed us to never be able to meet? I can’t even understand that; I certainly feel no need to praise God for something so nonsensical. It’s like an abused wife thanking her abuser. We can just as logically curse God for consigning us to hell from birth.

Perhaps I can be forgiven for being unimpressed by the crucifixion story.

Jesus died for my sins?
Tell him I said thanks.
(Seen on a bumper sticker)

At least when Elvis died for my sins,
he stayed dead!
(Seen on another bumper sticker)

(This is a modified version of a post originally published 11/23/11.)

Photo credit: Wikimedia

"Ya mean ya don't already know the answer to both those questions....pfffft!Oh I get it...yer ..."

Roe Is a Mirage: Conservatives Wrongly ..."
"Wow! I keep thinking we've all gotten dumber since the Internet, despite unprecedented availability of ..."

A Distillation of Crazy
"or there ARE no real atheistsOh, yeah. I forgot that "atheists" believe in God but ..."

A Distillation of Crazy
"The funny thing is that I'm sure Montgomery and I, in that moment, would help ..."

A Distillation of Crazy

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Barry Howell

    BOB??? Your biggest mistake is NOT believing that anything can possibly exist beyond a person’s physical life, because YOU can’t explain or understand how anything COULD exist beyond their physical death.

    You don’t believe in anything that’s real and true, unless you can explain it in PHYSICAL terms with your own stupid physical intellect.

    • Barry:

      Your biggest mistake is NOT believing that anything can possibly exist beyond a person’s physical life, because YOU can’t explain or understand how anything COULD exist beyond their physical death.

      The burden of proof is on the person making the remarkable claim. I start with the assumption that no one has ever been resurrected from the dead by supernatural means, and then I evaluate with an open mind claims to the contrary. Where’s the problem?

      • Yeah Bob, it’s infinitely more likely that if there WAS someone named Jesus, that the storm scared everybody off before he died on the cross and so his friends who stayed behind just took him down, hid him away, nursed him back to health, and then claimed he had “risen”. People live their whole lives claiming 2000 years LATER they KNOW he died? It’s pure brainwashing. Plain and simple.

        • Clay:

          Good thinking. To imagine that there really is a supernatural creator of the universe (despite the quite satisfactory explanations that science has given us for why things are the way they are) is quite a bit bigger claim than to imagine that the Bible is yet another manmade religion.

      • Striving

        #1: Lazarus

        #2: As to burden of “proof”, you have access to all the proof you could ever need. You can see the facts of the case, you just don’t like the law so you expect that someone else must battle with you endlessly, to convince you of something you do not WANT to understand or believe, or cave to your arguments and validate your view. God could stand in front of your face and tell you what is what and, after you first shock and awe, you would STILL opt to refuse Him the second He wasn’t right in your face. (has happened to others)

        No one has to “prove” a thing to you. It’s your eternity, spend it how you want to baby! You’ve been told that you were created and that your Creator is God and there is a GOD, One True God, who has a set of rule and consequences. You’ve been told Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God who died for your sins. You’ve been told that the Bible is the Living Word of God. I assume you have access to the Bible. The rest is on you.
        You can mock Christians and deny Christ. You can challenge the existence or fairness of God with your last breath and every breath before that. It is all on you. You can do whatever you want; the end result will be the same whether you agree to it, refuse to believe it, deny it, mock it; doesn’t matter. God is Father, King, Creator, God is GOD and you are HIS creation, child, subject. You will have no choice in the end, you will come under His hand. EVERY knee will bow and EVERY voice confess. Enjoy.

        • Striving

          #1 part B: Widow of Zarephath’s son,
          Shunamite’s son,
          Man tossed into Elisha’s tomb,
          Widow of Nain’s son,
          Jairus’ daughter,
          Tabitha,
          Eutychus,
          &

          JESUS

          Not believing is not evidence that something doesn’t happen or isn’t true. Your “evidence” and entire belief system is simply not believing someone else’s beliefs and trying to back it up with faulty “logic” and other people’s old hypotheses and theories. None of your arguments are any stronger than those of the people you contradict.

        • Yoav

          Gandalf

          Harry Potter

          Buffy (twice)

          The Doctor (sort off)

          Dionysus

          Osiris

          And many more….

        • Dang! I was about to jump on the Christian bandwagon but I see now that fiction has a lot more choices than just Christianity.

          🙁

        • rerics

          How about examples of resurrections that have been documented outside the bible? That you actually believe in? Didn’t think so.

          Honestly, If a Christian was being prosecuted in a court of law with evidence as weak as the “evidence” they spout from the bible to support their silly notions, how the worm would then turn.

        • 1. Yes, there are stories of Jesus raising the dead. Why imagine that that’s history?
          2. Do you assume stories are true until they’re proven wrong? Are you skeptical of claims from other religions, or do you accept them as easily as you’d have me accept those of Christianity?
          So God appears to me and what happens? I’m going to deny that he exists? I’m going to be mean to him? What?

        • natsera

          And Alice really, truly DID walk through the looking glass. What, you dispute me? It’s written down in the book, and therefore MUST be true!

        • Striving, thanks for reviving this thread. I love this. Can you please explain to me why science can be taught to adults but religion can only be taught to children please? If that’s not proof of brainwashing then I don’t know what is. You would have to argue that people get dumber as they get older wouldn’t you? It’s hard to fight logic, with hopes, dreams, and faith and no matter how many blue pills you scarf down, those of us who choose the red pill know MORE about REALITY than you. If someone asked you why you chose Christianity over any other religion you would reply to them by quoting the Bible, which again proves you don’t even understand the question, or can reason about it, much less understand your choice. I bet you choose your religion on the same day you chose your parents didn’t you. If you’re capable of believing things without evidence then doesn’t that mean you’ll believe pretty much anything that makes you feel good? anything that provides comfort about your mortality? Anything that gives you a sense of moral superiority? blue pills man. That’s all it is:
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_pill_and_blue_pill

        • I’ve written more about that child/adult distinction here. Agreed–that Christians admit themselves that Christianity must be taught to children shows that they understand the weakness in their worldview themselves.

        • Nice article Bob. I commented on it and shared it to my Facebook. BTW, didn’t realize until then that you were the author of some of these blogs. they need to put your Avatar at the top of the article. I’m gonna subscribe to all your posts, if i can see a way to do that. I’m now a fan. 🙂

        • Thanks for the feedback!

  • Barbara, you were brainwashed as a child like all the rest. If somebody tried to teach you all this stuff as an adult you’d never believe any of it for precisely the same reason you don’t believe in vampires and ghosts.

    • Kristin

      there are so many people who find God when they are adults, all ages. Its not brainwashing. Some people are raised in strict homes that are taught the Bible from childhood and don’t believe in God. Other are raised in broken homes and find God in later life.

      • Adults that find god later in life, always do it out of some sort of massive disaster or feeling of dissatisfaction which causes them to try to find meaning, or cope with problems. The God Delusion works well for that small fraction of people, in the same way the placebo effect works to cure pain. However, this should offer no evidence that God is real, but merely shows that ‘self brainwashing’ is still possible, and best termed ‘self delusion’. People do have the psychological need to feel there is a higher power, but that is an artifact of human brain function, and not evidence of an actual caring god. But yes Kristin, you’ve found “the exception that proves the rule”.

    • TheNuszAbides

      that’s generosity without any justification in Barbara’s provided sensibilities: she might be programmed so tightly that anyone who cooks up a King-James-esque scripture even in as half-assed a way as Joseph Smith did could get her to join The New Properly Holy And Correct Church of Christ Vampire. and you’ve heard of the Holy Ghost?

  • Steven John

    The sacrifice of Jesus was perhaps extremely successful. Human sacrifice replaced animal sacrifice. Jesus paved the way… the torment just gets longer, more complex and greater with each age. Like what you said about cancer. You did a fine job of dispelling the small talk and casual christian conversation. God is like an addict that continues to need more in every way. Like a psychopath trying desperately to feel something through the manipulation of others. It’s hard to understand or comprehend but that’s my best take on what he’s up to. I still love him. I think one day we’ll get it. And perhaps it will be by abandoning quaint ideas that don’t add up like the ones you outlined.

    • Steven: You are a Christian who loves God, but you compare God to a psychopath and an addict? That’s a curious theology!

      • Steven John

        That’s how the bible feels about him much of the time also. Ecclesiastes never left me since I was a child or the Psalms.

    • Steven, isn’t it more likely that Jesus survived the crucifixion than rose from the dead ? Back then even a lightning strike was considered a message from God himself, so a man “surviving” an execution would automatically be considered God, and then all the miracles stories would be written later “to correct the record”. bottom line, all religions are “merely guessing” about what ultimate truth is, and all have an equal amount of evidence which is equal to zero.

      • At least as likely IMO is that the Jesus story is just a legend. 40 years as oral history in a credulous pre-scientific culture, and we’re surprised that the tale picked up supernatural elements?

        • I agree, it’s just as likely that he never even existed. The best resource on this i’ve seen are the youtube videos about Jesus, which explain how his entire life and events shadow other historic records so closely that you have to conclude he WAS a myth. Not that I believe all videos, but the ones from the History channel, are more credible. Unfortunately if you tell a faithful person Jesus maybe never even existed at all they immediately cover their eyes with their hands and ignore the rest of what you have to say. You have to give them a little knowledge at a time or else it overloads their brainwashed minds.

        • I don’t find the “Jesus never existed” argument helpful. For guys with degrees like Bob Price and Richard Carrier, they can go there. I simply don’t understand their arguments well enough, and it wouldn’t help the big picture much even if I did.

    • Enjoy your Kool-Aid!

  • Christianity is the biggest load of BS that mankind has ever been saddled with. No thanks, for my part, I don’t want that crap in my life.

    • Kristin

      How was earth created? Where are you going when you die? Creation itself is evidence of God.

      • Doesn’t science nicely explain how the earth came to be? Supernatural explanations are unnecessary.

      • It’s hard to use reason with prople who have been programmed, but there is no “proof” of Creationism. Science relies on proof, religion (pick any one) abhors facts. there is no god; there never was; it’s just a legend.

  • death by crucifixion was only an ancient Roman punishment for the riots..

    Christianity made it sacred..

    • Kristin

      No, the reason “Christianity” made it sacred is because Jesus Christ died that terrible death even though he didn’t deserve any punishment because he lived a perfect and blameless life so that we could go to heaven if we accept his FREE gift.

      • I don’t think much of the death of Jesus. Was it any worse than the death I’m going to die? It certainly isn’t worse than the death suffered by millions of people.
        And that “gift” isn’t available to me. I’m obliged to believe something that I just can’t believe. From the Christian standpoint, I guess it sucks to be me.

      • Mike Lee

        Nothing is “FREE” when it’s given under duress. I have the threat of hell for not accepting it, so it’s hardly “FREE”. And keeping rules sacred that are purely subject to local laws and customs only shows god either has no standards, or one helluva jokester real estate agent.

        • The “gift” of the sacrifice of Jesus is no gift if I can’t take it. How can I believe in the unbelievable?

        • TheNuszAbides

          makes a lot more sense for confidence tricksters. “so you’re saying there’s this stuff i can repeat and emphasize that won’t actually affect my life one way or another beyond the time and energy it takes to repeat and emphasize these things in conversation, and those will make a whole lot of potential customers more inclined to trust me? sign me up!”

        • TheNuszAbides

          not to mention the shiver-inducing language overlaps/parallels between coupons, monetary debt, sins and souls…

    • TheNuszAbides

      no doubt, (as stupid as it was in the ’70s and ’80s and as bankrupt as the crediting or discrediting of an audience’s imagination or lack thereof) there are still theists unable to interpret Monty Python’s Life of Brian as not actually being about Jesus merely Because There’s Crucifixion In There And Making A Joke While There’s Crucifying On Screen Is Absolutely Making A Statement About [Our Best] Religion!

  • M.R.

    I’ll be praying for you sir.

    • That’s a thoughtful gesture, I guess. Instead, let me suggest that you critique your religious views to see if they’re reasonable.

      • Mike Lee

        Better to be prayed for than preyed on, I guess . . . which makes the confessional booth a bit of a multi-tasking device.

  • Sarah Eilerson

    Well, the fact that you find intellectualism insulting is rather the problem, isn’t it?

  • Duane, most religious people are insulted by anyone who dares to question them, or try to use logic and reason to come to conclusions about things. You already admitted you believe what you believe because of the way it makes you feel, and not because of evidence. So you basically gave up at that point and threw in the towel, knowing you have no grounds on which to make a case, other than a purely emotional one. That kind of emotional existence would just make you choose whatever religion you were first taught, and you’d be a Muslim if you were born in some other country, because you are unable to take the first step towards truth which requires the realization of the absoluteness of one’s own brainwashing.

  • Levi

    Atheist and religious people only know as much as they are not stiff in their minds. Both sides seek their own goals and intentions, that usually leads them in a continuous circle to nowhere. Even though I acquired the right answers, I don’t see any point in wasting my time here. Bye bye.

    • You’ve got all the answers and you’re not sharing? C’mon! Not fair!

    • Actually Scientists will change their views to fit what the current evidence shows. Like the discovery of evolution, or that mental illness is in the mind, and not caused by demons. Science has no attachment to “the old ways”, but religion is based on the “old texts” being totally unquestionable truth. Which one is brainwashing? Even a scientific idea that is wrong is valid, because it’s based on fact and reason rather than hopes and dreams.

      • The religious conclusion is worse than a guess because with a guess, you’re open to evidence showing you that you made the wrong choice.

    • Mike Lee

      More post-modern BS. They’d rather bang rocks together with Hanson, trying to state “NOBODY KNOWS, SO THERE Xb ttpppbbbbbbt!!”, because science hasn’t provided anything. Beyond the aqueducts. And vaccines. And . . .

  • Kristin

    God gave us free will. Giving us the choice to sin. if we didn’t have free will than we would be a bunch of robots, but God didn’t want that for us. He wanted us to make our own decisions. Do you really believe the evolved from Apes/Evolution nonsense? Proof of him is all around us Nature, life, all of those things went mistakes. I promise

    • Do I accept evolution? Of course. I’m not a biologist. Using what logic can a layman like me reject the consensus of a field of science?

      It’s not surprising that modern science explains nature far better than the blog of an Iron Age tribe 3000 years ago. I think I’ll stick with science.

    • And as for the free will point, I don’t see God as much of a champion of free will. He avoids impinging on the free will of the rapist, ignoring that the free will of the victim is being violated? How does that make sense?

  • LEA

    Dear Bob, I do not believe that you have a proper understanding of Jesus
    Christ as I can perceive from your essay regarding the cruxifiction of Jesus
    Christ. This may well be the reason for your continued attempts at debunking
    everything about Him. My advise to you is to do some more research so that you
    can bring an accurate argument and not one just thumb sucked and while you go
    about it also include the phenomenon of satanism. Specifically study the ideas
    around the values of “blood sacrifice”. I would like to hear what you
    come up with.

    1. The reason why Jesus’s death is so significant and incomparable to any other
    death is because he is the only human being who has been able to live a sinless
    life. He could only do so because he is God, even so he suffered as a human on
    the cross for no other reason than to shed his blood as the innocent Lamb of
    God as a sacrifice. This supreme blood sacrifice, voluntarily given, so that
    all other types of evil blood sacrifices including murder could be undone,
    forgiven, through the mysterious workings of the Holy Spirit. And surely, if
    you want to really know if Jesus is God, then you have to just ask him to
    reveal that to you, which he will do when you ask in sincerity. I understand
    him to be the manifestation of YHWH as symbolised in the Holy Bible, the right
    arm of God working salvation.

    2. Jesus will not allow a single human being to go to hell without giving that
    person every possible chance to recognise who He is while setting them free
    from darkness. We do have free will, the main reason why we are in the mess we
    are in. According to scripture, there will come a day when the line is drawn
    and there will be a separating of the sheep from the goats. This world is not
    going to continue forever in the depravity that it is in. It will all end.
    Which side will you be on? There is no middle ground. The agony he underwent is
    not what it is about at all. Rather it was ordained that he would die by this
    method long before it actually happened so that the curse of such death be
    broken. Hell is not there for humans but for demons. Humans who end up there
    are the ones who deny Jesus as their saviour not because Jesus requires such
    recognition but only because by the human excercising their free will and
    receiving Christ as their saviour can they be set free from the demonic bondage
    of hell. Basically it is a choice that you have to make. Do I choose Jesus or
    Lucifer? Once again there is no middle ground.

    3. This idea of yours is just not real at all. The Resurrection could only have
    occurred if Jesus had in fact died because the very definition of this
    resurrection is exactly about that. Resurrection from the death of the body.
    This miracle occurred so that we could see our true destiny. The Bible speaks
    about the sacrificial death of Jesus centuries before it happended and it is
    always about the fact that he died so that we could receive complete forgivenes
    for our sins simply by believing. The new testament reiterates this fact over
    and over. So why are you making this false statement about the scriptures? Have
    you not read them?

    4. I personally believe that the original sin occurred when the serpent,
    Lucifer, who presented himself, shape shifter that he is and a cold blooded
    reptilian (alien), communed with Eve and Adam. The original sin is sex but not
    between humans rather between human and non-human (demonic aliens, fallen
    angels). this is the forbidden fruit. This unholy union has impaired us
    genetically and spritually so that we are now all hybrids and misfits carrying
    the evil gene which now gives us the propensity to sin, even against our will
    and desire, and there is evidence of this inclination toward sin even in small
    children. This is why sin is often equated with the flesh in the Bible. In our
    original untainted state we know only love and we are innocent of evil. This is
    why the Bible tells us that we are born sinners. This is so whether you agree,
    like it or not, you are just farting in the wind when you try to absolve
    yourself from taking responsibility for your own condition because one thing
    you cannot deny is that you are part of the human race living on this earth
    right now. That is your position. The highest form of maturity would be for you
    to accept Jesus Christ and be born again, receiving a new body, just like the
    one Jesus showed us when he rose from the dead. This by faith, believing being
    the only work for you to do. Research the element of belief and its
    implications for humanity.

    5. This sin was not a mere lapse. God clearly explained to Adam and Eve the
    consequences of communing with the fallen angels and that it would bring death
    and every dark thing that death symbolises into their world. God told Adam who
    the enemy of his soul was so I am sure that he understood exactly what was
    potting. Eve was first tempted only because she represented a method for
    Lucifer to introduce his offspring into humanity, her having a womb. Adam was
    standing right next to her and when right all with it, and even participated in
    the unholy ritual. He did not stop it. The curse of this sin has always been
    generational merely because it is in our genetics, our DNA, and has given rise
    to all other sins. Now through Jesus Christ, and only through him, who
    represents the second Adam, we are set free from this generational curse, just
    like that, so easy, so simple. All you have to do is believe and you will be
    washed clean and covered by the blood of Jesus Christ.

    6. The fact remains that there is not one human being who has the purity that
    Christ Jesus has. He was able to walk on earth for 33 years without sinning
    even once. The only reason he was able to do so was by virtue of the fact that
    he was half God, the other half being human and therefore prone to the same
    inclinations and suffering as humanity is. He was sorely tempted. Could you
    imagine having so much divine power and yet still submitting to stupid men all
    around him just that he could remain obedient to his Father in heaven so that
    he could save them from their ignorance. Can you imagine what it must be like to
    know beforehand how, when and where you will die? A gross ignorant man may give
    his life instinctively, on the spur of the moment, to save another from
    physical death, but never with such conscious awareness before the fact like
    Jesus did. Surely with such fore knowledge any normal human being would in fear
    run away rather than face their death. If God did not come to earth in the form
    of Jesus then we would have no way out of our miserable depravity for we are
    unable to save ourselves. Only the blood of the lamb, since it is pure,
    transmuted by the power of God himself in Christ, is acceptable and none other,
    for the forgiveness and cleansing of sins. His death is exceptional in that he
    was in fact equal with God, being an integral part of the triune manifestation
    of God, and he agreed to come to earth and undergo the trial and sacrifice
    because God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that humanity
    may find true life in him. Can you imagine having to give up everything that
    Jesus was accustomed to in order to live a life on this planet among humans who
    cannot recognise him for who he really is?

    7. The nature of the sin in man is not a superficial thing that can be wiped
    out by a mere statement or intention of forgiveness by God since even those of
    us who receive Jesus Christ and are forgiven are unable to live completely
    sinless lives due to the propensity of our flesh to sin. There is the matter of
    choice, free will, and the continued onslaught of the demonic hatred for
    humanity upon us. There is more to forgiveness than just a mere blotting out of
    sin. There is the paradigm shift that is required and which is acquired only
    through the rebirth of baptism by the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ wherein we
    receive a new mind, a new body, a new heart, everything new. Only those who
    walk in this spirit will enter the Kingdom of Heaven since their very DNA is
    being altered to once more represent the pure strand that it once was before we
    willingly allowed demons to enter us. And unfortunately those humans who
    stubbornly refuse to receive this incredible free gift of renewal from God
    through Jesus Christ are going to die the second death of the soul since this
    is what they have chosen. Very sad thing.

    8. Jesus literally offers us life in all its fullness, destroying suffering and
    death; this is incomparable to anything else that could possibly ever matter to
    us as human beings. Fire is useless when you do not have life. As I pointed out
    before, what is important about Jesus is not the level of intensity of pain
    that he endured but the fulfillment of prophecy, and the meaning of his birth,
    life, death, resurrection and ascension. Prometheus’s fire cannot grant eternal
    life, free from sin and death, it can only warm our bones and cook our food.
    Then again there is another kind of fire that the fallen angels taught us
    about, a strange fire that God forbids because it is alien, belonging to the
    elemental world, the same fire that sorcerers use in their occult practise; a
    fire that is destructive for human beings. There is not another being, whether
    mythical or human or alien, that has impacted humanity with the incredible
    magnitude of transformation as Jesus Christ has, and he would do more, if only
    we would let him.

    9. The story of the prodigal son is not so much about forgiveness but about
    unconditional love, acceptance of those who have transgressed in life. Our God
    is a God of Hosts, he leads armies of angels. Why? Because humanity is
    embroiled in a war, and it is mainly a spritual war that is taking place. The
    treasure is the soul of humanity. I attempted to explain before why a
    “blood sacrifice” is required. The significance of blood will become
    clear to you when you realise that the law of cause and effect rules this
    world. This is the same law that causes the Tibetan Buddhists to believe in the
    endless wheel of rebirths. Jesus breaks demolishes this law utterly when he
    provides his blood to cover all causes and effects setting human beings
    completely and totally free of all cause and effect. This law requires that
    those who kill with the sword must die by the sword and so on. The original sin
    and all that has issued out of it is not just a matter of forgiveness because
    that alone changes little. God has been forgiving human beings even before
    Jesus Christ was crucified. The difference in the blood of Christ is that it
    sets us free of the consequences of sin and regenerates our beings literally.

    10. Frankly the logic that you use is not only repetitive but also that of a
    person fumbling around in the darkness, in great pain and anger. God created
    Adam and Eve and everything else perfect and if we do have a weakness, then it
    stems only from the free will we have to make our own choices. This was a risk
    God was willing to take. Adam and Eve chose to know evil and good. God did not
    make this choice for them. To use your own logic, you cannot have it both ways,
    you cannot choose death and expect to receive life. You cannot practise evil
    and expect to gain good. You cannot creat chaos and demand peace and harmony. The
    evil inherent in humanity comes the mutation of our genetic and spiritual
    structure due to communion and union with demonic fallen entities. These fallen
    entities were once angels created by God to serve us but refused. Even as they
    envied us they despised us because we are apparently a really special awesome
    creation. We may be deceived in our natural innocence, the very souce of our
    formidable strength but ultimately we will triumph. Those humans who do not
    make it into heaven are those who deliberately chose and communed with death
    and refused life repeatedly. Once again, God did not make this choice for them.
    In our present condition, we have no alternative but to trust God, that he is
    the ultimate sovereign and is not going to let anyone perish when they can be
    saved from eternal destruction. It is only in the authority and spirit of Jesus
    Christ that we will enter into our perfection once again as mature divine human
    beings able to use our power and authority against Lucifer and company and
    therefy take back our glorious inheritance that we gave away for a plate of
    food. Take a look at the parable of Jesus speaking of the farmer who planted
    good seed and an enemy came and planted weeds amongst the good seed. The reason
    why the story is left to unfold as it has instead of God stepping in and ending
    it all when Adam and Even made the fatal error is because he will harvest the
    good seed, the part of humanity that is not aligned or so destoryed by evil.
    Contrary to what you think, the majority of so-called humans that end up in
    hell with the demons are in fact no longer human since their souls have been
    wholly taken over and possessed by the non-human demonic beings who feed off
    their life soure. There will be a second death, the death of the soul, and without
    the soul the entity can no longer be called human. When Jesus died on the cross
    he entered this realm of Lucifer and he set the captives free and this is what
    he does all the time. Since you and I cannot change the course of history as it
    is we may feel resentful, even that this situation has been foisted on us, but
    take note, you have not option but to make the choice between Jesus and
    Lucifer, there is no middle ground. While you sputter around in arrogance and
    ignorance railing at the unfairness of it all, you will only be trying to put
    off the inevitable moment when the bell tolls and there is no room for choice
    between life or death anymore.

    God will not hold it against you for feeling the way you do but what he cannot
    accept is your denial of Jesus Christ since this is the only way he could
    redeem us from the curse of death, an offering he freely made, despite the
    cost, so that you, could choose to re-enter into the fullness of his presence
    once again in the magnificent perfection of who you really are.

    • My advise to you is to do some more research so that you
      can bring an accurate argument and not one just thumb sucked and while you go
      about it also include the phenomenon of satanism.

      And I advise you to stick with arguments. Did I make a mistake? Could be. Show it to me, and we’ll have something to talk about.

      he is the only human being who has been able to live a sinless life

      It’s a story, not history. Show me evidence otherwise.

      This supreme blood sacrifice, voluntarily given

      What does it say about God that he would demand such a thing?

      Jesus will not allow a single human being to go to hell without giving that
      person every possible chance to recognise

      I’m not sure he’s given me a chance. Sure doesn’t look like it.

      there will be a separating of the sheep from the goats.

      Yeah, and how does he separate the sheep from the goats? By good works, not by believing in the unbelievable.

      Which side will you be on? There is no middle ground.

      That’s what all religions say. Why is yours any different?

      I didn’t read beyond this point. Did I miss anything good?

      • busterggi

        You didn’t miss anything by stopping where you did, just a load of excessive words that boil down to “you’re going to Hell” as per the usual Christian .

        • Dang! Still?!

        • Lea

          Hi Busterggi, now, now, is that a falsehood you’re propagating? My excessive words cover something else too, don’t they, yet not one of you has actually taken a level-headed look at it and responded. I am wondering if this blog is just a vacuum of ignorance without intelligence. The very nature of the thesis that Bob wrote covers the topic of hell so why judge me when I answer along the same theme, even you too, Bob, the moderator? That is more than dumb.
          As I read some of the posts here, I get the sense that atheists think themselves superior somehow to the rest of us believers in Jesus Christ. You are already programmed from the time you are birthed into this world until now. You religiously believe what scientists tell you about evolution without even questioning the theories they provide. This alone attributes blind faith on your part. Do you not know that the Darwin’s theory has been discarded?
          The scientists have moved on now to such theories that humans are hybrids. In their limitations and unbelief in the holy scripture they think that we are a hybrid between a pig and a chimpanzee but they are getting closer to the truth since we are hybrids. A hybrid between human and non-human demonic fallen angels. Lucifer appeared as a serpent to Eve meaning that this is one of the hybridisations that have occurred, reptle and human.
          From science we know that we carry reptilian DNA and the pineal gland which is a very curious sort of component found in our brain. Every other part of our brain comes in pairs except this pineal gland, which is singular. This gland uses tryptophan to create serotonin and melatonin. Melatonin can only be produced when it is completely dark while we sleep. Interesting is it not?
          Sin is believing something has value when it does not. Alot of our science falls into that category simply because we spend vast amounts of money on activities that have no value for humanity while there are millions suffering in poverty on the planet. Right now they are creating laboratory mutations of the grossest kind. Instead of worrying about how cruel God is because he sent himself to die on the cross in the form of Jesus perhaps you should consider the depravity we are participating in by supporting such science. I can bet you right now they are trying to mate a chimpanzee and a pig to see if they are going to get a human being. And there is a lot more going on behind closed doors that is just so perverted it is unspeakable.
          So Busterggi, since you are a human being, like the rest of us I hope, you too are believing in your own particular brand of religion in which you are the god of your own life. Come to think of it, it is rather strange to find an aetheist blog on a faith/religious website.
          I said before there is no middle ground. You either are on Lucifer’s side or you are on Jesus’s side. Right now, with the denial of Christ and the ridicule and mockery expounded on this thread, you are not above it all but merely fall into the category of anti-christ, so you should call this blog something more like: Luciferianism. Even though you do not know it you are serving him.
          But I do not condemn you. You are only a lost sheep and Jesus will surely find you.

        • busterggi

          Another excessively wordy way to say, “you’re going to Hell” but you did demonstrate your total ignorance of biology so that’s a sliver of a plus.

        • You religiously believe what scientists tell you about evolution without even q uestioni ng the theories they provide. This alone attributes blind faith on your part.

          What is it about Christian extremists and evolution? I don’t accept evolution on faith but on trust. It may not hold up over time, but science has such an incredible track record for teaching us about reality (contrast that with religion!) that it deserves our trust. No, not faith, but trust based on evidence.

          Do you not know that the Darwin’s theory has been discarded?

          I do not. Show me that the scientific consensus has rejected evolution.

          The scientists have moved on now to such theories that humans are hybrids.

          You need to read a different kind of “science.”

          I can bet you right now they are trying to mate a chimpanzee and a pig to see if they are going to get a human being.

          Read a little science.

          And there is a lot more going on behind closed doors that is just so perverted it is unspeakable.

          But those doors aren’t closed to you, are they? We’re fortunate that you’re here to tell us the Truth®.

          You either are on Lucifer’s side or you are on Jesus’s side.

          You do know that there are other religions, right?

        • Lea

          I’m surprised, Bob, that you are unaware of the these scientific developments. Billions of dollars have been spent on trying to find the “missing link” and it has not been found, instead they found the Cambrian Explosion which dispels Darwin’s theory of evolution over exceedingly long periods of time.
          There is no scientific consensus yet because most scientists are reacting to the chimp+pig=human, and a quick evolution idea in much the same way as creationists do to evolution theory. This is somewhat of a recent development from what I can understand.
          The reason that you may object to the word “faith” is because you think it only carries religious connotations? Faith and trust are much of the same. You say you trust evidence. To believe in the system of dating things back to millions, billions of years, requires faith especially when the evidence shows that these tests give widely differing, conflicting results depending on the source. It is in fact a wild hypothesis and nothing more. According to the Bible, faith is believing in those things that are unseen.
          You have placed your trust in scientists, believing in whatever they say as gospel even though they are only limited human beings themselves. This is a form of religion.
          Science has given us many positives but there is a side to the science that I consider positively evil since it provides nothing good for humanity, and is highly destructive and perverted. Inhumane.
          Apparently they have already produced a cross between a pig and chimp. I don’t think it is a far-fetched supposition to think that these scientists are also doing genetic hybridisation/mutations on humans in their labs, behind closed doors.
          You make these short and clever quips that I don’t know how to respond to because they seem a bit inane, so I’m going to ignore them and focus on what I would like to think of as an intelligent discussion, unless of course, you would prefer to end the conversation.
          I have studied as many religions as I can find, even minorities such as the Yezidi and Druze. I find that the Bible is exceptional and distinctive, unique when compared to all other religious text or beliefs (some do not have scripture). All these religions, and some of them stating they are Christian based, are similar to each other, following the same theme, just changing the names of the deities (all different manifestation of Lucifer and company). All of them incorporate truths that are found in the Bible to a lesser or greater extent. Doctrine, therefore religion, comes from demonic sources and enslaves mankind. There is only one truth or it would no longer be the truth. Scientifically I would expound like this: 1+1=2 and there is no other right answer.

        • I’m surprised that you wallow in Creationist propaganda and think that you understand the field.

          You (not surprisingly) ignored my challenge. To your “Do you not know that the Darwin’s theory has been discarded?” I demanded to see that the scientific consensus has rejected evolution. I follow the scientific consensus on matters of science. I’m funny that way.

          Apparently they have already produced a cross between a pig and chimp.

          I have no idea what you’re referring to. Show me.

          You make these short and clever quips that I do n’t know how to respond to because they seem a bit inane, so I’m going to ignore them

          Don’t. When you give me a very lo-o-o-ong essay that ignores what I wrote last time, I don’t have time for you. If you think my responses are inane, either wrestle with that (and see that perhaps you’re missing something) or don’t expect me to reply. When you write something and I take the time to respond to it, I have no interest in your ignoring that and writing thousands of words on yet another topic.

      • lea

        Hi Bob, if you did some research into the significance of the “blood sacrifice” and delve into the way that satanists (other religions too, such as buddhism) use this and why it may shed some light onto your understanding.

        The facts are that the Bible was written to tell us about Jesus and the prophecy has come true, as has and is other prophecy regarding our world. The only role for prophecy is to give people like you proof, evidence, in order to believe in Christ. It is not difficult to find the plan of God. The whole of the Old Testament builds up to the life, death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ. Your idea that Jesus never died because he came back to life is more than illogical. Death is death. A dead person coming back to life is another thing. Jesus did not leave behind a physical body. Instead this physical body was glorified into a new body, to show us that we too will one day receive such a body. Why do we need a new body? Because the present body has been tampered with and mutated to such an extent, by Lucifer and company, with our help of course, that it must be discarded, regenerated, completey transformed. Only the Holy Spirit of Christ can do this and bring us back into our perfection where we once were without death.

        It is like unto the story in the Bible about the rich man, Lazarus and the beggar at his gate who died and went to heaven. Lazarus died and ended up in hell. He saw Abraham and the beggar from across the chasm and asked Abraham to send the beggar over to him with a wet finger to dry his thirst. He was told the chasm could not be crossed. Lazarus then asked Abraham to send the beggar to tell his brothers about what happens after death. Abraham said that if his brothers did not believe Moses and the prophets then they would not believe even if a person rose from the dead. And this is the exact scenario we have here. There evidence is there. Seek and you shall find. All these stories comprise the history of humanity. But most of all, when you open your heart to the possibility that Jesus is for real and you ask with sincerity for such a revelation, the knowledge of Jesus will occur inside you.

        Jesus being God himself, born diminished into a human body, is the only person to have lived a sinless life on this earth. He even said this himself, that he is without sin, when people were accusing him of all sorts of things. The fore shadow of the animal sacrifices demanded purity with no blemishes. All this is history, his story as you know. If he were not without sin then the resurrection and ascension would not have occurred. The stories about Jesus, are for instance, very different to those of Mohammed, who had sex with minors, who gave himself a higher status than his followers, who killed, raped and plundered. I am trying not to write a book because I notice that you do not have the ability to concentrate on lengthy dissertations.

        Jesus separates the sheep from the goats according to those who know his voice. The parody of this, which Lucifer has created through a myriad of different religions, with the help of man, teaching about Pan (in different forms) who plays the flute etc calling mankind unto himself. Currently the new age channelers are telling about the Ascended Master from the starship called Ashtar, called Nada which means sound. We can also see the development of technology that can programme us through radio frequency sound into nothing more than mindless robots. Nothing is attained by works but as it is said: our work is to believe in Jesus Christ, that’s all. Good works can flow out of this grand relationship but they cannot save you.
        And yes, Bob, I do believe that through this blogging that you do you will come to find the reality of Jesus Christ before you die. Maybe you once believed in God for something and he was silent and then you turned your back on him, deciding he does not exist. I’ve gone through this experience and it sure is hard to keep faith with a God who is so unfathomable. Who even seems to dissappoint us. Yet, there is no other God besides YHWH, all else is a counterfeit. Lucifer has known the plan of God for humanity all along and has been exceedingly busy planting all sorts of different versions of the truth and he is very serious about taking down humanity. There is only one truth. This is because when you add a sum there is only one correct answer. Science. And no, not all religions say that there is no middle ground and that you must choose either life or death. Many religions embrace the evil as good.
        The truth is not found in the religious dogma of the various religions. It is found only in Jesus Christ. Doctrine comes from demonic origin enslaving mankind. Jesus fulfilled the law of karma, cause and effect, and has given us access to complete freedom.
        Is it not the highest form of mercy for one man to die for the sake of many that they may find life? Is it not the greatest love of God for man to incarnate on earth in the form of Jesus Christ and to take on the whole of sin of humanity upon himself?
        I hope you get this far because I want to tell you that the best part of your life is on its way.

        • Hi Bob, if you did some research into the significance of the “blood sacrifice” and delve into the way that satanists (other religions too, such as buddhism) use this and why it may shed some light onto your understanding.

          I already understand, but thanks. Where I come from, if you’ve wronged someone, you can make it right by making amends and with an honest apology. But this God guy is so furious he needs to kill someone. For the imperfection in humans that he put there. The guy needs counseling.

          the prophecy has come true

          I’ve written and destroyed 3 prophecy claims in this blog (search and ye shall find). I’m unconvinced.

          Your idea that Jesus never died because he came back to life is more than illogical.

          (1) It’s a story, not history. (2) I know what dead is. A day and a half out of action isn’t “dead.”

          Death is death.

          Right, and that’s not what Jesus experienced in the story. So why get worked up about it? He had a bad weekend; he didn’t die.

          Jesus did not leave behind a physical body.

          You just believe everything you read, I’m guessing?

          the present body has bee n tamper ed with and mutated to such an extent, by Lucifer and company

          Don’t blame Lucifer when we come out of the box imperfect. Blame our Creator®.

          Lazarus died and ended up in hell.

          Infinite punishment for finite crime. Wow—that dude has no sense of justice.

          There evidence is there.

          It’s a story. It’s not evidence. Do you believe the Iliad was true? Gilgamesh? Beowulf? The story of Merlin?

          The stories about Jesus, are for instance, very different to those of Mohammed, who had sex with minors, who gave himself a higher status than his followers, who killed, raped and plundered.

          Jesus gave himself a higher status than his followers. As for genocide, support for slavery, and other barbarities, you can find that in Yahweh.

          I am trying not to write a book because I notice that you do not have the ability to concentrate on lengthy dissertations.

          Shorter comments would be helpful.

          Jesus separates the sheep from the goats according to those who know his voice.

          So replying to my point that the parable of the sheep and goats show that you get into heaven by works is difficult, so instead of admitting the problem you just ignore it?

          I do believe that t hrough t his blogging that you do you will come to find the reality of Jesus Christ before you die.

          You pretend that there’s Jesus and there’s atheism. Two choices. There are a lot of religions out there. Why elevate yours (I mean, besides the fact that you grew up in a Christian environment)?

          it sure is hard to keep faith with a God who is so unfathomable.

          I think you mean: It’s hard to keep faith with a God who acts just like a god who isn’t there.

          Yet, there is no other God besides YHWH

          An evidence-less faith statement. I have no use for such things, but thanks.

          Many religions embrace the evil as good.

          With all the disease and misery on the earth, how do you know the Creator was the good guy? Just as strong a case could be made that it was the bad guy and the “other” force is actually the good one.

        • Lea

          Who says we came out of the box imperfect? The Bible tells it differently. That perfect Adam and Eve, who represent humanity, communed with the serpent. They had been informed and warned but they were also free to choose. This led to the union between the non-human, foreign, demonic entities (fallen angels, nephilim) and the human. This resulted in our genetic mutation into a hybrid and as a result our bodies now carry the gene of evil and this can be verified through the scientific discovery of reptilian DNA in all humans. This is the root of corruption of our perfection and it is found to originate in the flesh body. We inherited from Lucifer and company the attraction for the bizarre, the perverted, the occult, the darkness etc. and we cannot save ourselves.

          Why hold it against God if he chooses to free mankind from this imperfect body and condition by sending himself to earth in the form of Jesus Christ to die on the cross, shedding his blood as a sacrifice, to cleanse us from all sin, giving us a chance to choose and enter into a life of perfection once again. I thought is was the cocky humans who killed him. To be sure, he knew that would happen, yet he wanted to do this for us. At least he didn’t send you or your son. According to the Bible, ultimately, sin requires blood to be cleansed away. Perhaps this has something to do with the power of the life force in blood. He vanquished sin and death through his own blood. Obviously the dynamic of the sin he was focused on required more than just an apology in order to bring about the salvation and transformation of humanity since it is inherent in our genes.

          Jesus did not give himself a higher status than his followers but served them. He did not partake in violence and then give himself 15% of all the booty his followers pillaged in crimes against humanity. Neither did he assign himself more wives while his followers could only have four. It’s time for humanity to grow up and stop blaming God for the things we do.

          * Yeah, and how does he separate the sheep from the goats? By good works, not by believing in the unbelievable.* You weren’t happy with my reply although I thought I covered the “good works” part as follows: Nothing is attained by works but as it is said: our work is to believe in Jesus Christ (God), that’s all. Good works can flow out of this grand relationship but they cannot save you. I now add: Without receiving the atonement of the blood of the lamb your good works are as filthy rags, meaning they cannot save you as you need to be born again (become a new person) in order to enter the Kingdom of Heaven which is inside you.
          I am sure you must have noted my statement before that there are only two choices. Lucifer or Jesus. Aetheism falls into the category of anti-christ as does any other belief that refuses to acknowledge God in the form of Jesus Christ.
          Bob, you know nothing about me except from what you can gather on this blog. I never grew up in a Christian home. Although I received Christ at the age of thirteen I went on to reject him repeatedly for many of the same reasons you do. I embraced all religions and believed that God is to be found there just in a
          different manifestation according to the culture etc. I dislike the concept of hell even now but it exists whether I like it or not.
          Through the study of religions and reading the Bible and also being open and receptive to the Holy Spirit I eventually realised that there is a huge difference between Jesus and other gods, one that cannot be reconciled. I was never able to not believe there was a God because I had the evidence inside me already which I could not deny. I have hated him and his creation for a time but I have never been able to believe he does not exist. Even now it is not easy for me to tell someone there is no other way but Jesus. In fact I avoid making this statement unless I have to. I do not consider myself religious and only go to church on the odd occassion. Today I embrace things that the majority of Christians consider taboo such as aliens, reincarnation (not like it has been given by Buddhists and Hindus) and other concepts that I believe have been shown to me by the Holy Spirit. So I don’t fit into mainstream Christianity but I am indeed part of the body of Christ.
          At present humanity is incapable of understanding the concept of God even adequately but we can relate to Jesus. What I have found from experience is that if in the times when you think God is silent, not there, and you are able to keep faith with him that he does always show up. He also at times does this when you are not keeping faith. You can’t put him in a box or expect him to demonstrate himself in the manner according to your demands.
          Disease and misery came about through the original sin. The injection of foreign/alien matter into humanity and creation is the cause of all evil and disease. The Bible informs us about a time when good is called evil and vice versa. This is just to confuse and deceive us so that we turn against Jesus and sink humanity into further depravity and darkness.

        • Who
          says we came out of the box imperfect?

          Are you perfect? Are you able to live a sinless life?

          No? Then I guess you say that we came out of the box imperfect.

        • Julean

          Humanity was created by God as perfect and powerful. All these abilities we hear about such as telepathy, teleportation, the power of the mind to move objects (mountains), change the weather, healing, etc etc belong to us as natural inborn characteristics. Our vibrational frequency is love. The Bible is like a story about God becoming a parent. God informed and warned his children that there was an enemy of their life. His children paid no heed, disobeyed and chose to believe the enemy rather than him and made a choice which changed the destiny of mankind. It was a mistake like the kind of mistake that happens which cannot be changed once its happened, like a drunken car driver who kills another due to his drunkeness. You can say you are sorry as many times as you like, the family of the deceased may even say they forgive the drunkard, but it makes no difference to the changed situation due to the mistake. Adam did not apologise but blamed God, he told God that it was because of the woman that he had given him. The woman did not apologise but blamed the serpent. Even so the damage had been already been done and the consequences had to be faced. In the case of Adam and Eve, what ever it is they did, caused death, and its retinue, to enter creation. God then killed an animal (innocent having done no wrong), the first blood sacrifice for sin, and used the skin to clothe the humans. Just so, the blood sacrifice of Jesus Christ covers the sin of all mankind. God did not demand the sacrifice but provided it. He provided the animal as a means to cover the nakedness of sin so that he and man could continue in a relationship, man was now sinful and God was holy and this difference caused a separation between them so that they could no longer communicate and ineteract as before. In the same way he provided himself as the ultimate blood sacrifice on the cross.
          If God is Designer of the Universe, the one behind Quantum Mechanics, do you think he could just change the rules without creating major disruption possibly even destroying creation completely? Just so, it is possible that he could not change the situation for Adam and Eve without destroying them in the process. For example, It is known that the alien implants that are found in some humans have ingrown to such an extent that they cannot be removed without killing the human.
          Furthermore, it is also likely, based on the attitude of Adam and Eve and their lack of remorse for their mistake, that they did not want God to interfere and change things for them. The humans, now fallen into error, failed to take responsibility for their condition or perhaps even to perceive that they were in error in the first place, maybe they even liked what they now were despite the shame and nakedness they experienced.
          So God clothed them and sent them out of the Garden of Eden to make sure that they could not access the Tree of Life because they, being very near to their original form, still possessed these “supernatural” powers and now this knowledge of evil as well – and they were sure going to abuse these abilities. Humans devolved as their lifespan decreased to under 100 years. Early humans lived very much longer. We lost the ability to use the fullness of our brain losing our natural powers and abilities since we now only use 10% of our brain. Personally I believe this is due to genetic interference by the serpent-god, Lucifer, who may well turn out to be one of those non-human aliens out there.
          You can say this is just a story but so are the ideas/theories put forward by scientists regarding the origin and evolution of mankind. They have proven nothing concrete to date despite the immense amount of time, energy and resources that has been ploughed into their endeavours, and their dating of the age of the earth is mere conjecture, a made up story. This desire to prove the Bible wrong and to prove that there is no Creator God, is only leading to deeper depths of perversion and darkness for humanity.
          Since I am unable to live a sinless life that I am wise enough to get with the programme of God and accept his gift of righteousness through Jesus Christ.

        • Kodie

          You can say this is just a story but so are the ideas/theories put
          forward by scientists regarding the origin and evolution of mankind.
          They have proven nothing concrete to date despite the immense amount of
          time, energy and resources that has been ploughed into their endeavours,
          and their dating of the age of the earth is mere conjecture, a made up
          story.

          You obviously know nothing about science except what you are told. I think it’s funny that you think science is “also” just a story, like, you admit what you believe is just a story, while you are talking like Cinderella is real, mice and birds can become people and pumpkins can become stagecoaches, and a prince can fall in love with someone in one night without her telling him her name, and he can find her because nobody in town wears the exact same shoe size, and they will be married even though he doesn’t know who she is, what she’s really like, and where she lives or who her family is. But it all works out so perfectly, so that is true too.

          Let’s start an archaeological dig to look for the glass slipper.

          By contrast, science is observed. It’s not based on personal feelings. Religion is based on assumptions and personal feelings and gullibility, especially upon suspicion of science and how scientists study their subjects. You want to bring science down to the level of your beliefs rather than bring your beliefs on the level of science – that’s a fine bit of propaganda. It’s because there is a barrier between religion and reality, you can’t quite make it. By misapprehending science you can pull it down to the fairy story level and spit on it, but that really just means you have no interest in leaving behind your delusions. It also means you agree your story sounds like bullshit to the outsider, while you go to great effort to try to make it sound academic, it sounds like a vivid hallucination and doesn’t resemble reality at all.

        • Julean

          Hi Kodie, didn’t see you post earlier. Thanks for the input and the compliment saying that my essays are academic sounding.
          Show me where I have misapprehended your doctrine. Science is not always observed. The evolution of mankind has not been observed. One of the biggest delusions foisted on humanity started with one of your great gods, Darwin. Scientists and their followers act just like religious bigots towards things they cannot find a material theory for. Aethiests are no more enlightened than the rest of religious humanity.
          I don’t think I made such admission – that my story sounds like bullshit. It’s not my story too. I was responding to a repeated statement that Bob makes whenever I give an answer to his above essay and so on. If I did come across like that then I want to make it clear that I absolutely and utterly and totally believe in Jesus Christ and the Holy Bible. Jesus is not a religion, he is God, and he is not in competition with science.

        • Kodie

          Thanks for the input and the compliment saying that my essays are academic sounding.

          That’s not what I said. I said you go to a lot of effort to try to make them sound academic, but they are basically just rambling hallucinations.

          Every time you compare science to your bullshit fairy story, you do try to bring science down to the incompetence of religious accounts and beliefs. It is as if you understand how made up and invented your religion is and you just want to say that science is random and made up too. You just said it again, then you say you don’t compare them.

          Scientists and their followers act just like religious bigots towards
          things they cannot find a material theory for. Aethiests are no more
          enlightened than the rest of religious humanity.

          Because there is nothing there. You are making many dumb assumptions about science because you are biased against learning. We know all about your beliefs and what they water down to. A heavy dose of confirmation bias, and a lot of other logical fallacies, especially the one where you assume there is a god. Science can’t find your god so you discredit science! That’s a heavy clue that you have never thought this all the way through.

          Also, it’s spelled ATHEIST. There is no such word as ‘aethiest’. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/an-

        • Julean

          This is what I am saying: You have no true basis for your beliefs other than what you accept as gospel from scientists. They tell you what to believe. And their theory of God not existing is so stupid because they simply cannot know for sure, yet they will go on to expound it as fact and deceive alot of people like you, just like with the far fetched idea that we come from apes etc. There is no evidence.
          We are all free to choose what we believe. Science has nothing better to offer when it comes to the “supernatural”, yet the unexplainable is happening all the time to people, casually and more often heatedly denounced. Science has the same characteristics as a religion, that is my point.
          Ah, ya, you right, I have been spelling it wrong all along. Thank you for pointing that out. Science is open to discredit because it makes such huge and unfounded assumptions.

        • You really need to tone it down a little, especially about the science. Maybe more “I’ve heard that” or “It seems to me” or things like this. Your knowledge about science is so poor that it doesn’t support your assertions, and you look more reasonable if you avoid speaking beyond your understanding.

        • Kodie

          What kind of unexplainable things happen all the time? I bet they all have explanations. You are describing science as a made up poppycock far fetched story that you find hard to believe – and you compare it to religion. See, you admit you are bringing science down to a level where your silly fairy tale can compete. But you don’t know what science even is, or how it works. You can’t raise religious nonsense up to the level of reality so you put science beside it and declare that science is the silly thing and your story is not. Are you listening to yourself?

          You are far removed from recognizing reality. You’re lying to yourself and me and everyone. Why can’t someone convince you that science reflects reality and you are hostile to it, biased by the tracts of bullshit that you consume to support your own brand of nonsense? Why do you think you can convince anyone that

          FUCKING angels and demons and invisible sky beings and blood sacrifice of a human being/not really a human being 2000 years ago somehow transforms your “soul” a thing that doesn’t exist in the body?

          Some kind of apes had sex and had baby apes and over time, over thousands of generations became upright and increased intelligence as it adapted them for survival, made tools, language, and feared spooky things they didn’t understand yet and called that god. Others were curious and asked about this “god” and they pulled stories about god out of their anus. Eventually, they learned more and more about their environment and eventually discovered where they actually came from was fucking apes, and you are just a credulous idiot ape.

          And we have mountains of evidence. You have been told we don’t have any, but that’s because the religious had to do something to keep you from finding out. You don’t investigate this shit on your own, because you already think you know everything.

        • Julean

          You are indoctrinated through your belief in the dogmas of the scientific education you have been exposed to which you accept without question. I am created in the image of God who is spirit and my permanent body is formless and cannot as yet be measured by the limited scope of science, as yet. I hope it will some day soon. There is NO EVIDENCE of our origin from apes or anything else. Since you don’t know this it means that you have not questioned anything that has been rammed down your throat as truth. You are believing a lie.

        • Kodie

          You are exceedingly ignorant about what science is, how people know it’s not just some hallucination, and what it accomplishes. Religion makes you say the stupidest assumptions about science and you sound like a true dope. You know why? It’s propaganda to make you suspicious about what you don’t know, call it names, and keep living in a dream world. How much money have you given them so far? Religions try and try to make up their own versions of “science” because gullible people like you don’t know the fucking difference.

          There is plenty of evidence that we came from apes. Why do you keep saying there is none? Where did you read about that? Question the people who tell you what to believe and what their motives might be.

        • If the only evidence for evolution was just our common ancestry with other great apes, we wouldn’t have evolution. Evolution is built on much, much more than that. (But why am I troubling you with this information? You don’t care. You whip up “science” as it suits you.)

          On the topic of evidence, you have evidence for your God hypothesis? Let’s see some.

        • Julean

          I do care. Evolution scientists are the ones whipping up a so-called pseudo-science which suits them not me. It doesn’t affect me because I am not programmed by their indoctrination and God can be seen in the unbelievable design of a flower, and human body, a child’s laugher, a smile, joy, love, peace. If I don’t take care now, I may just go on to write another essay.

        • Enough schoolyard retorts. Give me evidence, both that evolution is crap and that God exists.

          No one cares what you think about science. Show me the data, show me the experts.

        • TheNuszAbides

          the dogmas of the scientific education you have been exposed to which you accept without question

          of course you can presume no such thing about a stranger on the interwebs, but no doubt you consider this ‘fair turnabout’ when you see so many nonbelievers using similar language to describe so many believers.
          however, you lose any ground by being unable to back this up the way [many] nonbelievers can back up [various] statements about evidence, scientific method, etc.
          for example, what is your evidence that these “dogmas of the scientific education” are accepted “without question”? the main point (i dare say) of scientific method and record is that the evidence can be questioned, and replicated, and re-examined. the degree to which these exercises have been conducted (if in any way possible) with regard to, e.g., the inerrancy of a religious scripture (take your pick!) would be the leg you might think you have to stand on, if you could only articulate one or two of them … and then contrast them with a comparably weak case at the doorstep of science. i know this is a resurrected party, not holding my breath for your ever attempting to meet the challenge of course.

        • TheNuszAbides

          please read some Zoroastrian hymns and get back to us with a report on their relevance to the human condition.

      • TheNuszAbides

        I rather enjoyed the opening portion of the final paragraph/sentence:

        God will not hold it against you for feeling the way you do but what he cannotaccept is your denial of Jesus Christ since this …

        and alas, i too stopped reading.
        i.e. “it’s okay, there there, don’t feel bad UNLESS YOU PERSIST IN YOUR FOLLY OF COURSE …”

    • LEA, you wouldn’t need so many words if you had any actual evidence. Basically all you’ve done is write a dissertation of your own opinions interspersed with the biblical teachings that are already proven to be nothing but mythology. There is equal evidence for all religions, and it’s zero. Why don’t you just admit you made the arbitrary decision to choose Christianity, because you are a coward who is afraid to die, and can’t stand the thought of disappearing from existence when you die. Nothing happens when you die. You are weak. And you are a fool.

      • lea

        Hi Clay, thank you for your response. I wasn’t
        aware that the Bible had been proven to be Mythology. In fact, archeology
        appears to have substantiated the Biblical history to a great extent. I would
        think that there is enough evidence out there, should you wish to make a
        sincere investigation into the reality of the Bible. My belief in Jesus Christ
        has nothing to do with religion. Christianity is a label. Of course, other
        religions may feel the same way, the difference is to be shown in the impact
        that one’s beliefs have on one’s life and those around them. There are vast
        catalogues of testimony of people who have experienced the transformation in
        Christ Jesus. What more do you want?

        My dissertation was just an attempt to give the explanation, for the way of
        Christ Jesus and the meaning of his cruxifiction on the cross, in answer to
        Bob’s thesis. You have no proof that God does not exist, you do not know what
        happens to your soul when you die, you have no hard evidence for your beliefs,
        do you? And whatever you write is also just your opinion, one I am very
        interested in, even though I know very well that nothing except the power of
        the Holy Spirit can change your mind and heart.

        I always wonder at people who so easily discount other people’s experiences.
        Are they really seeking the truth about life and humanity or are they just the
        devil’s advocate? I should tell at the start that I take mythology literally
        which means that those incredible stories about gods and half-man, half-animal
        or half-reptile etc I consider to be mainly true. Why? Those stories are there
        because this is what humanity experienced at that time, and for no other
        reason. The Bible speaks of the Nephilim too, the fallen angels of God. The
        interbreeding of these fallen angels and humans is what constitutes the reason
        for the corruption of the perfection of humanity. The fall into sin.

        So if you are an aethiest then does this mean that you see no difference
        between good and evil? What do you base your morality on? Does everything and
        anything go? Or do you have an internal compass you follow? Do you have a
        conscience? Does anything you think and do matter?

        The mere fact that the vast majority of humanity throughout the ages have
        believed in a higher power and continues to do so should tell you something.
        Takes an open mind to consider that there may be some truth in what alot of
        other people are saying about the spriitual reality of life on earth. We call
        things myths and legends simply because they do not fit into our current worldview.

        Death (and dead bodies) and its inevitability appears to be a central focus for
        us. If it is true as you say that we disappear when we die, what is there to
        fear? Absolutely nothing. Makes life and death very easy, cut and dried. It may
        even give us a sense of freedom to do as we please without considering the
        effects to the causes we create – consequences. What a relief! Evil and
        sinfulness has no meaning, neither does love. There was a time I wished and
        wanted this to be so, I even disliked God for creating us in the first place
        because we are such a bunch of miserable losers. I have never been afraid to
        die, and in my darker moments, wished for that complete state of oblivion,
        non-existence that you speak about. In fact, why don’t we just all kill
        ourselves and put an end to the trauma of the human experience, since it all
        came about by pure chance and has no meaning at all. Is this what you believe?

        I have my own personal experience, as untold and told others have, and there is
        also a vast body of scientific work available to you, which has informed us
        that we are absolutely not our bodies. That our bodies are merely vehicles
        while we walk on earth. To choose to dismiss this available evidence is not
        clever.

        Perhaps you say to yourself, well, why have I not experienced this for myself.
        Maybe I am not chosen for heaven. I must be one of those who are depicted as
        going to hell because I have had no sign given to me. I must be bad because
        Jesus has not revealed himself to me. Something rises up, my inability to
        accept this situation, so I then decide and pronounce for myself that there is
        no Jesus and there is no heaven and hell, and I set myself free from the fear
        of life and death in this way. Pretty neat paradigm, isn’t it? Obviously one
        that may be working for you, but you are deceived.

        The vast majority of humans fear death, and even life itself. Many of them have
        been set free from fear through Christ Jesus. There seems to be this
        inclination in humanity to want to live forever. This desire is there because
        it is part of our human DNA, to be eternal. Thank you for calling me weak and a
        fool, for I am so, for Christ Jesus, who is the love of my life.

        • I’ve actually watched a lot of Sam Harris youtube videos (if not all of them), as well as Richard Dawkins, and Christopher Hitchens. I have never disagreed with a single word any of them have said. The best way for me to communicate to you all the problems with religion is to ask you to at least start with Sam Harris. He addresses point by point each of the things you mention.

        • Lea

          Hi Clay, I am going to do as you ask and watch what Sam Harris has to say. In the meantime, can I ask you to respond to the following please:

          So if you are an aethiest then does this mean that you see no difference
          between good and evil? What do you base your morality on? Does everything and
          anything go? Or do you have an internal compass you follow? Do you have a
          conscience? Does anything you think and do matter?
          I’m truly interested to know what you think.

        • I’ve written quite a bit about morality here. You can search for it of go here for one post.

          The primary thing to understand is that there’s a difference between “objective morality” or “absolute morality” and “morality.” Just because you don’t have objective morality or meaning doesn’t mean that those things don’t exist.

        • I believe all intelligent life on all planets will have a concept of good and evil, based on defining ‘good’ as anything that is helpful to the species. Morality is the desire to do good, and help your own kind. It is a form of ‘cooperation’ and is helpful to the survival of any organism. Humans have a very evolved empathy and we all understand the golden rule. (Sam Harris points this out). Even monkeys understand this, and even have an understanding of ‘fairness’ and basic morality. It’s all in the brain however. No supernatural being needed. All evidence shows that consciousness and all of thought happens in brain cells only. There is no need to suppose the existence of a god to further our understanding of minds. Anything man doesn’t understand he attributes to either magic or god…or at least we did before the so-called “enlightenment”. I’m open to the possibility that a god created Quantum Mechanics, but there’s no evidence that any of the actual established religions are anything other than mythology. If you can believe that a God can exist without a “first cause”, then you should also be able to wrap your mind around “Pantheism”. All agnostics or atheists would be fools to not admit that Pantheism is just as likely to be true as not. (see, I had time to type today!)

        • What makes obvious moral sense on earth might seem very strange on Vulcan or Romulus. Different environmental forces would create different moral programming.
          What is pantheism? That God = nature?

        • I think most lifeforms that evolve to reach intelligence have a concept of cooperation, and knowing what is best for the survival of the species. Those organisms that cooperate well will thrive as an evolutionary advantage, and out-survive those that don’t develop such cooperative desires. Once language developed, mankind had to create words/labels for it, which became “good”, “bad”, “moral”, “immoral”. Monkeys get it too, but they don’t have labels for it because obviously they don’t have language. There are exceptions to this, like human sacrifice, etc, which happened in ancient times out of religious fervour, mysticism, and fear of the unknown or imagined supernatural forces…and there would be similar “immoral” events on Vulcan and Romulus also. Vulcans and Romulans would definitely have a concept of self-preservation, cooperation, and a word for “good” and “bad”. But yes, if their religion called for sacrificing one of their own species, they would “do it” and they would call it “good” I guess. I think religion would evolve in all intelligent life also, as a way to explain things, and ultimately as science develops, contradictions arise, so the religion v.s. science debate will be happening on billions of planets right this minute!

          On Pantheism, it fits an idea I had long before knowing the word “pantheism”, which is that the entire universe may exist in the mind of God, and so we are all him, and he is us. It solves the contradiction of: “If God exists then did he create the universe, or is he PART OF the universe.” And it eliminates the “first cause” paradox. And it leaves open the possibility that God is not necessarily “conscious”,but merely “executing the rules” of Quantum Mechanics, like a machine.

        • Maybe. But then again, we only have one organism to study, and we don’t even understand that one thoroughly.

          Bears are solitary, and wolves are social. Different strokes for different folks?

          Romulans (as I understand them, poorly) are pretty savage. Their morality would be quite foreign to us. That seems plausible to me.

          Your point, presumably, is that this is just Hollywood and that cooperation would be essential to intelligent life forms. Sure, maybe, but who can say for sure?

          I understood pantheism as God = nature, but what does this explain? We understand nature, so let’s avoid applying a freighted name as a synonym.

        • To me, saying all intelligent forms have a concept of good and evil, is as obvious as saying most creatures that don’t live in a liquid walk on legs. Even though we only know of life on this planet there are solid and reasonable extrapolations that can be made, IMO, regarding other life in the universe. And that extends to morality I believe. Just like math would be known, the number PI would be known. Certain truths are going to be universal about how brains work. Even brains, themselves, will all have similar structure. Networks of communicating cells driving motor cells of some kind for motion.

          You are right about the word “God” being a loaded term! People automatically think “biblical god” if they read the word God in some text. Mankind needs a better word to represent whatever it was that created Quantum Mechanics whenever speculating about perhaps QM not being its own “first cause”. QM is definitely a set of “rules” about how things are allowed to behave, and it created one hell of an interesting universe. I’m fine with people believing something probably created those rules other than a simple anthropic principle and multiverse cop out. What irks the hell outta me is people who are so brainwashed and scientifically illiterate that they accept the mythological writings from thousands of years ago as truth…hiding behind the fact that “you can’t prove a negative” as their shield from having to think logically.

        • I agree: intelligent beings have morality as a category of thought. What I’m not sure about is how closely their morality would resemble ours. If humans are social animals like wolves, why couldn’t there be nonsocial animals like bears that are intelligent?

          I agree with you that, from our very limited viewpoint, cooperation seems to be a key point to civilization. Maybe I’m coming at this from too sci-fi a standpoint, but intelligent beings that we’d consider impossibly savage seem plausible.

          And what’s the deal with God named “God”? It’s like a cat named “Cat.” What’s wrong with Yahweh?

          hiding behind the fact that “you can’t prove a negat ive” as their shield from having to think logically.

          I’m amazed when I hear this, not from lay Christians, but from professional apologists. Their arguments are a thinly veiled “OK, let me show you how to reinterpret the facts so that my Christian presupposition remains in the running.” Nowhere do they take the correct approach, which is to find the best interpretation of the facts.

          I want to avoid being closed minded, thinking that no apologists have anything interesting to say, but I’m getting there!

        • Julean

          Human sacrifice originates from the antediluvian period when humanity was under the tyrannical rule of the fallen demonic angels and their offspring who ate humans and fed off their blood (life force). Even today Lucifer requires the blood of humans in order to manifest himself physically to his followers.
          I agree that God is the Quantum Mechanics and we are all a part of him, everything is, but he is also a separate and supreme entity at the same time. God is without cause and effect which is a law that applies only to our dimension just like time.

        • Uh … the point here is that Yahweh demands a blood sacrifice. So does that make demanding a blood sacrifice a good thing or a bad thing?

          No quantum mechanics, please, until you can show us that in the Bible.

        • Julean

          I wrote on the first point you made here quite extensively down below on another post with regard to “demanding a blood sacrifice”. The blood sacrifice of animals as shown to us by God was a method used by the priests of that time to prepare themselves to enter into the presence of God since only the sprinkling of blood cleansed or covered the sin, otherwise they would have been destroyed by his holiness. It also acted as a means of cleansing the sinful consciousness/conscience of the people because guilt and shame drag the human spirit into despair. The most important teaching to take from the old testament sacrifice system is that of the foreshadowing of the event of Jesus Christ on the cross, God the ultimate sacrifice.

          It wasn’t an ideal measure and YHWH does make it clear on a number of occassions that he doesn’t like the issue and that it cannot absolve us of the sin that is in us entirely and so had to be repeated over and over again. And the way human beings managed to pervert this method also upset him.

          “For You do not desire sacrifice, or else I would give it; You do not delight in burnt offering.” Psalm 51:16

          “To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices to me?” Says the Lord. “I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams and the fat of fed cattle. I do not delight in the blood of bulls, or of lambs or goats.” Isaiah 1:11

          “For I desire mercy and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.” Hosea 6:6 (quoted by Jesus in Matthew 9:13, 12:7)
          From this I understand that the blood sacrifice was more for the people than for God, although God does want to remain in relationship with us and will do what it takes to keep in touch with his children. I am also certain that if there was another better way he would have taken it.

        • Kodie

          The blood sacrifice of animals as shown to us by God was a method used
          by the priests of that time to prepare themselves to enter into the
          presence of God since only the sprinkling of blood cleansed or covered
          the sin, otherwise they would have been destroyed by his holiness. It
          also acted as a means of cleansing the sinful consciousness/conscience
          of the people because guilt and shame drag the human spirit into
          despair.

          You mean it was a superstitious ritual that doesn’t cleanse anything.

        • Julean

          It was an imperfect, the perfect sacrifice was God himself.

        • Kodie

          You keep talking about god like he’s real.

        • Julean

          He is the only thing that is real.

        • Kodie

          You must have a different definition of ‘real’ than most people do.

        • Julean

          I suppose I do. The most important answers may never arrive through science although I keep hoping that it will bring something better than it has until now, especially since the advent of quantum physics which is taking scientists more and more into the esoteric realms.

        • busterggi

          So since god was the perfect sacrifice and redeemed us all then I guess we don’t have to worry about being sinners anymore – perfect, right?

        • We didn’t do anything to be tainted by original sin, so we shouldn’t need to do anything to be purged of that sin.

          Sweet! See you in heaven.

        • busterggi

          Not unless the Marx brothers are there. Harpo is the only harpist I listen to.

        • Julean

          Unfortunately we inherited the sin genetically and sprititually which means we are born that way and then we go on also to commit our own brand of errors. Sounds good, I would love to see you in heaven!

        • Julean

          Perfection comes later, now begins the transformation.

        • busterggi

          Now begins????
          What’s god the daddy waiting for, he supposedly killed his kid 2000 years ago and he still hasn’t even started the next part of his plan?

        • Julean

          I think the entry above is the best response I’ve made regarding your thesis on the crucifiction of Jesus. What do you have to say about it, Bob?

        • Did you respond point by point to my argument in the post? If not, then there’s not much to talk about. Your theology is off topic.

        • Julean

          In him we live and breath move and have our being.

        • Julean

          If good is based on the instinct for survival then it must also justify any act required in defence or progress of such organism even if it creates injustice towards other organisms, species, tribes, religions. So it is innately self pre-occupied?
          Evidence does not show that consciousness and thought originates in the brain. Consciousness and thought continues to exist when separated from the body. The human being remains intact as an individual entity and retains their unique identity once separated from the body. There is more than enough evidence for this.
          God is a paradox. God is the matrix field of the universe, therefore to be found in nature and everything else, and at the same time God (YHWH) manifests as a individual entity who is capable of having a personal relationship with every single living being.
          I believe that mythology contains vast amounts of truth. Closer to the time of our creation the so-called supernatural obviously was a norm allowing for the incredible stories we read about. Uranus (sky god) had sex with Gaia (human female) and the Titans were born. A terrible spawn and the ensuing saga of humanity eventually wiped out by the flood. These stories are there only because that is what humanity experienced. It is part of our history.
          Religion and sorcery is a manifestation of these interactions with the supernatural/unseen/spiritual world and is itself evidence of such.

        • Lea, what is the evidence that consciousness exists outside of the brain? I will accept any repeatable experiment, which is the foundation of science. If you cannot name a repeatable experiment then all you have is a “story”. Do you believe in ghosts just because there are so many ghost stories that they must therefore all be based in truth?

        • Julean

          Clay, I will respond as soon as I find the time. I am not ignoring you or Bob. How many times does a man have to die and return to life before you will believe you are not your body? There are earthbound spirits and demons running around all around you.

        • Lea, your arguments are all circular anyhow. You use the Bible itself as a justification for why you believe in the Bible. I don’t think you are capable of having a discussion, because you are so full of platitudes and unfounded beliefs.

        • Julean

          The foundation of my faith is in only one, a holy, divine person called Jesus Christ. The Bible is his book and is useful, perhaps even vital, while alive on earth. I challenge you to read it and experience the living words of God but if you do it may just save you should you be one of those unfortunate souls that land up in hell when they die. Then you won’t think that its all platitudes and unfounded. That is when reality will hit you really hard.

        • The average atheist understand Christianity better than the average Christian. Most atheists you’ll encounter here are quite familiar with the Bible.

          But why the Bible? Why don’t you recommend that we read the Koran? Or the Tao Te Ching? Or maybe recommend that we study all religions before we settle down with one?

          You pretend that the choices are just Christianity (by that, I mean your version of Christianity) and atheism. They’re not.

        • Julean

          You reckon? I have taken notice that you in particular do know some of the scriptures as you have quoted them although you cannot claim to really understand it, could you, based on the erroneous claims you make in the original argument regarding the title of this page.
          The one truth turns out to be exquisitely simple and deeply profound. Jesus Christ is the difference. There is more and I am going to give it to you but I have to get some sleep too. I do recommend that all religions be studied, it was only when I looked deeper into these things that I understood more about who Jesus is and what makes him so different.
          And really, Bob, stay away from legalistic religion. Dogma is rooted in the demonic and enslvaes. Choose the true freedom that can only be found in Christ Jesus and you won’t go wrong.
          I think I answered this elswhere. Don’t accept any other person’s version of Christianity. Let it be a relationship between you and your invisible friend. The choice is only between Jesus and Lucifer, in other words, Life or death (hell?)

        • Respond to the points I made. And then we can move on to other stuff. I’m getting tired of beating down a flawed point, only to have you repeat your point or move on to another one.

        • Lea if you can explain why you chose your religion over all the other religions then that would prove that you are not brainwashed. However i think if somebody asked you to compare Christianity with other religions you’d be at a loss and only be able to quote biblical scripture because that’s all there is in your brain.

        • Julean

          I am never at a loss to tell you why I know that Jesus Christ is the way.

        • BTW Lea, sorry for the personal insults. I usually don’t do that, and you proved yourself of good character by not replying in kind.

        • Julean

          Thank you for the apology, Clay.

        • (I think I’m responding to your note to Clay and not mine. Oh, well.)

          (Are you using a PC? If you compose your reply and then paste it into Notepad, then copy and paste that into Disqus, things look better. I’m just guessing, but perhaps that’s why you have the line breaks.)

          archeology
          appears to have substantiated the Biblical history to a great extent.

          Has it proven any miracles? That’s all that’s interesting. Saying, “Well, the Bible says that there was a city named X and, sure enough, we’ve found the evidence!” is negligible.

          What I’d like to see is archeological evidence for the Exodus. Where are the 2 million bodies in the Sinai?

          should you wish to make a
          sincere investigation into the reality of the Bible.

          Have you made a sincere investigation into the reality of any other religious book? Or did you stick to the one that was popular in your part of the world?

          You have no proof that God does not exist

          Is that necessary before you conclude that there is insufficient evidence to believe in God?

          nothing except the power of
          the Holy Spirit can change your mind and heart.

          So then it’s the Holy Spirit’s fault that I’m going to hell? (I’m taking him off my Christmas card list.)

          I always wonder at people who so easily discount other people’s experiences.

          Because they provide no evidence to you. There are plausible natural explanations for them.

          Those stories are there
          because this is what humanity experienced at that time, and for no other
          reason.

          Primitive man couldn’t have been confused?

          So if you are an aethiest then does this mean that you see no difference
          between good and evil?

          Look up those words. There is no supernatural backing to them in the dictionary.

          The mere fact that the vast majority of humanity throughout the ages have
          believed in a higher power and continues to do so should tell you something.

          Guess what it is!

          We call
          things myths and legends simply because they do not fit into our current worldview.

          By “current worldview,” do you mean “science”?

          Evil and
          sinfulness has no meaning, neither does love.

          True about sinfulness, but you need to check the dictionary about the other two. Again, nothing supernatural.

          why don’ t we just all kill
          ourselves and put an end to the trauma of the human experience, since it all
          came about by pure chance and has no meaning at all.

          You’re a smart guy. You want meaning in your life? Assign yourself some.

          vast body of scientific work available to you, which has informed us
          that we are absolutely not our bodies

          I’ve seen none of it. Speculations that use words like “quantum” and “vibrations,” sure, but this isn’t scientific consensus.

        • Lea

          Hi Bob, thank you for the input about the line breaks etc. I am brand new to blogging, this is my first landing. I am going to try and give you some good examples to consider, even though it is highly likely that you will reject them, but I hope that it will give food for thought. Near death and out of body experiences are a pretty good indication of what occurs after death, I think. I do believe the Bible. I take it literally. I found this link:

          http://www.near-death.com/experiences/atheists01.html
          I’ll get back to you on the rest later.

        • This commenting system (Disqus) has some quirks, and that line break thing is one of them. That one must be blamed on Disqus.

          Why are the natural explanations for NDEs insufficient? I realize that science has yet more to learn, but what evidence is there to suppose that there really is something supernatural going on?

        • Lea

          Bob, tell me honestly, did you read all the information provided on that link? These are full blown aethiests like yourself who are providing these stories. Frankly, the natural explanations seem to be a little desperate to me and they are only suppositions too.

          These people who experienced NDE and OBE did not believe in God and believed that when they died they would no longer exist, but found a very different outcome. The Bible tells us that there is more unseen than what can be seen.

          You could wait until science verifies the phenomenon or you could in the meantime be open to the knowledge that there is a Supreme Being, the one we call YHWH, even if you find you cannot accept Jesus. It appears to me that it
          is not the absolute requirement to be “born again”, receive Christ by the Holy Spirit, while on earth in order to go to heaven when you die. There are chances to choose God, even after death but you might save yourself from some really horrible experiences because hell is indeed real, by simply recognising that there is this possibility that Jesus is real and of course, be the love that you are while you live.

          You cannot blame the Holy Spirit for not contacting you when you have the door firmly closed, locked and bolted, to his entrance. Furthermore, the Holy Spirit works to reveal Jesus Christ to you, so you are the one who has chosen to take the attitude that you have towards Jesus despite the knowledge that you have.
          You cannot put the blame anywhere else. Knock and the door will be opened.

        • Scanned it; didn’t read it.

          Frankly, the natural explanations seem to be a little desperate to me and they are only suppositions too.

          And you’re a neuroscientist, so you can evaluate “desperate”?

          When there’s a scientific consensus of the afterlife through NDEs, I’m there. Until that point, I wonder why Christians don’t try to get their supernatural claims validated by scientists. Every such attempt that I’m aware of has failed.

          You could wait until science verifies the phenomenon

          Science today gives us every reason to reject the supernatural. I’ve written on that here, and especially here.

          or you could in the meantime be open to the knowledge that there is a Supreme Being

          Why?? Why your guy instead of a hundred others? Just because you like him? You’ve made no attempt to show that the Christian god is any less make believe than any of the others.

          Consider also that Pascal’s Wager goes both ways.

          You cannot blame the Holy Spirit for not contacting you when you have the door firmly closed, locked and bolted

          And how do we distinguish this situation from the Holy Spirit® being make believe?

        • Lea, you are just quoting things you have heard other Christians say. It’s all just platitudes and fluff. Each religion has its own unique set of such platitudes, and they are all meaningless to someone who is not sufficiently brainwashed to buy into them. There is a reason people raised atheist stay atheist, and people raised with religion cling to it for dear life. It has to do with not being able to admit you are wrong, and also being flat out brainwashed. I’m sure you disagree that you are brainwashed. Part of being brainwashed is that you don’t KNOW you are.

        • Julean

          An aethist is as brainwashed as any other, perhaps even more so because must take a exceptionally rigid mind to consistently deny the spiritual, that which cannot be measured or evidenced, the supernatural. It takes the most incredible gullibility to believe that our ancestors are apes and pigs or we evolved from rock and chance over billions and billions of years just because some human scientists said so (gods?) especially when they can’t even prove it. And it is untrue also that aethiests remain aethiests and those raised in a religion remain in that religion. Admitting you are wrong goes both ways. I am certain that I am not yet completely free from all programming because it runs deep and comes at you constantly but yes I do consider myself free from the dogma and doctrine of science and religion, merely because I ask God to help me discern stuff, so I don’t rely entirely on my own thinking. If you think that everything I am saying here is what I have heard from other christians then I have to say that you obviously don’t know much about christians.
          If I tell another christian that I think the original sin is intercourse between humans and demonic/reptilian entities and that we are hybrids, and that the UFO/ET phenonmenon is a physical manifestation of these foreign entities, they would burn me at the stake for heresy. No, I am only joking. Most Christians today are very open minded and loving, they just look at me as if I am mad and shake their head, but still accept me for who I am.

        • Kodie

          It takes the most incredible gullibility to believe that our ancestors
          are apes and pigs or we evolved from rock and chance over billions and
          billions of years just because some human scientists said so (gods?)
          especially when they can’t even prove it.

          Wow, you are still really programmed.

        • Julean

          No, you are.

        • Julean

          My dear Kodie, until you can admit that the theory of evolution is a brankrupt and corrupted implausible science fiction shoved down our throats by human beings who wanted to use the idea to destroy God, you will be under a delusion. It really doesn’t take rocket science to figure this one out.

        • Kodie

          merely because I ask God to help me discern stuff, so I don’t rely
          entirely on my own thinking. If you think that everything I am saying
          here is what I have heard from other christians then I have to say that
          you obviously don’t know much about christians.

          You ask yourself ‘what do I think’ and then you tell yourself what you want to believe. That’s the voice of god – you.

          The second part of this makes zero sense. Every Christian through here, just about, says what you say, and they all think we’re not aware of all this fascinating bullshit. Maybe we don’t know every christian, but we know all their regular arguments, their favorite “silver bullet” arguments.
          You are not new.

        • Julean

          How do you know how it works when hearing the voice of God, have you experienced this? I’m glad to hear that other christians have said the same thing. We have a rock of consensus amongst christians to say the least, one that isn’t ever changing or forced to fit in when “evidence” comes along that refutes their prior theories like constant shifting sand.

        • “A rock of consensus”?? Seriously? America is a Petri dish of Christianity. Look at the sects that we’ve invented in the last couple hundred years: Mormonism, the Holiness Movement, Salvation Army, Christian Science, Jehovah’s Witnesses, 7th Day Adventist, plus uncountably many sects.

        • Julean

          Very true, some of us missing the focal point entirely which is Jesus Christ. There is a very strong unbreakable consensus though amongst most, even those who differ on trivialities, going on what you (or who?) say regarding other Christians having been here and saying the same thing. Unlike the science under discussion here, where the gods of your religion make up a theory and then go on to present false evidence, breaking all the scientific rules of emperical science to make the so-called discoveries fit the false theory, all because they hate God and Christians.

        • You don’t like science, do you? Kind of odd since you might be dead now if it weren’t for modern science.

          Oh well. Lots of people are ungrateful, I suppose. But I’m tired of the unsubstantiated claims. Show me the false evidence and show me that it’s driven by a hatred of Yahweh.

        • Julean

          There is alot about science that is absolutely wonderfully amazing, astounding and does advance humanity. I like the science that is without perversion, corruption.
          Do I have to go and do the research for you? I am sure you have access to the same avenues that I have to find the information you are demanding. But just one simple factor to put forth at this point is the idea of the chemical soup and the impossibility of this being able to transform into life as we know by random chance in accordance with established principles of science. Another easy one is the fossil trail which is turned out very dissappointing for the evolutionists.
          Evolution is like shooting out into space a large scrapyard and expecting a boeing to come out. Or take a frog and put it in a blender then let it stand until a frog jumps out.
          There, another shortish post. But I may come back with a vengeance armed with that evidence you want.

        • I like the science that is without perversion, corruption.

          And it must be marvelous to be the only person who’s able to sift through the science and figure out the perverse science from the good science. Wow.

          Do I have to go and do the research for you?

          I understand the research, thank you. I’m pretty sure, based on your unevidenced claims, that you don’t. Yes, you do have to do the hard work of understanding the issues before you make claims. (Saves you from embarrassment.)

          I could respond to your points, but there’s no point. You don’t care what I say, and you don’t care what science says. What sites do you use, BTW?

          Evolution is like shooting out into space a large scrapyard and expecting a boeing to come out. Or take a frog and put it in a blender then let it stand until a frog jumps out.

          That you don’t understand how these are incorrect analogies shows how little you know about the topic at hand.

          But I may come back with a vengeance armed with that evidence you want.

          I’m quite certain you won’t.

        • Lea, admitting that you “hear voices” isn’t helping your case much. You’ve already proven yourself to be scientifically illiterate… You’re just making a bigger fool of yourself each time you reply.

        • An aethist is as brainwashed as any other, perhaps even more so because must take a exceptionally rigid mind to consistently deny the spiritual, that which cannot be measured or evidenced, the supernatural.

          You got it all figured out, huh? The best explanation for the paltry evidence for the supernatural is that it’s hidden, not that it’s nonexistent.

          It takes the most incredible gullibility to believe that our ancestors are apes and pigs

          Golly, you must be smart. I look at any profession of which I’m not a part and figure that I don’t really have the qualifications to evaluate and pass judgment on them. But not you.

          That kinda power can go to your head—watch out.

          especially when they can’t even prove it

          You need to learn at least a little about science, otherwise you look like a buffoon. Here, for example: science never proves anything. Ever. All the marvelous stuff we know from science isn’t proven and it’s always provisional.

          I ask God to help me discern stuff, so I don’t rely entirely on my own thinking

          Or, you just relabel your own thinking as having come from God. Nice! Any conclusions that I come to are just the result of a fallible person, but you can point to the Big G as the source of your wisdom. How can I compete against that??

          If I tell another christian that I think the original sin is intercourse between humans and demonic/reptilian entities and that we are hybrids, and that the UFO/ET phenonmenon is a physical manifestation of these foreign entities, they would burn me at the stake for heresy.

          Gee … “other Christians” are starting to sound a little better.

        • Julean

          Ddi I say science never proves anything? Well, that’s wrong, what I meant to say is that science has not proven that we come from apes or that creation has evolved from a rock and some moisture and chance etc. Takes more faith to believe in this possiblity that in a Creator God.
          I really must apologise also if it comes across like I know it all because I am fully aware that these things we are discussing cannot be proven through emperical science. So I thought we were just sharing points of view. Debating. I am open to God’s revelation and I may not always get it right because I am not perfect yet.
          You would come across a little smarter if you actually debated the issues at hand instead of trying so hard to dis me all the time. Your responses in the entry is what I find inane. I expect more from someone who knows more than me about science.

        • what I meant to say is that science has not proven that we come from apes or that creation has evolved from a rock and some moisture and chance etc.

          You step back from an error (good for you) and then you repeat it? Not good.

          Science doesn’t prove stuff, but we know the conclusions of evolution as well as we know any scientific theory. It’s been tested for 150 years and it keeps holding up.

          Takes more faith to believe in this possiblity that in a Creator God.

          Cute line, but idiotic approach to science.

          I really must apologise also if it comes across like I know it all because I am fully aware that these things we are discussing cannot be proven through emperical science.

          You can’t prove anything with science! Yes, you do indeed sound like a Know It All. There is a scientific consensus and you, a non-scientist, reject it. On what grounds could you possibly do so?!

          You would come across a little smarter if you actually debated the issues at hand

          I love debating the issues at hand. Are you saying that I’m not holding up my end of this discussion? If I recall, I’ve given you very long and detailed responses to your comments.

          I expect more from someone who knows more than me about science.

          And what is that “more”? If your point is that I’m foolish for rejecting the obvious truth of God’s Creation, then we pretty far apart here and I can’t imagine I’ll ever please you.

        • Julean

          Scientists in the field of the origin and evolution of man and creation DO NOT HAVE EVIDENCE to substantiate the imaginative conclusions/theories that they expound as fact and have forced onto mankind, The hypotheses have not been substantiated but comprise of wild speculation, fraud and lies in an effort to conjure up “evidence”, that have regularly been exposed. This is akin to the same kind of thing that the Roman Catholic church did to humanity not so long ago in its quest for dominance, power and money in the world.

          Brainwashing is a method of controlled systematic indoctrination, especially one based on repetition or confusion.

          You have been brainwashed by your education to dogmatically believe in a lie and you do so without question. To question it would be sacriligeous?

          The indoctrinated “scientific” mind is the result of some human beings wanting to believe there is no God because it suits their own agenda (a Lucifierian agenda). This field is heavily dominated by people who dislike christianity and fundamentalists and this discredits their ability to be
          objective/impartial.

          Darwin’s letters present this evidence: “he was admitting that he “fluctuated” and that he had “never been an Atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God” (1879). He said that “the impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe, with our conscious selves, arose through chance, seems to me the chief argument for the
          existence of God” (1873). He also stated that one’s faith is a private matter for the individual alone.”

          Discussing the origins of the universe, Darwin admitted, “I cannot pretend to throw the least light on such abstruse problems. The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us; and I for one must be content to
          remain an Agnostic.”

          There is no conclusive evidence for the transition from ape to man. On the contrary, there is some evidence that present day man is a somewhat deteriorated descendent of his ancestors. We have devolved. The primitive men were not brute beasts or semi-apish savages, as we are made to believe by evolutionists, and the probabilities are that the early man was no different than the present day man. In fact, since the Cro-Magnon man the human brain
          seems to be decreasing in size. According to the scientists themselves, the Cro-Magnon men were known to have been far superior to modern men both physically and mentally in terms of brain capacity.

          You have been deluded. I place my alliegance with that which brings blessing and love to humanity. You trust and believe in something that it simply not true science but a religion, and you have made Darwin your god, bringing greater darkness.

          To maintain that it is the way of science to replace old facts with new facts is simply not a sane or sober foundation because it reduces science to the
          ridiculous, to the fantasy, which it is by definition not supposed to be. To throw out the old ideas as the new arrive, is to throw out the baby with the bathwater, so to speak. It means we can never trust a so-called fact to be
          truth.

        • Kodie

          Brainwashing is a method of controlled systematic indoctrination, especially one based on repetition or confusion.

          Isn’t that why you keep repeating yourself? You don’t have any evidence, your only argument is to have false ideas about science, and your religion has replaced sense with nonsense, made-up imaginary science to prop up the premise that there is a god. Whatever will fit to make that true. You will follow whatever they tell you to believe and distrust anyone trying to teach you science. That makes you a lost cause and a hypocrite as far as I’m concerned.

          You can “never trust” science because it keeps exploring and actually finding new facts that refine old ones. You can trust an imaginary fairy story that exists inside your fallible brain exactly because you’ve been brainwashed and indoctrinated that stability is the ideal. We’re just animals. We don’t know everything about our world much more, essentially, than a dog does. Science is figuring out how the world actually works. You are saying because it’s sometimes mistaken, or kind of rough, that it’s no good? You don’t like improvements? You are basically against progress. You don’t understand how progress works. Throw out your computer, you’re a disgrace of a human being. Just wash your clothes on a rock and collect berries for dinner – you have no idea what science is and why our knowledge tends to change. The truth doesn’t change – we just keep looking at it closer and closer, and guess what? GOD IS NOWHERE TO BE FOUND.

          Sorry if that just makes you defensive about your beliefs, but you keep wrapping your fuzzy brain inside this shell of ignorance and you don’t have to. But I’m done with you. You answered a 5 month old post to evangelize your beliefs, having no idea that the whole internet has been here for years before you and already heard what you came to tell us that you think is brand new. You’re not making any new arguments. At all. And making tons of logical fallacies. The worst one you keep making is that science sounds too crazy to you that you favor your own delusion of a ghost who lives inside you, and epic battles between angels and demons, and a portal to an afterlife. If that sounds more realistic to you than evolution, you have no idea what you’re even talking about. You have an indoctrinated bias against science because you believe what you’re told by people who have a grave fear of you actually seeing them for liars and propagandists. The more you would learn about science, the more confused you would be why they would have told you untrue things all these years, and if you’re the least bit curious about comparing the two, all they can tell you is how horrible science is – it sounds imaginary! Stay dumb, Lea.

        • Guest

          Kodie, extremely well said. I loved that rant! A true and justified one! 🙂 You just said everything I wanted to say to Lea. It’s amazing that there are people still this illiterate in the world. She probably just got the internet at her little farm house last week, and she’s sitting on the front porch, with an old dog, knitting something out of yarn, just back from Sunday school, and knows that all of science is just a bunch of lies invented by Satan. lol. Only about 1 out of every million religious people are actually “evolution deniers”. They disagree with the fossils record not because it’s wrong, but because it disagrees with the Bible! What a complete imbecile. Back woods. Ancient Appalachian moonshine-drinking crazy. Saying that scientists are brainwashed and religious people aren’t !??? Such an amazing level of arrogance, mixed with stupidity, lack of education, and the aforementioned debatable quality of brainwashed.

        • When you ignore the points that I make, I assume that’s because you agree with them. Still, it would be good to have confirmation. Please don’t launch into yet another very long essay without resolving the points that we’ve been talking about to date.

          Scientists in the field of the origin and evolution of man and creation DO NOT HAVE EVIDENCE to substantiate the imaginative conclusions/theories that they expound as fact and have forced onto mankind

          And how do you know this? Ooh—let me guess: you read it on Answers in Genesis. Or at the Creation Research Institute. Or someplace similar, I’m guessing?

          Learn some science, bro.

          The indoctrinated “scientific” mind is the result of some human beings wanting to believe there is no God because it suits their own agenda

          Science gave us the world we live in today. 2 centuries ago, people died by the millions from measles, smallpox, and water-born illness. Today, not so much. 2 centuries ago, people rarely used GPS for navigation and communicated by laptops and the internet. Thank you, science. (Or should I say: Thank you Lucifer?)

          Darwin’s letters present this evidence

          No one cares what Darwin said. What Darwin said is in the domain of History of Science. That’s not today’s topic.

          since the Cro-Magnon man the human brain seems to be decreasing in size.

          We have a tiny brain compared to a whale. What do you deduce from that?

        • Julean

          I am devoting as much time as I can to respond to you, wish I could do more. For confirmation I chose to look mainly at atheist scientists who were honest and brave enough to acknowledge the error of their ways of adherence to the man-made religion of evolution and why. Elsewhere I found that the evolutionists themselves presented the evidence that they are confounded.
          Yes Bob I am totally 100% in agreement with you for the many good things alot of our good science has given humanity. As I asked Kodie, let’s be specific and not lose sight of the fact that the particular brand of science we are discussing here is the origin and evolution of man/creation. Lucifer is incapable of good.
          What sort of atheist are you, knocking Darwin like that? How could you, man? Don’t you know that people worship him? Shame on you!
          The point about Cro-Magnon man is that evidence shows that the human brain (nothing to do with the whale, since we want to compare oranges with oranges, not oranges with apples) has decreased in size as time went on, not the other way round as evolutionists proposed/expected/theorised. Devolution, dying humanity.
          You must admit I’m getting better at this blogging thing now, giving shorter answers and all.

        • For confirmation I chose to look mainly at atheist scientists who were honest and brave enough to acknowledge the error of their ways of adherence to the man-made religion of evolution and why.

          That confirms both your bias and my suppositions. (Did you mean to confirm them both?)

          So you’ve already decided what the correct answer is. And you’re not even a biologist. Wow—how do you do that?

          Elsewhere I found that the evolutionists themselves presented the evidence that they are confounded.

          All that matters is what the consensus on evolution is within biology. What do you suppose it is?

          What sort of atheist are you, knocking Darwin like that? How could you, man? Do n’t you know that people worship him? Shame on you!

          Darwin worship might be a straw man that Creationists amuse themselves with, but I don’t care. And neither do biologists. No one double-checks their findings with the writings of the Great Man to make sure they’re in compliance.

          The point about Cro-Magnon man is that evidence shows that the human brain (nothing to do with the whale, since we want to compare oranges with oranges, not oranges with apples) has decreased in size as time went on

          1. With the whale example I showed you that brain size doesn’t mean much.

          2. Show me that the consensus about evolution has changed due to this information. If not, why are you wasting my time with it?

        • Danel Maloy

          YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH YAHWEH

        • TheNuszAbides

          are you positing a literal burning at the stake, in this day and age? please publicly call out these proto-criminals for their nasty intentions.
          … or are you just using exciting language for phony dramatic effect?

        • Greg G.

          Bob was quoting Julean there.

        • In your first sentence you said brainwashing is when a scientist doesn’t accept an idea without proof. Well you have the very definition of the word “brainwashing” wrong. Brainwashing is when you DO accept ideas without proof. The process of science is all about discarding old ideas that have been proven wrong, and admitting knowledge can increase as mankind learns more and more. Religion is about “clinging to” the old ideas that have been proven wrong, in order to not have to admit one is brainwashed, feel better about mortality, feel a meaning in life, and feel a moral superiority. Religion is about “feelings” and is based on delusional thinking. Science is about evidence and is based on facts. Using the “well so are you” argument when a scientist calls you brainwashed is just pure childish, and makes you seem like an elderly person who has passed into their final childhood.

        • Danel Maloy

          I take your mental retardation literally. Go fuck a prostitute.

        • Danel Maloy

          Dear Creationists,

          You are stupid.

          Genuinely stupid.

          By every conceivable metric that we can assess intelligence, intellect, mental ability, reasoning and sense, you’re stupid. Even the very ability to string words together in coherent ways, you’re stupid. You fail at all of this. You are fucking stupid. There is no way of getting out of this accusation; it is as close to an absolute, proven fact, that an honest assessment of the situation can get.

          Not ignorant; no, that’s something else. Ignorance is merely the lack of knowledge. That’s fine. I cannot blame someone for merely not knowing some random piece of shit, or not being exposed to information. You don’t get a choice in ignorance and merely not knowing. For a start, you’re born ignorant of everything in the entire world. New born babies don’t even know what things in the world are part of their own fucking bodies and what things aren’t – they really do have to learn this for themselves. So, no, you’re not just ignorant because if you were, I wouldn’t be here writing this.

          No, this is something fucking different, far fucking worse. What you stand not only accused of, but proven guilty of, shits and pisses all over the innocence of simple ignorance and goes into the dark territory of deceit and fucking lies. This is wilful ignorance. This is prideful ignorance. You take your fucking ignorance and wave it around at every opportunity to say “hey, look at me, I’m so fucking stupid” and expect people to give you some kind of shit-hot respect for it.

          Do I want to blame you for it? When your elders, and priests, and preachers, and the unqualified crank pseudo-scientific quasi-philosophers they get to back them up, have all conspired to brainwash you into thinking this is a good thing? Yes, I fucking do. You have made a choice to stay ignorant, and be happy with it. You’re a fucking idiot, and you damn well know it. You’re probably a right-wing homophobic little shit as well, so probably think being gay is a choice. So here’s one for you; being a fucking fruit-loop imbecile is a choice, a choice you made when youdecided that thinking was too much fucking effort and just let some cockend from Answers in Genesis do it for you.

          “We don’t see ants coming out of peanut butter, therefore evolution is wrong.” – you’re a bunch of fucking idiots.

          You know it. You know it, and you Just. Don’t. Fucking. Care.

          Why do I bother with you? Just why? Why do I drag myself down to that sort of level? I continually drag myself down to the level of creationist cock-ends but just can’t figure out why.

          Let’s look at some clear facts here.

          I have a fucking masters degree. I took four years out of my life learning quantum mechanics; management; nuclear physics; organic, inorganic, analytical, green, environmental, atmospheric chemistry; mathematics; and a fuck-ton of life skills and problem solving skills possessed by a tiny fraction of people. Oh yes, now that’s some fucking catharsis right there.

          I can write, I can draw, I can play and compose music, and I can program a computer to do a little fucking jig. Importantly, I know the difference between “there”, “their” and “they’re” – and fuck knows that’s a rare skill. I can do most of that without getting my cock trapped in a blender, too. I’m even nice on occasion and, if I try, even likeable. I’m just going to blow a trumpet and say I have most talents bar singing (le sigh).

          I wrote a whopping four-hundred-fucking-page book to get a doctorate. It’s sat there on a table right now, all bound and shiny with gold letters and my name on it, looking thick enough to bludgeon someone to death with. To get that far, I was locked in a room with two experts who read it and who spent nearly three hours ripping it to shreds and finding any excuse they could not to give the final award to me. At the end of it all, half a dozen people with the same level of qualification and beyond have all conspired to say “you’re good enough to be one of us”. I fucking starved. I fucking wrote ’til I dropped. I stayed up late and got up early. All to get that. And as blasé and modest as I try to come across in public, I wouldn’t have done any of that if I didn’t think it was all worth it.

          And I’ve taught students. People even better than me, who have fought their way through the same shit and more, have said I’m good enough to be their proxy or their replacement to teach the next generation. I’m actively passing on knowledge, whether established or cutting edge, to students who one day will grow up to be the next me. Some days I hate those little shits, but to be fair to them, one day a good chunk of them will also be locked in that room with a pair of experts, shitting themselves and wanting to all go away. They will come out of it alive, as One Of Us, and they will fucking well deserve every bit of it. I am a cog in that academic and scientific machine, and damn well proud of it.

          In short, I’m smart. I’m intelligent. I’m rational. I’m reasonable. I’m “brainy” as fuck as some might want to put it and have the paper to prove it. By every conceivable metric, I am at the top of the grey matter tree. In pleasant company, of course, but it’s still spacious at the top. If I believed in the absoluteness of the IQ test, I’d be bragging my ass off about being in the 98th percentile (I dunno, actually, last time I took one I was, like, 15 – who gives a shit?).

          That’s me.

          “There are no transitional forms. There are no transitional forms. There are no transitional forms.” – This is the face of stupidity, the kind of stupidity there is no excuse for outside of having your brain removed.

          You, however, as someone who thinks the planet magically poofed into existence 6,000 fucking years ago, you’re at the bottom of that tree. Right down there in the grim dark bottom amongst the detritus, the worms and things that couldn’t even pull on a fucking pair of trousers without falling arse-over-tit to the floor. I may well be in the 98th percentile or wherever, but you, you dumb fuck, wouldn’t even know what “percentile” means without Google – which, by the way, has been built by the kind of people who know what “percentile” means without using Google. Because they had to have some way of knowing what it meant before they fucking built the thing – since you, you dumbfuck imbecile, need every little fucking thing explained to you in small words that don’t tax your brain too hard. Got that one? Need it dumbed down further? Fuck off.

          You, because you manage to be mentally retarded in such a way that it’s actually offensive to those with genuine learning difficulties, couldn’t fucking understand the mere basics of anything I could possibly teach you about anything. Chemistry, biology or physics; it’d be all like fucking magic to you, and all the research and understanding would be like something that just happens to other people. Even the fucking basics of logic, or language, or how to frame an argument, or what evidence is, or why it’s important, or how science even works would be something beyond your tiny brain to fathom for even a second. Hell, the hurdles I would have to leap just to get you people to the point of discussing actual evolutionary biology, or actual geology, or actual radiometric dating would require me to type thousands of words, spend months of my life and back-up to the basics of how if you have two beans and then two more beans you have “some beans”. We’re talking some seriously fucking basic shit, here, that I’d have to cover first.

          “The Grand Canyon could have formed in about five minutes” – in your fantasy world were physics doesn’t exist.

          And after all that effort and time and even sincere attempts to get your fucking brain to learn something, it still wouldn’t be worth it. You would ignore it anyway. You’d just let it go in one ear and out of the fucking other as if the squishy shit between them that others take for granted was just a gloopy transparent mess for you. You wouldn’t even address the fucking basics of what I could tell you. I could try to exemplify every nuance, meaning and deconstruction of, say, the phrase “evolution is a religion”, and you’d zone out as soon as I broke into fucking polysyllabic words and then, just as a little bit of drool came out, you’d say “but evolution is just a religion”. It’s all just fucking voodoo shit to you, something you’re actively scared of and don’t want to understand. You’ve rendered yourself physically incapable of understanding and basic comprehension and so I find myself almost constantly, every time I see one of you dumb shits opening your fucking mouths, struggling not to outright scream from the rooftops shouting “Fuck. This. Shit!”. Every single word in this extensive rant has been compressed in my head into a single thought; a thought that fires in my brain every time I see you slack-jawed fuck-tards speak, or type, or even making a motion to open your mouths or put fingers to a keyboard.

          You sit and worship people like Kent Hovind, whose entire thesis wouldn’t even count as a winning entry in NaNoWriMo (which requires 50,000 words in a month) and has a Flesch reading age of a pre-teen (by contrast, the Flesch-Kincade reading complexity for my own thesis goes to the part of the scale where “reading age” stops being a meaningful concept, and a single chapter is larger than Kent Hovind’s entire derp-fest, and there’s fucking diagrams to boot – fucking suck it). Or you shout “amen” after every little tiny piece of faeces that oozes out of the mouth of Ray Comfort – a man, lest we forget, who thinks the word “bibliophile” is a fucking insult derived from “paedophile”. These aren’t just people amongst your ranks, these are your fucking experts. Your fucking experts can’t even wrap their heads around the simple shit understood by even the amateurish of Internet Atheists or pop-science enthusiasts. Hell, I know people who would faint at the sight of an integral, but hey, that shit ain’t for everyone and they’restill fucking smarter than you, since they’re not so stupid as to think evolution requires goldfish giving birth to zebras.

          “Hello, my name is Kent Hovind.” – Opening sentence of Kent Hovind’s doctoral dissertation.
          “The C-H and H-H bonds are two of the most neglected structures in classical chemistry, despite the fact that the C-H bond is ubiquitous in organic compounds and dihydrogen is one of the most common substances in the universe” – the opening sentence of mine.

          You repeat mantras that have been refuted countless times. “Evolution is a religion!” “How do you know? Were you there?” “If we evolved from monkeys, how come there are still monkeys?” What the fuck do these things even mean? Really, it proves nothing. I means nothing. It’s bollocks, the lot of it.

          Even if you ever get around to addressing any of the countless refutations to this simplistic fucking bullshit, all you can ever come up with is restating the point again, or whining about some other pathetic and irrelevant detail, or – and with fucking depressing regularity – spouting some bullshit about how people like me are suppressing your freedom. You know what? Go fucking jump off a bridge, and test your freedom to not believe in gravity. Literally, go do that now. I’ll wait.

          I’m not even going to bother with refuting any examples here or going into specifics about evolution myself. I’m breaking plenty of my usual rules about dealing with you stupid-as-fuck individuals already, so I’m going to break another and tell you to do your own simple cursory fucking research on this. Not that you’d manage that, as anything you ever cite must always come from an approved source like “CreationWiki” – a site, may I add, that actively makes a point, and a proud point at that, of stifling any potential disagreement by not allowing any edit that is “pro” evolution. Do you see that bullshit on skeptic or “evolutionist” websites?

          Target demographic; white Christian males, somewhere between the ages of 35 and 42.

          No. You fucking don’t.

          You want to know why? Because we want the world to see the best you dumb-fucktarded intellectual rejects have come up with, in all their mundanely pathetic glory, just so everyone can see how fucking terrible each and every one of your so-called “arguments” are. Sometimes, we don’t even bother responding, we just quote you verbatim (that means “unaltered” (which means “we didn’t change it” (ooh, look, nested parentheses (that means “brackets”) I bet that’s blown your tiny fucking mind))) because even casual scrutiny makes your points look terrible; and frankly, a full refutation just isn’t worth the fucking effort. Not because we can’t, but because – as I said above – I’d practically have to teach you the English Fucking Language from scratch to point out the flaws.

          You, who thinks a fucking single man and rib-clone woman and their two sons populated the entire earth without any freaking-frakking-fucking incest occurring because “hey, don’t ask awkward questions”, hold in high regard people who aren’t even worthy of pissing in the academic shadow of people like me. So where does that place you in that pecking order? You intentionally refuse to understand simple things; like how irrelevant evolution by natural selection is to abiogenesis; like the fact that “macro” and “micro” evolution are just things you made up (at least in the way you morons use those terms); or like how natural selection has nothing at all to do with eugenics. It’s all OH-YOUR-FUCKING-GOD-IT’S-HITLER all the fucking time. I mean, seriously, you intentionally avoid learning. You avoid understanding. You actively train yourself to not understand and you fucking revel in all this. You memorise your silly little one-sentence replies that mean sweet fuck all, and, by some magic, expect educated people like me to bow down to your right of free expression; well this here is my “free expression” in response you fucking lunatic, you’ve damn well driven me to it over the years.

          You have no intellectual rights to this “debate” at all because you cannot even speak the language it requires. Even worse, you seem to think this actually qualifies you more.

          How the fuck does that logic work?

          “Have you ever told a lie?” – selectively editing your interviews, re-recording questions to replace the context of the answers, or pretending that your most embarrassing moment had “always” been satire really, doesn’t count.

          Hint; it fucking doesn’t. It never will.

          Get with the fucking programme already; if you cannot comprehend basic facts, you cannot expect to be invited to the debating table as an equal. It’s like you’re coming into a boardroom, full of people with projections and presentations and graphs and calculations, and then you start smearing the table in bullshit (actual shit, actual bull’s shit) and rolling around in it, flinging it at people, painting the window with it, flailing your arms up and down to make a little bullshit angel in the faeces-strewn floor, and then standing up to shout “Ta-da! Give me a Nobel Prize”. You’re not my academic equal. In terms of intelligence and knowledge you’re fucking scum rotting at the bottom of a dark and forgotten barrel while I’m basking in the sun. I would love, genuinely love, to help raise you up to being on my level. I would love it. But you wouldn’t listen. That’s not really a prediction, it’s experience. I’ve seen you fucks talk under a Ray Comfort Facebook update. You just don’t listen. It’s a fact. I would tell you to read X, Y and Z. Hell, I’d even write my own summary of X, Y and Z, but you wouldn’t listen or even care. It would fall onintentionally deaf ears. As I said earlier, you’re not merely ignorant, you’re fucking wilfully ignorant.

          Le sigh…

          But you know what the worst thing is?

          The worst part is that some creationist out there, probably you because it’s being addressed to you, is probably going to find this rant and say “oh look at the little evolutionist, running out of points and resorting to insults”. Well fuck off. Fuck the fuck off. Fucking fuck the fucking fuck off. Lube up some vegetables in your own bullshit and cram it. You think this is my attempt to prove you wrong?

          No. Not at all.

          It’s funny because it’s true.

          This is my attempt to insult you.

          This is my attempt to degrade and belittle you, your beliefs and your reasons all in one. They’ve already been shown to be wrong. I don’t need to add to that. It’s done, it’s dusted – there is no fucking debate you morons. The world ain’t 6,000 years old, women weren’t made from ribs, dinosaurs didn’t go onto a big boat to escape a flood, and natural selection doesn’t mean bacteria turning into chickens in a Petri dish overnight so that Hitler could kill Jews. You lost this good and hard the day science started digging through the geological column. If you want to complain that I’ve ran out of legitimate responses by writing this, then that just proves every single point that I’m making in this profanity ridden rant; that you don’t fucking listen, and are even proud of the fact that you’ve left yourself bereft of the ability to do so.

          You’re not stupid because you believe the world appeared out of nowhere sometime more recently than the domestication of the dog – and no, I’m not going to tentatively say something like “evidence suggests that” it’s more recent than the domestication of the dog. No, it’s aFucking Fact that the dog became domesticated in the tens of thousands of years ago. I don’t really give much of a shit that you believe it, that doesn’t concern me. You’re a fucking shit-faced idiot because of why you believe it. If you haven’t got the gist of this already; you’re proud of being stupid, you actively refuse to learn, you don’t examine anything critically, you fall for any piece-of-shit “evidence” your masters tell you. You don’t question them. You don’t realise they’re just out there wanting to keep you stupid, to keep you ignorant and to keep you not wanting to learn about the universe from sources that actually took the time to look at the universe. They want to keep you that way because you buy into their shit, with money. Your actual hard-earned money. You actually value these people with your working time. You go out, slog away in some backwater burger-flipping hell hole and actually give part of your monetary reward to people who want to keep you stupid. That’s galling to the rest of us who have a working and fully functioning brain that we deign to actually use.

          You pay them. You donate to them. You buy their books and DVDs that they produce for fuck-all money and sell at a premium. Seriously, how much money does it cost Ray Comfort to show up to a college campus with a cheap camcorder to make one of his derp fests? Fuck all. Yet you’ll pay him $15 plus postage for the privilege of sucking his cock and reassuring yourselves over it – meanwhile he practically fucking swims in cash. Your cash. And it’ll keep going because he wants you to be stupid. Follow the fucking money, right? It’s in their best interests to trick and con you’ wake the fuck up to it.

          You show this crap to your kids so they grow up stupid and buy more DVDs and books by the Comforts and the Hovinds and the Hams and the Gishes of this world. You show them Jesus riding a fucking dinosaur and pictures of Noah mucking out a boat that’s chock-full of animals that somehow managed to survive and reproduce to form every living thing we see on the planet in a geological blink of an eye (breathe…) and you think this is right? You don’t think this is the most ridiculous idea in the world? If it wasn’t for the coincidental fact that you’re backed by a non-falsifiable belief shared by a significant proportion of the population, you would actually be declared clinically insane. No fucking joke here, there are actually people with more coherent and rational beliefs in their head being secured in mental health wards.

          Despite being as embedded as you possibly can in the evidence for it, you don’t realise that there’s an entire industry that makes a fortune from retarding your ability to think. You accept this, and refuse to actually exercise your innate abilities to think, question and explore so long as you say the magic words “but I am thinking, questioning and exploring”. No you’re fucking not. If you were, you’d be in my position. You, too, would find yourself locked in a room, actively battling and fighting with people tearing your ideas apart and demanding that you defend them and stand by them and justify every single thing you say. But you’re not. You never will be. Though, let’s be fair to the non-doctorate holding, non-creationists reading this for a brief moment; you don’t even have to be in that position of getting an academic qualification, you just want to be in the position where you’re willing to explore, and learn, and discuss and adapt. You don’t have to have any pieces of paper to be my equal; you just have to have the curiosity and a bit of genuine passion for learning. That alone more than qualifies you.

          “The Tyrannosaurus Rex was created to eat plants” – the only reason Creation Today employs Paul Taylor is because his vaguely English accent makes him sound sophisticated next to Eric Hovind. It can’t possibly because he has a functioning cortex.

          Creationists, on the other hand, they refuse even that… and worse they think it’s a good thing.

          There are a lot of people I think are stupid. Really fucking stupid. I mean, you might think it’s a long way down to the shops, but that’s peanuts compared to this stupid. There are people who think the World Trade Centre wasn’t hit by planes, but by holograms. There are people who think the skies are filled with mind-altering chemicals that can be dispersed – from miles away, no less – by spraying vinegar in the air. There are people who think we’re not being faced with a potential disaster of epic proportions because of how our society has polluted the planet. There are people who think vaccines cause autism and will find any old piece-of-shit evidence to prove it no matter how many times even the mere correlation is disproved. There is serious fucking stupid out there in the wide, dark and idiotic world.

          But creationism is something else. It has that industry supporting it and perpetuating it, and it has people who buy into it so willingly. And you, because you think that everything came from nothing in a fucking click of a magic man’s fingers, are part of this. You’re out there derping on daily about something that we, using the entire knowledge collectively gathered by the human race, know is a lie. Honestly, though, you probably think it’s a lie too – but you’re both too damn proud of yourself and too damn proud of your stupidity to admit it. That’s your problem. It’s not about fossils, or genetics, or radiometric dating, it’s about your unwillingness to learn and better yourself. And it always will be.

          In conclusion. Fuck you. Go fuck yourself. And may the god you believe in have mercy on your pathetic, idiotic, morally and intellectually bankrupt soul.

        • Danel Maloy

          You can’t stop spewing shit, can you? Verbal diarrhea alert my nigga.

    • Kodie

      Contrary to what you think, the majority of so-called humans that end up in
      hell with the demons are in fact no longer human since their souls have been
      wholly taken over and possessed by the non-human demonic beings who feed off
      their life soure.

      “In fact”????? You are talking about a story. Nothing happens after you die. You choose to believe that human life has this epic to unfold and understand, it’s a story written by humans for humans. You are talking about a fantasy. In reality, we are just animals. There is no cosmic justice. Good people die and just die, and bad people die and just die. Some people will never be rewarded and some people will never be punished. We are all in this together and if we see fit, we recognize someone who has done good things and punish people who have done bad things. Upon what is “good” or “bad,” we don’t always agree. Eventually, we move on to current events and forget about all people but the most famous examples. For example, Christopher Columbus. When I was a kid, he was considered a good person, someone to remember, learn about, and take a holiday off for. In recent decades, he’s seeming like not a very good guy. But he’s already been dead hundreds of years! How can we punish him now? Hope that god sorted that one out himself?

      What do you mean we don’t choose “life”, we’re alive. It’s not really that much of a choice. You are talking about the afterlife which doesn’t exist. You have brought up a lot of points and called them facts, as if you are the first person to address these points and Bob has never seen your side of things before, as if he may ponder your wise tome and reconsider that he hasn’t thought it all the way through. What it doesn’t sound like is facts. It sounds made up. Angels, demons, blood sacrifices, how does this all work? Where is heaven and where is hell, and why do you think there is more after life? Oh yeah, you believe accounts of NDEs. That’s bullshit. Brains play tricks on people, end of story.

      You start with the premise that there is a god and a Jesus Christ, and go to find any random unscientific hints that what you want to be true is true.

      Prometheus’s fire cannot grant eternal
      life, free from sin and death

      Neither can believing in Jesus.

    • Danel Maloy

      I’m embarrassed that you are a member of my species. Your cells will soon revolt in a democratic overthrow, you will get cancer, and you will die.

    • adam

      ” The reason why Jesus’s death is so significant and incomparable to any other death is because he is the only human being who has been able to live a sinless life. He could only do so because he is God,”

      No:

  • Julean

    The blood sacrifice of animals as shown to us by God was a method used by the priests of that time to prepare themselves to enter into the presence of God since only the sprinkling of blood cleansed or covered the sin, otherwise they would have been destroyed by his holiness. It also acted as a means of cleansing the sinful consciousness/conscience of the people because guilt and shame drag the human spirit into despair. The most important teaching to take from the old testament sacrifice system is that of the foreshadowing of the event of Jesus Christ on the cross, God the ultimate sacrifice.

    It wasn’t an ideal measure and YHWH does make it clear on a number of occassions that he doesn’t like the issue and that it cannot absolve us of the sin that is in us entirely and so had to be repeated over and over again. And the way human beings managed to pervert this method also upset him.

    “For You do not desire sacrifice, or else I would give it; You do not delight in burnt offering.” Psalm 51:16

    “To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices to me?” Says the Lord. “I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams and the fat of fed cattle. I do not delight in the blood of bulls, or of lambs or goats.” Isaiah 1:11

    “For I desire mercy and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.” Hosea 6:6 (quoted by Jesus in Matthew 9:13, 12:7)
    From this I understand that the blood sacrifice was more for the people than for God, although God does want to remain in relationship with us and will do what it takes to keep in touch with his children. I am also certain that if there was another better way he would have taken it.

    • Danel Maloy

      nobody cares, faggot.

      • Alex Harman

        Can we please leave the use of “faggot” as a pejorative to the religious right? There’s no rational basis for homophobia.

        • TheNuszAbides

          was that Master Maloy? and he seemed so enlightened about prostitution and the Urban Youth, too…

  • Julean

    The blood sacrifice of animals as shown to us by God was a method used by the priests of that time to prepare themselves to enter into the presence of God since only the sprinkling of blood cleansed or covered the sin, otherwise they would have been destroyed by his holiness. It also acted as a means of cleansing the sinful consciousness/conscience of the people because guilt and shame drag the human spirit into despair. The most important teaching to take from the old testament sacrifice system is that of the foreshadowing of the event of Jesus Christ on the cross, God the ultimate sacrifice.

    It wasn’t an ideal measure and YHWH does make it clear on a number of occassions that he doesn’t like the issue and that it cannot absolve us of the sin that is in us entirely and so had to be repeated over and over again. And the way human beings managed to pervert this method also upset him.

    “For You do not desire sacrifice, or else I would give it; You do not delight in burnt offering.” Psalm 51:16

    “To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices to me?” Says the Lord. “I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams and the fat of fed cattle. I do not delight in the blood of bulls, or of lambs or goats.” Isaiah 1:11

    “For I desire mercy and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.” Hosea 6:6 (quoted by Jesus in Matthew 9:13, 12:7)
    From this I understand that the blood sacrifice was more for the people than for God, although God does want to remain in relationship with us and will do what it takes to keep in touch with his children. I am also certain that if there was another better way he would have taken it.

  • Once I found out the Jesus myth pre-dates christianity, that settled the issue. Research this for yourself and answer for yourself: did the church borrow from other religions?
    I am a seeker of truth.
    Sorry, christianity, like islam and other religions, do not pass the truth test.
    You’re all better off shrugging off the shackles of religion and just seeking truth as it relates to the Divine.

    • Renold Rift

      What is the Truth test .. ?

      • Is what religion teaches validated by nature, history and science?
        Are they lying to you?
        Is there another agenda or motive?
        Again, you must seek these answers for yourself. There is no debate, and if you’re religious, it shall be a painful journey.
        Good Luck!

    • Truth

      look eastwards, hinduism “the sanathan darma” could appeal to you…

  • Dan Fu

    The Crucifixion story,indeed makes no sense.The story doesn’t belong to Jesus.He just act and made drama out of it.The question is,we’re did the story comes from?Can the bible reveal the mystery or the religion leaders or pheraps,you?

  • Paul Fernandez

    Yeah, the Greeks thought it was foolishness too, as Paul the Apostle pointed out. That didn’t stop him speaking about it, or it establishing a belief system that has changed the world.

    • Yes, it has changed the world. Are you arguing that that’s evidence of its truth?

      • Paul Fernandez

        Nope. Conversely, you do seem to be saying that because you don’t believe in resurrection, it couldn’t have happened. Is that so?

        • In the fiefdom that is my mind, everyone does what I tell them to, and I get to decide truth from falsehood. Darn it all, it doesn’t work that way in the real world.

          No, I don’t believe that I’m the sole arbiter of truth.

        • Paul Fernandez

          Okay, so you’re not too attached to point 3, then? “Middle English resurreccioun, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin resurrection-, resurrectio act of rising from the dead, from resurgere to rise from the dead, from Latin, to rise again, from re- + surgere to rise”. So technically, “reason 3” completely fails logically. You said “if Jesus died, there’s no resurrection.” (Merriam-Webster) But from a language point of view, there can only be resurrection if Jesus died.

          Reason 3 only makes sense if you jettison the idea of language actually conveying meaning. Which is fine – but since you presumably believe that your language conveys meaning, I’m guessing that’s not a price you’re prepared to pay.

        • Okay, so you’re not too attached to point
          3, then?

          I said, “Miracle or sacrifice—you can’t have it both ways.”
          I’m missing the problem.

  • Mike Lee

    lol, and as this kind of bizzaro logic makes sense to them, it’s not a shock why science won’t get absorbed into the minds of hard core believers. That loop of madness is impenetrable.

  • miserableoldfart

    It’s called FAITH, and it is a belief in a form of existence that transcends time and logic. That’s about as much debate as there can be. The rest is all window dressing, and you know that’s a fact, even if you have a doctor of divinity degree, about as dumb as a master of business administration.

    • Julius Swerving

      Thanks for unnecessarily insulting my degree.

  • purr

    Why blame Adam for a moral lapse that he couldn’t even understand?

    I thought Eve was to blame for that:P

    Hence the pain of childbirth, punishment to Eve and her descendents for the sin of making Adam eat the apple.

  • ronedee

    First and foremost Bob, you are thinking as men do. Once you remove yourself from that small box, true enlightenment follows! 1. Love, led to creation, with the point ultimately being; 2. Shared Divinity. But, independence (as not to be robots) was necessary and then required; 3. Free Will, that led to sin, rebellion (wanting or taking what was God’s) and then separation from Him. 4. Shared Humanity through Jesus(God in the flesh) was the path back. His sacrifice was for the presence of sin, which died with His physical body. And [now] sin “can” die with ours too. If we: believe, have continued faith, and grow closer to our divine spiritual natures.

    I really hate over-simplifying what I believe is a wonderful gift from God. Who are we to question Him? And who are we to judge Him? If we try to think like God, with nothing being impossible we find answers! But…. an open heart, and mind is necessary! You really can’t add anything up by subtracting all the time.

    • Who are we to question Him? That’s like asking, Who are we to question Zeus? Or Poseidon? Or Quetzalcoatl?

      When I know there’s someone there, I’ll worry about my insignificant place next to them. Until then, they’re pretend.

      • ronedee

        well….. for some, ignorance is bliss. “I do not see Him. Therefor He does not exist.” A very good friend of mine “Mike” was orphaned as a baby. As many children are. I ask him once if he would ever try to find his parents? Mike looked at me with a stern look and said: “They don’t exist in my mind.” And, maybe that’s true…. in his mind. But, we know differently. Right Bob?

        • “I do not see Him. Therefor He does not exist.”

          That is weird. Who says that?

        • ronedee

          Some weird guy named Bob!

          “When [I know] there’s [someone there]…..”

        • Not this Bob. “Therefore he does not exist” doesn’t follow from that.

        • ronedee

          Not to carry this too far(probably too late)…. so, you are an Agnostic writing about Christianity & Atheism? Or, are you one of those Atheists that don’t fit the definition of the word? Or are you some combination of all the above? Or, maybe you just like to argue and piss people off of any preference? Just interested in “nailing you down”…pun intended!

        • you are an Agnostic writing about Christianity & Atheism?

          I am an agnostic (who isn’t?), though that’s not what I call myself.

          are you one of those Atheists that don’t fit the definition of the word?

          Are you the legendary Definer who will resolve once and for all the definitions of any and all words?? Wow, cool!

          I have no god belief. I call that “atheism.” How about you?

        • ronedee

          You’re “an agnostic, and call yourself an atheist”…. So, you don’t know what you are. We may have found something we can agree upon!

        • Havin’ a hard time with the old reading there? Maybe glasses. Or maybe a remedial class.

        • ronedee

          Or maybe someone who makes sense to converse with?!

          “I am an agnostic” (a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God)

          “I call myself an atheist” (a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods)

          Are you a woman “calling yourself” Bob too? Just sayin’

        • I am an agnostic in that I have no certain knowledge, either way, about any gods’ existence.

          I am an atheist because I have no god belief.

          You may define them differently, but that’s how I define them.

        • ronedee

          Ok! Thanks for your clarification Bob. That’s new to my experiences w/ individuals of both groups. I’ve heard this in essence from atheists. But never had anyone combine the two for identifying themselves.

          In general, “aggies” seem rather milder, and more open than atheists. “Anti’s” on the other hand, seem to try and distance themselves a bit from agnostics in the “openness” aspect.

          But both will team-up in an instant on an “xtian” at the drop of a bible quote!

        • This distinction between the two terms is quite common in my experience. As a result, atheists have lots of names they can embrace for themselves.

        • James

          The distinction is very common. Imagine an atheist going over to a religious site that you frequent and confusing the most basic facts about Christianity. That’s exactly how you come accross right now.

        • ronedee

          LOL! Well then mosey on over to atheist.org, and set your brethren straight there my man! They are confused.

        • So you’re saying that “a lack of a god belief” is a definition of atheism that is radically at odds with what they say?

        • James

          Philosophy 101 here, Ron. There are two distinctly different claims being made here; a faith claim and a knowledge claim. Two different positions are possible on each of these two distinctly different claims. The faith claim has one of two possible answers, one either believes or he/she does not – i.e. either a theist or an atheist. For the second, it’s a knowledge claim, one either thinks it’s possible to have knowledge of a deity or one does not, i.e. either a gnostic or an agnostic. These can be arranged on a simple square; in one quadrant we have the gnostic theist, in another the agnostic theist, in the third we have agnostic atheist and in the fourth, the gnostic atheist.

          Many theists claim to be gnostic theists – most atheists are agnostic atheists. Of course, gostic theists are only “gnostic” to the extent that they don’t really know what the word “knowledge” actually means – i.e. based on solid proof and not just speculation (or hope, or faith, etc). As there is no proof for the veracity of the various claims made by either Christianity or any of the many other religions, all believers are actually agnostics – whether or not they admit it. Self-delusional nonsense aside, we are all agnostics – we either don’t have absolute knowledge but we do have faith anyway (i.e. theism), or we don’t have absolute knowledge and we don’t have faith (i.e. what you’re calling “agnosticism,” but what is correctly called agnostic atheism).

          Just because folks at your church use bad terminology doesn’t mean folks who use the correct terminology are confused, Ron. But then again, that’s the basic problem with most theists: they always start with the presupposition that they’re right.

        • ronedee

          James, thanks for setting me straight! But in most cases I’ve encountered, the identification of the nonbeliever comes from the nonbelievers themselves….and that is as varied as a supermarket spice rack! Which led me to the question, in question. Christians, and theists spend little time mulling over the finer points of the nonbelievers opinion of themselves. We’ll let you do that!

    • Ron

      Free will is never mentioned once in the Bible. In fact, it quite clearly states that we are all predestined to serve as pawns in God’s cosmic chess game. (Acts 13:48; Rom 8:28-30; Rom 9:11-21; Eph 1:4-5, 11; 2 Thes 2:11-12; 2 Tim 1:9)

      • ronedee

        Matthew 22:14

        • Ron

          Luke 14:23

        • ronedee

          Luke 14:24

        • Ron

          All you’ve provided thus far is a parable based on events described in the OT. Post the verse(s) which specifically mention(s) free will.

        • ronedee

          And what have you provided? Words that mean nothing more than ammunition to you? Obviously “free will” is provided to everyone? Why would God need to say it? To remind us? We’ve reminded Him of that fact from the beginning! You’re [not] compelled to do anything ….. but complain? Oui?

          Yes, the Lord will have His justice one day. So enjoy your free will…… for now!

          Proverbs 16:9
          The heart of man plans his way, but the Lord establishes his steps.

        • Ron

          What have I provided? Six passages showing that your “free will” position has no biblical support. Nothing exemplifies lack of “free will” better than direct links to the one source apologists can’t dismiss out of hand.

        • ronedee

          Then…why are you resisting God’s will? Your argument makes no sense…and you are living proof of it!

        • Kodie

          If you can’t believe your own bible, then throw it away.

        • ronedee

          Kodie, nowhere does the bible say we have “No Free Will”, just as it doesn’t say, we have “Free Will”.

          But, if points are to be proven… I have made the point [for] free will…Ron has NOT! If indeed he made his point…we would be loving each other, and praising the Lord God together…along with YOU I might add! But, alas…. I praise Him here alone! God Bless!

        • Kodie

          You have invented a religious belief out of nowhere then. You have come to the conclusion that this crock of shit you devotedly believe makes no utter sense without selective and creative interpretations, presumptions, conjecture, extrapolations, etc. A total pile of human-derived invented horseshit, in other words.

          Have fun alone with your delusions!

        • ronedee

          LOL! ALONE?!

          No my dear…. If anyone is in the minority, and deluded…its you, and the people who think like you. But, I have to give you an A for effort.

        • Kodie

          But, alas…. I praise Him here alone!

          You’re handing out letter grades for remembering what you forgot you just wrote? Thanks! I don’t need your validation, though.

        • ronedee

          Huh?! I can’t believe that I’m going to spell this out….. but just in case there is another …. **biting tongue**….

          “But, alas…. I praise Him H-E-R-E alone!”

          There is a little place out there called “THE WORLD”. Where billions of praising Christians live! 6.9 billion to be exact!

        • Ron

          Six-point-nine out of the planet’s seven billion inhabitants are Christians, eh? That’ll be mighty unsettling news to the five billion or so Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, unaffiliated, Jewish, etc. who thought otherwise.

        • As Ron pointed out, your numbers are pretty far off. Also, this argument is simply the bandwagon argument. “One million Chrysler owners can’t be wrong!”

          I hope you at least imagine that you have a stronger argument than just that.

        • ronedee

          Wishful thinking there Bob! 2.2 out of 6.9 billion. Still impressive!

        • Sounds like the lesson for the day is: let’s quote accurate statistics.

        • Ron

          Well, according to your very own scriptures, Lord Genocide has deliberately preordained a huge percentage of the world’s population to reject belief in its existence for lack of convincing evidence.

        • ronedee

          Well Ron, If there is a God…. doesn’t He get to make the rules? Why would [a] God have to prove something to you? Wouldn’t it be the other way around? As a microcosm; my earthly father never rewarded me for doing “the right thing” in his presence. Life itself is proof of God. And until someone can refute that evidence, there will always be God.

        • Is “God exists” the null hypothesis, where the Christian has no burden of proof? That’s not how I see things.

          Sure, if God exists, then he can make up whatever crazy rules he wants. Might makes right. But let’s consider that only after we’ve figured out that he does, in fact, exist.

        • ronedee

          That’s fine. What’s to prove really? There will always be more questions than answers, for searchers. But, at some point we make a decision to either; stop looking [everywhere] for answers, or look [inward] for “the” answer. Why is there “order” in the universe? Well, science has learned more about that order through molecular biology. A microscope, over a telescope! I don’t have answers for you Bob. I only have my personal experiences in life, and with God. At one time I was doubting, and very cynical. I once physically kicked a hitchhiking Jesus freak out of my car. And there are other things too that I’m not very proud of. But, something happened over time that changed me, It wasn’t a church, or religion, or any outside source. It was a revelation that grew. It all started with asking God a simple question. Not immediately, over a long time…. it was like torches lighting a dark path, until it became daylight! And you know what Bob? I finally got my answer…. But, not your answer. Life exists for one, true reason. And we need to find that truth. But it starts with “wanting it”…. and asking!

    • Danel Maloy

      Kill yourself, faggot.

      • ronedee

        Johnny you should watch yourself…. someone with an expansive mouth as yours and all that grey matter and foul abuse seeping out… leaves a shitstain several miles long behind them! It’s only a matter of time until you cross the wrong maniac my hateful friend.

      • Name calling is unhelpful. Focus on arguments.

  • Alex Harman

    You’re not adding any value here, and your use of racist, misogynistic, and homophobic slurs is inappropriate and unappreciated. You’re making atheists look bad. Please stop it.

  • Robert

    Thank you for this. This made me more grateful of the sacrifice Jesus did for me. It made me realize that God’s salvation and forgiveness is free and i should recieve it if i want it. And who am I not to accept it? Im just a puny piece of creation!

    • Looks like we’re on opposite sides of this question.

      Before we can celebrate the sacrifice of Jesus (which, as I make clear above, wasn’t much of a sacrifice), we need to figure out if the supernatural things written about him are real. I see minimal evidence. What convinces you?

  • dean

    mate, you have no clue this story/article is pathetic seriously

    • Mate, I encourage you to return with an actual, y’know, argument. Tell me what’s wrong with it, specifically, and we’ll have something to talk about.

  • Littlebritches10

    First of all Jesus is not a god, He is THE God! There is only one God according to Exodus 20:1-5 (KJV I believe is the perfect, inerrant, preserved Word of God). I want to make it clear before I go on that the three persons of God (God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit) or the Trinity is one of those things in the Bible that isn’t meant for us to understand. If we understood everything, we would be God. He is a higher power than us so obviously He will know more than we do. Getting back to where I was. Jesus is God so therefore His death is much more significant than you may think. Adam and Eve were given a choice to sin or not. God wanted His creation to be free not robots under His control! He is the potter and we are the clay. If you created something and it rebelled against you would you be angry? I would. And so was God. He had to punish his creation just as a parent must punish their child when they disobey. Thankfully for our sakes he did not destroy His creation. Instead He found a solution to the sins of the world. He would come down from Heaven in the form of a man, live a sinless life which makes Him the only one eligible to take the sins of the world on His shoulders. He suffered an unimaginable death. First of all He was perfect and He was being crucified by His own creation for absolutely nothing! They hated Him! They beat Him so much that you could not recognize Him as a man! They put a crown of thorns woven together on His head and pushed down so that they would sink into His head! They spit on Him and laughed at Him and humiliated Him. Yet He did nothing to stop them because He knew He was going through this to save you! He was all powerful. He could have killed them all with a word if He wanted but He didn’t for your sake. They finally took Him and nailed His hands and feet to a cross. Even in all His pain He had mercy on a sinner nailed to a cross beside Him. He couldn’t die yet though. All of His blood had to be shed before He could die. When all of His blood was shed all the sins of everyone in the past present and future were given to Him and His own Father had to turn His back on His only Son Jesus because He could not look at sin. Finally before Jesus died He told John to look after His mother Mary and He called out to God and said, ” Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.” He was talking about the people who were crucifying Him. Then His last words were, “Father, into Thy hands I commend my spirit.” And He died. During the three days He was dead He went to Hell to deposit the sins of world. Then He arose out of the grave on the third day and after being on the earth for forty more days He ascended up into Heaven to sit on the right hand of God and one day He is coming back to take the ones who believed on Him to Heaven with Him to live forever more. If you have any questions contact me at littlebritches10@gmail.com I hope this was a help to everyone!! God bless you!

    • What good is the Bible except to explain God and his plan to us? For the Trinity to be so non-obvious that it took Christians almost 4 centuries to figure it out? Imagine going back in time and asking Paul to help you understand the Trinity—he wouldn’t even know what you’re talking about.

      Jesus is God so therefore His death is much more significant than you may think.

      What death? He was out of action for a couple of days. Big deal.

      Adam and Eve were given a choice to sin or not.

      They didn’t have the moral knowledge of children, remember? How can they sin if they don’t understand?

      He is the potter and we are the clay.

      So might makes right?

      If you created somethin g and it rebelled against you would you be angry? I would.

      Maybe anger management therapy would help.

      Thankfully for our sakes he did not destroy His creation.

      Wow. Tell him I said “Thanks.”

      In fact, he did kill pretty much everyone with the Flood.

      Instead He found a solution to the sins of the world.

      A solution? They’re his rules, aren’t they? Why is he perplexed at the difficulties of his creation?

      which makes Him the only one eligible to take the sins of the world on His shoulders

      When you look up “mumbo jumbo” in the dictionary, I think this is the phrase they give to illustrate the definition.

      He suffered an unimaginable death.

      He died. And then he came back to life. So I guess he didn’t actually die. Big deal.

      Yet He did nothing to stop them because He knew He was going through this to save you!

      Uh, dude—it’s just pretend. You’re taking it way too seriously.

      Even in all His pain He had mercy on a sinner nailed to a cross beside Him.

      He was perfect. Isn’t that what we’d expect from someone who was perfect?

      All of His blood had to be shed before He could die.

      And you enjoy this crazy cult of death that you’ve joined? Y’know, you can just quit.

      Jesus died He told John to look after His mother Mary

      Why couldn’t his brother James do it?

      after being on the earth for forty more days

      It was 1 day. Read Luke.

      • Littlebritches10

        I know it doesn’t matter to you but I’ll pray for you. I’m sorry i was no help to you but I won’t change my beliefs either. Thank you and may God bless you!

        • I thought you had evidence or reasons to believe in God.

          No?

        • Littlebritches10

          I’m an inexperienced 13 year old. Unfortunately I do not know a lot of answers just what I’ve been taught and what I believe. So sorry you’ll have to ask somebody older than I.

        • If you’re a 13yo, good for you for educating yourself outside your comfort zone.

          I think the lesson here is that your essay above is simply a statement of your theology. OK, that’s fine. But don’t imagine that everyone will share your views. In particular, if you want to convince them that they should adopt your views, you need good arguments.

          A simple statement of your views is not a good argument.

        • Littlebritches10

          I thank you for that I will pray for you. Goodbye

  • Gary Beggan

    Whilst studying I came across this page and no unlike some, i did not laugh at it but I simply was taken aback by your opening comments regarding what ‘Christians’ believe. Your opening comment and the basis of your ten points was this…..

    I’m afraid that the crucifixion story doesn’t strike me as that big a deal.

    The Christian will say that death by crucifixion was a horrible, humiliating way to die. That the death of Jesus was a tremendous sacrifice, more noble and selfless than a person sacrificing himself for the benefit of a butterfly. And isn’t it worth praising something that gets us into heaven?

    First point is that ‘it doesn’t strike you as that big a deal’.

    Well my friend I never expect it to. You see I have read through some of the things people are trying to argue with you about and again you just won’t ever get it! In fact the Bible is pretty clear on that.

    13. which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words. 14But

    a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are
    foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually
    appraised.

    John 14:17

    the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him
    nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you.

    1 Corinthians 1:18

    For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to
    us who are being saved it is the power of God.

    1 Corinthians 1:21

    For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him,
    God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.

    1 Corinthians 1:23

    but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to
    Gentiles,

    1 Corinthians 1:25

    For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

    So on that opening remark we can end the conversation…you just won’t get it unless God himself opens your heart to receive him and see him in the light of your sinfulness

    So before ending this useless discussion about matters you cannot understand fully. I would like to highlight that your comments, “The Christian will say that death by crucifixion was a horrible, humiliating way to die.” Well I think anybody would say that about someone being crucified but again without an understanding of why it had to be a crucifixion and what led to it, was done on the leading to it, done upon the cross and done after his death. And I am not talking about you reading and trying to make light of the actual events. But the spiritual message and power behind it is what we Christians look at.

    “That the death of Jesus was a tremendous sacrifice, more noble and selfless than a person sacrificing himself for the benefit of a butterfly. And isn’t it worth praising something that gets us into heaven?”

    Again a silly thing to say, it was a tremendous sacrifice and He is worthy of our praise but once again you cannot even see the point spiritually of what He did and continues to do everyday in the lives of millions upon the world.

    As for your other ten points, not one of them even makes sense to a Christian as they are cheap thoughts without even studying what the Christian believes and are simply statements to get people to click on your page form Google. Next time please attempt to actually through some real questions behind such a sensational heading and not some amateur comments that have no truth and do not relate to the Cross of Jesus at all.

    So I will simply say this that I pray that you would have your heart enlightened by the Spirit of God, and that you would see a Most Holy God in the light of you (like us all) mere sin filled beings. Which I know will lead you to repentance.

    Every Blessing

    • Thanks for taking the time to reply, Gary.

      Well my friend I never expect it to. You see I have read through some of the things people are trying to argue with you about and again you just won’t ever get it! In fact the Bible is pretty clear on that.

      OK. Maybe Scientologists tell themselves something similar—that certain people just won’t get it. Or maybe Mormons do or Sikhs or Buddhists. Does this keep you up at night?

      If not, then you can understand how Christians having something to tell themselves when an outsider has no use for their religion means little to me.

      you just won’t get it unless God himself opens your heart to receive him

      So it’s God’s doing, but he hasn’t done it yet. And if he doesn’t, then I wind up in hell.

      Kinda makes God out to be a savage SOB, doesn’t it?

      So before ending this useless discussion about matters you cannot understand fully.

      (Do I feel condescended to? Not at all—this is how thoughtful people normally share ideas.)

      Again a silly thing to say, it was a tremendous sacrifice

      Can you tell me why? Or do you just dismiss my puzzlement with a “You’ll never get it”? Or maybe it’s a secret?

      continues to do everyday in the lives of millions upon the world.

      How do you know that this is actually God changing lives rather than the people changing their own lives?

      For it being essential to understand God, he certainly is shy.

      As for your other ten points, not one of them even makes sense to a Christian as they are cheap thoughts without even studying what the Christian believes

      And yet you’ve not rebutted a single one. Could this possibly be false bravado?

      Next time please attempt to actually through some real questions behind such a sensational heading

      Next time, back up your shock with an enumeration of the problems with the argument.

  • mary

    I totally agree with your article . Lately, after all the Doomsday prophesies and Myan Calendar BS, I began to read different versions of the Bible. My entire life has been Christian schools, church and fellowship… I began to notice how the New Testament was now making “Jesus” sound more like Satan! Condemning, destructive, and a punisher. I DO NOT ever recall the Bible sounding so “damned if you do, damned if you don’t”, like he will KILL< KILL< KILL everyone do you all? I mean the books of Matt, Mark, Luke, John 1 & 2 all have different accounts of the crucifixion and resurrection also. One states an earthquake occurred, and there were no angels then there were and on and on. I am beginning to wonder why God would even have to send his "son" to perform miracles and healings too. Why, if he is omnipotent and omnipresent, would he need a Human Being to come to earth and perform what sounds to me like witchcraft.? Turning water into wine, expelling evil spirits, healings… I wonder if when God cast out Lucifer from heaven, if He sent him to earth as a man and no longer an angel and Jesus himself was Lucifer the son of God? He still held powers to do miracles, and was sent to tell about his father and for his OWN betrayal was made to bring the "sheep" to Him. And when he, Jesus, was born why were so many wanting him dead? Why would they REALLY crucify him with criminals? Maybe the only way for him to become of spirit body again was really to be crucified?? Just a thought.

    • You’re reading this a lot more literally than I do. To me, it’s just a legend. We have legends of Merlin the magician who could shape shift, for example. Why is it obvious that that’s false and that the gospels are true? Seems more likely that the gospel story simply grew with the retelling until it was written down 40+ years after the fact.

      There are other natural interpretations, but this one is easy to imagine.

      • EINSTEIN PHOENIX

        @BobSeidensticker:disqus Bob Seidensticker – AND WHO EXACTLY DO YOU THINK YOU ARE BTW TO HAVE THE AUDACITY TO PUT YOUR IGNORANT,NAIVE BLASPHMEOUS THOUGHTS ON THE WEB….YOU IMBECILE SLAVE OF SATAN……YOU AND YOUR LIKE MINDED MORONS ARE NOTHING BUT CHILDREN OF THE DAMNED SATAN……YOU THINK THAT YOUR IMBECILE BRAINS CAN ANALZYE AND DECIPHER THE WAYS OF GOD LET ALONE PUT YOUR OWN LIFE TOGETHER…..I PITY YOU PEOPLE WHO SOLD YOUR SOULS TO THE DEVIL CUZ ITS JUST A MATTER OF TIME WHEN YOU REALIZE THE TRUTH….MAYBE WHEN YOUR SITTING ON A HIJACKED PLANE THAT IS GONNA CRASH YOU WILL THEN PROBABLY BELIEVE IN GOD AND START PRAYING LIKE A CHICKEN……….YOU IMBECILES THINK LIKE A MAN TRYIN TO EMPTY THE WATERS OF AN OCEAN INTO HIS TEA CUP…..THAT IS THE CAPACITY OF HOW MUCH YOUR BRAIN CAN THINK…..DONT BOTHER TO REPLY CUZ AM NOT INTERESTED AND I DONT SUFFER FOOLS……….

        • Hey, Einstein. Thanks for taking time out of your busy day to share some ideas.

          Good thing you’re not in charge. The First Amendment allows me (and you, too, BTW) to write pretty much anything.

          Satan? Show me that he exists. And what did I get in return for selling my soul to Old Scratch?

          Ah, yet another thoughtful drive-by. Golly—where can I get some of the hope that is within you? You’re a winsome disciple for your faith, brother.

        • TheNuszAbides

          EINSTEIN PHOENIX?
          this is the sort of thing that inspires others to say “seriously, Bob, quit sockpuppetting fake believers to make yourself look good”. Poe’s Law put to the test!
          i think the worst part is that it’s easier to fake a theistic position (just sprinkle on an assortment of Things Not All But Some *ists Believe) because so many of their assertions are definitively irrelevant to (or can comfortably posit that they ‘transcend’) a sincere demand for evidence. (faking a non-theist is far simpler without detail (because The Message of Atheism, if there is One, is remarkably simple), but the difficulty would increase remarkably the more convincing noises one wanted to make, since there is no Atheist Bible and hence fewer (where there are any) secret passwords and handshakes to fortify the in-group with…

        • adam

          blasphemy?

        • He’s Einstein. Don’t bother debating him–you’re lost before you start.

  • mary

    One more thing, in the Bible it states that God will send out a lie, so big that many will be deceived. He will basically allow it to carry on and whoever is really able to figure the lie out is a true follower of God right? Well what if that is the lie? There was no Jesus? Simply Satan Lucifer, deceiving us all into worshiping him and his carnal birth and crucifixion? And it also states that people should not pray to wooden gods, bronze gods, and anything that has no life blood. It is basically dead, Unable to do anything for you right? Well then WHY would it be okay to worship and pray to a crucifix?

    • I’ve had similar thoughts. Look at the world around us. There are lots of good things, but lots of bad things, too. Is this truly the best that an omniscient and omnipotent God can do? Adam sinned and polluted everything, and God is just stuck with that? Doesn’t sound very omnipotent to me.

      Why imagine that we’re ruled by a good god? You could just as easily argue that the guy in charge is a bad god who gives us enough nice sunsets and puppies to keep us content while he tortures us with worries and death and so on.

      Or you could see the whole thing as mythology and legend, as I do.

      As for the crucifix, I imagine that most Christians would agree that you don’t pray to a cross but use it to guide your imagination.

  • Chris

    1. His death was special because He was perfect in every way, Lived a sinless life, born miraculously, taught with authority, existed before the creation. The only man to live a perfect, sinless life. 2. The point of this, is to keep us from Hell. People don’t understand what the crucifixion was, you read Yeshuas last prayer, He asks that the CUP be taken from Him. What is the CUP? The Scriptures tell us Yeshua not only suffered on the Cross, but took the CUP OF WRATH that was poured out onto Him. Read the Scriptures you will understand. 3. Yes He did, you are either ignorant of the facts, or a deceiver. He predicted His death, He willingly went to the cross. The Romans knew He was dead, they pierced his side. 4. We do sin, we are sinner, our nature is to sin and be disobedient. Ask any parent! Just because you can’t understand a certain thing does not mean it is not valid. 5. Original Sin is a hard concept to grasp. Sin entered the world, through Adam and Eve, some say it is in our blood/DNA. This is why original sin affects us all, this answer the simple question why are humans born to be disobedient? Could it be that Adam and Eve have passed that on through DNA? Again just because you don’t understand something, doesn’t mean it isn’t correct. 6. A perfect sinless man, decided to give up His life for others? He had done no wrong, said no wrong, was already hated amongst men. How is this not a perfect sacrifice? Never heard of a stranger sacrificing himself for a person he doesn’t know, even though that stranger had done no wrong, and the person he doesn’t know has done wrong. Think about it properly. 7. We are not perfect, God is. Imagine I said to you, take this $100 dollars, you must pay me back in two weeks. Then two weeks later I said, hey don’t worry about that $100 dollars. That would mean I have either changed my mind (God does not change His mind) or I lied. Being Perfect means I must stand by the first comment I made. Hence when Adam and Eve ate from the tree, they DID SURELY DIE, God must keep His word. Through Adam and Eve we Die, through Yeshua we Live. 8. Myth and Facts are two different things. We have proof Yeshua did what He claimed, the rest are myth with no proof. 9. This has already been explained. God is Perfect, Perfect means perfect, can’t lie, can’t break words, can’t change. He could forgive us like that, but then He would cease to be perfect. 10. So because you can’t grasp God’s ways it is wrong? You see God is not a dictator, He wants us to chose HIS WAY and He wants us to understand WHY His way is correct. This is why he allows all of this to unfold. Also when you read and understand the concept of Hell, there a few views. 1 is eternal hell, full of torment. 2 is perishing in hell (ceasing to exist) 3 is Hell is simply a place where you cannot see/feel/hear/know God. For everything i wrote about much more can be said, for anyone that is interested just do simple google searches but do what i do and make sure you can find the source in several places. The internet is great, but a lot of nonsense on it, like this article. Peace and God Bless

    • Chris: Thanks for the input.

      His death was special because He was perfect in every way

      (1) This is theology, not evidence. (2) Why does his being perfect matter? He was “dead” for a day and a half. It’s still not that big a deal.

      2. The point of this, is to keep us from Hell.

      More theology.

      He asks that the CUP be taken from Him.

      Sounds like an Adoptionistic view of Jesus.

      Why would he want to subvert the plan at the 11th hour? He’s part of the Trinity. He knows the plan.

      took the CUP OF WRATH that was poured out onto Him

      Theology again. And meaningless theology at that. Why couldn’t God just forgive? That’s what you do.

      3. Yes He did, you are either ignorant of the facts, or a deceiver.

      I suspect that you’re mature enough to know what death is. When you’re dead, you’re gone. When you pop back into existence in 36 hours, that’s not “dead.”

      Just because you can’t understand a certain thing does not mean it is not valid.

      If something makes no sense, why not reject it? Yes, I know that you have a presupposition you’re trying to uphold, but that’s not an especially defensible argument.

      5. Original Sin is a hard concept to grasp.

      I’ll agree with you there. Being blamed for something you didn’t even do? Not cool.

      why are humans born to be disobedient?

      You mean: Why are humans imperfect? There’s a simple natural answer.

      Again just because you don’t understand something, doesn’t mean it isn’t correct.

      I agree. But we only believe something if there’s sufficient evidence. If an argument doesn’t make sense, reject it.

      How is this not a perfect sacrifice?

      I never said it wasn’t.

      God does not change His mind

      Sure he does. He said that he wished that he hadn’t created mankind before the flood, didn’t he?

      when Adam and Eve ate from the tree, they DID SURELY DIE

      Obviously, they didn’t. God said that they would die (as if the fruit were poisoned). They didn’t. Ironically, it was the serpent that was correct. Ouch.

      We have proof Yeshua did what He claimed

      Nope.

      He could forgive us like that, but then He would cease to be perfect.

      Christianity has warped you sense of perfection. Forgiving is a sign of imperfection? Not in my book.

      That God is bound by some Stone Age code of conduct, and a human sacrifice (of sorts) is necessary to assuage his divine rage is bizarre. And you actually worship this dude? He’s a nasty piece of work. Recommend he up his meds next time you talk to him.

      10. So because you can’t grasp God’s ways it is wrong?

      No, as I’ve said before: because “God’s ways” make no sense, I shouldn’t follow that path.

      Obviously, right?

    • Madison Blane

      “God does not change His mind”
      “So the Lord changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people,” (Exodus 32:14, NASB). The NIV and NKJV say “The Lord relented.” The KJV, RSV, and the 1901 ASV say, “The Lord repented.”
      The Hebrew word at issue here is נָחַם nacham. There are 108 occurrences in the Old Testament.

  • wik

    First of all i want to know what is sacrifice how some one Resurrection – Why legend? and how he can sacrifice for a myth Started every thing from ADAM and Eve

    If Jesus would be so sure of his resurrection is why the prayer in Gethsemane asked God: “Father, if you can, get away this cup from me “? Paul said that if Jesus had not risen from the dead is ” our faith is vain . ” So let’s see how to present the biblical description of the resurrection.

    Here are defects “relationship” of the resurrection, or Decalogue Doubt:

    Tomb of criminals. idea of evangelists with the discovery of the tomb of Jesus is suspect because, as we know, Jesus was condemned as a criminal and died as “unworthy” and as such probably had to be buried in the grave of the aggregate along with other victims, not as someone rock burial significant.

    Forgetful women. In Mark we read that when Joseph of Arimathea hid Jesus’ tomb hewn in the rock, and cited the stone before the entrance to the tomb “(15, 46), watched ago, Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother … (in dotted insert place name depending on the hand-held translation of the Bible, and so BT was the mother of Joseph , the NTI -Jesus , while NTG – Joses ). They saw so huge stone, which were covered with the input.After two days of a woman confident in their abilities moved to the tomb to anoint Jesus.Along the way, however, attacked their doubts: “Who will roll away the stone from the door of the tomb?” (16, 3). Stone is known as a “very heavy.” How is it possible that Mary Magdalene was going to anoint the Lord, since she knew that she could not have move the stone, but still headed for the grave. The second evangelist must have seen this infirmity “relationship” brand, as it already wrote that the women set off to anoint Jesus, but that went ” to see the sepulcher “(Mt 28: 1). Yeah just look at the stone, may have risen?

    The number of women. According to Mark the day of Easter to the tomb of Jesus go to two women, according to Matthew, there were three , according to Luke few , and according to John – one (Mary Magdalene)

    Who saw the woman. however many women enter the tomb and see:
    a) sitting young man (Mark),
    b) two standing men (Luke),
    c) sitting angel (Matthew),
    d) two angels seated where Jesus’ body had ( Jan)

    How to retain women. however many women:
    a) announce the news (Luke),
    b) runs with joyful fear to share his discovery (Matthew),
    c) running out, too terrified to say anything to anyone (Mark). First Mark wrote: ” And they went, fled from the tomb, it took them trembling and fear, and nothing to anyone would say, for they were afraid . ” This was obvious nonsense from the psychological point of view – they learn amazing things and keep silent about it, saying nothing to anyone (remember that it is a woman!) And contrary to the requirement of a young-angel, who said a few verses earlier: ” … go, tell his disciples and Peter … “. So Matthew has removed the disadvantage of Mark, clearly contradicting him: ” Then he went out quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, came that it favored his disciples. “(28, 8). In Luke women are already talking about the only students, but also to others: “And they returned from the tomb, reported on the eleven and to all the other “(24, 9).Even more familiar with the fourth evangelist. Here we see so illustrious evolved from fear, escape and silence about the event after the immediate and joyful story.

    Who saw the first. According to Paul, the risen Jesus appears first to Peter (1 Cor 15:5), according to John and Mark – Mary Magdalene (20.15), according to Matthew – both Maries at the same time (28, 1n), while Luke maintains that the first saw him two disciples of Emmaus (24, 1n, 24, 13N)

    Why did the apostles were stunned and disbelieving? Why do not you want to believe in his resurrection on the third day (Mark 16,9-13), since Jesus already had them predict exactly? The Gospels yet clearly say that Jesus accurately described his death and resurrection on the third day. Do not treat his words seriously? Why not go at least check whether a third day? Why do so only women or a woman, perhaps they are the authors of the dogma of the resurrection? ( see )

    Quick burial of Jesus. To die on the cross, Jesus would hang much longer than suggested NT. Jewish law required that, however, to remove the body hanged on the same day, so after a few hours came to Pilate, Joseph of Arimathea ” serious member of the Council “, which is probably as an Orthodox Jew wanted to fulfill the requirements of the Law (see Deuteronomy 21, 22n). Despite this, the evangelist decided that he had to also be the one who ” waited for the kingdom of God “(Mk 15, 43), Matthew knows that he was a” disciple of Jesus “(27, 57). Pilate was surprised at the request of Joseph, because he believed that Jesus could not die (Mk 15, 44, KJV). Convinced him the centurion (it can convert the previously Cornelius), so Pilate agreed to remove Jesus from the cross (which actually could still breathe). Again with the help of inept “relationship” Mark comes Matthew, who rewriting the story of Mark omitted passage in which Pilate is surprised that Jesus could die so quickly. Remaining gap, however, Joseph Pilate comes to the body, this seems to be without a murmur, the reader does not have However, the certainty that Jesus actually died, because even though Pilate has already expressed doubts about the rapid death of Jesus, it is half question could be born naturally, especially in people at that, who had to know how much more or less takes death on the cross. With came another Evangelist – John, who “remembered” a story of Jesus with a spear piercing through one of the soldiers. Flowing blood and water gave evidence that Jesus actually died. It was not until John let Jesus rise from the dead for sure.

    Matthew’s guards. Description Brand could raise an obvious objection, that the resurrection is a fake Jewish sect, because he did not write it for any witnesses to the resurrection. Just Jesus was buried a few days later found the empty tomb, which was supposed to be proof of the resurrection, and in fact more certain was that the apostles stole the body of Jesus to preach the divinity of his teacher. At this obviously thinking he had come second Evangelist, who again smoothed infirmities of the First Gospel. Now Matthew added to the grave Roman guards who witnessed the resurrection. Has replied: “The next day, that is after the date of preparation, gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees and told Pilate: Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, still alive, After three days I will rise. Have so secure the tomb until the third day, lest did not come to his disciples, do not steal him and say to the people has risen from the dead. And last deception will be worse than the first. Pilate said to them: You have a guard: go, make the tomb secure as you know how “(27, 62N, BT). Jews were so certain enforcement officers who could protect potential fraud apostles. When the guards have reported miraculous incident, the Jews did not deign even though a certificate to recognize Jesus as the Messiah. Matthew also so did not avoid the mishaps. In addition, if the guards were in fact after seeing the power of Jesus epiphany that accompanied the supernatural arises from the grave, would have to convert to Christianity. Probably would not be able to bribe the Jews to tell lies. Do you have risked eternal life for lousy money? These apparent dispels doubts himself NT. In Acts we have a similar situation, when Peter was miraculously frees himself from jail. Guard when he saw it, he asks: ” Gentlemen, what must I do to be saved? ” (16, 30). Of course, the same day he was a Christian. It is worth mentioning the fact that medieval Christians have accurate data on the number of guards at the tomb of Jesus. Here is a Christian interpolation in Ancient Israel’s history of Josephus tells us, ” was a thing impossible to steal it, because around his tomb guards set: thirty thousand Romans and the Jews . ” Now, Christians can rest easy – the swarms of students will not be able to outsmart even less bribe.

    Number of witnesses . Paul writes: ” … he appeared to Cephas, then of the twelve: After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at once , of whom are still living , though some have fallen asleep; Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles; And finally, after all he was seen me as to one abnormally born . ” (1 Cor. 15, 5-8). These revelations can put between a fairy tale. Strangely confusion, Jesus, who appeared to the crowds, did not deign to show up old enemies and oppressors. He could therefore very easily be able to substantiate his resurrection, and save the world of unbelief. It would be too simple, however. Writing later evangelists knew nothing about said Paul epiphany, nowhere the slightest mention of such a great revelation, other texts contradict Paul. The student Paul, who had to write down Acts puts on the lips of Peter the following testimony: “God raised him on the third day and made ​​him appear not to all the people, but to us, chosen by God as witnesses , which we with him ate and drank after His resurrection. He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that God has ordained to be judge of the living and the dead “. (Acts 10: 40-42). Paul, who had not even seen Jesus fancied himself that he had seen him a crowd of several hundred people, while Peter, who had been his pupil, says something quite different: the LORD appeared to only those who were with him ate and drank after the resurrection, and those that spread the rest . And how much of it was how many people food to him after the resurrection?Nowhere is no mention of any mass feast Jesus risen, according to the oldest of the Gospel must be assumed that this was the … 11 people (although Mark says that before a meal apostles, Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene yet). On the other hand, in the gospel of Mark the piece tells the story of the apparition of the risen Jesus ( 16, 9-20 ) is counterfeiting. Quite tricky, but admitted that even the Catholic translators Millennium Bible: ” Though the text of the lack in some manuscripts and not know it some of the Fathers of the Church ( Eusebius, Jerome ), it is an overwhelming number of manuscripts – especially the most serious – this includes completion of the Gospel of Mark. Not You can not deny that the relationship of this passage from the preceding context is quite artificial , and his style differs from anything literary characteristics of the whole Gospel “- informs footnote to the above-mentioned passage in BT, the third edition of 1980 To save this content add finishing footnote: ” It is not excluded that Mark threw a conclusion in order to and in his Gospel, as in others, there were reports of depicting the risen Christ . ” It is fair to say that this is a very silly remark, as clearly stated a different style, which seems to overemphasize the idea that one person wrote it. If we even agreed that he wrote it the same author, but a little later, it still is subject to doubt the truth of the passage – like why not mention something so incredibly important right now? If it has replied Mark, it actually would have done it under the influence of other stories – not wanting to make his story was worse. It is unlikely, however, also because it is written somewhat earlier that the fragment did not know the Church Fathers such as Eusebius and Jerome, accused them the use of frivolous manuscripts. It seems to me that the obvious nonsense of attention to who those two fathers. Eusebius of Caesarea (ca. 260-ca. 340), theologian and historian of the Church, the Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine,regarded as the creator of ecclesiastical historiography , the history of the Church is the first attempt to present the history of the Church from its foundation to the time of Constantine the Great. In turn, the Strenuous Jerome (c. 347 -429), theologian and exegete, father and doctor of the Church, after a stay in the East secretary of Pope Damasus I, who commissioned him to work on improving the Latin translations of the Bible , after many journeys, he settled as a monk in Bethlehem where 390-395 made ​​a new Latin translation of Hebrew books and improved translations from the Greek, a new translation, called the Vulgate , was widely used in the Catholic Church from the Middle Ages to the twentieth century, the author works in the field of biblical exegesis and early Christian historiography. If someone had a good command of the manuscripts it is these two figures – the first major church historian and the first known name of the translator of the Bible . However, they allege ignorance of Catholic interpreters to be made ​​funnier I should add that St. Jerome is the patron saint of scholars …. Let us have a footnote on one remark: the completion of this include the most serious manuscripts. Here we have a blatant lie. verses 9-20 there is no example in the so-called. Code of the Vatican and Sinaitic Codex . Just reach for PWN Encyclopedia and find out what’s manuscripts. I quote: “The most important manuscripts gr. New Testament are: Codes Sinaiticus and the Vatican (IV century) …” ! In closing this thread recap: Marcus , the oldest evangelist knew nothing about the release of anyone of the risen Jesus , ended his story at this point, when the three women went to the tomb of Jesus, who encountered empty, at which he was a young man (without any miraculous) women scared all this and fled in panic. Ends the original text Mark these words: ” No one can said nothing, for they were afraid ” ! Matthew already changed the ending of Mark, and has replied a happy ending : a woman is not scared, but saved and in this state being revealed to them Jesus , who exclaimed: “Welcome”:-))) (Mt 28: 9; BT), when women threw themselves at his feet, he added: ” Do not be afraid, go, tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me . “And actually – as he said it happened: when the students went on one of the mountains of Galilee, saw the risen. And here we have another “blunder”. The words that Jesus spoke to his disciples, which are on the hill, completely shattered its authenticity: here was Jesus require that students go teach all nations the word of God, which shattered his earlier words, when he was still alive and spoke in Matthew: ” Do not go to Gentiles “(10, 5, see also 15, 22-28). At the same time Jesus had established the Holy Trinity, which is a theory that originated in the Church … in the fourth century. Summarize what is in Matthew : Jesus appeared to two women . The optimistic version we’ll throw in the students, which together, according to Matthew, it could see 13 people . In Luke (the same author had to write a book of Acts, where Peter said that the Lord appeared to only selected), you can have some doubts when it comes to the number of witnesses the revelation of Jesus because he first had to reveal two disciples, and later a larger number of students, most likely As for the 11 apostles, but the question could suggest the wording of the second revelation: when the first two witnesses came to Jerusalem to tell you all about it, they had a find “collected eleven and those with them” (24, 33). Mr. second time was manifested when two students who had seen Jesus talked about, however, is not clearly written, and talked only to the rest of the apostles, or whether and to others who were with them. In the further text, however, seems to show that the second time was only released eleven apostles. My doubts dispelled BT Catholic translators who headed this passage: “Jesus appears to the Apostles” . To summarize: in Luke the risen Jesus sees 13 people . In John, Jesus appears first to Mary Magdalene and three 12 Apostles (previous evangelists wrote that after the death of Jesus, there were 11 apostles). In fact, the original disciples probably had a show one time, because the whole chapter 21, which are even such amazing detail that through Jesus Peter caught 153 fish, was credited (as admitted even Catholic translators BT). In total, according to the gospel of the last 13 people saw Jesus after the resurrection. Not so, neither in the Gospels, nor in Acts there is no confirmation of the Pauline revelation on the number of witnesses. If we stick to the text of the Gospel, we find that the witnesses of the resurrection was to be a dozen people , the fact that precisely all four relationships are contradictory : in Mark Jesus did not know anyone (or, if we assume that you can rely on the appended later passage – saw him, Mary Magdalene and the eleven disciples), in Matthew saw him two women (or, if we accept the dubious credibility of passage – saw the two women and eleven students), in Luke – no women, a dozen students from John – Mary Magdalene and the twelve disciples .If only two fragments to agree! However, this can not be required evangelists at such a fundamental description.
    When Celsus drew attention to Christians on their infirmities “revelation”, Christian apologist, Origen, came up with an explanation, which, because of its humor, it is worth quoting longer passages. At 178, the Celsus wrote: ” If Jesus really wanted to reveal the power of God’s hose should be shown to those who persecuted him, the judge, and in general everything. (…) After all, was not afraid of no one, since he died and, as you say, is God not after it too was sent to hide (…) Is where he lived, and no one believed him, and taught all opening, and since has gained serious argument through the resurrection, came secretly to one woman and his followers? (…) Jesus by his passion wanted us to teach contempt for death, and resurrection should openly invite everyone to light and instructed in how to come down to earth . “After 70 years, the Christians came up with an explanation of the riddle:” While Jesus was one , it was being conceptually complex, and not everyone who looked at him, saw him equally. This complexity Jesus is clear from following his words: “I am the way, the truth and the life”, “I am the bread”, “I am the door” and a number of other statements, not everyone will equally allow viewers to watch: this depends on their perceptual abilities , it becomes clear to anyone who will think why Jesus wanting to turn on a high mountain is not carried with him all his disciples, but only Peter, James and John, they are one because they were able to watch his then-glory, and be able to recognize Moses and Elijah appearing in glory, and hear their conversation and heavenly voice coming from the clouds. (…) Moreover, Jesus explained to his disciples in private session parable propounded in a manner understandable by the general public “outside”, and therefore those who listened to explanations of parables, they had better hearing sooner than those who listened to the parable without explanation; better also have spiritual vision, and it seems to me that and carnal. (…) If, therefore, cherish such a high opinion of Jesus, not only with regard to its internal and secretive nature of God before the crowd, but also above all its relation to the body, which transformed when he wanted and who he wanted, saying that “before they sacked the power and sovereignty “and before” died to sin “, all to see, but since we overthrew the power and sovereignty and was nothing, which would be accessible to the broad masses of the senses, they could not watch it anymore, all who have seen him before, and therefore avoiding them all showed up after the resurrection. Anyway, after all the talk about what? After all, even with the same apostles and disciples he was not always and not always appeared to them, because they could not continuously look at him, his divine nature was in fact too bright after the economy has made ​​the work of God , he could watch her ​​Cephas – Peter “( Contra Celsum 2,64-65)

    So we see at as dubious and incompatible relationships, millions of people base their belief that Jesus rose from the dead. The source of these revelations to be haunted women (Mary Magdalene was said to have seven devils), and a bunch of illiterate fishermen who, after the death of his word spread among fellow leaders that they saw him, and the glory of the risen into heaven. And that accused them that they stole the body of his Master, came up with the idea that the tomb of Jesus … became the Roman guards, but nothing he did not know the oldest evangelist. And that none of the Roman guards could not confirm their relationship, dissolved rumor that the guards were bribed … (cf. Mt 28, 11-15 – if any guards saw it, it would have to immediately convert, and do not risk hell for a bribe) . Is there more reliable is the testimony of a Roman Praetor, a lawyer who testified under oath that he saw the figure of the deceased at the time of the ascension of Augustus?

  • Rob

    what’s more incredulous to me beyond the actual stories and histories recorded is the hard cold fact that the bible exists at all. when we look at ancient historical documents it’s unheard for for an actual document to exist close to 100 years of its original occurrence. anything of that caliber would be of inestimable value. there are thousands of such writings in modern existence for the new testament books some dated according to modern methods close to 1900 years old. to me, i cannot ignore the veracity of the stories held within when the veracity of its raw historical existence is beyond question the only book of its kind. not only is the ancient record uncanny but in our modern day, access to the best selling book in history has mushroomed to a world-wide audience. as opposed to becoming more irrelevant, the bible is actually expanding its reach to epic proportions. i can immediately go online to a free site and peruse original hebrew and greek texts.

    Mr. Bob, i appreciate your taking the time to share your thoughts and feelings on the bible. i encourage you to dive deeper, below the surface and find the deep undercurrents which run through the bible. moreover the bible can lead one to a personal knowledge of God in Christ. this knowledge can not always be shown, but it can be known. and i also suggest a paradigm shift in your perspective. we should at least respect the bible for tackling the tough issues head on and offering alternative solutions to the problems in mankind to which billions have applied and found perfectly sound and useful for over 2,000 years.

    • Yes, there is one tiny scrap of John that is dated to the early 2nd century. I agree that that’s pretty cool. But for parts of the New Testament, you’ve got to go to the great codices of the mid-300s.

      And the vast, vast majority of Bible manuscripts date after 900. Not especially useful.

      If you got an original manuscript of the story of Merlin the magician, would you believe it? If not, then perhaps the faithfulness of the copy isn’t the only point to consider.

      I’ve written more about the available New Testament manuscripts. Take a look.

      • Rob

        It doesn’t surprise me, within certain paradigms, how easy it is to dismiss the historicity as merely irrelevant. But i do appreciate again, that you at least made the effort!

        it’s also relevant that all but 11 of the new testament verses can be reclaimed by merely looking at the writings of the early church fathers. if every fragment and manuscript were erased from existence, then we would still have to wrestle with the witness of the early church fathers.

        if my personal paradigm is to believe the bible and its teachings are irrelevant, then i’m going to ardently pursue such evidence and interpret any evidence to bolster my paradigm…vice versa.-)

        again, thank you for your viewpoint. you have done some homework here and i enjoyed looking into your paradigm.

        • within certain paradigms, how easy it is to dismiss the historicity as merely irrelevant.

          That’s certainly not my point of view. I’m saying that the argument of historicity for the gospel story is quite weak, and the “we’ve got lots ’n lots of manuscripts!” is largely irrelevant.

          it’s also relevant that all but 11 of the new testament verses can be reclaimed by merely looking at the writings of the early church fathers.

          Oh? Are you saying that if you gave the early church fathers’ writings to an objective observer, without the New Testament to guide them, they could recreate 99.9% of the New Testament? I don’t think so.

          if my personal paradigm is to believe the bible and its teachings are irrelevant, then i’m going to ardently pursue such evidence and interpret any evidence to bolster my paradigm…vice versa.-)

          And then we have my situation, which is to find the truth. Is the Jesus story accurate? Great! Then quit horsing around and give me the convincing evidence. I’m happy to accept the Jesus story; it’s because that story has paltry evidence that I reject it, not because I’m predisposed against it.

        • Have you read the Church Fathers, Bob? Not all of the material, because there are thousands of pages, but some?

          I think Rob’s assertion is an interesting line of discussion.

          I will wait to see what you think.

        • Very little.

        • There’s a great deal of information there, and only recently have hundreds of documents been translated from Greek.

          Rob is probably correct. The Church Fathers, especially those whom we call the ‘Desert Fathers,’ memorized all of the Psalms and NT, and many knew the entire Bible by heart.

        • Memorized the whole Bible? How do we know this?

        • The way they lived. The things they did. The words they spoke. The lives they touched.

          I do not expect you to believe me. But it may be an interesting line of research for you someday.

        • No, I don’t believe you.

          I agree that it’s an interesting topic, but “radicalrevolution says that some of the early church fathers memorized the whole Bible” makes for a short and unconvincing post.

        • I like to keep posts as short as possible. The ‘convincing’ part is up to the reader. I am surprised that you haven’t encountered some Eastern mysticism in your travels, though. Christian mysticism, that is.

        • Mysticism isn’t the point. It’s the claim that early church fathers memorized the whole frikkin’ Bible, remember?

          When you make an interesting or bold claim, readers may actually take you seriously. That’s a good thing, but they will expect that your claims aren’t just pulled out of your ass and that you can back them up. Demanding the evidence compliments you, because the assumption is that you can sit at the big kids’ table and defend a proper argument.

          If you don’t want to sit at the big kids’ table, don’t make claims that you can’t defend.

        • Fair enough.

          NOTE: All the references are lifted from Wikipedia, so they are easy to locate with a search.

          St John Chrysostom (347-407)

          He lived in extreme asceticism and became a hermit in about 375; he spent the next two years continually standing, scarcely sleeping, and committing the Bible to memory. As a consequence of these practices, his stomach and kidneys were permanently damaged and poor health forced him to return to Antioch.

          NOTE: This tiny fragment is just the tip of a very impressive mountain of work. He died in exile defending the Church from heretics.

          Origen (184-254)

          Origen was a scholar and early Christian theologian who was born and spent the first half of his career in Alexandria. He was a prolific writer in multiple branches of theology, including textual criticism, biblical exegesis and hermeneutics, philosophical theology, preaching, and spirituality.

          Origen excelled in multiple branches of theological scholarship. For instance, he was the greatest textual critic of the early Church, directing the production of the massive Hexapla (“Sixfold”), an Old Testament in six columns: Hebrew, Hebrew in Greek characters, the Septuagint, and the Greek versions of Theodotion, Aquila of Sinope, and Symmachus. He was one of the greatest biblical scholars of the early Church, having written commentaries on most of the books of the Bible

          At the request of Ambrose, he now began a huge commentary on the Bible, beginning with John, and continuing with Genesis, Psalms 1–25, and Lamentations, besides brief exegeses of selected texts (forming the ten books of his Stromateis), two books on the resurrection, and the work On First Principles.

          NOTE: The text here does not directly state that Origen memorized the Bible, yet his vast work with the text and his many years of study makes the conclusion likely. He died a Martyr under Emperor Decius.

          Gregory Nazianzus (329-390)

          Gregory wrote and spoke extensively on the Bible from the time he was a young man until he died in his 70’s. By 451 he was designated Theologus, or Theologian by the Council of Chalcedon — a title held by no others save John the Apostle and Symeon the New Theologian. He is widely quoted by Eastern Orthodox theologians and highly regarded as a defender of the Christian faith.

          NOTE: This short bit of text is just a hint about St Gregory’s accomplishments.

          John of Damascus (675-749)

          One of the vitae describes his father’s desire for him to “learn not only the books of the Muslims, but those of the Greeks as well.” From this it has been suggested that John may have grown up bilingual. John does indeed show some knowledge of the Quran, which he criticizes harshly.

          John died in 749 as a revered Father of the Church, and is recognized as a saint. He is sometimes called the last of the Church Fathers by the Roman Catholic Church.

          NOTE: Another lifelong student of the Bible, who knew it extremely well (I cannot prove it was ‘memorized,’ but the evidence suggests that it was as familiar as his own right hand).

          Thank you for the butt-kicking, Bob. I hope this helps.

        • Thanks. I’d not heard of half of those figures.

          Not to be excessively picky, but only the summary about John Chrysostom mentions memorizing the Bible, and even that doesn’t claim that he memorized the whole thing.

        • Understood.

    • Madison Blane

      Does that make the Iliad and the Odyssey true? We’ve got BOTH of them!!

  • Dave

    I appreciate this article very much, Bob. Thank you for taking the time to write it! You pose great questions, to which I have no answers either, mostly because I find insufficient credibility in the source of any religious text (humans are inherently imperfect, and by extension, human written text as well).

    Where to begin…

    While I am by no means denominational at all, I believe wholeheartedly that there was something that started this chain of events (completely disregarding whether or not there is “design” involved, let alone awareness of our existence after it all started).

    The existence of something completely inexplicable to our comprehension is at least implied through our observation of seemingly infinite complexity, in both the smallest and largest imaginable scales.

    My point: If matter and energy are neither created nor destroyed in our existence (this may not hold true in other dimensions), where did it all come from initially? As we dig further down into the subatomic world, as well as out into the vastness of our universe, we will continue to find MORE to research. This is both a beautiful and terrifying realization for science, because it begs the continuation of science, while simultaneously promising no complete and/or correct answer to the questions “What is the smallest stuff in the universe?” and “What encompasses and contains our known universe?” (we will only beget the same question upon our findings).

    So, if the human-created rules by which we bind our physical world (Conservation of energy/matter, with which I can’t argue) indicate that energy and matter were always here, I think any self respecting scientist would ask the follow up question, “From where did it all originate?”. The Big Bang Theory is a solid start, but even the singularity from which we would have started was comprised of IMMENSE amounts of energy and matter.
    Now, let’s ask “Is the logic behind conservation of matter/energy self defeating, in that we all agree we exist (or I hope we do) and therefore had to be CREATED in some capacity previously?” Logically, it follows that a force of some kind either relocated matter and energy into a dimension perceivable to us, or that same force created matter and energy to begin the Big Bang. Those are the only conclusions at which I could arrive, so I welcome other ideas.

    All of that to say, I believe something had to have created the matter and energy that is us and our existence, today. However, the extent of that entity’s continued involvement or awareness in our lives is unclear to me.

    I could go on for days, almost literally, from differing points of view with an all-encompassing acceptance of others’ beliefs, so long as they clearly differentiate between their beliefs and facts as I’ve attempted to do here. Faith and fact are not mutually exclusive, nor are they necessarily the same, and that’s just a fact. Thank you for your time.

    • I appreciate this article very much

      Excellent! I’m glad it was helpful.

      where did it all come from initially?

      Yes, there are lots of questions at the frontier of science. This gives precisely zero evidence for any religion. Many Christians seem to imagine that science’s difficulty works to their benefit, missing the fact that they have to work for evidence, just like science. “Science doesn’t know; therefore God” is the impotent logic of a child.

      This is both a beautiful and terrifying realization for science

      Well, sort of. Still, scientists (and the rest of us) are able to sleep peacefully at night. It’s not like these revolving list of questions are any challenge to our wellbeing.

      Now, let’s ask “Is the logic behind conservation of matter/energy self defeating, in that we all agree we exist (or I hope we do) and therefore had to be CREATED in some capacity previously?”

      This is a tangent, but I think it needs to be mentioned anyway: philosophers don’t help at the frontier of science, only scientists. Christian apologists sometimes pretend that their pop philosophy can help when they’re trying to answer questions about nature that they couldn’t even formulate with their philosophy or theology.

      By pop philosophy, I mean questions and ideas like, “Why is there something instead of nothing?” “But you can’t have an infinite regress!” “Everything must have a cause!” “There wouldn’t be order without an Orderer” and so on.

  • AndreasEntero

    The author of this article has very little understanding of the sacrifice of Jesus as it is explained in the Bible. It is not just Adam that sinned but every one of his descendants, every human being that has ever existed has sinned except for one, Jesus of Nazareth. This exceptional case is what makes His death unique: out of all the figures of every religion, not a single one has claimed to be both God and man, performed historically verifiable miracles to prove this, and predicted His resurrection which, to correct this article, occurred after a real, physical death had taken place. There is a punishment for sin, there has to be. Society agrees that every crime must be punished and, to put it in perspective, its as if Jesus walked into the courtroom of the Universe and said “Here I am. I’ll take the punishment. They’re slate is wiped clean with my blood, I’ll endure the anguish so they don’t have to.” Whether we like it or not, there are consequences to our actions, but knowing that God Himself took the punishment of death on the cross in our place, and allows us to escape the fate of Hell when we die (due to our sinful nature, as pointed out by the author above), there can be resolution for our questions and doubts. Salvation is as easy as it gets because the hard work was done for us at the cross: our part is simply accepting this fact and believing that Jesus gave up His life, that He rose again like He said He would, and that He is coming back again to set everything to rights, and until He does, we try to follow his example. On a side note, there’s no historical or religious figure that sets a better example on how to live: Jesus was the embodiment of love. It doesn’t get better than that.

    • Kodie

      I don’t think there is anyone who doesn’t understand how the equation works. We just don’t think it’s true.

      • MNb

        To be more precise: I don’t think it makes sense. First of all it doesn’t make sense to assume I descend from Adam and Eve. Then it doesn’t make sense that I inherited original sin from then. Then it doesn’t makes sense that god incarnated himself into a human body to sacrifice himself to himself. Finally it doesn’t make sense that no matter how evil my deeds are, I have to believe this to enter heaven, a place I don’t long to be anyway.

    • It is not just Adam that sinned but every one of his descendants

      By “sinned,” do you mean “acted as God made them”?

      performed historically verifiable miracles to prove this

      I imagine that we have different standards for “historically verifiable.”

      There is a punishment for sin, there has to be.

      Sin is the offense taken by a god. Are there gods? I see no evidence.

      Society agrees that every crime must be punished

      Yeah, but in proportion to the crime, right? Infinite punishment in hell is a one-size-fits-all justice that makes no sense.

      “Here I am. I’ll take the punishment. They’re slate is wiped clean with my blood, I’ll endure the anguish so they don’t have to.”

      Doesn’t do me much good, does it? I can’t believe in supernatural stories. So I guess Jesus wants me to burn. Forever.

      Sux to be me, I guess, eh?

      Salvation is as easy as it gets

      Or impossible, as I explained above.

      our part is simply accepting this fact and believing that Jesus gave up His life, that He rose again like He said He would…

      Try to believe in leprechauns and you’ll see what I’m up against.

      there’s no historical or religious figure that sets a better example on how to live

      If you say so. I don’t know that Jesus did all that much. Am I missing something?

      You know why Shiva is blue? It’s because he drank poison that would’ve killed the entire world. Now that’s a sacrifice. I know that God killed the whole world with the flood. Oh—and Jesus killed a fig tree.

      I don’t think much of a sacrifice that has Jesus out of action for a weekend.

      • Tolife

        Wow Bob, woooooow! If anyone is going to writing heaven, its you, lol! Cool stuff sir.

      • Hope seeker

        Do you sincerely think that believing in Jesus is tantamount to believing in leprechauns. So why are you busy writing such blogs? What would you think of someone or people going back and forth on leprechauns???

        • Yes, belief in Jesus is like believing in leprechauns because you can’t just do it by force of will.

          No, belief in Jesus isn’t like believing in leprechauns because believing in Jesus can cause actual harm within society. Leprechaun believers don’t do much harm within society.

    • Fred

      Translation: WALLOFTEXTWALLOFTEXTWALLOFTEXTWALLOFTEXTWALLOFTEXT

    • Tolife

      Are you sure it wont piss jesus off that you’re on this forum? Or…let me guess, looking for some ‘persecution’? There you have it, prophecy fulfilled, lol!

  • Philip vicentino

    Mr bob the only difference we have is that I have faith in truth and u have no truth at all.for u this truth s non sense,if he is God he gives life and he takes it what is that to u,he s the poter u r the pot can a pot can talk back to a potter?though he is a potter he became a pot for ur sake.,thus it doesn’t matter to you but in anyways he is still God and u r still a pot.

    • “God exists!” or “God looks out for me!” or “God is truth!” are just empty claims. I need evidence. I’ve seen none. Christianity looks just like another false religion.

      Got evidence otherwise?

  • getreal5

    Thumbs Up!!!

  • Nimmy

    What we (and the Bible) mean by the phrase “Jesus died for our sins”
    is that all sins have a penalty. We see the same thing in the justice
    systems of nations–for every crime, there is a penalty. When the
    penalty is paid, we say that justice has been served, and that’s a good
    thing.

    Our sins are really rebellion against God, and they carry a weighty
    penalty. The penalty is death–not just physical, but spiritual as
    well. In physical death, our bodies are separated from our souls and
    spirits. In spiritual death, we are separated from God.

    Jesus died for our sins in that He paid the penalty for our
    sins. As you point out, this does not mean we stop sinning. What it
    does mean is that the penalty incurred by our sins is satisfied by the
    payment made by Jesus Himself.

    By way of illustration, if you committed a crime and the penalty for
    that crime was $1,000,000, you could not pay it. However, if you happen
    to be the son of Warren Buffet, he could pay the penalty on your
    behalf. The penalty is still paid. The victim is still restored. The
    cost is still real. Yet because of the generosity and sacrifice of your
    father, you are not bound to pay the penalty.

    So, Jesus died for our sins and paid the penalty for them out of His
    love and generosity, allowing us to avoid paying the penalty ourselves
    if we accept that.

    Jesus, the Messiah

    Jesus is not merely a Messiah–He is the
    Messiah. He is not merely one of many good people who made sacrifices
    for others. That is not what the word “Messiah” means. Indeed, many
    people have done good things and made sacrifices for others, from Mother
    Theresa to many others. Yet, while people may make notable sacrifices,
    no one but Jesus could die for the sins of another.

    All other people are only human and have their own sins to deal with.
    Only Jesus, the eternal Son of God who existed before the world and
    time began, has the authority to die to pay the penalty for the sins of
    anyone else.

    So, Jesus is the Messiah–the only one who could pay the penalty for the sins of the world.

    • What we (and the Bible) mean by the phrase “Jesus died for our sins” is that all sins have a penalty.

      “Sin” is the offense taken by a god. If there is no god, there is no sin. That doesn’t mean, of course, that there is no bad in the world. There’s plenty, and I think we should minimize the injury we do to others. But that’s not sin.

      When the penalty is paid, we say that justice has been served, and that’s a good thing.

      The idea that simply being born is reason enough to be sent to eternal torment isn’t justice.

      Our sins are really rebellion against God

      We act the way God made us. God doesn’t like that? He should blame the Designer.

      Jesus died for our sins in that He paid the penalty for our sins.

      Cool! Then I guess we all go to heaven.

      if you committed a crime and the penalty for that crime was $1,000,000, you could not pay it. However, if you happen to be the son of Warren Buffet, he could pay the penalty on your behalf. The penalty is still paid. The victim is still restored.

      No, the victim has been compensated, not restored. Job was compensated when he got a new batch of kids; he wasn’t restored. The old kids were still dead.

      allowing us to avoid paying the penalty ourselves if we accept that.

      And that’s the trick, isn’t it? I’m going to roast in hell forever because I can’t believe on command (just like you can’t believe in leprechauns on command).

      That is not what the word “Messiah” means.

      It means “anointed one.” Lots of people were anointed—prophets, priests, and even Cyrus of Persia.

      no one but Jesus could die for the sins of another.

      But he didn’t die, did he? He’s up in heaven right now, safe and sound.

      Only Jesus, the eternal Son of God who existed before the world and time began, has the authority to die to pay the penalty for the sins of

      anyone else.

      Wow—what kind of savage monster would demand a human sacrifice for anything, let alone an insult?

    • Kodie

      Since there is no god and no hell, your story makes impossible sense. There is no ultimate penalty a Jesus Christ could die to pay for you. Your comparisons to real life situations make it easy to understand – nobody here doesn’t understand the equation. It’s just fantasy though. You could commit a crime and get away with it and “justice” will never be served. Deal with that. People get penalized on earth because justice is a human concern. God is a fantasy story to hope for the people who never get justice on earth, who are punished every day even if they don’t deserve to be, or who are never punished even if they do things that are bad and hurt people. Tough luck, though, it’s not real.

      • Worse, the “justice” that everyone gets in the afterlife (no Hitlers or Ghengis Khans getting away with murder) is no justice that we humans would recognize and respect. An infinite time of punishment isn’t fair in anyone’s book but God’s.

        • Kodie

          You made me think of something from your usual morality reasoning – about how you say things like how different things would be considered moral or immoral if Hitler won, the “might makes right” situation. Slavery is considered “good” for a long time while people who had the power to institute it were not confronted, battled, and outlawed from owning slaves. Only now, you get “good Christians” saying of course slavery is awful, what kind of monster owns people? But then why wasn’t that obvious 200+ years ago?

          But consider god has the power to make you or destroy you, or bring you to him or send you to hell, the power to threaten and achieve obedience – the power is abuse of power. If it’s so obvious that slavery is wrong, why is it right when god does it? Because he has the might, he is always and forever right, no matter what he does.

          But then, if we get to the part where he’s not real… I don’t tend to love to discuss the character of god as if he is just portrayed as a terrible person so much. We have to get to the part where he’s not real. The imaginary “god’s will” is a concept that whatever happens in the world or to you personally is what god intends. If you lost your job, that’s god’s will. If you lose your house, that’s god’s will. If your child has a disease that is not only nearly killing them but making you broke, that’s god’s will. If you step in a puddle, that’s god’s will. If you have toothpaste on your shirt, that’s god’s will. If you find $10, that’s god’s will. If someone offers to buy you lunch, that’s god’s will. If you look at a pretty pond with flowers and swans, that’s god’s creation. If you notice the warmth of the sun on your neck, that’s god’s will. If you find someone who will marry you, that’s god’s will.

          They can’t believe anything is to chance. God shows us every day that he can mess you up, he can make you beg for mercy, and only if you delude yourself, you can thank god for giving you a disaster. When people rally to help out (if your situation is famous enough, for example), that’s all god for you too.

          And if it doesn’t happen to you, those people deserved it, and we have to listen to the warnings. Like some ignorant savages they have to appease their angry yet just merciful volcano god. Might does make right. He can fuck you up if you don’t get on your knees and beg, because he’s mightier than you are. They also, by the way, think about sin – how man hurts this mighty asshole of a god that isn’t real. Give me a fucking break. People act this way, though. They have to grovel to their boss because he has the job, he can just give it to someone else. It’s all very childish, like when you’re small, you know you could get spanked or grounded, you obey the big people who give you a bed to sleep in and let you go to school in clean clothes and feed you hot dinner every day. We’re children, threatened by an imaginary parent figure, that’s all.

          Our “brother” Jesus cannot take a spanking meant to teach us, warn us, or threaten us to behave. That’s not how justice, even abusive justice (like god’s), works. It’s not like, as long as someone pays back the cost of the broken window, it’s all the same. All your life, you are in debt then. To be a Christian is to take that punishment anyway, to try to pay back Jesus. To an imaginary character who has no power or concern in your life! The weather is the weather. A dog bites you because it wants to. Diseases aren’t signs, they’re not aiming at you or punishing you for something you did or teaching you something you need to learn or just because god’s a prick. To have Christ in your heart is to say Thanks Jesus, let me have a turn on the cross now, for you. For no reason.

          My great-great-great-grandfather died, and he said to his daughter, I have taken this poison so that Kodie (and she stopped him there and said “who’s Kodie?”)… he said so that Kodie can pay me back her whole life for my sacrifice. Her life will be great if only she will do that – read my notes and follow my wisdom, my racist racist wisdom. She cannot have a good life if she does not set aside her own sense, I will have died for nothing. I am taking poison today for my precious descendant, Kodie, so that she will feel grateful to me and never be able to thank me enough with her racism. She will be cursed a life of shame if she does not think of me everywhere in everything. I put a hex on her and somehow, even dead, I will know and be able to watch over her and read her thoughts, and I will be able to zap her or things near her to foul her life, for I have died of poison and she has the legitimate moxie to ignore the terms!??? And then he died.

          I mean, if it’s not Jesus or my great-great-great-grandfather, then the military is invoked. They fought and died or got maimed or suffer PTSD or whatever, for my freedom, so the thing to do is to sacrificially deny myself these freedoms? To demonstrate my gratitude, it was all symbolic.

        • he can make you beg for mercy, and only if you delude yourself, you can thank god for giving you a disaster

          God is the abusive spouse, and the Christian comes back for more.

        • wik

          What Would Jesus Do?

          Advocate child abuse and murder amongst many other cruelties.
          Christians are always claiming, “he’s the lamb”, “our savior”, “the king of peace”, “the embodiment of love”, amongst the many other names they associate with a loving, merciful nature. Jesus a nice guy? Not in my book. Nor in any other person’s who is capable of compassion and rationality. Let’s examine who the hell the Jesus character really is. These verses will show not only is Jesus’ “loving” nature a joke but so are the Christians who worship him. Jesus’ real mission to come to earth:
          Jesus says that he has come to destroy families by making family members hate each other. He has “come not to send peace, but a sword.” Matthew 10:34

          Jesus says, “Don’t imagine that I came to bring peace on earth! No, rather a sword lf you love your father, mother, sister, brother, more than me, you are not worthy of being mine. “The real beauty of this verse is that Jesus demands people truly love him more then they love their own family. I ask you how can we love someone that we can not see or interact with? Love is an emotion pertaining to physical existence not to faithful ideologies, yet God threatens you with Death just because your love for your mother maybe stronger than your love for him. Matthew 10:34

          Families will be torn apart because of Jesus. “Brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death.” Matthew 10:21

          Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn’t the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. Matthew 5:17

          Jesus advocates murder and death:

          Jesus condemns entire cities to dreadful deaths and to the eternal torment of hell because they didn’t care for his preaching. Matthew 11:20

          Jesus, whose clothes are dipped in blood, has a sharp sword sticking out of his mouth. Thus attired, he treads the winepress of the wrath of God. (The winepress is the actual press that humans shall be put into so that we may be ground up.) Revelations 19:13-15

          The beast and the false prophet are cast alive into a lake of fire. The rest of us the unchosen will be killed with the sword of Jesus. “An all the fowls were filled with their flesh.” Revelations 19:20-21

          Jesus says he is the only way to salvation yet he purposely disillusions us so that we will go to hell:

          Jesus explains that the reason he speaks in parables is so that no one will understand him, “lest . . . they . . . should understand . . . and should be converted, and I should heal them.” Matthew 13:10-15

          Jesus explains why he speaks in parables to confuse people so they will go to hell. Mark 4:11-12

          Jesus advocates child abuse:

          Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: “He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.” Matthew 15:4-7

          Abandon your wife and children for Jesus and he’ll give your a big reward. Jesus asks that his followers abandon their children to follow him. To leave your child is abuse, it’s called neglect, pure and simple. Matthew 19:29

          Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law. Mark 7:9

          A few other things about Jesus:

          Jesus says that those who have been less fortunate in this life will have it even worse in the life to come. Mark 4:25

          Jesus sends the devils into 2000 pigs, causing them to jump off a cliff and be drowned in the sea. Clearly Jesus could have simply sent the devils out, yet he chose instead to place them into pigs and kill them. This is called animal abuse. Mark 5:12-13

          Jesus kills a fig tree for not bearing figs, even though it was out of season. Jesus must not be as smart as Christians would have us believe, for he was retarded enough to do something this silly. You’d think the son of god (god incarnate) would know that trees don’t bear fruit in dry season. Mark 11:13

          Luke 12:47 Jesus okays beating slaves.

    • wik

      Jesus Christ is a False Messiah

      According to Jesus’ admissions, as well as the Bible’s prophecies, Jesus of Nazareth could not have been the Messiah. This of course, would invalidate Christianity as we know it. The compilation presented here shall be split in three sections. The first shall be the biblical prophecies that were made in order to identify the messiah, which Jesus does not fulfill. The second shall be the prophecies that Christians use to say that Jesus was the Messiah, yet they clearly fail. The third set shall be the prophecies and statements Jesus made yet they are false and have never came true.
      Prophecies to Identify the Messiah, Which Jesus Does Not Fulfill:

      1) Matthew 1:23 says that Jesus (the messiah) would be called Immanuel, which means “God with us.” Yet no one, not even his parents, call him Immanuel at any point in the bible.

      2) The Messiah must be a physical descendant of David (Romans 1:3 & Acts 2:30). Yet, how could Jesus meet this requirement since his genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 show he descended from David through Joseph, who was not his natural father because of the Virgin Birth. Hence, this prophecy could not have been fulfilled.

      3) Isaiah 7:16 seems to say that before Jesus had reached the age of maturity, both of the Jewish countries would be destroyed. Yet there is no mention of this prophecy being fulfilled in the New Testament with the coming of Jesus, hence this is another Messiah prophecy not fulfilled.

      Prophecies Christians Use to Verify Jesus as the Messiah, Yet Clearly Fail:

      4) The gospels (especially Matthew 21:4 and John 12:14-15) claim that Jesus fulfills the prophecy of Zechariah 9:9. But the next few verses (Zechariah 9:10-13) show that the person referred to in this verse is a military king that would rule “from sea to sea”. Since Jesus had neither an army nor a kingdom, he could not have fulfilled this prophecy.

      5) Matthew (Matthew 2:17-18) quotes Jeremiah (Jeremiah 31:15), claiming that it was a prophecy of King Herod’s alleged slaughter of the children in and around Bethlehem after the birth of Jesus. But this passage refers to the Babylonian captivity, as is clear by reading the next two verses (Jeremiah 31:16-17), and, thus, has nothing to do with Herod’s massacre.

      6) John 19:33 says that during Jesus’ crucifixion, the soldiers didn’t break his legs because he was already dead. Verse John 19:36 claims that this fulfilled a prophecy: “Not a bone of him shall be broken.” But there is no such prophecy. It is sometimes said that the prophecy appears in Exodus 12:46, Numbers 9:12 & Psalm 34:20. This is not correct. Exodus 12:46 & Numbers 9:12 are not prophecies, they are commandments. The Israelites are told not to break the bones of the Passover lamb, and this is all it is about. And Psalm 34:20 seems to refer to righteous people in general (see verse Psalm 34:19, where a plural is used), not to make a prophecy about a specific person.

      7) “When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.” Hosea 11:1. Matthew (Matthew 2:15) claims that the flight of Jesus’ family to Egypt is a fulfillment of this verse. But Hosea 11:1 is not a prophecy at all. It is a reference to the Hebrew exodus from Egypt and has nothing to do with Jesus. Matthew tries to hide this fact by quoting only the last part of the verse (“Out of Egypt I have called my son”).

      8) “But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.” Micah 5:2 The gospel of Matthew (Matthew 2:5-6) claims that Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem fulfils this prophecy. But this is unlikely for two reasons.

      A) “Bethlehem Ephratah” in Micah 5:2 refers not to a town, but to a clan: the clan of Bethlehem, who was the son of Caleb’s second wife, Ephrathah (1 Chronicles 2:18, 2:50-52 & 4:4).

      B) The prophecy (if that is what it is) does not refer to the Messiah, but rather to a military leader, as can be seen from Micah 5:6. This leader is supposed to defeat the Assyrians, which, of course, Jesus never did. It should also be noted that Matthew altered the text of Micah 5:2 by saying: “And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Judah” rather than “Bethlehem Ephratah” as is said in Micah 5:2. He did this, intentionally no doubt, to make this verse appear to refer to the town of Bethlehem rather than the family clan.

      Statements Jesus Made Which Are False:

      9) Jesus in John 14:12 & Mark 16:17-18 said: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth in me, the works that I do shall he also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.” This implies that Jesus’ true followers should be able to routinely perform the following tricks: 1) cast out devils, 2) speak in tongues, 3) take up serpents, 4) drink poisons without harm, and 5) cure the sick by touching them and MANY other of Jesus’ “works”. Curiously I have yet to see a Christian that can do any of the above on demand.

      10) In John 14:13-14 Jesus stated: “And whatsoever ye ask in my name I do, that the Father may be glorified in the son. If ye ask any thing in my name, I will do it.” In reality, millions of people have made millions of requests in Jesus’ name and failed to receive satisfaction. This promise or prophecy has failed completely.

      11) Paul says Christianity lives or dies on the Resurrection (1 Corinthian 15:14-17). Yet Jesus said in Matthew 12:40 that he would be buried three days and three nights as Jonah was in the whale three days and three nights. Friday afternoon to early Sunday morning is only one and a half days, so he could not have been the messiah by his own and Paul’s admission.

      12) Jesus’ prophecy in John 13:38 (“The cock shall not crow, till thou [Peter] hast denied me three times”) is false. Mark 14:66-68 shows the cock crowed after the first denial, not the third.

      13) In Mark 10:19 Jesus said: “Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, do not steal, do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.” Jesus needs to re-read the Ten Commandments. There is no Old Testament commandment against defrauding. The only relevant statement about defrauding is in Leviticus 19:13 , which says : “Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbor.” This is an OT law, but is not listed with the Ten Commandments. Surely, if Jesus was god incarnate he would know the commandments.

      14) “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven” (John 3:13). If Jesus is in heaven, how can he be down on earth speaking? Moreover, according to 2 Kings 2:11 (“and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven”) Jesus was not the only person to ascend into heaven, nor was he the first. Elijah preceded him and apparently Enoch did also (“And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him”–Genesis 5:24).

      15) In Luke 23:43 Jesus said to the thief on the cross, “Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.” This obviously has to be false, for Jesus was supposed to lay dead in the tomb for three days following his crucifixion.

      1 6) Jesus says : “Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy” (Matthew 5:43). This statement does not exist in the OT either. In fact, Proverbs 24:17 says, “Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth…”

      17) Jesus is reported to say: “The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it” (Luke 16:16). Certainly every man is not pressing to enter the kingdom of God. The very fact that I am an atheist (one third of the world’s population does not believe in a god) proves this verse to be false.

      18) “Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the Sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless?” (Matthew 12:5) Nowhere does the OT state that the priests in the temple profaned the Sabbath and were considered blameless.

      19) “Yea; have ye never read, ‘Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise'” (Matthew 21:16). Jesus is quoting Psalm 8:2, which says, “Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength because of thine enemies…”. “Perfect praise” has little to do with “ordaining strength because of thine enemies.” Another misquotation!

      20) “But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him” (Mark 9:13). There are no prophecies in the OT of things that were to happen to Elijah.

      Jesus, in all his “God incarnate” wisdom, contradicts himself:

      21) Jesus consistently contradicts himself concerning his Godly status. “I and my father are one.” (John 14:28) Also see Philippians 2:5-6 Those verses lead us to believe that he is a part of the trinity and equal to his father being a manifestation of him. Yet, Jesus also made many statements that deny he is the perfect men, much less God incarnate. Take the following for example: “Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God” (Matthew 19:17). “My father if greater then I.” (John 14:28) Also see Matthew 24:26 Clearly, Jesus is denouncing the possibility of him being the Messiah in those three verses.

      22) Jesus said, “whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire” (Matthew 5:22). Yet, he himself did so repeatedly, as Matthew 23:17-19 and Luke 11:40 & 12:20 show. Clearly Jesus should be in danger of hell too?

      23) Does Jesus support peace, or war? Matthew 5:39 “Resist not evil, but whoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.” Also note Matthew 6:38-42 & 26:52 where Jesus teaches non-resistance, Non-violence. Now read (Luke 22:36-37) Where Jesus commands people to take arms for a coming conflict. (John 2:15) Jesus uses a whip to physically drive people out of the temple.

      24) Matthew 15:24 Jesus said, “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of lsrael,”. This would of course mean that he is here only to save the Jews. The scriptures repeatedly back up this notion that Christ is savior to the Jews and not the gentiles (see Romans 16:17, Revelations 14:3-4 & John 10). The contradiction lies in what Jesus later tells his followers: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations” (Matthew 28:19).

      25) Can we hate our kindred? Luke 14:26 Jesus says “If any man come unto me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brother, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he can not be my disciple.” John 3:15 “Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer.” Also see Ephesians 6:22, 5:25, & Matthew 15:4

      26) Even many of the staunchest defenders of Jesus admit that his comment in Matthew 10:34 (“I came not to send peace but a sword”) contradicts verses such as Matthew 26:52 (“Put up again thy sword into his place: for all that take the sword shall perish with the sword”).

      27) Deuteronomy 24:1 & 21:10-14 all say that divorce is allowed for the simple reason if a “man no longer delighteth in his wife”. Yet Jesus comes along and breaks his father’s law by saying in Matthew 5:32 that adultery is the only way one can be divorced.

      28) In Mark 8:35 Jesus said: “…but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel’s the same shall save it.” How could Jesus have said this when there was no gospel when he lived? The gospel did not appear until after his death.

      29) Matthew 6:13 Jesus recites a revised prayer and states, “Don’t bring us into temptation.” God is the cause of everything, even Satan. God has been leading people into temptation since the Garden of Eden. Otherwise, the trees of life and knowledge would have never been there.

      30) Matthew 12:1-8 Jesus thinks it’s okay to break his father’s laws, by breaking the Sabbath day. He states that he is basically exempt for such fiascoes and that he is Master of the Sabbath.

      31) John 3:17 Jesus contradicts himself when he says, “God didn’t send his son into the world to condemn it, but to save it.” Jesus seems to forget his own stories.

      32) James 4:3 If your prayers are not answered, it’s your own damned fault. This is in direct contradiction to where Jesus says “seek and ye shall find, ask and it shall be known to you”.

      33) “If Jesus bears witness of himself his witness is true” John 8:14, “If I bear witness of myself it is not true.” John 5:31

      34) “I am with you always, even unto the end of the world” (Matthew 28:20), versus “For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always” (Matthew 26:11 , Mark 14:7, John 12:8) and “Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and where I am thither ye cannot come” (John 7:34). Is this the kind of friend one can rely on?

      35) “And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her” (Mark 10:11 & Luke 6:18), versus “And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery” (Matthew 19:9). In the book of Matthew, Jesus said a man could put away his wife if one factor– fornication–is involved. In Mark and Luke he allowed no exceptions.

      36) Jesus is quoted: “Judge not, and ye shall be not judged; condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven” (Luke 6:37 & Matthew 7:1), versus “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment” (John 7:24). Jesus stated men are not to judge but, then, allowed it under certain conditions. As in the case of divorce, he can’t seem to formulate a consistent policy.

      37) “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” Matthew 27:46, (also note the time before crucification where Jesus prays for the “cup to passeth over me”) versus “Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour?’ No, for this purpose I have come to this hour” (John 12:27 RSV). Jesus can’t seem to decide whether or not he wants to die. One moment he is willing; the next he isn’t.

      38) In Luke 23:30 (“Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, fall on us, and to the hills, cover us”) Jesus quoted Hosea 10:8 (“…and they shall say to the mountains, cover us; and to the hills, fall on us”). And, like Paul, he often quoted inaccurately. In this instance, he confused mountains with hills.

      39) “And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they know him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist” (Matthew 17:11-13). John the Baptist was beheaded, but Jesus was not. And what did John the Baptist restore? Nothing!

      40) We are told salvation is obtained by faith alone (John 3:18 & 36) yet Jesus told a man to follow the Commandments-Matthew 19:16-18 (saving by works)-if he wanted eternal life.

      41) In Luke 12:4 Jesus told his followers to “Be not afraid of them that kill the body.” But Matthew 12:14-16, John 7:1, 8:59, 10:39, 11:53-54, & Mark 1:45 show that Jesus consistently feared death. Jesus went out of his way to hide, run, and attempt escape from the Roman and Jewish authorities.

      42) Matthew 5:28 says to sin in “your heart” is considered a sin in itself. The messiah is supposed to be God incarnate, not able to sin, yet in Matthew 4:5 & Luke 4:5-9, Jesus was tempted by Satan in the desert, which is sinning in his heart. Jesus also took upon all the sins of the world during his crucifixion, so how can it be said that “Jesus was the perfect man without sin”? This would lead one to believe he was not the Messiah.

      43) Jesus told us to “Love your enemies; bless them that curse you,” but ignored his own advice by repeatedly denouncing his opposition. Matthew 23:17 (“Ye fools and blind”), Matthew 12:34 (“0 generation of vipers”), and Matthew 23:27 (“. . . hypocrites . . . ye are like unto whited sepulchres. . .”) are excellent examples of hypocrisy.

      44) Did the people of Jesus’ generation see any signs? (Matthew 12:38-40) Jesus announced that no signs would be given to that generation except the Resurrection itself. (Mark 8:12-13) Jesus announced that no signs would be given to that generation. (Mark 16:20) They went out preaching, and the Lord confirmed the word through accompanying signs. (John 20:30) Jesus provided many wonders and signs. (Acts 2:22) Jesus provided many wonders and signs. (Acts 5:12 & 8:13) many signs and wonders were done through the apostles.

      45) Jesus commands the disciples to go into Galilee immediately after the resurrection. Matthew 28:10 Jesus commands the disciples to “tarry in Jerusalem” immediately after the resurrection.

      46) Matthew 28:18 & John 3:35 both tell that Jesus said he could do anything. Yet Mark 6:5 says Jesus was not all powerful.

      47) Jesus says in Luke 2:13-14 that he came to bring peace on earth. Matthew 10:34 Jesus back peddles and says he did not come to bring peace on earth.

      48) Did Christ receive testimony from man? “Ye sent unto John and he bare witness unto the truth. But I receive not testimony from man.” John 5:33-34 “And ye shall also bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.” John 15:27

      49) Christ laid down his life for his friends. John 15:13 & 10:11 Christ laid down his life for his enemies. Romans 5:10

      50) Deuteronomy 23:2 says that bastards can not attend church unto the tenth generation. If Jesus was spawned by Mary and Jehovah as the Bible claims then he is technically a bastard and should not be the leader of the church.

    • Hope seeker

      I struggle with a lot of doubt, but your response is very genuine and makes sense to me. Thank you for the encouragement.

  • anderw_m

    After reading what others have said and what you have said, there is one other question: Atheists always question the existence of God as creator. They say prove it, i dont see Him.” Well fair enough. But what about our brains, or air, electricity ? I know you would have thought of these, since you perfectly understand IT design (IBM etc)..
    So what about life ? Its more complicated than circuits or chips or robotics which are studied from living creatures right?! and we know you were a designer.. It would be ignorance for me to say that IBM stuff just came into existence on its self, it was just a mistake with no plan or guide, its just highly evolved swamp gue etc… …then you’d say thats ludicrous 🙂
    Evolution has no real proof to it and im not getting into that fair-tale except even Darwin stated its ludicrous to believe the human eye evolved -para. [Origin of Species]:.
    So getting back to what i was saying… If your faith is based on being no tangible proof for God like how we can see our partners and friends and the Sun, Id ask you, what is the proof that God doesnt exist ?
    And why did you become an Atheist / dont want to believe / admit He exists despite the order, design, art in nature ?

    “Why do bad things happen to good people ? ” – common Atheist question for not believing:
    – God doesnt necessary control people. Just take a few examples. North Korea, Hitler, P. Pot. These people followed the humanistic evolutionary doctrine – survival of the fittest etc. So its simple. They became evil in their thinking. They chose that way. They wanted to become god to control everyones thinking and actions… the rest is history.
    – Is there really such a condition of a Good person ? No, just examine our own thoughts and actions.
    – without suffering, there is no compassion, and love couldnt be proven in that light. Selfishness would rule. (and im not saying this to excuse suffering..)
    — Suffering.. but what about the good in this world ? what about the people who defend others etc ? Its just thypical this excuse is used, just like the media, they overrule any good by a bad story of evil and crime. There is still lots of goodness in this world.. and if suffering proves God doesnt exist, id say due to all the good in this world, it proves God does exist. 🙂

    [And I use the word FAITH because what ever you or I believe, it is based on faith due to the fact neither of us were there in the beginning etc…]

    • They say prove it, i dont see Him.”

      Not quite. They don’t ask for proof (available only with math and logic) but for compelling evidence.

      So what about life ? Its more complicated than circuits or chips or robotics which are studied from living creatures right?! and we know you were a designer.

      Evolution explains why life is the way it is. It’s the consensus view.

      And notice that the complexity we see within life is often Rube Goldberg-like complexity, not the simple elegance that you see in a refined design.

      It would be ignorance for me to say that IBM stuff just came into existence on its self, it was just a mistake with no plan or guide, its just highly evolved swamp gue etc.

      Evolutionary programming has been tried in some cases. It works, but it’s basically highly evolved swamp goo, as you say.

      Evolution has no real proof to it

      Oh dear. Another evolution denier. You really need to sit at the kids’ table and let the grown-ups have their conversation, OK?

      If your faith is based on being no tangible proof for God

      I have no faith.

      what is the proof that God doesnt exist ?

      You’re making the claim. The burden of proof is yours. Enjoy.

      And why did you become an Atheist

      Oh, I guess I’m just too proud to bend the knee. I mean, all atheists know, deep down, that God exists. But bowing down and admitting our inadequacy is just so humiliating. A little denial helps us get through the day. Oh—and the raping, too. Atheists get to rape all they want, and that’s lots of fun.

      Kidding! Had you going, didn’t I?

      The evidence points to atheism—why else would anyone adopt any viewpoint?

      • lilbit

        Scientists have created artifical cells that react similarly to that of organic cells..
        At what point do we admit that life is actually not THAT complicated. It’s actually a very simple system of orbits of energy structured in different ways to create different forms (called matter).
        perhaps it is people who do not have enough of an understanding of science and the universe who chalk it up to some supreme creator.
        When you don’t understand things they do seem very complicated.
        I remember when I first started learning algebra and thought people were out of their minds for thinking that you could use LETTERS in MATH.. (those crazies) But now that I have an actual understanding of the process it’s really not that complicated of a thing to grasp.

        • I would say that life is very complicated, but then I’m not a biologist. That it’s Rube Goldberg-ish rather than elegant argues for evolution rather than a designer.

      • anderw_m

        Thanks for the reply Bob 🙂

        As for Evolutionary Programming, its still ‘out of something’, there is still code that doesnt change, its only certain parts of the code allows to change, like Stacks etc.. but even in that, its base code restricts what it can and cant do. True Evolutionary Programming would be like this: Turn on a PC with a blank HDD (or no RAM & HDD) and vala, it starts designing through trail and error a complex code like the Stuxnet virus 🙂 Well, thats if its made to follow the Evolution belief.
        One could even thing AIDS virus is an Evolutionary virus as it changes and changes, even changes depending on its host… but the end of the day.. its still a virus called AIDS.

        Rube Goldberg-like: well, yes and no, the deeper in magnification you get in life organisms the smoother it gets, compared to man made stuff which gets more coarse.

        I know you were kidding, yes I know very moral
        Atheists 🙂 of course its a borrowed morality because Evolution dosent know such a thing.. or there couldnt be any evolving or beating to death the kin creature to be better than the rest.. but then like lots of religions (Evolution is just another one) they are faith based and it depend on our bias.

        Some belief is due to our situation like
        Family, Culture surroundings, but not all… and we all have personal reasons to accept one thing over another… whether ‘proof’ agrees or disagrees with us, like a lizards lung that functions ‘in and out’ which somehow evolved in to a birds lung that functions ‘in and through’ 🙂
        Like Dawans choice to believe Evolution over a creator God was due to him becoming bitter about his favourite daughter dying… and thats what pushed him to publish many years after against the problems he had with the theory… and this sort of thing happens time and again even to the best of us…

        Good night Bob.

        • Are you saying that speciation never happens?

          Since evolution is solely based on evidence, no, I don’t think it makes any sense to call it a religion.

          I’m not sure your point about Darwin. You’re saying that he knew as well as you do that God exists, but he was just angry?

        • anderw_m

          Speciation, yeah creatures do change.. you can domesticate a fox in 3 fox generations, for a savage fox into a harmless ‘dog type’ fox by only selecting the most placid pups to breed and it even alters their physical look and colour.

          You are kidding right, Evolution is solely based on evidence, like:
          Piltdown Man (filed tooth and chemically altered bones);

          Nebraska Man (Pig tooth);
          Java Man (Human);
          Neanderthal Man (Human with Rickets)
          Archaeoraptor bird lizard – no, some young birds have claws in their wings like bats to help them climb etc, which they loose when they are adults. eg. The Hoatzin.

          Ok, Dawin studied theology at a religious school, during his travels his faith became less and less, but after his daughter Ann died as a child, he was at total rejection of a creator God as in later writings it was apparent.
          If the death caused it, i dont know, i wasnt there… but it seems after that event, he had arrived at the conclusion – no God. My point would be.. how many people blame God for something that goes wrong, or enters into total rejection and like in his case, set out to disprove God as an outcome…. (Ive seen the same thing happen) his child died, and God didnt heal her… sort of thing.

          But what i do know is, there is not enough evidence, like zero to say its proof, most the Raptor – T rex type dinos finds are only a few real different species of dinos, not the magnitude the media goes on about. They are just categorised according to their size and location. If one takes care to look at them, its just a age thing, some a infants, some adults… and the same species (but there are different species of dino). For something to change according to the theory, genetic information needs to be injected, and body defenses (white blood) cant exist as they ensure mutation is restricted, and when its not, a deformed etc baby is killed by the group in nature which ensures the species keeps safe.. but something lacking the gene for a brain, can never get it from itself.. thats faith thinking to wish so. if anything we are losing gene info at rapid rates…

        • Pofarmer

          Holy shit man, read some books. A good one to start on would be “Why evolution is true”. Another one, and topical, would be “evolving out of Eden.”

        • anderw_m

          Why evolution is true… its not, its a hoax, it links in human evolution are hoax.. It was never observed as science states should be, so evolution is not science. its religion.

        • Pofarmer

          Yes, and all the information and science built on it is a myth. Very perceptive of you. An omniscient, omnipotent, all loving , all knowing God, who is also concerned about the skin on the tip of your dick, now that is definately real.

        • Why waste your time with a comment like that? You think that’s actually going to sway someone to your point of view? If you want to pretend that you can pick and choose science to suit your religious preconceptions, whatever, but I doubt you’ll find many people here who’ll change their minds based on that.

        • MNb

          Why waste your time on reacting? He doesn’t even try to provide an argument, let alone provide evidence. He writes like a Dutch creationist I met on internet a few years ago:
          “Let me awake MNb from his sweet dream – evolution has been refuted.”
          Neglect him or ban him, whatever you feel like.

        • You’re right. It is difficult to let the nutty comment be the last word.

        • Speciation, yeah creatures do change.. you can domesticate a fox in 3 fox generations

          That’s not speciation.

          You are kidding right, Evolution is solely based on evidence, like:

          Piltdown Man (filed tooth and chemically altered bones);

          Nebraska Man (Pig tooth);

          Java Man (Human);

          Neanderthal Man (Human with Rickets)

          You are kidding, right? Piltdown Man was a hoax. Biologists uncovered the hoax. And science changes its mind.

          What could your point possibly be? That any scientific discipline that has ever made a mistake is utter crap?

          (Omigod, think of the science I’m leaning on just typing into a computer and using the internet … !)

          Evolution is the scientific consensus. You don’t get a vote. Deal with it.

          Ok, Dawin studied theology at a religious school, during his travels his faith became less and less, but after his daughter Ann died as a child, he was at total rejection of a creator God as in later writings it was apparent.

          So his daughter died, he became mad at God, so he whipped up some half-assed “science” just to spit in God’s face? If you mean something else, you’ll have to clarify.

          No one (except Creationists, of course) imagine that what Darwin said has any relevance to the study of evolution today.

          how many people blame God for something that goes wrong

          I reject the god hypothesis for lack of evidence.

          But what i do know is, there is not enough evidence, like zero to say its proof, most the Raptor – T rex type dinos finds are only a few real different species of dinos, not the magnitude the media goes on about.

          I like to curl up with a good novel once in a while. Sounds like you read quite a bit of fiction.

          For something to change according to the theory, genetic information needs to be injected, and body defenses (white blood) cant exist as they ensure mutation is restricted, and when its not, a deformed etc baby is killed by the group in nature

          Yes, that, or you could read about the actual science and see what people who actually understand the evidence say.

        • anderw_m

          “You are kidding right, Evolution is solely based on evidence, like:” I was saying this sarcastically. Theses Links were hoax and cant be used to qualify Evolution.

          Bottom line is humanists and Christians base their beliefs on faith. One rejects the concept of God or supernatural, the other allows it. Since science is observable, no one was at the beginning and no one observed it, leaving us to interpret the evidence left. And both are bias about it.
          It depends on what evidence supports the belief..
          Mt St Helens formed canyons and sediment layers within weeks, days, hours.. not millions of years as evolution states the Grand Canyon took.

        • Bottom line is humanists and Christians base their beliefs on faith.

          That’s a good laugh line, but if you mean faith as in “based on insufficient evidence” then, no. Evolution stands or falls on evidence. By contrast, I doubt you much care about evidence for or against God. You don’t believe because of evidence.

          One rejects the concept of God or supernatural, the other allows it.

          Show me evidence for the supernatural.

          Mt St Helens formed canyons and sediment layers within we eks, days, hours.. not millions of years as evolution states the Grand Canyon took.

          Learn the science before you criticize it.

  • Tolife

    Hahahahaha, I totally love this post. Wooooow, you are the best Bob.

  • Mike from CT

    Man you are bad at critical thinking.

    • Hey, Mike, thanks for taking the time to comment.

      I think something happened to your comment, though. It must’ve gotten chopped off or something. There’s no argument there. I’m sure that a drive-by “Wow, you’re an idiot!” isn’t what you wanted to leave here.

      Point out the specific errors.

  • dejen

    who ever wrote this should study islam he will find all the answers

    • Show us the answers. Show us how Islam isn’t myth like all the others.

  • dejen

    all those who say god doesnt exist are idiots

  • dejen

    who do u think created all the plants and the galaxies and who created humans

  • nate paz

    you should study the bible more before you try and make such a strong point. if you were to have taken time to understand the bible and what He has taught us, you would have seen your errors you made whilst creating this.

    • MNb

      Obviously you think you are such an expert. Why don’t you point just one of those errors? Say the most obvious one?
      You don’t want us to think that this task is too hard for you, do you?

      • nate paz

        4. Taking on the sin vs. removal of sin aren’t symmetric. We didn’t do anything to get original sin. We just inherited it from Adam. So why do we have to do anything to get the redemption? If God demands a sacrifice, he got it. That’s enough. Why the requirement to believe to access the solution? i am no expert whatsoever yet, everyone sins. we did get sin from adam but we ourselves sin all the time. it is part of human nature

        • Kodie

          You do realize humans are animals? Nobody’s perfect, but we didn’t inherit it from Adam. That’s just a story.

        • adam

          And a SICK story at that….
          God punishing everybody and everything for what an innocent (did not have knowledge of good and evil) adam did is psychopathic at best…

        • Kodie

          They love this story. We must have done something bad for life to be a harsh punishment… well, no, “we” didn’t do anything wrooooong. It was all perfect before and now it’s not, and someone got on god’s bad side, and this person’s knowledge was passed along genetically. Then a while later, god sent someone to just let everyone off the hook. That’s a whole lot easier than sacrificing animals. Just give money instead.

        • Pofarmer

          “Then a while later, god sent someone to just let everyone off the hook”

          But it didn’t work, ’cause we’re all still dirty rotten sinners.

        • adam

          God had himself killed (how do you kill a god) in sacrifice to himself to allow him to forgive everybody for what god did to them.

          And they THINK this is GOOD and rational….

        • adam

          Yes, absolutely NOTHING has changed except the BELIEF that they wont be accountable for all the bad things they’ve done or will do, because they have uttered incantations at their god.
          Yes, and they are still dirty rotten….

        • Kodie

          No, we’re off the hook. It’s about free will now. We can go ahead and choose to be sinners and not ask forgiveness, or we can ask forgiveness and be saved (from hell). And also give money. Do you see what’s happened here? Before Jesus, people had to make sacrifices in the form of burnt offerings to try to win god’s favor, and now that Jesus has sacrificed himself, we don’t need to do burnt offerings now. We’re off the hook, we just have to ask, and also sacrifice 10% of our gross wages now. So Jesus didn’t really do anything, and god gave up, sort of. God is the judge in this beauty pageant, and a select few get to go to heaven, the rest of us willingly choose to stay fallen and go to hell.

          Apparently, he can be bribed also, and that’s not because god is the devil. Humans came up with that system. We know because there is no god. You get some mega-preacher on tv saying send $237, an amount he has been told directly from god has magical powers, and god will heal you or fix your debt, or find you a job. Let me ask you how is that not still the burnt offerings system only with cash, since nobody takes “dinner” instead of money anymore? You cannot go to your Cadillac dealer and pay for your vehicle in collected meat. It isn’t that killing animals is cruel, since we mostly all still cook and eat them ourselves, it’s that they introduced Jesus to make the system liquid.

        • Yes, I’ve heard them refer to some special verse (say Luke 2:37) and then say that, to get the blessing of this verse, we turn that verse into currency to discover that you must give him $237.

          But why not $2.37? Why does the magic only work if he gets a windfall?

        • Kodie

          I think it was about hitting a price point. I don’t remember what the exact amount was, but each numeral had symbolism, so, likely there was a 3 and a 7, but it wasn’t the max, like $732. That’s an outrageous price point. Most people (I guess?) can talk themselves into spending $237 if it will get them out of a jam. Later on in the program, you can send a flat $1000. It’s just out there, if you can afford to. It’s a tactic. If you were on the fence about $237 before, now it just doesn’t seem like too much, and go for it. For Jesus!

        • Pofarmer

          Hold on Kodie. Are you suggesting that we act largely like other primates? That sometimes we are nice to each other, sometimes we are mean to each other? That we form social groups and structures and that all of this can be explained in a naturalistic framework without a bunch of theological woo? Don’t you think that’s just a bit presumptuous?

        • Kodie

          That is what I’m suggesting.

        • wtfwjtd

          Well Jesus, I’ll be a monkey’s uncle!

        • avalpert

          If you heathens have your way you just might – I mean, men marrying men obvious men marrying monkey’s is next

        • adam

          Sick fantasy of yours…

          Well unless the monkey loves you and is willing…

        • Kodie

          I think the worst thing about dying is never knowing what comes in the future. I know you were kidding, but I am serious. Humans could evolve or go extinct. Our extinction would provide a niche for some other apes to evolve, or possibly some other kind of animal? The intelligence is there to emerge. If we are lucky enough to evolve, well, I think I asked this once elsewhere, that humans are too mobile to split…. however, colonies of humans could go into space and never meet each other again. You get a colony on Planet A and one on Planet B, far off in opposite directions and leave some on earth to rebuild or carry on whatever, and there you go, 3 different species. And yet, there is no way to know what will happen. I also find it kind of frightening, to either prospect of living so long as to eventually find out, or to be contained in dormancy for so long that the future is unrecognizable. I also wonder what we’ll look like to them when they dig up our culture and ancient technology.

        • This is theology, not evidence.

          Do you not understand how this works? If you’d dismiss a random evidence-less claim from a guy from another religion, you can see how we respond to your evidence-less claims.

          You’re a waste of time if you have no evidence.

        • nate paz

          i walk not by evidence, for there is none to be found. i walk by faith

        • Pofarmer

          Then you’re a moron. Sorry.

        • Most of us around here only care about evidence. If you have none, then you have nothing to offer to us.

          “Do it by faith” isn’t compelling. How many followers will you get with that line?

        • MNb

          As soon you turn on your computer you walk by evidence, not by faith.

        • Kodie

          You walk by “fits in with what I think already”. There is no evidence, but someone tells you a story and it feels good to you, so you believe it. Does that sound like the right way to make decisions? Do you know how easily manipulated a human’s brain can be?

          You know when you tell a child that Santa comes down the chimney and leaves presents and eats cookies and has flying reindeer and lists of who is naughty and nice, and they trust you and believe all of it? Even there, you have to give a child evidence – when they go to sleep and there are no presents, and when they wake up, there are presents… I mean, who else has access to toys from a store and is already inside the house. It’s not hard to think it through, but it’s a lie unless you want it to be true. Parents bend over backwards to prove Santa came – footprints, cookie crumbs, presents. He’s at the mall. Pretty soon a kid starts to figure stuff out on their own. Why is there a different Santa at every mall? Why is the Santa in the picture when I was 4 different from the Santa when I was 5? How does Santa get in when we don’t have a fireplace chimney? How does he get around the world in one night? How come this is the same wrapping paper Mom and Dad use to wrap gifts for each other?

          You are like the child who wants to pretend not to notice it’s the same wrapping paper. You’ve been told there is a Santa Claus and as long as you get your presents, it is true. You are afraid that Christmas won’t come next year if you figure it out.

        • wtfwjtd

          Have you ever actually thought about what you are saying here? Just how is this “original sin” passed on? Genetically? Magically? Telepathically? And what evidence can you provide for it?

        • MNb

          “We just inherited it from Adam.”
          Perhaps you. Not me. So why would I even want redemption? Why would I care if your god got what he wanted and what exactly he wanted?

    • But we have you to point out the errors, so problem solved.

      Show me what’s wrong with it.

      • MNb

        Ha – I beat you with just a few seconds.

      • nate paz

        adam sinned and we did inherit sin but we also inherited sin’s nature. everyone sins it is in our blood

        • Just cuz you said?

        • nate paz

          no, it is in the bible. its a good book

        • Pofarmer

          Do you have any evidence of this sinless world pre-adam?

        • nate paz

          look ya’ll, im not here to debate this, im just standing up for what i believe. but please consider the following, would you rather make it to the end realizing that God doesn’t exist and you lived a happy life for nothing, or would you rather make it to the end realizing that you were wrong and lived a terrible life for nothing? something that i should add to this is that people who look for God and find Him are able to have true happiness

        • Pofarmer

          I don’t accept the premise that you have to “find God” to live a happy life. I’m much happier abandoning that baggage.

        • zelda

          I was happy before I met God, but then He came into my life and I thought to myself, “whoa…what just happened?” I was happy and then all of a sudden I realized I had never felt true happiness before.

          Maybe you just aren’t a person who feels the need for someone bigger to watch out for you. That’s fine. I am one of those people. Maybe that makes you the stronger person. That’s fine. As long as Christian’s are happy, and you are happy, what’s the problem? I am sorry if any of us have offended you. Really, it is not our place to tear each other down. We have different viewpoints. That’s all. We’re both people on this earth who have struggles. Now, I see no one is going to be convinced either way anytime soon. So why don’t we accept that fact?

        • Kodie

          Maybe I’m just a person who doesn’t need to pretend there is something there when it’s not. Maybe it makes you much happier than any of us to believe that, but it doesn’t make it true. But as long as I know you are delusional, who knows what you’ll justify with that bible of yours. This is something Christians do – it’s not about god, it’s about the people who think there is that’s the problem.

        • wtfwjtd

          “As long as Christian’s are happy, and you are happy, what’s the problem?”

          The problem is, I have gay friends, and women friends, who aren’t happy, because the Christians want to use their arbitrary beliefs to justify using the government to force my friends into second-class citizenship. So yeah, it’s a big problem, and as long as it is a problem, I’m gonna work to spotlight Christian absurdities, and do my best to prevent the Christians and their man-made beliefs from hurting my friends. I don’t know how I can make it any clearer than that.

        • avalpert

          I hate to do this and ruin the symbolism but because you all ganged up on poor Nate you got the post count here to 666 – tell me that is a sign of something, I dare you.

        • Dang it! Who pushed it past the sacred number??

        • MNb

          “I have gay friends, and women friends, who aren’t happy, because …”
          Yup. On these points I’m uncompromising. Fortunately my female counerpart appreciates this and largely agrees (she sometimes thinks my attitude too confrontational, that’s all).

        • As long as Christian’s are happy, and you are happy, what’s the problem?

          wtfwjtd has some great points. I’ll add: pushing Creationism, prayer, etc. into public schools (contra the First Amendment); prayer and “In God We Trust” within the government; and in general the license that some Christians imagine that their God gives them to flout secular laws.

          In the U.S., the Constitution calls the tune, not God. The Bible and Christianity are allowed because the Constitution says so, not the other way around.

        • MNb

          “I am sorry if any of us have offended you.”
          Why? Are you responsible for all the garbage all believers produce?
          For the record: it’s very hard for believers to offend me, because if they try I tend to laugh at them.

          “So why don’t we accept that fact?”
          I don’t know about you, but I have accepted it long ago. Or I couldn’t have been married with a muslima for 13 years and have a relationship with another one for 10 years. But if you think this implies that I’ll shut up you are mistaken.

        • adam

          When are Christian’s EVER happy?
          They weren’t happy when they had the absolute power torture and murder those who were ‘heretics’.
          They weren’t happy because THEIR god wasn’t on our money or in our Pledge.
          They arent happy now.

        • Pofarmer

          It’s the nature of the beast. People who are happy and contented are hard to control. The Church, all of them, have been bleating the same tune for literally thousands of years. Andrew White Dickson gives excerpts from the 1200’s where preachers are excoriating people for being dirty rotten sinners not living up to the love of Christ. I am currently reading a book by Eric Hoffer on Mass Movements. I highly recommend it. Although it is provisional, it explains a LOT.

        • They must be continually off balance, looking for the solution to their problems. Otherwise, what’s the role of the church?

        • MNb

          I think you should reformulate this: many christians (I don’t want to generalize) are continually looking for the problems to their solutions – the latter they claim to find in that outdated book of theirs.
          (you can totally steal this – it’s not mine anyway)

        • Guest

          More like looking for problems for their solutions….
          .
          .

          Bob, thanks, I really enjoy your forum and posts.

        • Thanks for the feedback!

        • Annerdr

          And yet, you post on an atheist blog, almost as though you felt the need to debate some of things providing you with some uncomfortable cognitive dissonance.

        • Yes, clearly you’re not here to debate this. You have no evidence; you have no argument.

          Your argument is Pascal’s Wager. Not effective, I’m afraid. It applies to you as much as it does me. What if you get to the end and you realize that the Buddhist were correct? Or Mormons? Or Shintoists?

          Whoa–sucks to be you then, eh? I’ve seen the paintings of Buddhist hell. Trust me–you don’t want to go there.

        • nate paz

          through my life, the one thing that has always been solid in in my life was my lord and saviour. to have the feeling that no matter what i do i will always have forgiveness, and i will never hit a wall i cannot climb with the help of God. my faith is how i know, there is no question in my mind to what happens to me when i die

        • Kodie

          Wow, if you believe you are a weak piece of shit, you are.

        • Nate: the atheist will tell you that you’ve gotten through the rough spots in life because of yourself.

          An imaginary friend who doesn’t help you avoid problems but is there for is far less useful than an actual person. Y’know–a real friend.

        • Pofarmer

          If the Mormons are correct, it would actually be kinda cool.

        • Agreed. A not-so-bad heaven would work (even if the Mormons get the really-cool heaven).

          And let’s not forget that South Park said that the Mormon interpretation of the afterlife was correct.

        • Kodie

          Is there still no coffee or booze in Mormon heaven?

        • Pofarmer

          I dunno but they get to be their own god of their own planet, so I suppose you could make the rules you wanted. Maybe I should look into it. On second thought, maybe not.

        • Kodie

          What terrible life are you talking about? Is that part of your delusion?

        • Pofarmer

          It’s kind of a standard Christian argument. Everything is horrible, things are the worst they’ve ever been, society is going to hell, blah, blah, blah.

        • That’s been my understanding as well. Christianity tells us that we’re worthless worms, and the miracle is that God doesn’t just squash us and be done with this ridiculous experiment.

          Wow–I gotta get me some of that.

        • Pofarmer

          It’s not even that. By not being good enough Christians you are making it WORSE! Hunger, abortion, eczema, you name it.

        • Kodie

          I do not know why Christianity is not widely recognized as a superstition. I once got into trouble on a site that wasn’t about religion or atheism on a religious topic by calling some Christians (that I know) of a weaker faith. Like, because they are not church-goers and act like normal, modern people who don’t proselytize or judge or agree with or act like the nutjob Christianity addict who can’t shut up about it and has a billion rules to follow. Like, just because we don’t act like the bible matters in any way doesn’t mean our faith is “weak”!

          So I get sort of bothered by all this stuff they believe anyway, whether they are culturally acclimated or isolationist rapture’s waiting room types. You can hardly even get one normal self-identifying Christian to say anything bad about the deeply misguided kind, not even to say they’re deeply misguided. They have a superstition. They act superstitiously. There are even atheists who are not bothered by religion and just want to live in peace and harmony, leave them to their sacred beliefs because they are theirs. It’s somehow a distinction between a sacred belief in god (even if performed “weak”) and well, aliens are flying on a comet and we have to kill ourselves to get on board. It’s a harmless invisible best friend, harmless as stooping down to pick up a penny head’s up. Even if the only luck you get is a penny, that’s still measurably more. And they run all these food banks and hospitals. Nobody wants to do that! Let them do their stuff.

          I have to keep reminding people that I never believed in Jesus, I wasn’t raised to, and it’s so obviously a story to me that I can’t really believe anyone debates the clues in the bible. They do see different things than we do. That’s what they say, and I can’t really disagree. God is described with human attributes, emotions, and concerns. We watch over things, we arrange things, and all the stuff we don’t arrange must have been arranged by a greater being too large to see.

          It is so obvious a perspective problem. I think of myself as a kind of god over certain domains, and I consider the beings in my domain to be the people. I have used this analogy before about paper. Paper just about overruns my apartment sometimes and I need to collect it and sort through it. Some I have to save and file, some I can just crumple up and toss, and some I have to shred. There is nothing any individual piece of paper can do at this point but wait for my wrath and merciful judgment to begin. They can try to guess what I like all they want, but they don’t know, and they can’t change. Everything in my apartment is personally tolerated by me until I decide the date and the time to start throwing out some trash and clean up the place. But when I’m not here, the empty beer bottle thinks it’s better than the lamp, or at least as good. What Christianity seems to be is a situation in which a god favors the type of animal that can think of a god. We’re all here, and god favors the useful, but nobody can actually know what makes god tick. I personally invited that ice cream container in, so it thinks it has every right to stay, even when there’s no ice cream in it. Christians think it matters to the god, like me, who gets to stay in the save pile and who gets shredded by arbitrary reason. The gas bill says “I have important information! I get saved!” But look at the date. You are wrong, gas bill.

        • Pofarmer

          I have been having a “discussion” over on Camels with Hammers with a fundamentalist about The Fall. To say they see things differently is an understatement.

        • MNb

          “There are even atheists who are not bothered by religion and just want to live in peace and harmony, leave them to their sacred beliefs because they are theirs.”
          In a sense I’m such an atheist. I’m not enough of a Don Quichote to go on an atheist mission to deconvert the nice religious people in the town where I live. I rate living in peace and harmony higher, thank you very much.
          But don’t be mistaken: I’ve never been a closet atheist. The topic doesn’t come up very often, that’s all.

        • Kodie

          I’m not the type to bring it up myself, but people call out all the other superstitions. I live where most of the Christians are the subtle modern, cullturally acclimated kind, but then their beliefs come out in some sort of way that tends to shock me, mostly because we’re not talking about it all the time. Jews are less subtle and not just the ones that are orthodox, because I imagine Jews who aren’t orthodox are presumed Christian unless they state otherwise, and things Christians take for granted, or even me, like Jews will presume I’m Christian because they know I’m not Jewish and part of my job involves telling parents and students about upcoming holidays (like when it was Christmas) and they are sarcastic to alert me to the fact there are Jews. So it’s not just Christians – it’s me and Jews too.

          What I’m trying to contrast here is that, for example, I know a guy who is a chemist (biochemist?) and he is really smart and then he’ll say something about astrology. This is borderline. A lot of people believe in their horoscope, but might just as easily shoot him down for his superstitions.

          Religions=sacred; nobody can talk to anyone about this in a negative way. Every person’s religion is beyond criticism and we have to let it be.

          Superstition=silly; if someone expresses something in this category, it’s open season to make fun of them and they are expecting it and not “persecuted”.

          I am mostly talking about atheists online who approach forums to let the rest of us know it’s best to let these things be, and also nominal Christians who are nevertheless Christian who (a) don’t like to be lumped in with those extreme people, and (b) agree we should honor their sacred beliefs anyway. Religions are serious to people so we should back off. Superstitions are still ok to make fun of people. I read topics like this and posts reviving them and it is really hard to know what the difference is and why rational (mostly) people allow the distinction.

        • Pofarmer

          “I read topics like this and posts reviving them and it is really hard to
          know what the difference is and why rational (mostly) people allow the
          distinction.”

          This is sort of where I’m at right now. Why should we let silly, superstitious, unscientific beliefs just be? Especially when the purveyors of said beliefs want to excoriate us for not believing them? Rigorously check out every Marian apparition and supposed Catholic miracle. Talk about the actual chances of all the folks being raised from the dead in both the old and new testament. Point out that the whole idea of “ascending to heaven” rests on a flawed cosmological model. It might make some people uncomfortable, but perhaps it would encourage them to take the blinders off and THINK! Perhaps.

        • Kodie

          People get really emotional about certain opinions, and we leave them alone because it’s considered rude to antagonize people. I also have a problem talking about it in real-time conversations, about anything. It is not just religion but for example, the environment. Where I work, I had to listen for 20 minutes to a woman whose husband is an environmentalist get on my case for the styrofoam cups and the k-cup machine, and (a) that is not my decision to make, (b) we’re not getting ceramic mugs, because I don’t want to have to clean them and you don’t want the boss’s version of a clean cup, and (c) I personally have a lot more to worry about, but I try to do what I can.

          I then made the mistake of gossiping about this lengthy conversation with her to another person, mostly because people don’t know what my job actually is or what it involves, like being the point-person on suggestions, who it turns out thinks global warming is a crock of shit.

          Let me expand on his reasoning (none of which I had heard from a denier before): (1) Industrialization brings the population down. (2) Therefore, not as many “carbon footprints”. I didn’t think it was so possible to deny something you borderline understand is an actuality simply by ignoring what industrialization and capitalism has changed about said population (had it actually declined) and ignore the basic fact that population has tripled(ish) since before the Industrial Age.

          And I could have argued with him, he’s good-natured enough not to worry about what I think, but I do not think on my feet very well. He is also similarly misinformed about economics and women’s equality.

        • MNb

          “we leave them alone because it’s considered rude to antagonize people”
          For me it’s not so much a matter of avoiding being rude. Heck, I’m a Dutchman and the Dutch belong to the rudest people in the world. For me the problem is that antagonizing people all the time doesn’t exactly contribute to the quality of my life.

        • Kodie

          It’s very weird to me, because I hear people say rude things all the time, but as soon as you argue with them, it’s all your fault it turned into a scene. Rude, wrong, opinions – they are just expressing themselves. Expressing disagreement? Well, you have to have the stomach for it.

        • Pofarmer

          I agree Kodie. I was talking to a friend of mine the other day who is a main line Southern Baptist. Good guy overall, good heart. But I can tell he has the same problem that I had up until recently. When you look at the world from the angle of sin and good and evil, there is just so much of it that doesn’t make sense. If you look at it from the angle of evolved primates dealing with one another, so many more things fall into place. False, sloppy, superstitious thinking creeps into too many areas of our lives if we let it. maybe I made him think a little bit, I know I made us both a little uncomfortable. Me, I’m not uncomfortable because of what I believe, I’m uncomfortable because of what the consequences could be living here in the bible belt.

        • Scott_In_OH

          When you look at the world from the angle of sin and good and evil, there is just so much of it that doesn’t make sense. If you look at it from the angle of evolved primates dealing with one another, so many more things fall into place.

          This was so incredibly, palpably true for me, as well. As I said on another blog, it was like the proverbial puzzle falling into place.

        • Pofarmer

          Geez, made the mistake of going to Leah Libresco’s blog on the Catholic Channel. Sin, sin, original sin, the fall, sacrifice, sin. It is just such a screwed up skewed way of looking at the world. It’s like looking at the world through the curved funhouse mirros and wondering why things don’t ever quite match up.

        • MNb

          Wow, are you somewhat familiar with her journey towards her conversion? I am sure psychologists have to say a few things about it ….
          I understand male advantage here, but I don’t get this.

          http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unequallyyoked/2012/06/this-is-my-last-post-for-the-patheos-atheist-portal.html

          “I was ready to admit that there were parts of Christianity and Catholicism that seemed like a pretty good match for the bits of my moral system that I was most sure of”
          Now compare with

          “Sin, sin, original sin, the fall, sacrifice, sin.”
          If this is a pretty good match for her moral system then what does this say about her moral system and especially her self-image? I shiver when I try to formulate an answer that makes sense …..

        • Pofarmer

          In my opinion, this is where she went off the rails.

          From your link

          “During the discussion, he prodded me on where I thought moral law came
          from in my metaphysics. I talked about morality as though it were some
          kind of Platonic form, remote from the plane that humans existed on. He
          wanted to know where the connection was.”

          “But I didn’t have an analogue for how humans got bootstrap up to get even a partial understanding of objective moral law.

          I’ve heard some explanations that try to bake morality into the
          natural world by reaching for evolutionary psychology. They argue that
          moral dispositions are evolutionarily triumphant over selfishness, or
          they talk about group selection, or something else. Usually, these
          proposed solutions radically misunderstand a) evolution b) moral
          philosophy or c) both. I didn’t think the answer was there. My friend
          pressed me to stop beating up on other people’s explanations and offer
          one of my own.”

          So she just basically hadwaves away the best arguments, that human behavior is evolutionary and natural and that the concept of human morality is the result of our apparently unique ability for Empathy, and goes full blown praying to Mary and all the Saints Catholic. I just don’t know how you switch worldviews as wildly as it looks like she did and not have your head explode from all the cognitive dissionance. But, Heh, Eric Hoffer has an answer.

          “A rising mass movement attracts and holds a following not by its doctrine and promises but by the refuge it offers from the anxieties, barrenness and meaninglessness of an individual existence. It cures the poignantly frustrated not by conferring on them an absolute truth or by remedying the difficulties and abuses which made their lives miserable, but by freeing them from their ineffectual selves—and it does this by enfolding and absorbing them into a closely knit and exultant corporate whole.”

          “The urge to escape our real self is also an urge to escape the rational and the obvious. The refusal to see ourselves as we are develops a distaste for facts and cold logic. There is no hope for the frustrated in the actual and the possible. Salvation can come to them only from the miraculous, which seeps through a crack in the iron wall of inexorable reality. They ask to be deceived.”

          Hoffer, Eric (2011-05-10). The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements (Perennial Classics) (p. 83). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.

          He also states that for a mass movement to be powerfull, it must ask the believer to believe at least a few impossible things. That is what differentiates the believers from everyone else.

        • MNb

          “I hear people say rude things all the time, but as soon as you argue with them …”
          Yeah, the Golden Rule seems hard to apply.

        • I’ve heard that the trick with population is to turn children from money makers (extra hands to help in the fields) to money sinks (kids who need food and then go to school and don’t contribute much).

        • MNb

          “Especially when the purveyors of said beliefs want to excoriate us for not believing them?”
          As soon that happens I see it as a carte blanche for me. But if they leave me alone I won’t bother them.

        • I have your coat of arms: beneath a hornet’s nest, put Dimitte Me et Dabo Tibi Solus (leave me alone and I’ll leave you alone).

          http://hornetnestsfreeremoval.com/media/bees$20Aug$2008001_edited-1hbirdfeed.jpg

        • MNb

          Regarding discussions online I totally agree with you, as you probably already have figured out. Nobody forces our very own Norm from Australia to post here. We don’t have to live with each other, so I gladly let him have it. And I’m more or less OK with you calling religion a form of superstition; I can think of some objections, but they are not very relevant let alone interesting especially in this context.
          In daily life though I’m a big fan of live and let live. That’s to say, in general, because when a couple of JW’s visited me last year (very nice people) I didn’t spare them either. Because consensus. They knew at beforehand what they were in for.

        • Kodie

          I don’t have many encounters about religion. Where I live, people tend to be pretty quiet about it, and that is how I grew up. I don’t live in the parts of America that are blatant about it as a topic of conversation – I assume Christians everywhere in America enjoy the basic assumption that who they’re talking to is probably Christian also (except, like I mentioned Jews, and I’ll get to that in a second). Where I live, since it’s a given, nobody really has to talk about it, and I guess other places, they feel like they have to mention it all the time, even if everyone else probably is, because it infuses everything they do or enjoy. Jews seem to get this, which is why I know more people to have identified as Jewish. So much of what I consider secular American culture has been arranged for and by the majority that just doesn’t consider Jews, so at the least hint of saying something that doesn’t apply to them or before I get my assumptions wrong, Jews are very quick to correct. I think I can tell who is Jewish without being told, but apparently, over a handful of times, I’ve said something, to me, generic, that sets off their hackles and they have to say something immediately before I go on assuming they’re Christian too. And since I’m not Jewish and I’m white, they also assume I am a Christian. Social deduction.

          I am living and letting live, but for Christians, apparently. I haven’t been offended, for the most part, by anything anyone of a religious belief has said in my presence, except apparently the unspoken assumption that I’m also Christian. When I was young, I can’t say I was raised for tolerance, but it was the 1970s, and it got through. I thought equality was good. Every sex, race, ethnicity, or belief was a thing people should include rather than exclude or segregate or impose restrictions on. I mistakenly thought that meant everyone else was – it certainly seemed to be the case, that diversity was generally tolerated and wanted – anyone could apply for a job and your co-workers are people from every corner, every color, any sex or sexual orientation, and people were being cool and not bigots. I found out later, at least where I live, this seems to be true except for atheists. The handful of times I put that out there, it was not good. I have never claimed my atheism in opposition to a religious argument or proclamation, nor simply announced myself before people made assumptions – I only answered the question that was asked – by a new friend, or a boyfriend, or going around the room introducing ourselves (in an academic multi-cultural setting where it was appropriate to share one’s beliefs, at least when everyone else did it). I may have been excused from my job because of it, under the disguise of some other bullshit reason, since that’s illegal. It wasn’t talked about in my secular family, and I don’t know what anyone in my family actually believes either.

          These people are superstitious. They know me, they can’t be around me. They don’t know what I’ll do. They don’t know what I think or what I think of them. They’re afraid of me or what I do when they’re not around. If someone has known me for a long time, and it came out, it’s like a jarring realization. This explains a lot. This is like finding out your nice neighbor has a basement full of dead bodies and child pornography on their computer. That’s what atheism still means in America, as far as my experience goes. I don’t know other atheists because they are afraid to come out as well. I don’t care to join a physical group, and I don’t care to be brave – I don’t have enough stability in my life to take that kind of hit, and I’m not quick on my feet, like I said.

          They are absolutely superstitious. I am just like them, and they are like no Christians we talk about, they are just like me. They are liberal, modern people who are sex-positive, not homophobic, and generally selfish people who try to win at this game called life by cheating at the rules a bit (but not enough to get arrested or even cited). And yet we are so far apart. They have an invisible best friend they never talk to or remember, and I don’t. At the very least, atheism (because speaking out) gives the impression that the person is going to be a troublesome pretentious asshole not living and letting live. It’s fine as long as you allow Christians to have their privilege, which is apparent to Jews, and Jews don’t make a big deal out of it, except to shine a light on basic assumptions, not to talk anyone out of believing in Jesus.

          I am not that interested in talking people out of believing in Jesus either in real life, but I’m allowed to roll my eyes. If they’d think the worst of me if I opened my mouth, and not be afraid to tell me what that is, I’m allowed to roll my goddamned eyes.

        • MNb

          “The handful of times I put that out there, it was not good.”
          Yeah, in this respect I’m a lucky guy.

          “That’s what atheism still means in America, as far as my experience goes.”
          I believe you immediately. I have read a few too many horror stories by American atheists – some worse than yours. Of course stories like yours confirm nicely another Dutch anti-American bias: so much for the land of the free.

        • Pofarmer

          Well, I think live and let live is a fairly good position in everyday life. That only goes so far, of course. But here? If you don’t want to have a spirited conversation, don’t log onto the innerwebs. Don’t have a blog on Patheos, and then act all Butthurt when an Atheist calls you on your Catholic or Evangelical, or whatever nonsense.

        • MNb

          Of course.

        • avalpert

          I agree with this approach – after all the most dangerous part of Christianity (and Islam for that matter) is their belief that not only must they behave a certain way but it is their job to get everyone else in the world to believe as they do,

          South Park did a pretty amusing two-part episode (Go God Go) satirizing the long-term trajectory of evangelical atheism.

        • MNb

          “im not here to debate this”
          Ah – you proselytize but don’t like receiving difficult questions and possible refutations. Got it.

          “would you rather make it to the end realizing that God doesn’t exist”
          Yes.

          “and you lived a happy life for nothing”
          See, that’s why I pity you silly christians. I’m just 50 and I can proudly say that I didn’t live for nothing at all. I made a difference in quite a few human lives.

          “something that i should add to this is that people who look for God and find Him are able to have true happiness”
          Yes. I live as an open atheist in a thoroughly religious community and am possibly the only atheist in town. Still it strikes me how these liberal believers (we also have muslims, hindu’s and buddhists) so often use totally secular arguments to back up their views and decisions. Now I’m far from sure this attitude has what to do with their liberalism and tolerance, but it sure doesn’t harm.

        • Kodie

          It’s fictional though.

        • Again: just cuz you said?

          Why rely on your interpretation of the Bible? Why not Fred Phelps’s interpretation? Why not mine?

          And why the Bible? There are lots of other holy books, some older than the Old Testament. Why not them?

          Get out of your parochial view. You’re a Christian because you come from a Christian environment, not because Christianity is true.

        • mark hersey

          so? twilight, the hunger games, and harry potter are considered good books too.

        • Annerdr

          I have to disagree. Twilight is not a good book.

        • TheNuszAbides

          most likely he was exercising the Bestseller Fallacy … hardly an unremarkable coincidence that this is also applied to Da Bible?!

        • MNb

          ” it is in our blood”
          Can you tell me which experiments you have done to show sin in human blood?

        • MGreen

          Magical food in magical gardens with magical snakes is a standard theme in several Mesopotamian myths. That’s your first clue.

  • Kola TeBos

    nate is correct

  • Kola TeBos

    read the bible that is how

    • Why the Bible? Why not the Koran? Why not the Gitas? Why not the Book of Mormon or any holy book?

  • Ashley

    I love this article. And honestly I’m tired of hearing you should read the bible. I can hear every single Christian recite it so why bother boring myself through it. Lol thanks for a good read that resonates 100% with me!!

  • When blogging about Mel Gibson’s The Passion of Christ I noticed the word ‘fiction’ ends the word ‘crucifiction’, is that a coincidence?

    • “Take the fiction out of the crucifixion!!” I’m painting up a sign right now.

    • TheNuszAbides

      fun, but just in case anyone takes this entirely seriously instead:
      crucifixion -> fix -> figere, fasten
      fiction [a word not developed until after centuries of various ‘fixions] -> roots are form, fashion, feign, invent
      so in a sense, fixion is inarguable and static; fiction at least doesn’t pretend to be absolute.

  • Joe

    God did all of this to show he’s not like every other god in every other story ever written. No one likes feeling like there’s someone controlling everything who’s just gonna go back on his word whenever he feels like. He’s not the same as every other “god.” He created the world a certain way and he sticks to that and gives us a chance to live in the same world, not a changed one.

    • If you have evidence that the Christian god exists, let us know. Otherwise, this sounds like nothing more than theology.

  • Mark N

    Crucification isn’t really a gruelling punishment for the son of a God is it?…. Neither was his suffering on the particularly high end of the pain threshold! Jesus IS God…. Therefore Jesus is eternal…. Therefore Jesus can’t die!!! There’s a reason why scapegoating is frowned upon …. Its completely immoral and any God that would use it to set an example is not a presence worthy of any worship! Having read the bible … even if I wanted to believe in a God or have faith… It would not be the malevolent, bloodthirsty, infanticidal, ethnic cleanser of the Christian book!

  • VC

    The author criticises what he does not understand. If the author is looking for proof of the existence of God, he is responsible for seeking that truth instead of looking to others to prove it to him. In no other way would he be convinced otherwise. If a claim is made that God does not exist, then the burden of proof relies on the accuser. You can only find truth by sincerely seeking it.

    • I go where the evidence points. I do indeed look to Christians for the evidence–they’re the ones who claim to have it, after all.

      Don’t shirk the burden of proof. I don’t claim that God doesn’t exist. Do you claim that he does? Show me.

    • MNb

      Yeah – if a claim is made that The Flying Spaghetti Monster, Santa Claus and the fairies in my backyard tending my flowers don’t exist then the burden of proof relies on the accuser too. You’re invited.

      • wtfwjtd

        You have fairies tending your flowers? Damn, I need to find me some of those!

      • Madison Blane

        Blasphemer!! The Flying Spaghetti Monster (sauce be upon Him) ABSOLUTELY exists!!!

    • Kodie

      You can only find it by willingly submitting yourself to being fooled and persuaded by faulty logic. You criticize what you do not understand – that we understand how easily pulled into a fiction a person can be if you want it to be true, and willing to ignore the real world. If there is more to understand than that, no Christian has ever shared that. It’s always that we don’t understand, and nobody explains it to us, we just have to prove it to ourselves with cheap parlor tricks and looking at things and events as if they are signs from god. You don’t understand brains or statistics.

  • David

    Hello there:

    I just want to say something about the need that I see in this discussion to ask for “evidence” (in the scientific sense) about God’s existence or nature.

    I think a Christian may never be able to give “evidence” (in the scientific sense) about the existence or nature of God. But is that sufficient reason to view things differently than Christians or even worst to stop believing in God? I would say no. Here is why:

    The scientific method is just one way of acquiring knowledge, not the only way to know something. There are other ways equally valid like philosophy, for example.

    How important is knowing this? Extremely important because God cannot be explained through the scientific method.

    The scientific method by definition can only examine the things of this world but God is not of this world. God created the world, He is not contained in the world. You cannot simply put God, Who is outside the reality as we know it in this world, under a microscope and examine Him.

    The scientific method is not the way to “study” God.

    To try to explain God’s existence or nature via the scientific method is like trying to explain 1+1=2 with grammar. It is simply not the way to address the issue.

    So, next time you want “evidence” about God or his nature, just realize that although that would be awesome, it is just not the way to address the issue.

    • The scientific method is just one way of acquiring knowledge, not the only way to know something. There are other ways equally valid like philosophy, for example.

      I see little evidence that philosophy (as practiced by philosophers) teaches us anything new.

      How important is knowing this? Extremely important because God cannot be explained through the scientific method.

      I agree. So then we’re in agreement on the problem.

      Shiva also can’t be explained through the scientific method. So then you believe in Shiva as well?

      The sc ientific method by definition can only examine the things of this world but God is not of this world.

      Huh? Don’t Christians claim that God enters this world to answer prayers and perform miracles?

      Sounds like a testable claim to me.

      God created the world, He is not contained in the world. You cannot simply put God, Who is outside the reality as we know it in this world, under a microscope and examine Him.

      You’re giving lots of excuses. Why then be surprised when I don’t believe? You’ve nicely explained why.

    • The Thinking Commenter

      think a Christian may never be able to give “evidence” (in the scientific sense) about the existence or nature of God. But is that sufficient reason to view things differently than Christians or even worst to stop believing in God?

      Why Christian? There are lots of religions. Are you prejudiced or something? You seem very narrow-minded about it for some reason. 😀

    • MNb

      “There are other ways equally valid like philosophy, for example.”
      Philosopher A disagrees with philosopher B. What test will they design to find out who’s right? It’s very easy to answer that question for two scientists – not for philosophers and believers.
      The conclusion is that science provides the only way to knowledge.

      “The scientific method is not the way to “study” God.”
      That’s correct; it also means there is no meaningful way to “study” god”.

      ” trying to explain 1+1=2 with grammar.”
      Bad analogy. Math is a language.

      https://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~wtg10/grammar.pdf

    • smrnda

      I agree; god as described by any religion is not a falsifiable hypothesis that can be tested. To me, it means that it’s totally outside the realm of systematic knowledge and pure speculation. There is no way to gain reliable information on the topic, so I take the topic, and I throw it into the bin.

    • Angel Smith

      1+1=2 using grammar: one plus one equals two. 😛

  • David

    Also:

    I’ve heard many people using the Big Bang theory as even the best evidence that God does not exist. But it always surprises me how many do not even know who’s the father of the Big Bang theory.

    The Big Bang theory was created by the Catholic Church. So, it is obviously not the greatest atheist discovery as unfortunately many atheists make it sound like.

    My point is that the Big Bang theory and theism can go, in fact go, hand in hand.

    • I think what you mean is that Georges Lemaître, a physicist and priest, made important contributions to the theory. (No, the Catholic church itself isn’t a source of new discoveries in physics.)

      If you’re desperate to hold on to your theism, knock yourself out. Nevertheless, natural explanations like evolution and the Big Bang show no need for the supernatural to explain what we see around us.

      • TheNuszAbides

        still a distressing proportion of theists (esp. Thomists, it seems to me) seem to actually buy the “on Our watch” line of ‘reasoning’…

        – at best it discounts [some, obviously not all] barefaced conspiracy theories as to the hoarding of Real Knowledge (TM) or censorship of scientific truth (which hardly matters to a dedicated, Sophisticated theorist, because you can always add one more layer of What They Want The Evidence To Point To, Reverse Psychology or whatever)

        – attribution becomes utterly meaningless to any argument when it’s essentially saying no more than “this was the predominant religion of the time and place, and since most believers were willing to surrender their own individual discretion as to [organization of society/government/households/The Thoughts In Your Child’s Head] at This Clear and Brightly Colored and Perpetually-Relevant Line, who are you to say that everything Great Christian Scientist X discovered was not actively revealed to GCSX by God?” (not to mention the ‘testimony’ of any GCS who gives lip service to Creation/a Creator/et al. without such phrases having any material relevance to discoveries)

    • MNb

      Another guy who knows zilch about the history of physics.
      1) There is no such thing as “THE” Big Bang Theory. It’s an umbrella for all kinds of things. There are several theories describing the Big Bang. Thumbrule: as soon as a layman talks about “The Big Bang Theory” he will produce nonsense.
      2) “how many do not even know who’s the father of the Big Bang theory.”
      That specifically includes you. That father was Alexander Friedmann. As a Soviet-commie.he had nothing to do with the RCC.
      3) “the Big Bang theory and theism can go hand in hand”
      Breaking news! Stop the press! Except that you’re only half a century late. Almost all physicists have accepted that there has been a Big Bang since 1964. The vast majority of physicists are atheists. Before 1964 there were also atheist physicists who accepted the Big Bang: Paul Dirac and George Gamow (a pupil of Friedmann) belong to the most famous ones.
      Big Bang and religion have nothing to do with each other – except in the overheated minds of some self delusional believers.

      • wtfwjtd

        “There is no such thing as “THE” Big Bang Theory.”

        Now hang on there just a gosh-darned minute! Me and my wife watch the “The Big Bang Theory” almost every night, and love it! Oh, wait a minute, I think…

        • MNb

          Is that series really as silly as it seems to me?

        • wtfwjtd

          It grows on you, after a while. Like all comedy shows, the earlier stuff is best.

        • Pofarmer

          It’s whole purpose is to be silly. But it’s a fun show.

        • Angel Smith

          this made me lol so hard. i also love that show.

    • Ian Atkinson

      The Big Bang theory was created by the Catholic Church? No it wasn’t! Universal expansion was an idea first put forward by Georges Lemaître. The fact that this person was a catholic priest has no baring on his scientific work, in much the same way that Mendel’s work in early genetics had any baring on the fact that he was a monk. This is because they both stuck to the scientific method becaus they were religious, but real scientists too unlike greedy, lying, modern creation apologists.

      Edwin Hubble confirmed the idea by taking spectrographs of galaxies (hubble also discovered those) and measuring their red shift using the The 100-inch (2.5 m) Hooker telescope at Mount Wilson. Fred Hoyle started calling it the Big Bang because he liked to ridicule it – it didn’t fit with his religious sensibilities and that made him a poor scientist in his later life.

      There was still a problem with an expanding universe. James Clark Maxwell’s calculations for the behaviour of electricity and magnetism didn’t allow for the speed of light to be variable in time. An experiment by Mickelson and Morley confirmed this to be true. Mo variation in the speed of light could be detected from any direction even though the Earth is hurtling around the sun and the sun is hurtling around the Galactic core. Einstein worked with this fact and formulated his General and Special theories of Relativity.

      The problem with the Expanding Universe is it couldn’t have been expanding for an infinite amount of time – and because light covers 186,000 miles in a second it takes time for it to move across the Universe. so the further away we see something, the further back in time it is. Which means, if we look far enough, we should be able to see the light from back when the Universe was small and compact.

      The Cosmic Background Radiation (the light from the early Universe) was Discovered in 1964 by American radio astronomers Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson – so far away and receding so quickly from us that it’s redshifted completely out of the light spectrum and into the microwave.

      A lot of the behaviour of the early hot Universe has been tested using facilities like the Large Hadron Collider. Also recent detection of the gravity waves caused by the Big Bang using BISEP and the Keck Array is yet more evidence for it.

  • smrnda

    I’ve never bought into the notion that Jesus actually made any sacrifice. We’re talking an eternal deity who spends a blip of a second on earth. It’s kind of how people raise awareness about homelessness by spending a night sleeping in a cardboard box. It isn’t pleasant, but they aren’t homeless *in reality* and after the night, they’ll go back to living under a real roof with a real bed. To me, Jesus on earth is kind of like that.

    • freethinker57

      Have said the same for years, I don’t sense any real sacrifice or meaning to it.

  • vito

    the way I see it, If Jesus knew he was going to be resurrected very shortly and moreover, live in eternal bliss and have a great eternal career as Lord and a member of the trinity which runs the whole world, he did not really DIE in the full sense, for our sins or otherwise. He was tortured, though, I have to give him that. But it was over soon and he had an opportunity to avoid it, anyway, but chose not to. Secondly, if God knew, Jesus was not really dying, especially if this was God’s plan, he did not really SACRIFICE his ‘beloved son’. They were shortly reunited.
    By the way I just posted a question along those lines at the catholic section of patheos (standingonmyhead), very respectfully, but my question was not approved and never appeared in the comments section. Kind of strange as the article dealth precisely with the topic or Jesus’ resurrection and “what that means”.

    • No, it doesn’t make sense, even seen with a charitable view.

      I’ve seen other Catholic blogs reject comments. If they don’t want discussion, perhaps they could just have a Like button instead.

      • vito

        actually, I have just checked it again, and the comment has now appeared, after 3 or 4 hours. It seems they take some time to screen the comments. No responses, though…

        • Pofarmer

          It will be interesting to see if you get any responses. I have been banned from a couple Catholic blogs for questions like that.

        • vito

          not a single response in over 36 hours so far

        • Kodie

          Are the comments in general slowed down? It’s a very serious holiday for them, I would not expect a response, unless they are posting a lot but ignoring yours. I find weekends to be pretty slow generally.

        • vito

          You could be right, although I posted very early on Saturday

        • TheNuszAbides

          bump?

  • freethinker57

    This article is a good start to the oh so many questions/confusions I’ve had re the crucifiction/resurrection story. Just a few. If traditionally, being crucified was a Roman punishment for a political crimes, then Christ’s own experience on the cross should be similar. 1. Why was he crucified with common thieves? Those were not a crucifiable offense. 2. Despite the gospels conflicting on multiple other points, they all indicate Jesus died within hours of being placed there. And then was quickly removed. Why? The whole point of crucifiction is to make the death as slow and agonizing a death in public as possible, lasting 3-5 days, eventually dying of suffocation & horrible pain. Then your body would be left there to be picked apart by scavengers as a warning to the enemies of the state. (This was common practice all the way through the history. Your rotting carcass was great propaganda for the victor) According to biblical accounts, Jesus dies within hours, after receiving ‘a wound to his side’ & being given something to drink by the Roman soldiers below him. He then quickly succombs. Then he is removed from the cross ( defeating one of the primary purposes of this mode of execution-your being an example to others not to defy Rome) and buried in a tomb. Rome would not have cared about local religious customs and the need to prepare a body appropriately- it was part of the punishment.

    Supposedly when on 3rd day he is discovered gone from the tomb, that would be right around the time the other 2 men who were left on the cross would actually be succumbing to their crucifictions.

    I have ALWAYS thought this whole story line sounds very suspicious,it has never sounded plausible to me in any way. I suspect ( if he was real at all) that Jesus was drugged/wounded and was in some stupor & then woke up/was removed. At the very least if he truly was dead, and his body is gone, wouldn’t your 1st thought be that the body was stolen, vandalized in some way? In other points of human history, a missing body usually doesn’t lead those around you to think ‘resurrection!’ When stepping outside the paradigm of them telling you what happened, this is the only thing that sounds logical or plausible to me. Either he was still alive all along ( my primary belief) or that his bod was stolen. Since no one can say his tomb was watched/monitored during the 3 days, isn’t it more likely a natural explanation that a supernatural one?

    Those are just a few things that rattle around, there are so many things just not right with biblical stories and dogma, but these are today’s musings.

    • freethinker57

      I also concur with Vito’s statement below mine. If Jesus KNEW he was the SOG, then his ‘sacrifice’ doesn’t seem very great to me. 33 yrs of human life a re blip in the eons of time for a ‘god’. And he had one truly horrific day, which other human beings were going through routinely in that era of humanity ( Jesus was not treated differently than others. Supposedly Rome crucified close to 70,000 gladiator/ slaves during Spartacus’ rebellion. They lined the Apian Way for miles & where there for months, till their bones fell off the cross) So what makes Jesus’ ‘sacrifice’ so special?

      • Sam Brosenberg

        You’re over-stating it. At the end of the Third Servile War, the Romans captured about 6,000 slaves alive at the end of the last battle, and they crucified every single one of them. Overall, Spartacus’ rebels probably only ever numbered 70,000 at their most numerous point, so the Romans couldn’t have crucified ALL of them.

        Crucifixion was an insult and a threat as much as it was a punishment. It was reserved as a punishment for the crime of REBELLION against Rome, it was rarely used for any other purpose. Since it took a person 2-3 days to die up on a cross, the would be out in a public space and it was a great way for the Romans to say “Hey look at this guy! He rebelled against us. Are you SURE that you want to rebel against us too?”

        • freethinker57

          You’re missing my point. (I agree completely re what crucifiction was to the Romans and why they did it-it was a public execution for political crimes against the state of Rome. It was a common enough punishment is the main point)
          My post above speaks to the whole notion of Jesus’ being ‘sacrificed’ on the cross. If he truly was a divine being, what one day of suffering would have meant to someone who was (supposedly) eternal.

    • Since a sacrifice to God has to be burned to reach him, why was Jesus killed by crucifixion? That kind of sacrifice doesn’t work. He should’ve been burned afterwards, not buried.

      if he truly was dead, and his body is gone, wouldn’t your 1st thought be that the body was stolen, vandalized in some way?

      Not me. Whenever I’ve misplaced a dead body, I always think that it rose from the dead and walked away.

      Since no one can say his tomb was watched/monitored during the 3 days, isn’t it more likely a natural explanation that a supernatural one?

      Far simpler to me is to assume that the whole thing is a story. If any part of it is actual history, I await the evidence. Sure, lots of people died and were buried back then. Not surprising. What’s surprising is the resurrection part. As a result, I reject the entire story.

      • freethinker57

        I actually had never stopped to think why Jesus wasn’t burned as true offering to God would have been (hmm-storking chin). Good point.

        And I would defer to your, er obvious experience (?) in dealing with missing dead bodies? Either way, I am with you on the whole rejection of the whole story . It just never added up to me. Too many questions.

        • Angel Smith

          if jesus had been burned to ashes and THEN resurrected, that might be a miracle, but for all we know, he was just in a deep coma when he was buried. It happens all the time.

        • Keira

          it’s just a story, I wouldn’t look too deep into it. It could be any number of explanations, though all are more likely than resurrection.

          – His body was taken and his followers couldn’t bear to imagine him not being there, so they believed he was there with them. This would explain his sudden disappearance again when he rose up to heaven – he was never there in the first place.
          – He survived being on the cross (quite possible, given that having nails through your hands ain’t gonna kill you)
          – He was never put on the cross

        • wtfwjtd

          …or, if this Jesus fellow actually did exist and actually was crucified, his corpse was left on the cross to rot for several days, like virtually all of the other thousands of criminals that were executed in this manner. Then, his remains were thrown in a mass grave, and promptly forgotten. This was standard Roman practice of the day, and we’ve no good reason to think they would have made any special exceptions to it.

        • That’s a big part of the interviews I’ve heard from Bart Ehrman on his new book–that anyone getting Jesus’s body to put in a grave is very unlikely. Much of the point of crucifixion is the humiliation of hanging there, dead.

        • wtfwjtd

          You mean like a phoenix? Yes, that would seem more god-like.

        • Could’ve been. That’s certainly a lot more plausible than the supernatural interpretation. I think “it’s a story” is the better response, though.

          The problem is that the apologist will nibble away and demand that all the non-supernatural parts of the story be declared history (death, tomb). But that’s like saying that we should also grant that Dorothy went into her house during a tornado.

      • DanielleD

        “Sure, lots of people died and were buried back then.” Yes, and lots of people were buried (or burned) alive back then as well. Pretty much, if you passed out, they thought you were dead and wanted your corpse disposed of prior to releasing your stink; hence, the Lazarus “miracle”…by the time Jesus arrived, he had woken up. If Jesus was an actual historic figure, it was probably right around that time he figured that all out and started planning his “resurrection” plot.

    • Pofarmer

      Fwiw, I think Jesus “dies” on the 7th hour of his crucifixion, so it’s a symbolic number. And yes, it’s curious to me why he would have died that fast, or why the Romans would have cared and speeded it up. As far as anybody can tell, it’s completely fabricated by someone who didn’t know much about crucifixion.

      • I hadn’t thought about the 7. Interesting.

        Good point about the speeding it up thing. Maybe they can go home once the guys are dead?

        As for why they didn’t break Jesus’s legs to hasten death, John says:

        These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: “Not one of his bones will be broken”

        • wtfwjtd

          “Good point about the speeding it up thing. Maybe they can go home once the guys are dead?”

          Of course. Who wants to hang around a crucifixion doing soldier stuff when beer-thirty rolls around?

          As for that “fulfilled scripture” thing: This isn’t so much a quote mine as it is a mangling; apparently this was referring to the scripture about the passover lamb that states “do not break any of the bones” from Ex 12:46 and others.

        • Pofarmer

          Was it actually common to break the legs of the crucified? It seems most of the stuff I’ve found says it wasn’t.

        • Good question. That certainly contradicts the idea of crucifixion deliberately taking a long time.

        • Annerdr

          When Julius Caesar crucified the pirates, he cut their throats as an act of mercy. Breaking the legs would also have been merciful in that they would have died of suffocation rather than from dehydration.

  • LuvingGod

    You’re probably the bravest man I know, Mr. Seidensticker. I know what will happen to me when I die. That’s called faith, and I believe it because I’ve seen and experienced the change God made in me when I believed. You don’t have that faith so you can never tell anyone, conclusively, what will become of your soul, spirit, being, whatever term you choose to use, when you die. That has to require far, far more courage than believing in a loving and living God. I’m curious, though. You require proof of God and life after death. I know they are real because I see God all around me, I’ve spoken with some who have died and come back, and I see history unfolding just as it was written. Where is your proof, however? Prove to me the non-existence of God? Tell me, scientifically and emphatically, what will become of you when you die, AND now you prove it. One last thing… I would die for my beliefs and for my God. Convince me you would die for your beliefs and your nothingness?

    I probably won’t be back here. I stumbled upon your blog while looking for something else. I will pray for you, however. I hope you don’t mind that? Sometimes the best non-believers make the best believers when they finally ‘get it’. I pray someday you will. By the way, I’m not a fanatic in robes on a street corner with a sign. I’m a 58 year old, college educated, businessman who has studied theology and the Bible for most of my adult life. In saying that, you may want to go back and reevaluate some things you stated in your numbered list. Some are completely inaccurate from a Biblical point of view. I found number 10 particularly interesting, too. You’re an atheist, but in number 10 you feel no need to thank God. You mean the one you state doesn’t exist? Have a great Easter weekend!

    • You’re probably the bravest man I know, Mr. Seidensticker.

      Nice of you to say, but don’t dismiss your own bravery. You risk going to dozens of hells invented by other religions, and yet none of this keeps you awake at night. Nerves of steel, I tell you.

      What about the faith of the guy in the other religion. Is that valid just like yours? What if it tells him something else?

      That has to require far, far more courage than believing in a loving and living God.

      Believing in something that has insufficient evidence isn’t brave; it’s stupid.

      You require proof of God and life after death.

      No—just sufficient evidence. Not much to ask, I think you’ll agree.

      Prove to me the non-existence of God?

      As I’ve made clear, I neither offer nor demand proof. I simply go where the preponderance of evidence points.

      Convince me you would die for your beliefs and your nothingness?

      One of my loved ones is in danger? Of course I’d die to prevent their death.

      I probably won’t be back here.

      Stick around. You might learn something … assuming your faith is strong enough to be critiqued.

      Sometimes the best non-believers make the best believers when they finally ‘get it’.

      Atheists like me never convert.

      Some are co mpletely inaccurate from a Biblical point of view.

      I won’t get it without your telling me what the problem is.

      • freethinker57

        I would merely add that most believers make the best atheists, once they ‘get it’. Most atheists I have met/spoken with have spent a long time conisdering what they believe & why. And have read the bible extensively.

        • JT Rager

          So true! For the longest time I just said “I will just think about what makes sense to me later” when it came to the specifics about what I believed within Christianity. I knew there wasn’t a consensus on what “miracles” historians considered, and I knew I didn’t agree with everything in the Bible. I looked for a reason why I believed something beyond “my parents raised me this way”, and when push came to shove, I ultimately came to “that’s why you need faith” again and again. That somehow satisfied me with a dumb grin on my face for a few years.

          It took a while for me to even question why I needed faith in the first place. It seems so obvious now. Either way, I’m proud of reaching my atheistic conclusion by myself, even though I feel 20 years as a theist is far too long.

        • TheresaDoneIt

          So, is that to say someone like myself makes a mediocre atheist? I was not raised indoctrinated into religion. My father never mentioned god or religion unless I questioned his opinion on it and even the his answers were short and to the point with very little elaboration and a quick change is subject. I knew from a very young age (preteen) that religious thought was not grounded in reality and religion was a crutch for those afraid of death. I continue to do so and unless some damn good evidence is produced, will not ever be a theist. As a matter of fact, the more I am exposed to religious ignorance and the goal to dominate, I am becoming ever closer to calling mysel and antitheist.

        • Kodie

          Theresa, I grew up kind of like you did, without religion or anyone talking about it in my house or anywhere else, really. I think the comment by freethinker57 pertains to what LuvingGod wrote in their last paragraph.

        • MNb

          The way he formulates it is a bit awkward, but I don’t think he means it that way. He is talking about knowing and understanding what atheists exactly reject.

          “the more I am exposed to ….”
          That seems to be his point – apostates have been exposed a large part of their lives, unlike you and me. The only indoctrination I ever got was three visits to Sunday school when I was 6.

        • DanielleD

          It’s not an insult to atheists who were not raised religiously; it’s just the truth that those of us who were raised by overly religious parents, those of us who were brainwashed and still didn’t believe, those of us who lost our childhoods, those of us whose own mothers won’t speak to us simply because we don’t believe (such as adult “apostate” Jehovah’s Witness children, and there are millions of us)…well, it effected us a little deeper, a bit more personally. Possibly more than you can ever understand, regardless of how much evidence you research. What you feel when you research what religion has done to people is empathy for those who were wronged…and while that is a perfectly just and moral feeling to feel – we were the ones who were wronged, we feel the wronging harder, and it is less empathetic to minimize that fact. Similarly, many very good abolitionists were white, but the best abolitionists were former slaves because they themselves had experienced the oppression directly (and imagine what the white abolitionists would have sounded like telling Sojourner Truth she wasn’t a better abolitionist, that she should step aside because they did some research and are very near to calling themselves abolitionists); religion is merely another form of slavery (not to mention used to support slavery, the bible is very clear that slavery is a beloved institution of their God). One thing you can believe, you had it better than us…there really is no need to be defensively jealous if we get called “better” atheists for it…while you are closer & closer to calling yourself an antitheist, that has been our lives for as long as we can remember; before we even knew there was a word for it to call ourselves. Feel free to join the party, the more the merrier; but have enough self-respect to not try to act as if you organized it when you arrived decades late.

        • freethinker57

          Absolutely not!! Please don’t read insult where none was intended! My post was directed at those believers who have said before “once we ‘get it’, we’ll come back ( to god).” My point was merely that many (most) atheists I have known & spoken with PERSONALLY, have come to their conclusions about what they don’t believe and why through a long, careful, personal examination & study. The bottom line no matter what your background is if you really open yourself to critical thinking, it is hard to accept anything on just ‘faith’. For me ‘faith’ being the belief in something in the absence of proof.

          I am saddened that people in here become snarky with one another over who is the better atheist, or what makes a better atheist. I expect to see that on other sites but I was hoping not to find it here, where we could all discuss what we think & believe without criticizing each other.

    • Castilliano

      What I find funny is that there are followers in most every single religion ever who have exactly the same proof (or lack thereof) and certainty for their gods and afterlives that you just expressed about Yahweh and heaven.
      When you listen to followers of other religions, does it rattle your belief system? Does it make you think maybe they’re right about Shiva? Or Allah? Or Zeus? etc, etc.
      No?
      Well, that’s how we feel about your statements. They come across just as misguided and feeble.
      Good news though, you just have one god left before you’re an atheist.
      Cheers.

    • Norm Donnan

      Your so right,lets hope not only Bob gets it before the evidence they will find convincing will be after they die.

    • MGreen

      Feel free to believe in Yahweh the storm god but non-believer’s ranks continue to grow. Maybe one day you’ll see reason and escape the brain washing of your youth. Good luck.

    • MNb

      “you can never tell anyone, conclusively, what will become of …”
      Neither can you, as you will lack a body after you die.

      “I will pray for you, however. I hope you don’t mind that?”
      Feel free to waste your time as you please.

    • Shannon Culver

      So you’re going to pray for him? Don’t you think your almighty is all perfect and all knowing? Don’t you think that your god has a plan? Do you really think he will change his perfect plan, just because you decided to pray? It makes NO sense. Either your God has a plan for the universe or he doesn’t. If he does, then your prayers are a waste of time, and if he doesn’t, then they still are, just a waste of time. Just because praying makes you feel better doesn’t mean it does anything other than that. If all we ever did was pray, nothing would get done. 2 working hands can do more than a thousand clasped in prayer, and that my friend, is a fact. Also, atheist do NOT need to prove anything to you. You are the one that is making a claim. You are the one that is certain of your god and a afterlife, so you are the one that needs to do the proving. Also, it does not require ANY faith to not believe in something. Do you have faith that there is no big foot? How about the toothfairy? Santa? Zeus? How much faith does it require for you to not believe in them? NONE, right? You are also an atheist. There are thousands of gods you choose not to believe in, atheist just go one god further. You also mentioned that you needed scientific proof of what happens after you die, which is absurd. How on earth do you expect someone to be able to provide evidence of what happens when you are already dead? Do you remember what it was like before you were born? Do you remember what it felt like to not exist? I don’t think you do, but most atheists will tell you that that is exactly what we believe death is like. It is simply no longer existing. The universe has been here for billions of years and it will continue to be here for a long long time after you, and all of us humans are gone. When you die, you simply no longer exist, there is no pain, no joy, no sadness, no laughter. There is nothing…. but peace. Becoming one with the universe again, in which you came from. Becoming part of a star once again. Its a beautiful story if you ask me. Much better than, “GOD CREATED YOU in his image, but he messed up, made a few mistakes along the way, a lot of mistakes actually, remember when he drowned and murdered all of his beautiful sinful children the 1st time around?? So anyway, in order to cleanse you of the sins he created you with, he created himself as his son, (after he secretly impregnated Mary,… wait isn’t that rape??) so he could sacrifice himself to himself, so you could be forgiven of your sins and live in heaven for all eternity. But, if you don’t accept jesus as your savior then you will burn and scream and be tortured for all of eternity, because he loves you so so so much. Wait, what the hell?? Human sacrifice? Its all SO SO stupid, i mean really?!?! I can see why we believed in this silly, disgusting stuff thousands of years ago… but its time to let go of the past. We have answers now, and there is so so so much more to learn along the way. Religion needs to STOP holding science back. Anyway.. rant over. I am not proof reading , so hopefully all of this makes sense to you. Happy Easter!!!! 🙂

      • wtfwjtd

        “If all we ever did was pray, nothing would get done. 2 working hands can do more than a thousand clasped in prayer, and that my friend, is a fact. ”

        So true!

        • Shannon Culver

          🙂 another favorite quote of mine –

          “If for every well-intended prayer uttered in hopes of making the world a better place, there was instead a good deed accomplished, the world might look as though those prayers had been answered.”― David G. McAfee

    • God

      “I’ve spoken with some who have died and come back, and I see history unfolding just as it was written. ”

      Wow, you are batshit crazy. Seek help.

  • Greg G.

    Happy Easter, everybody! My chocolate bunny has already gone deaf.

    • TheNuszAbides

      is that a standard easter miracle in your neck of the woods? 😉
      wait… you ate its ears, didn’t you?!

  • d

    have you read the Islam version of Jesus….he is a prophet messenger of god…not god. More logical than the son of god ( whatever that means).

    • MNb

      Yeah – Mohammed riding a horse through the sky is far more logical. Are you aware that since the 7th Century CE (the beginning of the islamic calendar) there have been more prophets?

      http://lds.about.com/od/prophetsleaders/tp/modern_ancient_prophets.htm

      Why should I reject them and accept yours?

      • Yusuf Obaidat

        Prophet Mohammed is the last prophet and messenger from God to humanity to the end of time .

        • Kodie

          Until someone makes up a new one and says he’s definitely, definitely this time the last prophet.

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          That is why you have your mind to use ..

        • Kodie

          To tell the difference between someone who claims to be a prophet and a bullshit artist? They are the same person.

        • So a Muslim can use his mind to conclude that God doesn’t exist, and Islam is OK with that?

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          Yes we do use our minds and Islam not allow it but ordering it ! . Any healthy mind specially Muslim can conclude that God do exist but if someone muslim like you said conclude that God dosent exist he is no longer a Muslim , If you Muslim you have to believe in god . I hope i understand you correctly .

        • Yes, I understand that an ex-Muslim who no longer believes isn’t a “Muslim.”

          I have heard, however, that a Muslim changing his mind and rejecting the religion is a serious offense. Didn’t Saudi Arabia just declare all atheists as terrorists?

          Doesn’t sound to me like they think that Islam allows you to follow your thinking where it leads.

        • MNb

          Yeah and other believers claim he wasn’t a prophet at all or that someone else was the last prophet. See the link I gave above.
          Why should I reject them and accept yours?

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          When you study each one truly what are their claims proofs? , compare them to each other and study what each one accomplish thru history , saying i heard this i heard that is not enough ! . Then you decide what to reject and what to accept , i cant tell you why ! i cant write all bout Islam here in one phrase ! you need to figure it by yourself that if truly want to seek the truth or just the idea .There is many good books out there i dont have them but i cant find some good titles if you want ..

        • MNb

          Done so. I found all religious claim proofs utterly unconvincing. That’s why I call myself an atheist. No, my question is why you as a muslim think your claims convincing and not similar claims of christians.
          Btw I know because of personal circumstances islam better than you might suppose.

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          So you find Islam has no difference from others ? there is big difference ! what claim proofs utterly unconvincing in Islam ? because if just stuck on ” Mohammed riding a horse through the sky” that is very shallow study you did . Like i said there is many books you can read or just watch debates of Ahmad dedat with christians , but if you ask me personally their is many reasons first of all i love history and you can see clearly the difference between how people lived in Islamic regions and Christians , like Damascus and Baghdad and others, you can see how their societies was in wealth , science , justice , no myths no religious men selling them lands in heaven and indulgences …. etc and you can see when Muslims was conquers how many converted to Islam from Christianity .. You can see how Europe evolved when they left Christianity to Secularism and how Muslims fall behind when they left Islam .

          Second when i read the Quran i can see how it speak to the mind when many of it verses end with “will you not reason?” ” will you not give thought?”
          When you see the laws of Islam that organize people you can clearly see its specialty .

          Finally my mother she is ex-christian converted to Islam so this is great impact also .

        • Pofarmer

          How did/ do Muslims fall behind after leaving Islam.? The evidence would seem to point the other direction. Islamic. Fundamentalism stalls societies.

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          They got weak , occupied , their land got stolen (Palestine) , we were global power and now nothing . I dont know about Fundamentalism or what thats is but yes dome organizations are working on re-build the faith and works in politics like Muslim Brotherhood if that what you mean .

        • Pofarmer

          “what thats is but yes dome organizations are working on re-build the
          faith and works in politics like Muslim Brotherhood if that what you
          mean .”

          Yeah, how’s that workin out?

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          Its great but hard because of all western country that fight them and support the dictators .

        • Pofarmer

          What is great about it?

        • Yeah, let’s not point fingers. Every region of the world has had it tough. The Muslim world gets an infusion of a trillion dollars per year from the outside for a waste product that they didn’t even develop the use for.

          And they’ve given back to the world … what now, exactly?

        • Kodie

          A change in the person does not signify truth in the beliefs. People can change for whatever goals they want to reach and however method they find. Islam makes similar claims to Christianity in that it “changes” the person. Islam makes similar claims to Christianity where it manipulates the reader by suggesting it is reasonable and a reasonable person believes rather than denies. Religions are popular methods of self-improvement and just as self-destructive. You are no different than the many Christians who blow through here and claim that they noticed an improvement after following Jesus. If people really need a crutch to stand on to be a better person, to believe in themselves, that is not an argument for religious truth in any way, be that Islam, Christianity or anything.

          You are merely saying that the atheist hasn’t tried the right religion yet, and that Islam has features that Christianity lacks. It is not yet a positive argument why Islam is TRUE and not just another religion. It is a myth you believe in. You have problems with the arguments of Christianity, like we do, but you keep trying to make it work. It changes to Islam like Judaism was the base of Christianity. You are just telling another version of the same story, and you think your version justifies itself in results. Everyone else has it wrong but you! Even the OTHER MUSLIM here. That is the main feature of all religions – that there is a way to trick yourself into believing these stories, and once you do, it changes your life. Where is the god in that equation? That is only how you (and everyone who believes in ANY GOD, not just Allah) prove god to yourself, and you’re a fool. You believe something different, you take it in completely, and you change or feel change or are tricked into agreeing there is change that isn’t really there. It’s “different” than not believing, for sure. There is no god in that equation, it’s all you. And when you believe foolish things with no evidence for god, you and all other theists, not just Muslims, become a pawn and justify other actions and behaviors based on what your god really really wants – actions and behaviors and attitudes that can become dangerous and detrimental to a peaceful society.

          Your religious belief is just your opinion, it’s not a version of a story that is any closer to reasonable or true.

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          Sorry your language is beyond me i am not that good in English i cant understand your dilemma ?

        • Kodie

          Religions people all think their way is the best way. All of them claim improvement in their selves and so what? Where is god? You can read something you like, follow the directions, and feel better psychologically. How does that tell me there is a god involved in the process? All Christians say the same things as you do. If you want to say your beliefs are based on a true god, and calling the other religions some fantasy or mistake or misunderstanding, you have to tell me about god and not just results. You haven’t told me anything new that I haven’t heard from all the Christians I’ve ever listened to.

          If it is results that tell you there is a god, then you are working backwards from a conclusion. It is the opposite of logic. It is the exact same spiel as every other religion – “it’s true because of the feelings.” If not all of them are true, and only Islam is, you have to have a different way to describe the differences. It’s natural for a theist to focus on their own religion and easily dismiss what’s wrong with all the other ones – why do I have to work so hard to dismiss yours when so far it is like all the others to me. Easily dismissed as Christianity and everything that isn’t your personal interpretation of Islam is to you.

          Look up confirmation bias on the internet.

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          I just dont understand ,you have problem with the definition of God or his existence ? or Nothing special about Islam ?… You will find similarity with Christianity or Judaism in some maters because they all came from the same god but people in this two pastors changed and changed for their own benefits and wealth , we dont deny every thing in Christianity , Say, “O People of the Scripture, come to a word that is equitable between us and you – that we will not worship except Allah and not associate anything with Him and not take one another as lords instead of Allah .” But if they turn away, then say, “Bear witness that we are Muslims [submitting to Him].” 3:64 (Allah is Arabic name for God)

        • Kodie

          You don’t understand. I cannot make it more clear – you are not making a case for your or any god. You are just saying we haven’t been educated in your version yet, and your version is superior to Christianity for reasons you also don’t define well. You refer to results same as a Christian or any other belief. You just think so – it is your opinion, and you have confirmation bias. LOOK UP CONFIRMATION BIAS.

          There is no demonstration of the superiority of your story, or of there being a true god in any of your shared thoughts. You have more similarities to a Christian that you will admit. They do not argue any different than you and it is by itself not at all convincing. If you change your ways and live a better life, is that proof that there is a god? Does that prove that your god is the correct choice, based on you CONFIRMATION BIAS. You trick yourself and then you gain certainty that it is not like the others, and god must be present in your system as opposed to another.

          THERE IS NO GOD IN ANY OF YOUR STATEMENTS. There is only your bias that you have grown attached to your beliefs and believe you see positive results as a result of GOD changing YOU because you changed your belief to that god. THAT IS NOT LOGICAL OR DEMONSTRATIVE of a god. If you still don’t understand, you’re probably too stupid to continue paying attention to. You obviously cannot conceive of atheism, and fall under the same misconceptions that theists including Christians often do. Your arguments in favor of your personal interpretation of Islam do not differ in any way to what we regularly hear from Christians. There is no benefit from belief that seems to come actually from a god, but in the mental submission to undergoing systemic reprogramming toward idiocy and ignorance of reality.

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          Ok i am just gonna end this and tell you what a simple bedouin one thousand years ago answered when someone asked him about god existence he simple said “The presence of dung is the evidence that is a camel was here, the footprints in the sand is the evidence that is a person was here and the evidence of the earth and all the planets are proof that the same one or some great power has placed them where they are”
          Now see this simple man with no knowledge archived the truth of life that you and your friends could not archive perhaps never will .

        • Kodie

          So you know even less about science and you want us to take you seriously. You’ve been tricked by an illogical argument and you expect us to make the same mistake? How again are you different from a Christian? All you have said so far is a deist argument and a poor and often-repeated one – that there is a god at all and you know because there’s an earth. How do you fix on your preference of a god out of a large selection after you have followed your poor logic to conclude that there is a god at all?

          Christians use all the same fallacious arguments as you do, so you have done nothing yet to differentiate yourself or tell us why your god is real and they are mistaken.

        • Pofarmer

          It’s not only tricked by an illogical argument, it’s cornered by a Mass Movement, which the Muslim brotherhood certainly is.

          Via Eric Hoffer.

          “The effectiveness of a doctrine does not come from its meaning but from its certitude. No doctrine however profound and sublime will be effective unless it is presented as the embodiment of the one and only truth.”

          “Mass movements can rise and spread without belief in a God, but never without belief in a devil. Usually the strength of a mass movement is proportionate to the vividness and tangibility of its devil.”

          No truth required.

        • hector_jones

          Except that we have seen actual camels make dung, and seen people walk in the sand and leave footprints. But we’ve never seen a god create anything, so the analogy doesn’t work. That it may have convinced a simple Bedouin means nothing to me.

        • Kodie

          Simple Bedouin logic. I love how this is an original thought from an original ancient Bedouin and not the same bad reasoning Christians use. I am waiting for something completely new and different from this guy who believes his faith is far different and superior to Christianity. This clip from Coming to America may help to illuminate the problem here.

        • A Bedouin 1000 years ago can be forgiven for not understanding modern science. You can’t.

          When we have a plausible natural explanation, that explanation wins.

        • hector_jones

          And that simple bedouin’s name … was Richard Dawkins.

        • Pofarmer

          Wow, what horrible, horrible excuse for an argument. You could study some old threads here for the answers to your statements.

        • MNb

          The really interesting thing is to compare this with christian apologetics. Alas it’s in Dutch, but I will translate the relevant quote.

          http://www.gjerutten.nl/Kosmologischargument_ERutten.pdf

          “Inderdaad, wie ‘s ochtends ineens een fiets in de tuin ziet liggen die er gisterenavond niet lag zal niet zoiets zeggen als: “Goh, er ligt ineens een fiets. Die is wellicht spontaan, zomaar, zonder enige reden, onveroorzaakt, ontstaan uit helemaal niets”. Natuurlijk niet, we zullen denken dat er een oorzaak is voor het feit dat daar nu een fiets ligt die er gisteren niet lag.

          Bovendien, als er echt iets uit niets zou kunnen voortkomen, waarom zien we dan niet voortdurend vanuit het niets allerlei zaken ontstaan? Zoals koelkasten en olifanten? Wat maakt het niets zo discriminatoir? Waarom zou het niets alleen universa voortbrengen?”

          Alas, no page numbers.

          “Indeed, if we in the morning suddenly would see a bicycle in the yard which wasn’t there yesterday evening won’t say something like “Gosh, there is suddenly a bike. Maybe it originates spontaneously from nothing at all, without any reason, not brought about anything.” Of course not, we will think there is a cause for the fact there is a bicycle which wasn’t there yesterday.

          Moreover, if really something can come from nothing, why don’t we see originate all kinds of things from nothing all the time? Like refrigerators and elephants? What makes nothing so distinctive? Why would nothing only bring up universes?”

          Frankly I don’t see much difference with Yusuf. The fun thing is that this paper gave Rutten a doctorate in philosophy of religion. Yup, it’s from a thesis.

        • wtfwjtd

          A bicycle in the yard? Seriously? A child could see right through that embarrassingly weak argument.

        • I’ve seen this. There’s a popular video where a guy uses a jar of peanut butter. He says that eventually, we should open it up and see new life. Or something I heard from Creationist Jonathan Wells (who got a PhD in biology with the stated purpose of bringing down evolution): if you put a cell in sterile water and prick it with a pin, you’d have all the components of life, but no life. What does it tell you that you can never get life from that?

          It tells you that a damaged cell wasn’t the prior step in the evolution of that cell!

        • MNb

          Yeah, but why Allah and not Yahweh?

        • MNb

          “So you find Islam has no difference from others ?”
          I didn’t write that. I wrote

          “my question is why you as a muslim think your claims convincing and not similar claims of christians.”
          Christians also tell me to read books, to watch debates, that they love history, how their societies were in wealth, science, justice, how many people converted to christianity when christian countries conquered the world. They also complain how christians fall behind when they left christianity.

          “When you see the laws of Islam that organize people you can clearly see its specialty .”
          “When you read the laws of christianity that organize people you can clearly see its specialty – so the christian claims.
          So why do your arguments apply to islam and not to christianity? Or hinduism? Or buddhism?

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          Every christian saying that you can tell he is a liar or just ignorant by simple checking the HISTORY ! History proves my claims … Didnt you take history in school ? ever heard about dark ages (golden ages for Muslims).

        • Pofarmer

          “Didnt you take history in school ? ever heard about dark ages (golden ages for Muslims).”

          Then what?

        • ever
          heard about dark ages (golden ages for Muslims).

          Yes, I’m aware of the Islamic Golden Age–300 years where the Muslim empire was a center of learning.

          What happened? Why isn’t the Muslim world an intellectual center still?

        • TheNuszAbides

          maybe there were just good times for scientific progress. what the Powers That Be of the time (powers that were?) had to say about permitting or disallowing particular areas of study can’t really be stacked up against counterfactual assertions centuries after “golden age x”, “‘The’ Renaissance”, etc. the only obvious indication is that when people are allowed to ask questions they have some chance of discovering a factual answer (or the next question down the path they take, or both)…

        • Pofarmer

          There are lot of was’s in that paragraph.

        • You can see how Europe evolved when they left Christianity to Secularism and how Muslims fall behind when they left Islam .

          Europe has left Christianity to a large extent in the last half-century, and their social metrics (homicides, etc.) are much better than those in the U.S.

          Islam was a (perhaps the) center of civilization during the Islamic Golden Age (more here). Now, very little new comes out of the Islamic world.

        • Pofarmer

          Paul ,, or somebody,writing for Paul, said the same thing.

  • d

    at the end of the day, a sin is a sin. No one is perfect but we should strive to live as the best good person as possible as we grow older. This world is only a test. There is a reason why god made us different colours and cultures. No one can really answer the question on what is life.

    • Drew

      You pretty much just answered what life is when you’re saying this world is a test. Don’t ya think? Life is a test in itself? I am an Atheist and I hold no opinion on what life means other than what you make of it for yourself. I do that by raising my son into a good man, by helping others and simply making them laugh. That sounds like a pretty meaningful and fulfilling life.

    • MNb

      At the end of the day the word sin is meaningless. I don’t need it, nor do I need “the next world” to understand that I “should strive to live as the best good person as possible”.

  • Sam Brosenberg

    Read “Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth” by Reza Aslan. If you are even the slightest bit interested in religious studies, and a historical look at Israel during the time when Jesus would have lived, it’s a fascinating book, very well researched and written.

  • uthra

    liked the read. nothing for or against any religion (i am a hindu, btw) and I think that whatever God anyone believes in, doesnt come with a Guide Book of Dos and Donts. I personally adore Shiva (adoring a God isnt a crime rite), not becasue he is some God but because his story reads the kind of liefe i would want to live — lived a simple life with all the joys of life (including marijuana and hash) and surrounded by all kinds of beings that he considered his friends (dont we all have wierdos in our lives that we are nuts about) married only once, for life, to his sweetheart whom he loved like crazy till the very end (it was duly reciprocated), had two kids, one the traditional geek and the other the good-looking globe-trotter but both inherently nice fellas who respected their parents. Umm…personally, sounds like the perfect life by a decent guy to me, without transforming him and his family into Gods.

    • Nice.

      I understand Shiva is blue because he drank poison that would’ve killed everyone otherwise. Contrast that with Yahweh, who killed all his precious creatures.

      • uthra

        yeah bob. Mythology says it was the penultimate step before the sea gave up all its treasures, and while everyone wanted his share from the treasure, no on wanted to risk the poison. Shiva stepped up, drank it n it reached throat before parvati (his wifey) held it tight (like a tourniquet) so the poison couldn’t go further n throat remains blue. The best part? after this, everyone rushed to get the jewels of the sea while shiva was happy with his family, in a dress of tigerskin, n retreated into his own world. Not a cent taken! amazing story…

  • Keira

    Not to mention the severe lack of evidence that Jesus even existed…

    • TheNuszAbides

      oh, it’s been mentioned around these parts before… but yeah, this post has enough on its plate already.

  • danny

    your reasoning made no sense. You could have done a better job at it. It seemed you tried waaay to hard, and your dislike of christianity (or any religion for that matter) was more prevalent than logic.

    • God

      Examples?

    • Thanks for the input, but I need specifics. Did I make an error? You’ve given me no reason to think so. Show me the problem.

    • TheNuszAbides

      that would be a meaningful post if you were to demonstrate a competence in logic that outstrips Bob’s. being able to construct and post those three insult-high, substance-free sentences isn’t much of a case to start from.

  • Cliff Rice

    Was Jesus really sinless? It seems that the only way Jesus was sinless was to change the law and then claim that he wasn’t breaking the law. He harvested wheat on the Sabbath (a sin) with an explanation that saving an animal that fell in a ditch was equivalent to harvesting food, which meant that really any work done on the Sabbath wasn’t a sin. The law said that he should have stoned the prostitute, but instead defied the law and let her go. It’s pretty easy to be sinless when you simply change the rules of sinning.

  • Yusuf Obaidat

    Islamic version of Jesus is more logical than others

    • MNb

      Less illogical, you mean.
      Unfortunately islam has its own totally illogical stuff, like Mohammed riding a horse across the sky.

      • Yusuf Obaidat

        Miracles are not supposed to be logical but we are talking about the base of Christianity believes “crucifixion of Jesus” . Islam teaches came compatible with human mind that is why you see many are convert to Islam every day .

        • MNb

          Uh no – the base of christianity is not the crucifixion, but the Resurrection. So the christian will give exactly the same answer as you:

          “miracles are not supposed to be logical.

          “that is why you see many are convert to Islam every day”
          How remarkable! That’s what christians tell me as well again and again – that is, “many converting to christianity”.
          Makes me wonder why atheism is on the rise, slowly but steadily.

          http://freethoughtkampala.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/how-many-atheists-are-there-in-the-world/

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          Well i know and saw every christian say that you have to believe that Jesus died (crucifixion) :/ .. About the Islam converts its funny because just today RT published this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmqrFK4-OfQ&feature=youtu.be

        • MNb

          “you have to believe that Jesus died (crucifixion)”
          Pssst – I’ll tell you a little secret. Every atheist who thinks Jesus is historical – like me – believes as well that Jesus died, eventually at a cross. You know why? Because all humans die. Hey! I even believe Mohammed died. Isn’t it wonderful?
          As for the role of the Resurrection:

          https://bible.org/article/resurrection-christ-theological-implications

          It’s why christians all over the world celebrate easter. Plus Ascension Day. Plus Pentecost.
          Jesus’ death isn’t anything special without the follow up. That’s why so many christians are obsessed by the empty tomb, heavily discussed on this site as well.

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          Yes many people convert to Christianity but mainly are poor countries like in Africa and Latina America and you can see how much millions of dollars are supporting this missionaries . I dont surprised that atheism is on the rise but it is clearly that majority of them was Christians because all of the contradictions illogical things in the faith . From your link you can see that majority of Muslim countries are in red.

        • So Christianity has contradictions but Islam makes good sense? What about evidence–is there good evidence to convince the skeptic that Islam is correct?

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          The History of each one

        • Christianity has been a bit more successful in expanding its message, though Islam isn’t far behind. Each one makes outlandish claims without evidence. I’m not seeing any way to distinguish one as true and the other as false.

          My vote: they’re both false.

        • hector_jones

          The pastalogy of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (sauce be upon him) has no contradictions and makes even more sense than any of them. Come join us, Bob. BYOF.

        • Ramen!

        • wtfwjtd

          And the only dogma is… that there is no dogma!

        • Kodie

          You haven’t really made any positive arguments for Islam. You are “reconciling” the claims made by Christianity to another faith. If you have any positive arguments for Islam, why don’t you tell us what they are. It sounds like you are saying the reason atheists are atheists is because it’s Christianity that it silly and illogical, but we just haven’t tried the right religion yet, and you are here to present us with Islam because you believe it’s true. Why should anyone else believe it? Because we have to believe there’s a god, and you have a logical definition that is totally true and not at all another figment of collective imagination and storytelling?

        • MNb

          “mainly are poor countries like in Africa and Latina America and you can see how much millions of dollars are supporting this missionaries .”
          Yeah and obviously countries like Saudi-Arabia don’t have millions of dollars to support islamic missionaries …. plus poor countries don’t count, plus rich countries (where are all the converts to islam in western Europe?) don’t count either plus China doesn’t count, where christianity seems to be on the rise as well.
          Not only you don’t make positive arguments, the arguments you do make are incoherent.

        • Yusuf Obaidat
        • MNb

          Sorry, YouTube doesn’t work for me at the moment. Moreover I’m a much better reader than listener, so do me a favour and link to a text.

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          It is just a news from RT with a title “Islam fastest growing religion in UK as churches decline” ….. While Christian Churches in the UK are struggling to draw people to worship, the Islamic community there is burgeoning. Some Muslim groups are doing all they can to counter fears the rapid growth is a challenge to British traditions.” as you said its dont count .

        • MNb

          UK is just one country. Here a few others:

          http://discipleallnations.wordpress.com/2013/08/25/the-top-20-countries-where-christianity-is-growing-the-fastest/

          Here another survey:

          http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2012/08/10/survey-says-atheism-is-on-the-rise-worldwide-and-in-america/

          Now a related question. If the Flat Earth Society was growing, would you accept that as an argument that the Earth is flat indeed? No? Then I’ll shrug off your “islam is growing” argument as well.

        • Pofarmer

          It surely couldn’t be that in some Muslim countries they will kill or harass apostates? Nah, that couldn’t be it.

      • SparklingMoon

        Unfortunately islam has its own totally illogical stuff,like Mohammed riding a horse across the sky.
        …………………………………………………………………………..
        When we deeply contemplate the verses of religious books we come to know that they never talk about a God who is sitting somewhere above in the sky. It is human mistake of some people who explain His attribute ‘Most Highest’ as He is sitting somewhere above in the height of sky. It is usually described in religious books that God is in Heaven.Heaven means that his existence is in the height of His spirituality (and it has no relation to physical height.) A person have to start a journey in the depth of particles to understand the meanings of this spiritual height of God and how is He Omnipresent or All knowing.

        Muslims or other people, who consider that a winged horse had carried prophet of Islam up to heaven, should realize that Heaven has no relation to physical height or direction of this this universe. The meanings of Heaven are spiritual height of God’s Holy attributes. God is highly spiritual therefore a physical body or object has no access to Him. A person meets His God with the help of his nature as human nature has such a spirituality that make it possible to travel towards God as he exist in heaven that is height of spirituality.

        There is no description in the Quran that Prophet of Islam flew to Heaven on a winged horse . This story of flying to heaven on a horse is a human myth, invented by some people in explanation of some verse of the Quran. In religious books it is described about this spiritual ascension of Prophet of Islam to heaven in the night of Mirag that he lay between sleep and awakening (his eyes were closed but he was conscious), Miraj (ascension to heaven) vision took place. The Quran describes this spiritual journey in these words: ”And He revealed His Word when he was on the uppermost horizon. Then he drew nearer to God; then he came down to mankind. So that he became, as it were, one chord to two bows or closer still. Then He revealed to His servant that which He revealed. The heart of the Prophet was not untrue to that which he saw.” [53:8-12]

        There is no name of horse but of heart that is the real center of having revelation. It is some Muslims who try to send Prophet of Islam somewhere in the sky with his physical body on a horse(in the explanation of these verses). These explanations of physical moving are against the teachings of Islam and laws of God. God is Omnipresent and He is inside the spirit of each and every particle of this universe and human nature and soul have a hidden communication to their Creator as their particles come out of his Holy Attributes. In short ”Heaven”is a name of spiritual height and the ascension (Mirag) of the Prophet of Islam towards Heaven was a spiritual journey of his vision with the spirituality of his nature to meet God Who is Highly Spiritual.

        • According to Wikipedia, sura 17.1 of the Koran talks about the journey:

          YUSUFALI: Glory to (Allah) Who did take His servant for a Journey by night from the Sacred Mosque to the farthest Mosque, whose precincts We did bless,- in order that We might show him some of Our Signs: for He is the One Who heareth and seeth (all things).

        • SparklingMoon

          This verse (sura 17.1) of the Quran does not speak about Miraj ( spiritual ascension to heaven) but about ” Isra” (Night Journey to Jerusalem).These both spiritual journeys of Prophet of Islam are described in different suras of the Quran; Miraj in sura al Najam 8-12 and Isra in Bani Israel (17.1) Miraj took place during the 5th year of his Prophet hood (when Prophet of Islam (sa) was resting at night near the house of Kaba in Mecca ) and ”Isra” in the 13th when he was in the house of his relative Ume Hani.

          ”Miraj” is given name when the Holy Prophet had a vision of those celestial scenes he was transported into a highly spiritual state and the spirituality of his nature was enhanced by God Almighty step by step to the highest height of human capacity (And He revealed His Word when he (prophet of Islam) was on the uppermost horizon) and God Almighty bowed down to meet him(then He came down to mankind). This nearness to God Almighty has been described by this simile: ”So that he became, as it were, the one chord of two bows or closer still.” 53:8-12

          Isra (Spiritual Night Journey to Jerusalem) has different details as during this vision Prophet of Islam met Adam and all other prophets and led them in prayer in the Holy House of Jerusalem. It all happened in vision as all previous prophets were not physically there. It is also told by him that during the Night Journey to Jerusalem (Isra), he saw an old woman, a person standing on one side of the road, and three cups full of water wine and milk (of which the Prophet chose the last)”, and Gabriel told him what an these things signified. The Explanation and interpretation by Gabriel of the things the Prophet saw shows that the Journey was only a vision, for it is only things seen in visions that need interpretation and explanation. There are available some more information about this spiritual journey when you clicked the Detailed English Commentary of this surah 17: https://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?ch=17

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          What are you talking about ?! Prophet Mohammad went with his body and his spirit ! Quran , Hadith and all Islamic scientist proofs that ! Its a clear thing that dont need to talk much about it …

        • Pofarmer

          Islamic science?

        • MNb

          Like christian theology.

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          We call our people who study Quran , hadith and specified in biography of the Prophet , surisprudence …. etc Scientist

        • OK, but contrast this to a time centuries ago when Islam was known for being the place where real scientists were welcome.

          What fraction of the named stars have Arabic names?

          The English words algorithm, alcohol, and alchemy came from Arabic.

          The West owes an intellectual debt to the Muslim world. But that’s all history.

        • SparklingMoon

          Please give me only one verse of the Quran that has such descriptions that Prophet of Islam (sa) was carried to sky by any horse.

        • MNb

          It’s referred to in Surah 17 verse 1; the interpretations are to be found in the Hadith. These belong to islam as well.

        • SparklingMoon

          It’s referred to in Surah 17 verse 1; the interpretations are to be found in the Hadith. These belong to islam as well.
          ……………………………………………………………………….
          Hadiths ,no doubt, belong to Islam but only those Hadiths that were uttered by Prophet of Islam and His sayings and practices were according to the revelation of the Quran.

          God has promised in the Quran the safety for the integrity of the words of the Quran but not of Hadiths. The truth of a Hadith would be judged in the mirror of the teachings of the Quran.The words of the Quran were carefully recorded during the life time of Prophet of Islam but his sayings never had been written . Ahadiths were compiled from the statements of diverse narrators a century and a half after the Holy Prophet.There is no doubt that most of the compilers of Hadith were very pious and righteous. They tested the accuracy of Ahadith as far as it was possible and tried to steer clear of those which, in their opinion, were manufactured. They rejected every Hadith any narrator of which was of doubtful veracity. As all this activity was ex post factum, it was no more than conjecture. Yet, it would be most unfair to say that all Ahadith are vain and useless and false.

        • MNb

          Which means your question

          “Please give me only one verse of the Quran”
          is dishonest. Look, I don’t care what your interpretation is, though I enjoy your disagreement with Yusuf, but fact is that the Mohammed riding the sky on a horse story belongs to islamic creed. As such it’s no less miraculous than Jesus’ Resurrection. So my point is valid: christianity and islam both contain illogical stuff that defies reason.

          Of course you can take the metaphorical road and explain the story is about a spiritual journey etc. I leave that up to you and Yusuf. But then you can’t bring this in as an argument against christianity either, because christians can take the metaphorical road as well:

          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brandon-ambrosino/resurrection-as-metaphor-what-the-early-christians-meant-when-they-said-jesus-is-lord_b_2988438.html
          http://www.explorefaith.org/christ.html
          http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/international/2010/april/Debate-Continues-Over-Christ-s-Resurrection.html
          http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/30/AR2007033001919.html

          Don’t worry – I don’t buy the metaphorical explanations either. I’m not interested in spirituality (I never read your long boring dwellings) and I don’t need them to give my life meaning.

        • SparklingMoon

          Islamic Creed is only to believe in:1) God Almighty,2) Angels 3) Prophets 4) Holy Books (5) Day of Judgment 6) Good and bad is destined according to the Laws of God.

          Secondly, In my posts I always try to remove the misconception,mostly followers of Islam and Christianity have, about the existence of God. As it states in religious books that God exists in Heaven therefore some readers confused this word ‘Heaven’ with sky. God has no relation to physical height that relates to sky.

          Heaven is relate to spirituality and exist everywhere here around. For example, water is less spiritual than air and air is less spiritual than rays and rays are less spiritual than ….. I mean if we continue to think about a world that is more to more spiritual for understanding the conception of Heaven. There exist a very spiritual world inside this world and that spiritual world have a relation to God and His Heaven exist on the height of its spirituality (as spirituality also has different levels).

          Human nature is highly spiritual and has ability to progress in its spirituality. As different attribute are a part of human nature in a primary condition as love of God also exist in all human natures and can be progressed by human efforts. When this seed love of God is progressed by meditation and watered continuously by good morals then human nature becomes day by day more and more spiritual and starts to attract the Mercy of God. Prophets also meet God Almighty through this mean and has called others also to follow their path to find that God.

          There is no need for a person to ride in a horse to meet such a God Almighty Who exists everywhere around him inside this world. It is is also absolute absurd to consider that Jesus had went above somewhere to God Almighty and sit on his right hand with his physical body. Muslims and Christians believe that God exist everywhere and if some of them consider that Prophet of Islam or Jesus moved physically towards God then here is a question for them : ” Which direction moved their bodies east or west or north or south if according to their belief God exists everywhere?
          I refer you two books with a hope to have answer of your every question related to Jesus. https://www.alislam.org/library/books/christianity_facts_to_fiction/foreword.html
          http://www.alislam.org/library/books/jesus-in-india/ch1.html

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          Are you shia ? it is in our hadith books bukhari and muslim .(Sunni)

        • SparklingMoon

          Yusuf Obaidat
          I understand What you want to describe in your posts. Perhaps you have not read personally the verses of the Quran about Miraj ( Spiritual ascension to heaven) or Isra (Spiritual Night Journey to Jerusalem).The followers of Islam who have less personal knowledge of the Quran have this misunderstanding that prophet of Islam(sa) moved physically to sky in Miraj on a horse as considering that God Almighty perhaps was sitting somewhere above in the sky. ( I hope you will find truth if you read the translation of the verses of ‘Miraj’ in sura al Najam 8-12 and about ‘Isra’ in sura Bani Israel 17.1)

          Secondly, What I have written has no relation to sect Shia or Sunni but of reality. The life of the Prophet of Islam was a mirror of the teachings of the Quran and a prophet of God is sent to maintain the law among his followers. How a true Muslim can imagine that Prophet of Islam or any other prophet of God can utter a word that was against the revelation of God.

          Thirdly, the Holy Quran is the Word of God Almighty and the Sunnah is the practice of the Prophet of Islam (saw).It has ever been the way of God that the Prophets bring the Word of God for the guidance of people and illustrate it in practice with their conduct so that no doubt should remain in the minds of people with regard to the Divine Word. They act upon it and urge others to do the same. The practical illustration which has been continuous among the Muslims is the Sunnah.

          There is a difference between Sunnah and Hadith.The Prophet of Islam (sa) did not have the Hadith recorded in his presence nor did he make any arrangement for its compilation. Hadith, are those traditions which were compiled from the statements of diverse narrators a century and a half after the Holy Prophet. If the purport of a Hadith is not opposed to the Book of Allah, it would be accepted as authoritative, but we will not accept an interpretation of a Hadith which is opposed to the clear text of the Holy Qur’an. So far as possible, we shall try to interpret a Hadith so that it should be in accord with the clear text of the Book of Allah, but if we come across a Hadith which is opposed to the text of the Holy Qur’an, and it cannot be interpreted in any other way, we would reject it as spurious.There is something more in detail about this topic on this page : http://www.alislam.org/library/browse/book/The_Essence_of_Islam/?p=2&l=English#page/129/mode/1up

        • Kodie

          It is a clear thing! Why don’t you tell us what Islamic scientist “proofs” are. How is Islamic science different from science, in that it finds prophecy proven, and spirits proven? What else is there? How did Islamic science prove that to you?

        • MNb

          Ssssh …. we are enjoying here the spectacle of two muslim disagreeing with each other …. you don’t want to spoil that, do you?

        • Pofarmer

          I am kind of enjoying it.

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          Sorry i was not clear we call our people who study Quran , hadith and specified in biography of the Prophet , surisprudence …. etc Scientist . I was talking direct to him our scientist proven that thru script

        • Kodie

          Sorry you’re less clear now than you were before. Your scientist proved what through what script? How is your scientist a scientist and not a theologian? You are just as bad as Christians when we ask you a forthright question and expect an answer that is not in your theological gibberish. I guess it only makes sense if you are immersed in the nonsense. It means nothing and is not plain language if you are trying to describe why your faith is not only better than Christianity, or in any fundamental way different than Christianity or any other religion, or is in any way true, compared to there being no god. Your distinctions from Christianity do nothing to sell your beliefs to me – it’s just a different story, it’s superficially different, I can tell. Try to get to the heart of it instead of being more and more confusing and difficult. I.e., don’t be like such a Christian.

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          I was talking to SparklingMoon when i used the term scientist as he is a muslim i thought he will understand becuse in Arabic we call every one who study the religion ulama if the term theologian describe the same meaning its fine by me .

        • Kodie

          It’s an open forum. We can all see what you write. If you want to use a “term” that is specific in meaning to Islam, don’t use one that’s confused with a secular word that has a specific meaning in the secular world, like “scientist”. It’s sort of like you fancy yourselves scientists, which is another fast one Christians like to pull. It’s a fantastic way to manipulate yourselves into believing your faith has the depth of truth when it’s built on fiction. Try to remember that we can all read and respond to your stuff, so write it so the whole audience can understand what you’re saying.

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          I am new to this so give me a break would you .

        • Pofarmer

          Shoot, that was pretty forthright and polite for Kodie. You are getting plenty of breaks.

        • Kodie

          Give you a break for what? Your responses to other people are visible and open to responses themselves. You have been navigating well enough in that context for a few days that I don’t think being new at this is a good excuse. How dumb are we supposed to think you are? Is that nice enough for you now?

        • MNb

          Like I suggested before I’m more familiar with islamic thinking than Yusuf might assume. Thumbrule: islamic scientist means muslim theologian. It wouldn’t surprise me if Yusuf translated this directly from say Arabic.
          All your objections are correct, but Yusuf’s terminology is not invented to suggest that islamic faith has the same depth of truth as science. It stems from a time when christian theology also generally was considered science (ie more than 200 years ago).
          So it’s not like the “science” Ken Ham and the IDiots from Seattle pull off. That’s to say, until Yusuf begins to unload creationist nonsense as well, something muslims are also very capable of.
          That’s about the entire break you should give him. Neither Yusuf nor Sparkling has dragged modern science in yet by the head and shoulders; for the time being they deserve that credit.

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          Are you Muslim ? because this is dangerous stuff you are talking about ..

        • Kodie

          How perfect is Islam?

        • hector_jones

          Is this a threat?

        • Yusuf Obaidat

          No i meant not to change this into Mazes

        • MNb

          “his existence is in the height of His spirituality”
          Great. Next time I write “Almighty Daddy high high up in the sky” interpret is in a spiritual way.

        • Annerdr

          Wooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!

      • Robin Pitt

        don’t forget the talking ants.

    • Kodie

      Islamic version of everything else makes as little sense as all the others. Islam merely demotes the power of Jesus for their own convenience. Accepting Jesus as your lord and savior would be in conflict with the story Islam wants people to believe, so it can have its own wacky story and sell a new religion.

      • SparklingMoon

        Islam merely demotes the power of Jesus for their own convenience.
        ……………………………………………………………………..
        No religion is revealed to demotes the power of previous one but to reform it . Islam has reformed all previous religions by pointing out the mistakes, entered by their followers later and has presented the real teachings of their prophets. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad has written: It is one of the Divine mysteries that when the law which is brought by a Prophet or by a Messenger is corrupted after his death, his true teaching and guidance are perverted and absurdities are attributed to him, and all this misguidance is attributed to the Prophet himself, the soul of that Prophet is greatly moved for the removal of all the corruption and calumnies that are attributed to him, and then his soul demands that a substitute of his should appear on earth.

        According to this subtle spiritual verity, the soul of Jesus (peace be upon him) had two occasions to demand a substitute. The first was six hundred years after his death. This was when the Jews insisted more than ever that he was an impostor and a liar and that his birth was illegitimate and that is why he died on the cross. While the Christians on the other hand proclaimed that he was the son of God and even God himself, and that he had laid down his life on the cross for the salvation of mankind. It was then that the soul of Jesus was moved and demanded to be exonerated from all these charges and beseeches God for a substitute. Thereupon the Holy Prophet( of Islam) was raised, one of the many purposes of whose advent was to clear Jesus of all the false charges made against him and to bear witness on his behalf.

        The second time when the soul of Jesus was agitated was when the Christians completely assumed the qualities of Antichrist, and, as predicted, the Antichrist was to lay claim to both Prophet hood and Godhood, this is exactly what these people did. They claimed Prophet hood by interfering with the Divine word and framing regulations and carrying out changes that were the functions of a Prophet. And they claimed Godhead in the sense that their philosophers and thinkers designed to assume all the functions of Godhead.Their plans testify to their intents.

        Thus in this age the soul of Jesus was agitated a second time and longed for his substitute to appear in the world. When this desire reached its climax, God Almighty raised one who was his spiritual reflection to defeat the Antichrist of this age.That substitute is called the Promised Messiah, inasmuch as the reality of the Messiah is incarnated in him, i.e., the reality of the Messiah was united with him and he appeared in consequence of the demand of the soul of Jesus(as). That reality is reflected in him like a reflection in a mirror. https://www.alislam.org/library/browse/book/The_Essence_of_Islam/?p=3#page/273/mode/1up

        • Kodie

          So you can sell other divine mysteries, aka your own new bullshit story. Christianity came to reform Judaism, do you have an original idea yet?

        • SparklingMoon

          Christianity came to reform Judaism, do you have an original idea yet
          ……………………………………………………………………
          It is absolutely right that Jesus had come to reform the people of Israel ( Jews). Jesus was the last Israel prophet for the maintenance of the Mosaic Law among the people of Israel only.(This Christianity (Trinity) that is mostly prevailed in the world has no relation to the original message of God or of Jesus.) The time between Jesus and Moses is of 1400 years and during this long times the people of Israel many time lost their right path and many Reformer Prophets had been sent among the people of Israel by God to guide them. ( In other ares of the world God also used to send prophets for human guidance)

          Jesus had brought nothing new and his mission was to maintain mosaic Law and only among the people of Israel. In the time of Jesus the message of the Old Testament had lost its originality and true purpose and philosophy and Jesus had maintained it again in its original form as he had informed Gospels :Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am come not to destroy, but to fulfill (Matthew 5.17)

          In the Gospels we find that his whole massage is kindness and love,contrary to some hard teachings of Old Testament. There are many other example that present a contradiction between the practice of Jesus and the teachings of Old Testament. For example, it states in the Old Testament that stoning or death is a punishment for adultery but Jesus had not maintained this law to a woman in an adultery case.He only advised for repentance and nothing more: ”Go and sin no more”.(John 8:1-11) It does not mean by this practice of Jesus that he had changed the Mosaic Law because it was against his own teachings. He by himself had informed his followers that there could be no change in this law:

          ”For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, not one letter, not a dot, will dissappear from the law until all that must happen has happened. Anyone therefore who sets aside even the le ast of the law’s demands and teaches others to do the same, 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.” (Matt. 5:1 7 19) In this example Jesus had not changed the Mosaic Law but actually had maintained the Mosaic Law in its original form as was revealed to Prophet Moses. He had revelation of God therefore had made this decision according to the teachings of Mosaic Law.

          After Jesus the original teachings of Mosaic Law and the life and mission of its prophets (and of other prophets of the world) had been saved in the revelation of the Quran for the guidance of their followers. This Law is for whole mankind therefore God had promised the safety of the integrity of its words and secondly to send always Reformers among the followers of this Law to guide people.

      • yahya

        Actually the Islamic version of Jesus makes much more sense:

        There’s no belief in dying for sins

        There’s no belief in human divinity

        No Trinity

        It’s definitely a more logical view than Trinitarian Christianity.

        • Kodie

          The problem with religions isn’t the Trinity or Jesus as savior. You don’t get a pass for believing in a deity and having some form of invisible friend or an imaginary afterlife, and all the anti-human laws that come from this imaginary friend so you can’t think for yourself.

    • I’ve heard that some Muslims get arguments to use against Christians from atheist sites. Have you found that to be true?

      • Yusuf Obaidat

        My atheist friend shared this so i came here by curiosity but dont know about others .

      • Adam Cobban

        Bob, its like two people arguing whether ice is frozen water or water is melted ice

        • “It’s a floor wax!”

          “No, it’s a dessert topping!”

        • Adam Cobban

          It tastes like shit but smells like poop

        • Smitty Werbenjagermanjensen

          Haha Ill have to remember that one, thats very good

      • SparklingMoon

        Muslims get arguments to use against Christians from atheist sites. Have you found that to be true?
        ………………………………………………………………………
        No,I do not consider that Muslims use arguments against christian from atheist sites. Muslims are closer to Jews and Christian in religious matters than other religions of the world as the followers of these three religions are part of that promise of God Almighty He made to Abraham ,about four thousand years ago :”And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing (Genesis 12:2-3).

        Islam does not present completely a new code of life for moral and spiritual progress of mankind as most of its teachings already had been revealed to earlier prophets. God says about the religion of Islam:“He has prescribed for you the religion which He enjoined on Noah, and which We have revealed to thee, and which We enjoined on Abraham (and Moses and Jesus,saying, ‘Remain steadfast in obedience, and be not divided therein.” (Quran 42:14) God Almighty says further: ”We have revealed to you, as We revealed to Noah and the prophets who came after him. And We revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, the Descendants, Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron,and Solomon. And We gave David the Psalm. (Quran4: 163)

        Before the revelation of the Quran,the guidance revealed through each prophet was designed to cater for the specific needs of the time and location; hence they were essentially temporary in nature.With the advancement and maturity of mankind God sent advanced and matured teachings suitable to their time. God’s guidance for human race commenced through Adam and reached the zenith through Prophet of Islam. As God declares about the law of the Quran: “This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed my favor upon you and have chosen for you Islam as religion.” (5:4) Prophet of Islam had explained the position of this final Law revealed to him the Quran in the following words: ”My position in relation to the other prophets is like this as a man built a house, completing it and adorning it well except for a place of one brick. When the people entered the house,they marveled at its beauty and said, But for the place of this one brick (how much more splendid the house will be) ”(Bukhari,)

        One purpose of Islam and its revelation was also to maintain the truth of all other prophets and to describe their teachings in original form to guide their followers. Muslims should deliver the real message of Jesus to his followers for their guidance as has been described by God in the Quran.

    • Adam Cobban

      The fact that there is a “version” of any supposed truth, makes it by definition an “opinion” and open to interpretation. There is much danger in passing opinions as fact. One needs only to view human history and current events to know this

  • Adam Cobban

    On this Easter Day, i ask you, please stop shoveling chocolate bunnies and glazed ham down your gullet and take a trip down to your local children’s cancer or burn center. Then come back and explain again how loving and merciful your god is. Tell me how knowing that “this is all part of gods great plan” comforts the heart of a parent of a dying child. Please stop with the “god works in mysterious ways” because if you conform to the statement that god made all things and is controller of heaven and earth, than you MUST conform to the fact that your god has purposely and intentionally afflicted not only those children in those wards but did so with malice. You can keep your heaven, anybody, god or otherwise, that would preform such acts on a child is no one i would choose to be affiliated with. Happy Easter…. Pass the peas please

    • Christians sometimes respond to a puzzle in the Bible with “I’ll have to ask when I get to heaven.” But, of course, the purpose of the Bible can only be for us down here. The Christian simply admits the illogic with this move.

      • Adam Cobban

        I’m not being puffy chested, but i just live by a simple code. Be good to others, be well with yourself and hold the door for the next guy

        • Bina Chava

          You are right, but we are unable to hold the door for the next guy at many times. When someone close a door on my face, obviously i am getting an urge to shut doors on everybody. I can not handle the urge, if i suppress it, it comes out with a vengeance. I need someone to handle my such urges and i searched for a long time and lastly found that the Love of God is the only thing that can handle my evil urges. Thanks….

        • bamboodread

          That is because you are a bad person. (A sociopath or a psychopath, probably). I do not have your troubling urges, nor have I ever believed in a god

        • Bina Chava

          Ha ha, self boosting moral upright you are, you won’t stand the real tests of life. You can become a sociopath or a psychopath easily.

        • bamboodread

          You are the one on here admitting to having strange and ominous urges, mate. I think the authorities need to keep an eye on you. You sound dangerous

        • Bina Chava

          Are you afraid of me! it shows the symptom of one becoming a sociopath or a psychopath. But i am neither offended nor afraid of your words.

        • MNb

          Your comment has the level of a not too bright toddler.

        • bamboodread

          Ha ha ha

        • Jennifer McGinnis

          sometimes I have the urge to jump into the Grand Canyon. Luckily I live in Minnesota so it hasn’t been a problem. I get weird urges like that. Have no problem not doing them.

        • Jason Lane

          Then you must teach us your ways. Resistance and willpower is the only way I know how to keep my emotions from forcing actions which I may reget. A constant battle. Yet if you claim to not have any urges of ill will towards another then you have achieved enlightenment and will soon ascend to a greater plane of existence. A place with no need for survival instincts or fears of death or imprisonent for you or your loved ones. Some men find it offensive when another man holds the door as if you are claiming he can’t for him himself. As if he is weak. Perhaps perfection still eludes you. But as a humble person who is guilty of unnatural and natural urges of both malice and kindness I ask you… please teach us your masterful ways so that we join you during your lonely reign. I say this to you, not to only because is it not so.. that in this world one must earn what they value, including their lives. To attain such an enlightened state of mind must have taken hard work and effort. I hope you are not only honest with yourself but with others as well. And if this is true please teach us.

      • Bina Chava

        Why you assume every christian shall have all the answers for your Bible puzzles, it is your fault. If something puzzles you, try to find the truth without any prejudice, if you can…..

        • Ron

          “Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have.” 1 Peter 3:15, NIV

        • Bina Chava

          Be ready to speak up and tell anyone who asks why you’re living the way you are, and always with the utmost courtesy. Keep a clear conscience before God so that when people throw mud at you, none of it will stick. They’ll end up realizing that they’re the ones who need a bath. 1 Peter 3:15, The Message

        • bamboodread

          It’s not throwing mud; it’s calling you out for your silly, childish ideas

        • bamboodread

          Preparing to give readymade answers, ie., to lie, does not convince those who don’t suffer from your delusions

        • Why do you believe that we are lying to you? I’m not asking you for money. I’m not even going to ask you to believe in anything you don’t want to. I just stumbled upon this page during a time when I am confronted with sadness, and am reminded that there *may* still be people out there with a *possibly* bleaker outlook on life, so maybe I can help them right this minute, or at least provide some entertainment.

        • Kodie

          To paraphrase: Hi, guys, i feel so sad. I think I’ll try to make myself feel better by making sure those bleak atheists hear the good news. If they don’t want, it’s their choice to stay bleak. I tried.

          See, that’s how condescending and patronizing you sound. Who said we have a bleaker “outlook on life”? That’s your lie. That’s the lie you believe.

        • I said, “…or at least provide some entertainment.”

          I’m sorry I sound patronizing. I did say possibly.

        • Ignorant Amos

          I just stumbled upon this page during a time when I am confronted with sadness, and am reminded that there *may* still be people out there with a *possibly* bleaker outlook on life, so maybe I can help them right this minute,…

          Ha haa….you are at the wrong place for that. No one here other than the theist is shiteing themselves about the possibility of going to the fiery place to get a red hot poker up the arse for an eternity.

          …or at least provide some entertainment.

          There’s a fair chance you’ll do that.

        • The Christian claims of the supernatural are beyond remarkable. What I’m assuming is that every Christian should have answers for their own benefit. When they can’t answer my many questions, I wonder what good reasons could possibly underlie their faith.

        • Bina Chava

          Christian should have true answers that withstand the tsunami waves of questions their faith and hopes bring in their life, but not others many questions….

        • bamboodread

          That is why they use the words “faith,” “hope,” and “belief.” Three of the most wishy-washy words in the English lexicon. They don’t actually stand up on there own as meaning anything

        • Which words would be more useful to you?

        • bamboodread

          “I don’t know” are the three words every wise person starts out with.

        • Greg G.

          I don’t know about that.

        • bamboodread

          That is why you haven’t achieved wisdom

        • I can usually come up with something.

        • OK. Do so.

    • Bina Chava

      You just take a few seconds of the movie which actual length is more than 1000’s of years and want to negate God’s existence.

      Actually you are negating the God of christian religion, i too do that, but i have changed the teacher, i no more learn anything about God from any religion, instead of that i ask questions within me and i am getting answers for all my questions without fail.

      It is my personal experience that God is really full of unconditional love, even after seeing tsunamis, earthquakes, cancer, AIDs and leprosy. One thing is sure, religion is devil, do not ask the devil anything about God.

      • i
        ask questions within me and i am getting answers for all my questions without
        fail.

        As can anyone. Doesn’t sound like a reliable way to find the truth.

        • bamboodread

          Sounds like the atypical case of making the voices in your head your only grasp on reality

      • Greg G.

        instead of that i ask questions within me and i am getting answers for all my questions without fail.

        How much money will I have in my pockets when I read your response to this post?

        You should ask for a cure for cancer or a real, workable solution for world peace.

        Or do you only get non-verifiable answers?

      • adam

        ” instead of that i ask questions within me and i am getting answers for all my questions without fail.”

        Which is what most people do. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/0475458f4fd52f3b0b86eb714433ff8ab751ac1d0bddf2f25c23e130ca9d13db.jpg

        • Bina Chava

          Ha ha!, you speak about your experience, in my case my many opinions were crushed to death after i realized Him. So He can not be me….. Instead of that He is a different personality and beyond anyone’s imagination in each and every aspects of life.

        • Kodie

          You may have been overpowered by your cult instead.

        • Bina Chava

          ROFL, cult….??? sorry guy, i’m an ordinary soul…

        • Kodie

          That why you sound like you’re from outer space?

        • MNb

          Many ordinary people become members of some cult. You are one of them.

        • Ignorant Amos

          This bit cracks me up…

          Instead of that He is a different personality and beyond anyone’s imagination in each and every aspects of life.

          WTF?

        • adam

          “So He can not be me….. ”

          He can ONLY be you.

          Revealed Religion is unique to each individual, because they make it up in their own minds, just as you have.

          Otherwise, demonstrate this “God” is anything but IMAGINARY….

        • Bina Chava

          If God is IMAGINARY anything in the world is imaginary…. i mean the feelings and emotions. If you subtract feeling and emotions from any living thing there is nothing left.

        • bamboodread

          Have you feelings and emotions? Then they can’t be imaginary, can they/ Logic fail.

        • MNb

          “after I realized Him”
          So indeed He can only be you.

        • Ignorant Amos

          Another theists on another threads source material seems appropriate here….

          http://www.pnas.org/content/106/51/21533.long

        • Kodie

          I’d like a cage match please.

        • Are you loving your neighbor as yourself? Because, if you are, it kinda really doesn’t matter where God does or does not exist at any given time.

          I am seeing a lot of people not loving themselves, or their neighbors. Which makes me pretty sad. Which is why I continue to type.

          *We* conscious apes, who managed to climb out of the primordial soup can’t even seem to pinpoint the speed and location of a silly electron at the same time with all of our fancy gadgets. So when you ask for proof of the God (which we can both discuss without context because we can all completely understand the idea of a Creator), I have to apologize. It is my understanding that, at this time, we still can’t pinpoint the location and momentum of an electron, at the same time.

          It would seem that the tools that man has fashioned are still lagging behind the infinity of a single conscious being. So I will have to make due with typing words into a robot-box that can transmit those words in milliseconds and we can almost have a real-time conversation about how everything systematically came into existence magically out of nothing.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle

        • Kodie

          What do you think “the infinity of a single conscious being” is doing? Science, as you may be able to understand, is not magical. Humans have to ask questions and make experiments. We’ve done a great job so far, but you’re complaining that we’re too slow? You are kind of an idiot. Why are you even here?

        • “What do you think “the infinity of a single conscious being” is doing?”

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYK5JvDQL44

        • Ignorant Amos

          Yip…definitely entertaining…at least on a slow day like today.

        • epeeist

          *We* conscious apes, who managed to climb out of the primordial soup can’t even seem to pinpoint the speed and location of a silly electron at the same time with all of our fancy gadgets.

          So do you fall into the psi-ontic or psi-epistemic camps when it comes to quantum mechanics?

        • adam

          “So when you ask for proof of the God (which we can both discuss without
          context because we can all completely understand the idea of a Creator)”

          All the ‘proof’ exists that Gods are created by man

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cec86c13ff651044ebf846246f7b360fb2d8a3eccf42e97c497a2d680eb4b44d.jpg

          “It is my understanding that, at this time, we still can’t pinpoint the location and momentum of an electron, at the same time.”

          And this compares to God, just how?

          Electrons can be pinpointed, electrons can have their momentum measured.

          Gods are still IMAGINARY.

          God of the Gaps, still apply.

    • Branes51

      God doesn’t cause disease. That’s a function of life. And death is not evil. ALL living things eventually die. Pain and suffering are a part of life. I lost my wife to breast cancer 11 years ago. I could blame God, but she smoked for over 40 years. Granted, children don’t bring their diseases on themselves, but disease exists, death happens. As humans, we see suffering and death as evils because we have to experience them..but we aren’t able to see the big picture. It’s just like the general who has to sacrifice a military unit to achieve an important objective. He sends people to their deaths knowing it saves more lives. I’m not going to argue with you about the existence of God. If you don’t believe you don’t believe. But let me tell you this: if you are an American, you don’t have any rights. Because the rights guaranteed by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution (because they call on Providence to aid them), the rights to life, liberty and happiness. are given by the Creator..and you don’t have one. So guess what? No rights! Humanists like to say that the founding fathers weren’t Christian. Some were, some weren’t. But they all accepted the idea of a Supreme Creator because they asked for his help in creating this country.

      And like it or not, most of the morality that exists in our country, exists because of it’s Christian history. Not that the country is inherently Christian, although the majority claim to be one of the many sects. But the whole idea of treat others as you would have them treat you, being nice to others, all those things you mention below..all derive from Judeo-Christian teachings. That is not to say that Christianity is the only teacher of those things, but in America, it is the primary one.

      I understand your anger. But do you want a world where nobody dies? That would be impossible because starvation would ensue very quickly. And should every child live to adulthood? The earth would be unbearably overpopulated, resulting in, guess what..mass starvation once again. If we could encourage people to stop overpopulating, we wouldn’t have children dying from cancer and other diseases.
      God isn’t going to control us or our behavior. If He does interfere with human life it’s on an individual basis or perhaps in world changing situations.

      As for magic involved, two things. To the uninitiated, any sufficiently advanced technology may seem as magic. and if there is a God and He is all powerful, it’s not magic it’s just His power. This may upset some of my fellow Christians, but I’m not 100% sure Jesus wasn’t an alien. The virgin birth could easily be explained by artificial insemination. Although I’m not referring to someone from a different planet, but from an entirely different universe in another dimension. And this isn’t that farfetched if you’ve read Michu Kaku. There is a lot in the Bible to indicate that this could be the case.

      Either way, Christianity as a movement began shortly after His death and resurrection. There may not be any historical proof of His existence, but there is historical evidence regarding Paul and Peter and the thousands of Christians in Rome that were slaughtered rather than denouncing Christ. Considering that nobody, none of the apostles gained one cent from spreading the stories about Jesus, one has to wonder if perhaps there was something to their stories after all. Not only did they not profit by their evangelism. Eventually, they were all murdered because of it. And Paul, who was a virulent anti-Christian claimed that he saw the risen Christ on the road to Damascus where he was going to arrest Christians. This, from a Jewish Pharisee. Why would he spend the rest of his life preaching about someone he knew wasn’t real when it cost him everything, including eventually, his head? While in prison under Nero, he wrote most of his epistles, all claiming that Jesus was divine, all the while knowing he was going to be martyred. That’s pretty good reason to maybe listen to what the man said.

      • It’s an odd religion when the claims made for the god look identical to no god at all. People live and die; good and bad things happen—is this a godly world or a god-free world? They look identical.

        if you are an American, you don’t have any rights. Because the rights guaranteed by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution (because they call on Providence to aid them), the rights to life, liberty and happiness. are given by the Creator..and you don’t have one. So guess what? No rights!

        You’ve forgotten what they taught you in high school. First, the Declaration of Independence makes no reference to the Christian god, and it’s not law anyway. That’s the Constitution, which is very clearly secular. You should read it sometime.

        the whole idea of treat others as you would have them treat you, being nice to others, all those things you mention below..all derive from Judeo-Christian teachings.

        Why give credit to Christianity? Christianity is pretending to give morality back to us when it came from humans in the first place.

        But do you want a world where nobody dies? That would be impossible because starvation would ensue very quickly.

        It’s called “heaven.” The Christians tell me that it works just fine.

        The virgin birth could easily be explained by artificial insemination.

        Isaiah 7 makes no claim for a virgin birth. Read it.

        And the virgin birth is far more easily explained by the Jesus cult adopting that feature from other religions (whose gods were also divinely born).

        I’ve responded to these and many other of your arguments in this blog. I can point you to posts if you can’t find them (“who would die for a lie?” for example).

        • “But do you want a world where nobody dies? That would be impossible because starvation would ensue very quickly.
          It’s called “heaven.” The Christians tell me that it works just fine.”

          We kind of already have that heaven on Earth, and overall it does seem to be working. It seems like there are still a few kinks, namely people that assume the Earth is going to suddenly be unsustainable, which has never actually happened in the history of forever.

        • Kodie

          How incredibly ignorant you are. Humans have been only in the history of forever, 200,000 years. I was listening in the car to introduce her TED Talk on the origins of humans, illustrate it with a roll of toilet paper.

          Louise Leakey, grand-daughter of the famous anthropologist Louis Leakey, rolls it out, so to speak, in this TED talk and accompanying article.

          If there are 400 sheets of tissue paper in the roll, then the very first life in the oceans is seen at sheet 240. The age of the dinosaurs begins at sheet 19. Dinosaurs in their many forms and great diversity are around for 14 and a half sheets. Dinosaurs are extinct by the end of the Cretaceous, 5 squares from the end, making way for the mammals.

          Our story and place on the timeline as upright walking apes begins only in the last half of the very last sheet. The human story as Homo sapiens is represented by less than 2 millimeters of this, some 200,000 years.

          ……

          While Louise compares the history of Planet Earth to a roll of toilet paper, her father, Richard, once compared it to a thousand-page book. If each page represented 4.5 million years, the age of the dinosaurs begins on page 728, and all of recorded human history fits comfortably
          on the last line of the last page.

          You think that the human population can keep growing without running out of food or resources? You’re fucking nuts, actually. Dumb, crazy, ignorant. You have no foundation of knowledge to express what you think has happened in “the history of forever”. It’s called “you are speaking out your ass on a topic you have never studied.” Sure, humans are here, humans are still around, but humans are likely the only species, intelligent as you think “we” are, to make conscious choices that do not benefit the sustenance of our species. That’s another reason to despise the lies and ignorance of theists. Who did you come here to try and help?

        • “Who did you come here to try and help?”

          Well, now I am kind of hoping you, since you ‘sound’ angry. Maybe you are not, not trying to project.

          “Sure, humans are here, humans are still around, but humans are likely the only species, intelligent as you think “we” are, to make conscious choices that do not benefit the sustenance of our species.”

          That’s weird. It’s almost like we were ‘created’ differently than other species…

        • Kodie

          Hey asshole. Do you maybe think I sound angry because you say such moronic patronizing asshole obnoxious dick things?

          You’re not the first Christian I ever met. Do you have any idea how ignorant you are? That level of idiocy kind of sets me off. Try not to be such a fucking idiot and I will cheer the fuck right up.

          I don’t need your “help”. I think you don’t know shit, so no thanks.

        • Am I allowed to talk to the other people?

        • Kodie

          Now that we know your purpose is not to have a two-way conversation but to seek out “broken” people to proselytize, if it were up to me, I’d say “fuck no, troll”.

          But go ahead and see what you come up with. You are pulling out all the typical Christian shitty arguments and false beliefs. You’re a brainwashed pawn. If you want to learn, learn. If you want to preach your tired wrongness, I’d say get the fuck out.

        • No, no. It was originally the misguided seeking of possibly ‘broken’ people. Now it’s the two-way thing.

        • Ignorant Amos

          You’re fucking nuts, actually. Dumb, crazy, ignorant.

          In an idiotic entertaining way…at the moment.

          Who did you come here to try and help?

          Why, all us poor bleak non-believers living in the dark of course. Bwahahahaha!

        • Yeah, if we could just get rid of those damn stewards of the earth, standing in the way of strip mining, fossil fuels, CFCs in aerosol cans (like God intended!), and other kinds of progress.

          which has never actually happened in the history of forever.

          Society has never been as capable of damaging the environment in the history of forever.

          What environment-protecting busybodies are you concerned about?

        • No, no, stewards of the Earth are a good thing. We are supposed to look after the Earth.

          “Society has never been as capable of damaging the environment in the history of forever.”

          Considering the amount of expansion, in pretty much everything, in my lifetime, I am willing to acknowledge that this is probably true.

          This is almost exclusively the reason why I visit sites like this, though.

          Grand sweeping statements made by people who are almost exclusively under 60 years of age (certainly 120 years, amirite?) but have definite knowledge about all that has transpired, throughout the universe, for all of the hundreds of millions of years since it ‘scientifically,’ (but definitely not supernaturally) burst into existence out of nothingness.

        • Yes, Christians are supposed to look after the earth. That’s why I continue to be amazed at Christians are annoyed when environmental concerns are raised. Shouldn’t the Christians be leading that parade?

          Grand sweeping statements made by people who are almost exclusively under 60 years of age (certainly 120 years, amirite?) but have definite knowledge about all that has transpired, throughout the universe, for all of the hundreds of millions of years since it ‘scientifically,’ (but definitely not supernaturally) burst into existence out of nothingness.

          Hmm. Maybe we don’t read the same atheist articles as you. I can’t remember the last time I heard an atheist claim definite knowledge about anything. Give me a few egregious examples that bug you.

          Also, make clear what environmental excesses you’re concerned about.

        • Michael Neville

          Grand sweeping statements made by people who are almost exclusively under 60 years of age (certainly 120 years, amirite?) but have definite knowledge about all that has transpired, throughout the universe, for all of the hundreds of millions of years since it ‘scientifically,’ (but definitely not supernaturally) burst into existence out of nothingness.

          I’m the geezer of this bunch, I’m 69. I certainly do not claim definite knowledge of the universe. I know that my ignorance is almost boundless. However I do know a few things and I strongly suspect that I know more cosmology (the study of the origin and development of the universe) than you do.

          If you’re going to claim that we think the universe burst into existence 13.82 billion years ago out of nothing then you need to define “nothing.” Be rigorous in your definition.

        • Ignorant Amos

          When was there nothing?

        • Ignorant Amos
        • adam

          “We kind of already have that heaven on Earth, and overall it does seem to be working. ”

          WHERE?

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/38a372d179f379b51cdb5f1c227e4a5bd6dd543347d09566c2aedd943b72e754.jpg

        • adam

          “We kind of already have that heaven on Earth, and overall it does seem to be working. ”

          WHERE?

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7ead1dfb33fc5a434455e6d5ffd090caa7b6e7d822229360729a7a9750b56e83.png

      • adam

        “I lost my wife to breast cancer 11 years ago.”

        So what makes you think that wasnt God’s plan?

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/09fbca2c164961718e964cd51e6d254f02cca7cbbd327cb72ad57d37820d1c52.jpg

        ” the rights to life, liberty and happiness. are given by the Creator..and you don’t have one. So guess what? No rights!”

        If only you would have kept reading, you would not have looked like a total idiot:

        ” That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”

        The Constitution was that government that secures those rights.

        “And like it or not, most of the morality that exists in our country, exists because of it’s Christian history. ”

        So THAT’s where all the racism comes from:

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/86effa5e2bc761ae95f687bf44f1632c13ebd40a54b07502d779f242a887cc3e.jpg

        “God isn’t going to control us or our behavior. If He does interfere with human life it’s on an individual basis or perhaps in world changing situations.”

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cc237be5ddc93f7585625b2a21b18651052707be1c85856d76c2e70b64c966eb.jpg

        • ^^This is anger directed at a historical figure that you claim doesn’t exist…

        • Kodie

          No, it’s ridicule for the silly people who do believe that fictional character is your real friend. Another lie from you. I will grant you don’t realize it’s a lie. You just believe whatever garbage they sell you, then you come over to some atheist blog to repeat it. Millions and millions of people like you exist. That doesn’t make what you believe true, it only makes it annoyingly popular.

          Why you want to tell us what you think we think instead of being a good listener and asking questions of things you’re not sure about? I thought Christians were supposed to be good people, not obnoxious dicks. I mean, to hear you guys tell it, you’re only trying to help. To us, it’s a bunch of repetitive bullshit, not helpful, not true, and abundantly clear your church is the source of lies about atheism. What else are they lying to you about?

        • I ask the questions further down. I grew up on the mean streets of the internets, bruh, so I mix obnoxiousness in with my conversating. Not trying to be a dick.

          “…the source of lies about atheism.”

          So confused. What are the truths of atheism?

        • Kodie

          I don’t even think most of you have any idea how much of an obnoxiious dick you just are by saying stupid patronizing bullshit, like implying that why are atheists so mad at a figure they don’t believe exists? No, shithead. It’s the people. You think you mean well, but you’re really a bunch of intrusive wrong assholes.

          I don’t say there are “truths” of atheism like you’re implying. Theist claims of god are so weak and childish and poisonous, so I can’t believe any of them. That’s what atheism is. I don’t believe your claims of god.

          Here is a post I made recently with a pretty thorough rant of all the lies about atheism that theists tell each other, and churches use to scare you and deter you from atheism into staying Christian, some of which you’ve already stepped in:

          http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2017/04/case-christ-now-movie/#comment-3256066001

          If you believe any of that and try to use it to make yourself feel better, seeking out people with a “bleaker outlook on life” and say your other foolish things, such as your science can’t do blah blah blah, so god exists, or those environmental panics are really unjustified and annoying to you, and “this is anger directed at a historical figure????? you don’t believe exists”, you’re already an obnoxious dick in denial of what an obnoxious dick you are, even before you say anything.

        • “Theist claims of god are so weak and childish and poisonous, so I can’t believe any of them.”

          Wow, poisonous? That seems harsh. I haven’t been a jerk on y’alls discussion board. I did come attempting a discussion. I have also spoken to other people who are bashing belief in God, so maybe I do sound condescending. Not necessarily trying to be. Maybe a little smarmy, but I am not of the opinion that any of you are not intelligent.

          The thing that always drags me into these discussions is a curiosity about how y’all can not only know that God does not exist, but more how you can so confidently claim to know what has happened for the last several hundred billion years.

        • Kodie

          Yes, poisonous. Even if you didn’t mean to be an obnoxious dick, it’s not exactly something you seem to be able to help – I mean you theists, not singling you out. That’s part of the poison. You don’t care about us except that you think we are missing parts and want to come and heal us, or say other stupid things like “how can you know that god doesn’t exist.” If I don’t fucking believe your fucking stupid claims, how can I not be an atheist?

          As for science, you don’t fucking even have a clue. For starters, there haven’t been several hundred billion years. Makes no difference to you, but educated people call it evidence.

        • Michael Neville

          Just so you know, the present consensus for the age of the universe is 13.82 billion years. According to one hypothesis time began at 1×10^-43 seconds after the Big Bang. There’s a lot about science that’s counter-intuitive.

        • bamboodread

          What does “what has happened for the last several hundred billion years” got to do with not believing in fairytales?

        • Ignorant Amos

          The thing that always drags me into these discussions is a curiosity about how y’all can not only know that God does not exist,…

          And that is where your major malfunction is occurring.

          Which god? Define the the god you want to support. Until you do, we can’t know if it can exist or not.

          Atheists don’t claim to know, they claim that there is no good reason to belief such idiotic claims and so don’t.

          I take it you claim to know all not YahwehJesus gods don’t exist…(given that you are a Christian, maybe you are not)…how do you know such things?

          …but more how you can so confidently claim to know what has happened for the last several hundred billion years.

          You are such an idiot that you don’t even know how idiotic that statement happens to be. How can you be so asinine with just the one head?

        • Greg G.

          how y’all can not only know that God does not exist

          That is not a claim that most atheists make. There is a difference between not believing a god exists and believing no gods exist. I think that no gods exist but I cannot know that. But even if some omnipotent being exists, it shows no interest in our well-being in any way that is distinguishable from wishful thinking so it does not appear to desire or warrant worship. Why bother pretending that it does? Why bother pretending to know what your conception of a god prefers?

        • adam
        • Ignorant Amos

          So confused. What are the truths of atheism?

          Don’t be confused.

          Google is your friend…

          https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/about-atheism/

        • Greg G.

          What are the truths of atheism?

          Atheism is a position about one thing: the lack of a belief in gods. Atheists do not pretend to have “truths”. Atheism is the result of critical thinking and an honest approach to seeking truth about many topics.

        • Jason Lane

          You arguing against religion because of individuals that have had negative influences in your life or you hold resentment for. The only way to free yourself from resentment is to let it go or take it out on something or someone else. Your choice. Jesus preached exactly what Atheist seek. Understanding and truth through critical thinking. He preached in parables but the message is clear is unfiltered. Congrats you don’t have to feel divided anymore. It starts with the individual.

        • epeeist

          You arguing against religion because of individuals that have had negative influences in your life or you hold resentment for.

          Really? Got evidence? Or should we assume that you just pulled that out of your fundament?

        • Kodie

          You seem to be uncriticially repeating dogma from your church and casting aspersions. Is that what Jesus preached?

        • Jason Lane

          Ok my attempt was to unite individuals that seem to want to forget that we all struggle in this together trying to understand it. If I was talking to my devout Christian mother I would bring up all the negatives aspects of Christianity in the hopes that she might see that science and atheism has its merits too. My purpose, my individual belief, is that I am here to bridge the gap and do what I can to unite ideals. I believe life is the process of this until death. The common denominator is we all seek something while we’re here. If you seek nothing then maybe you believe there is nothing when you die. You seek the great power of oblivion and you can achieve that I believe. I’m not a very strict and devout Christian. I interpret the Bible personally. It has its contradictions. But each scripture is for a different time and situation. And I am no expert of the Bible or of every theory ever derived by a human being. I like what Jesus taught and nothing on earth will change that. Seek what you seek or float you’re a free individual.

        • Kodie

          You hope to accomplish all that by insulting people you don’t know?

        • Jason Lane

          If I directly insulted you I apologize. Not my intention. Just wanted to defend myself and explain myself if at all possible. I can control what I say, but not how individuals take that message. I am a weak flesh and blood human being and so I lack many things. Thank you for awaking and reminding me of this.

        • Kodie

          You arguing against religion because of individuals that have had
          negative influences in your life or you hold resentment for. The only
          way to free yourself from resentment is to let it go or take it out on
          something or someone else.

          This is what you wrote. Do you not see yourself that it’s presumptuous and insulting? One of the negative effects of religions is that it uses believers as puppets to spread vicious lies and rumors.

        • epeeist

          Do you not see yourself that it’s presumptuous and insulting?

          One of the things I have noted with a number of the religious who come here is a complete lack of empathy for other people. Must be the meaning that they get from their god that does that.

        • Ignorant Amos

          Ok my attempt was to unite individuals that seem to want to forget that we all struggle in this together trying to understand it.

          You are again demonstrating an arrogance beyond reproach. Why do you think we all struggle in this together? Just because you do? Why do you think we want to be united with a bunch of religiously brain dead fuckwits in their retarded thinking?

          If I was talking to my devout Christian mother I would bring up all the negatives aspects of Christianity in the hopes that she might see that science and atheism has its merits too.

          That’s nice…and perhaps someone like your devout Christian mother needs all the negative aspects of Christianity pointing out, and that science and atheism has its merits too. But we don’t. And we certainly don’t need it from some condescending prick with a stick up his arse.

          My purpose, my individual belief, is that I am here to bridge the gap and do what I can to unite ideals.

          You have a mysterious method of going about it…preaching won’t work. Perhaps if you point out where you think the common ground in our ideals overlaps and then explain to us atheists why you think it matters that some Christian on the internet has the same ideals and how it is relevant to belief/unbelief in an imaginary entity, would be an excellent start.

          I believe life is the process of this until death.

          Who cares? Waste your life how you please.

          The common denominator is we all seek something while we’re here.

          Define the “something”?

          If you seek nothing then maybe you believe there is nothing when you die.

          What is the “something” being seeked and why is it relevant to there being “something” after we die? Atheists don’t believe in an after life, but that doesn’t mean they have no goals in life while they are living. The two are mutually exclusive.

          You seek the great power of oblivion and you can achieve that I believe.

          Wtf does that even mean?

          I’m not a very strict and devout Christian.

          Who cares? Talking woo-woo word salad and Christian verbal diarrhoea is just the same as if you were. It’s still bullshit.

          I interpret the Bible personally.

          Who cares? Christians have been personally interpreting the buybull for millennia and untold millions have died as a result.

          Right from the get-go the diversity of Christianity has resulted in a plethora of Christianities throughout the ages and why there are over 45,000+ today.

          You are why the Jesus prayer in John 17:20-23 is a monumental failure.

          It has its contradictions.

          It sure has.

          But each scripture is for a different time and situation.

          Ambiguity is handy that way. It means that those Christians that want to murder the others, can find what they want to support their cause within scripture. Think Westbro Baptists for example…or Roman Catholics.

          And I am no expert of the Bible or of every theory ever derived by a human being.

          Hmmmm….

          I like what Jesus taught and nothing on earth will change that.

          An eternity of torment in Hell for finite mundane crime…nice.

          Seek what you seek or float you’re a free individual.

          We know…and we don’t need your permission for it either. Wise up.

        • Greg G.

          Wow! You”re a mind reader? I hope you have a backup plan.

          I read the verse from Isaiah that said God creates evil. My mentors have very poor answers to those questions.

          A few days after, I heard one of my favorite preachers telling what scientists say about science in a sermon that I knew was not true. A few minutes later, he was preaching what heaven was like with the same gravitas. I knew that he didn’t know that either and could not possibly know, but he could know what scientists actually said if he picked up a book.

          After that, it was hard to believe those I had trusted. It was never anything personal.

          I tried to rekindle my faith by returning to the church where I got saved. The sermon was on why people took the Lord”s name in vain. The preacher”s conclusion was that there was power in the name of the Lord. I thought, “Bullshit. Oh, there is the same power in that word, too!”

          That ended my faith. It was just the inconsistencies of religion.

        • Jason Lane

          I’m sorry if I offended you or assumed something about you that you didn’t reveal clearly. I believe I understand my existence as this. A yearning to understand truth. You are right I don’t know. Knowledge and belief are separate in this world but knowledge is ever changing and belief can be an anchor for SOME PEOPLE. I simply believe I’m here to seek God and attain understanding of what that means. I like to show people if possible that when they argue they are arguing about the same thing. Many Christians believe if someone is arguing against their belief then they are evil. Or at least I think. Many ways to pick a small statement apart. But protons need electrons and both need neutrons. We all need each other to learn from each other. I’ve done my best to present my neutral side. I may have failed but I survived and so get another opportunity. All I have to do is plant a seed of thought. I don’t care about owning someone or dominating a debate. Just here to speak my mind and that’s it.

        • Greg G.

          I simply believe I’m here to seek God and attain understanding of what that means.

          That’s what I used to think.

          For about two decades after I escaped from faith, I didn’t think about religion all that much but if someone asked, I would just say that I was an atheist. In the mid-90s, a guy at work heard about that and started trying to argue with me. We ended up debating very often. At first, I could answer his arguments but he started reading more so I started finding counter-arguments on the internet.

          One of the first things he told me was that evolution would be overturned in the next ten to fifteen years. I had heard that same claim twenty years earlier. Fifteen years later, we worked different shifts and I had changed to a different work area, but I happened to see him in a break area and reminded him of that claim. He denied ever saying it.

          Our debating changed us. I became more familiar with the Bible and Christian arguments while he went from a Fundamentalist to a Calvinist. I think Calvinism is the logical conclusion of Christianity and a reductio ad adsurdum refutation of it.

          Many ways to pick a small statement apart. But protons need electrons and both need neutrons.

          Sure we can pick apart small statements. I agree that protons and electrons need each other in a conservation of charge kind of way but they don’t need neutrons. They could exist as hydrogen atoms. Complex chemistry needs neutrons to bind protons that attract electrons, which interact with other atoms.

          All I have to do is plant a seed of thought. I don’t care about owning someone or dominating a debate.

          Fair enough.

          Just here to speak my mind and that’s it.

          I am here to speak my mind, too, but not just for that. I like to learn from others and to change my mind when presented with better ideas. You should try that.

          Many of the commenters are former Christians who came to realize that the religion is as false as any other religion. So it can be a support group for people who are dealing with the problems of their religion and why they ever believed it.

        • Jason Lane

          Well I’m not here as an alcoholic at an alcoholic anonymous meeting. Pardon the metaphor.
          Or anything like that.
          I can certainly learn new things from you. I’ve learned that some of the things I say seem harsh and offensive. I certainly feel offended by some of the responses I’ve got but what I expect to happen is not always what happens.
          Failure is a great teaching tool if recognized as such.
          Many of us try to hold each other accountable.
          And you said you escaped faith. Now you’re right I’m not a mind reader. But I assume this means you thought faith and Christianity were holding you back. If that’s true I hope that is a positive thing for you.
          I glad I was able to discuss this with you and challenge myself.

        • Greg G.

          And you said you escaped faith. Now you’re right I’m not a mind reader. But I assume this means you thought faith and Christianity were holding you back. If that’s true I hope that is a positive thing for you.

          Faith is believing things more strongly than the evidence will support, like that is supposed to be a good thing. It religion, the best faith is absolute belief. That can be in spite of the best evidence in the case of fundamentalists and evolution. Faith lets you believe you have found the truth and prevents you from continuing the search. Even if you use critical thinking in every other aspect of your life, you cannot do it and maintain faith. Cognitive dissonance will shut down the brain processes so that critical thinking is stopped because of faith.

          An example is the difficulty a person who believes in an omnipotent, omnibenevolent god thingy has with understanding the problem of suffering. Suffering is either necessary or unnecessary. If suffering is necessary, then it must accomplish something that is logically possible to do. The weakest definition of omnipotence is the ability to do anything that is logically possible to do, so even under that definition, the omnipotence can do whatever suffering can do, with or without the suffering, so all suffering is unnecessary if an omnipotent being exists. The existence of unnecessary suffering means the omnipotence is either indifferent or sadistic. In either case, every instance of suffering is an instance of the absence of benevolence which eliminates the omnibenevolent attribute. There could still be an omnipotence that is either indifferent or sadistic. The world is full of beings that might be omnibenevolent but they are not omnipotent.

        • Greg G.

          I simply believe I’m here to seek God and attain understanding of what that means.

          That’s what I used to think.

          For about two decades after I escaped from faith, I didn’t think about religion all that much but if someone asked, I would just say that I was an atheist. In the mid-90s, a guy at work heard about that and started trying to argue with me. We ended up debating very often. At first, I could answer his arguments but he started reading more so I started finding counter-arguments on the internet.

          One of the first things he told me was that evolution would be overturned in the next ten to fifteen years. I had heard that same claim twenty years earlier. Fifteen years later, we worked different shifts and I had changed to a different work area, but I happened to see him in a break area and reminded him of that claim. He denied ever saying it.

          Our debating changed us. I became more familiar with the Bible and Christian arguments while he went from a Fundamentalist to a Calvinist. I think Calvinism is the logical conclusion of Christianity and a reductio ad adsurdum refutation of it.

          Many ways to pick a small statement apart. But protons need electrons and both need neutrons.

          Sure we can pick apart small statements. I agree that protons and electrons need each other in a conservation of charge kind of way but they don’t need neutrons. They could exist as hydrogen atoms. Complex chemistry needs neutrons to bind protons that attract electrons, which interact with other atoms.

          All I have to do is plant a seed of thought. I don’t care about owning someone or dominating a debate.

          Fair enough.

          Just here to speak my mind and that’s it.

          I am here to speak my mind, too, but not just for that. I like to learn from others and to change my mind when presented with better ideas. You should try that.

          Many of the commenters are former Christians who came to realize that the religion is as false as any other religion. So it can be a support group for people who are dealing with the problems of their religion and why they ever believed it.

        • Ignorant Amos

          You arguing against religion because of individuals that have had negative influences in your life or you hold resentment for.

          Both presumptuous and arrogant. How do you know that is Greg’s reason for arguing against religion?

          The only way to free yourself from resentment is to let it go or take it out on something or someone else.

          Wtf? You think he resents religion because of the antics of some religious folk in his past…so your answer is to forget about it, or better still, go pick on someone or something not religious? Are you some kind of moron?

          Your choice.

          Yeah it is…or he could just keep resenting the negative source of his resentment, if your assertion is accurate, rather than picking some other innocent party that has bugger all to do with his feelings of resentment. Let’s say, for the sake of your argument, Greg source of resentment was as a result of being abused by clergy as a child…your proposal is that he can only free himself is to let it go, or vent his resentment on someone, or something unconnected? How fuckin’ in-Christian of you.

          Jesus preached exactly what Atheist seek.

          Jesus preached fuck all of the sort. We have third party hearsay accounts of people putting words into the Jesus characters mouth. We know the Jesus of the gospels didn’t exist….whatever else is left, no one knows what he taught, if indeed the whole yarn isn’t complete historical fiction, myth, and legend.

          Understanding and truth through critical thinking.

          Ballix.

          He preached in parables but the message is clear is unfiltered.

          Yet the message is interpreted many ways by many Christians…seems obvious that it is really not that clear at all. A look at the diversity of Christianity from its beginning tells us that the amount of filtering it has gone through is vast.

          Congrats you don’t have to feel divided anymore.

          You really are an arrogant arsehole.

          It starts with the individual.

          Hmmmmm… to quote whoever wrote the gospel of Matthew…7:5…“You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”

        • And if this shows that the resulting religion is inconsistent, you might want to go back to the drawing board.

        • Ignorant Amos

          That you think that, is quite revealing.

          Adam is taking the pish outta idiots that believe crap such as it is an historical figure. At least historical as described in the silly book.

          It would be foolish of me to be angry at Sherlock Holmes because there are fuckwits running around that believe he was real. That would be daft. Can’t you see how daft you are being for suggesting such idiocy?

        • Greg G.

          If Sherlock Holmes didn’t exist, then who solved all those crimes? Checkmate, athiests.

        • Ignorant Amos

          Bugger and damn…I didn’t think it through, did I?

          Oh, wait..I’ve got it now….it was the author of the stories, Dr. Watson…tah-dah!

        • adam
        • My Name, yay

          what the crusades werent about making peope convert

      • Jennifer McGinnis

        I’m not a huge fan of war and shit, so I pretty much put that guy on the level with the god in the bible. both pretty asshole-y.

    • Jason Lane

      I understand this frustrating concept. But many have had to view young people in pain. And many have harmed young people. We torture innocent animals to learn more. There are many teachers in the universe. Some teach through pain and others by example. No one had a choice being born in this world. But what did we have before? Nothing. If you believe in nothing you will attain nothing in death. A powerful choice. Now many of these sick children are heartbreaking to watch suffer. But strength allows us to help. Some wish to help in order to try to give them something to believe in when they die so they can carry that with them. Others choose to fight for their lives hopping to extend their existence so that they may experience more of the wonder and horrors of life. And still some wish to end their misery because it makes them suffer to see suffering and so it teaches them that they may need more strength. Some realize theirs is little hope and so they provide what they can to brighten their final moments. All are noble deeds and each individual is playing their role to perfection. Don’t condemn someone for the job they were designed to do. Others stay away because they are afraid and are allowed to do so to work on their need to be strong so that maybe one day they can provide for others when in need. There is no greater teacher than failure. God is all things both good and bad because we are still processing. Pain is apart of healing and this is healing on a universal scale. He will most certainly respect your wish to separate from Him because you find fault in him. But then you will be alone with yourself and have no choice but to know the faults in your own soul with no outer source to help correct them and nothing to distract yourself. I’ve been here is it true Hell and without solution. Oblivion would be an escape but you may find yourself born again. But His love is everpresent and may be tough but he is also patient. Just as he is cruel and vengeful and punishing. Disease is disease and we are born into it. Some are born with bone cancer. Others are born to sin or addiction. But we can always choose to find peace and learn to accept that our time on earth is short. The young are in good hands because they don’t need to suffer long to understand the importance of life. And many show great strength and wisdom and inspire long living sinners to turn away. I always say we don’t cry for the dead because they are dead… we cry because we miss their presence and the weight of the necessity of their existence becomes a reality. And facing reality can be terrifying. Many Christians profess God is love because they fear Hell. But God is truly the combined existence of our universe. Good and bad parts. And achieving heaven is uniting these parts to make us whole again. Why we separated is certainly a mystery but we know it was for a reason because it exists as our reality. After all this is only the 3rd dimension. Religion helps us understand our existence and so does science. They are tools for study. But not Gods or God.

      • epeeist

        tl;dr

        When I was in school they taught us about these things called “paragraphs”. Apparently they help to improve readability.

        • Jason Lane

          Wow!
          Thank you for the advice! I also learned this in school, and I truly apologize if you weren’t able to read or understand my posts without them.
          That’s my mistake. A lazy writer with no editor! Yikes. I’m glad to know I have imperfections that I can now correct.
          Im curious to know why you never bothered to explain the word “paragraph”, or how to properly use it.
          Did you forget or did you feel it was a waste of your time and intelligence to do so?
          Or were you just attempting to point out a minor flaw in my statement in the hopes it would shake my faith in my own intelligence or beliefs?
          Either way, Jesus was also a teacher. So you are doing exactly as he preached! Maybe there is truth there! He said teach a man to fish and he’d eat for life. He exuded patience and understanding.

  • Catherine

    Nikki Sixx died twice and came back both times

    • Bassist and co-founder of Mötley Crüe? I hadn’t heard of him before. And I haven’t heard about his several lives. I assume this was resuscitation by medical personnel?

      • hector_jones

        Rule of Rock n Roll – if you can avoid choking on your own vomit, you’ve got a fighting chance.

    • hector_jones

      Only 4 more to go!

    • TheNuszAbides

      wasn’t ‘documented’ as ‘carrying’ any other person’s ‘sins’, so i guess that doesn’t count for much. which is just as well; Crue fans act silly enough without mixing in supernatural tales.

  • Robin Pitt

    I’ve had ressutation done on me twice. you see what you believe because it is a comfort, it’s not proof of anything. I’m an atheist. I saw nothing both times. not heaven, not hell, not my relatives. there is no concrete proof of any deity. eyewitness testimony doesn’t count. heresay doesn’t count. none of it counts unless it can be proven beyond the shadow of doubt within the confines of the scientific community.

    if you have any of this, please, feel free to have your work peer reviewed, approved and go pick up your nobel peace prize.

  • Fred

    Please go look up the definition of the “faith”

    • hector_jones

      And then what?

    • Almost every time I go to a Christian source, I’m told that faith = belief well grounded in evidence. In other words, faith = trust.

      (Of course, I realize, as perhaps you do too, that this is just a ruse. They’ll define faith to mean “a belief well grounded in evidence” when everyone’s looking, but then the old definition of “a belief poorly grounded in evidence or even held in the face of contradictory evidence” returns as necessary.)

      • wtfwjtd

        When my wife and I were at a science museum a while back, they had an area dedicated to the Theory of Evolution. The placards explained that a theory wasn’t a hunch or a blind guess or wild conjecture, but a careful formulation of a hypothesis based on all available evidence. I was thinking at the time, they should have added, “a hunch, or blind guess , or wild conjecture isn’t a theory, that would be faith”. If the shoe fits….

    • wtfwjtd

      Oh, I see. “Faith” allows one to accept as fact things which most people find to be embarrassingly incoherent, illogical, and/or outright false. Got it.

    • Shannon Culver

      complete trust or confidence in someone or something and or the strong belief in a God/Gods or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof. So basically, believing in something no matter what evidence there may be proving it to be untrue.

  • Les K

    Some idiot is posting this on other sites as “Proof” that Christ didn’t exist. ROFL. What a joke.

    • Are you saying that there are errors in the post? And you didn’t bother to correct them?

      That sounds a bit inconsiderate. Show me where the errors are.

      • Les K

        Ok, lets do this.

        Sure death sucks, but why single out this one?
        Why did we later single out Martin Luther King Jr, or Abraham Lincoln, or JFK. They were people of prominence. Jesus was proclaimed the Son of God, and a teacher of men. That’s why it was singled out. If his can’t be, then no man’s should be.

        Jesus didn’t even die.
        Really? Were you there? I personally have a problem with this one myself, but it doesn’t change the fact that neither you or I was there, and we can neither prove or disprove it.

        Taking on the sin vs. removal of sin aren’t symmetric
        From a biblical standpoint, sin happens every day by every person in one shape or another. It may not be original sin as you said was inherited from Adam, but it is sin nonetheless. That’s why it has to be redeemed on it’s own.

        Jesus made a sacrifice—big deal.

        You say “I hope I would” if it came down to sacrificing your life for someone else. You question it. So did Jesus in the garden, hoping he wouldn’t have to do it. He however said “Thy will be done,” and literally walked to his death. Another difference, your death might be for 1, 2, or lets say for even 10 people. Jesus death was for ALL mankind, not just those living 2000+ years ago, but for all those in the last 2000 years, and all those in the next 2000 years. Trillions upon trillions upon trillions of people. Makes your sacrifice not even a footnote.

        Perhaps you should read this book, and then rethink your 10 reasons.
        http://www.amazon.com/The-Case-Christ-Journalists-Investigation/dp/0310209307

        • SparklingMoon

          Jesus made a sacrifice—big deal.
          …………………………………………………………………..
          The doctrine that God, out of His love for the world and in order to bring salvation to mankind, transferred the sins of disobedient, disbelieving and wicked people to His beloved son Jesus and made him accursed and caused him to be hanged on the cursed cross to deliver the world from sin, is completely wrong

          If weighed on the scales of justice, the act of imputing the sin of one man to another is unjust and human conscience can never accept that a criminal should be allowed to go free while an innocent person is punished for his crimes. (Ruhani Khazain)

        • Les K

          That is also putting 19th – 21st century thinking and conscience on a situation that was 2000 years ago. Doesn’t fly. While this would be true today, it was not true then.

          Don’t forget at the time of his sentencing, the people were given a choice between Jesus, and Barabas, a criminal who also was to be crucified. The people chose to release Barabas instead of Jesus. So not much different than your innocent man punished for crimes he didn’t commit.

        • at
          the time of his sentencing, the people were given a choice between Jesus, and
          Barabas, a criminal who also was to be crucified. The people chose to release
          Barabas instead of Jesus.

          It’s just a story. Just because it’s words on paper, that doesn’t make it history.

        • Pofarmer

          Barabas=Son of the Father. Nah, that’s not a literary construct at all.

        • TheNuszAbides

          the mere notion that it was even a name that was ever given to another human is scarcely more than evidence of paternalistic/provincial egocentrism, narcissism and so on.

        • SparklingMoon

          This doctrine is again falsified when we consider the reality of sin from the viewpoint of spiritual philosophy. The fact is that sin is a poison that is born when man does not obey God, does not love Him fervently and does not remember Him with love. A person whose heart has become estranged from God’s love is like a tree which, having been uprooted from the soil and, therefore, being unable to absorb water, withers with each passing day and soon loses all its verdure. Sin devastates man just as dryness kills a tree.

          Divine law has prescribed three remedies for this condition: Firstly, love; Secondly, Istighfar i.e. (the desire not to expose something.) As long as a tree’s roots remained covered by the earth, it has every chance of remaining green; Thirdly, repentance, i.e.,(turning to God in all humility to absorb the water of life) to attain nearness to Him and to be released from the darkness of sin through righteous deeds. (Ruhani Khazain)

          Verbal repentance is not enough;true repentance must be accompanied by good deeds which bring one nearer to God. Prayer, too, is a form of repentance because through it we seek nearness to God.This is why when God breathed life into man He called it Ruh, for his true happiness and peace lies in acknowledging and loving God and submitting to Him. He has also called it Nafs for it seeks union with God.

        • wtfwjtd

          “Jesus was proclaimed the Son of God, and a teacher of men. That’s why it was singled out.”

          Says who?Himself? Nearly everything that Jesus said or did can be traced back to other literature of the time period, and he had no writing or other original material to offer. Not very impressive, I’m afraid.

          “Jesus didn’t even die.
          Really? Were you there?”

          Pulling the old Ken Ham eh? Oh, he died all right, just like every other human being that’s ever walked the earth. Bob was merely pointing out the absurdity of the resurrection story–the gospel stories don’t tell us Jesus died, they tell us he had a rough day or two and then went to heaven. Some sacrifice.

          Taking on the sin vs. removal of sin aren’t symmetric
          From a biblical standpoint, sin happens every day by every person in one shape or another.

          Sin is just a theological construct, that imagines that certain actions are offensive to a certain god or gods. Within human societies, the concept of “sin” is meaningless. If your god is so offended by some action that violates one of his imagined arbitrary rules, let him deal with it. Besides, why can’t God just forgive people? Is his sense of morality really so inferior to that of man kind’s, that he has to demand violence and death before even considering the granting of forgiveness?

          “Jesus death was for ALL mankind, not just those living 2000+ years ago, but for all those in the last 2000 years, and all those in the next 2000 years. Trillions upon trillions upon trillions of people.”

          Once again, read the gospel stories, since you don’t seem to be familiar with them. There was no sacrifice, just a story of a man who was tortured for a day or two before going to heaven.

        • Scott_In_OH

          1. Those people aren’t singled out for their deaths. In Christianity, the brutality of Jesus’s death itself is held up as an example of how much God loves us.

          2. The Bible itself says Jesus didn’t die the way we usually mean die (i.e., to be permanently gone from this world and unable to ever enjoy any part of it again–now THAT’S a sacrifice).

          3. I actually agree with you on this one–Jesus’s death wasn’t just for Original Sin–but I’ve always wondered why, if people continue to sin, Jesus doesn’t have to keep dying. If we have to sacrifice something to God to get sins forgiven, how can one death be enough for the nearly infinite number of sins committed by humanity?

          4. Whether Bob would do it or not, I don’t know, but countless people have done it. Those people weren’t perfect, and yet they did more than Jesus did, giving up everything they had with no ability to come back next week.

        • Pofarmer

          “but I’ve always wondered why, if people continue to sin, Jesus doesn’t have to keep dyin”

          Well, hell, why is there still sin? Why is there still pain? Why is there still heartbreak? Why is there still disease? Why are the still ticks? Because it’s stupid, thoughtless doctrine, that’s why.

        • TheNuszAbides

          3. repetition/ritual (i.e. Easter services – granted, one probably won’t get even a fraction of the effect of Da Passion unless you make it to an incredibly powerful sermon while you’re on a [good or bad] psychedelic trip) is the key to keeping the flock in line, otherwise this kind of question would get asked far too often for Comfort. (or, just maybe, church time could become more productive because they just might start spending more time on practical questions about the here-and-now rather than the empty-yet-comforting platitudes glorifying the afterlife…)

        • Why did we later single out Martin Luther King Jr, or Abraham Lincoln, or JFK. They were people of prominence.

          I can accept that, but many of your compatriots say that the big deal is the agony of the death.

          Really? Were y ou there?

          Nope. You?

          I’m taking the gospel story as truth and then responding. Sound like an OK thing for you? Dead means dead. According to the gospel story, he was out of action for a day and a half. That’s not “dead.”

          You say “I hope I would” if it came down to sacrificing your life for someone else.

          Right. I’m imperfect. It can be a big deal if I do something noble. Not so shocking when the perfect Son of Man does it.

          So did Jesus in the garden, hoping he wouldn’t have to do it.

          Weird story, huh? He’s a person of the Trinity (I realize that that concept hadn’t been invented at that point) and he’s haggling to get out of his commitment? Doesn’t make a lot of sense.

          Jesus death was for ALL mankind, not just those living 2000+ years ago, but for all those in the last 2000 years, and all those in the next 2000 years. Trillions upon trillions upon trillions of people.

          Just make it magic then. “I forgive everyone!”—like that. Because the magnitude of the sacrifice—pain that a million other people have already experienced and then back in the driver’s seat in 36 hours—really ain’t that big a deal.

          Perhaps you should read this book, and then rethink your 10 reasons.

          Lee Strobel? I’ve lampooned that guy several times here already. Search his name at this blog to see.

          Sorry—I don’t think much about his contribution to the debate.

        • Les K

          Simple truth, unless you are an eyewitness, you can neither prove nor deny any of these events. Neither can I. I personally take issue with some of the biblical teachings, and have for years. But I also respect people’s right to believe what they want, even if it disagrees with my own.
          To act like your depictions, or mine for that matter, constitutes proof of anything is redundant. If it’s true or false, we will find out when we die.

        • unless you are an eyewitness, you can neither prove nor deny any of these events. Neither can I.

          I don’t have to. I simply take the Bible story at face value (sometimes hard given the contradictions, I’ll admit) and then evaluate it.

          I also respect people’s right to believe what they want, even if it disagrees with my own.

          They can believe whatever they want to. If they say that there’s logic behind their supernatural claims, however, I welcome their best arguments. So far, I’ve heard no compelling evidence for the supernatural—Christian beliefs included.

          If it’s true or false, we will find out when we die.

          Kind of a long time to wait. I’d rather evaluate the evidence during the one life that we know we have and follow that evidence. So far, it points to there not being any supernatural.

        • Les K

          Maybe you’ll get lucky and be the one to come back and share. But on the flip side, as you said, it’s a long wait. And the more foreboding question, what if you’re wrong? I wish you luck in life…and death.

        • And the more foreboding question, what if you’re wrong?

          Pascal’s Wager applies to both of us, my friend. It’s gonna suck if we’re standing side by side as we realize that actually the Buddhists of all people were right. Or the Muslims. Or the Zeus worshippers.

          Maybe we should find out who has the suckiest hell and believe in that one.

        • TheNuszAbides

          find out who has the suckiest hell and believe in that one

          that is beautiful. the Church of Least To Lose?

        • Admit it–you want in, don’t you?

        • MNb

          “unless you are an eyewitness, you can neither prove nor deny any of these events”
          Well, I wasn’t an eyewitness of your birth, so I can neither prove or deny that you came from a cauliflower.

        • Les K

          Wow, you are so funny. I have no proof either, but I’m pretty sure your mom was raped by a donkey. explains why your an A**

        • MNb

          Spot on, Les, except your last sentence. You being pretty sure my mom was raped by a donkey makes as little sense as Jesus’ Resurrection.

        • Pofarmer

          “Taking on the sin vs. removal of sin aren’t symmetric”

          Well, they’re both nonsense.

  • Ole

    The invention of religion is absolutely the ideal way to control human beings — it’s the carrot and the stick approach. If you’re good and god forgives your sins, you get the carrot – heaven. If you are unrepentant you get the stick – hell. You can’t lose with this approach — if the carrot isn’t incentive enough, then threats of eternity in hell might make you fall into line.

    • I hear that for lots of ex-Christians, the fear of hell was the last thing to fall away.

      • TheNuszAbides

        indeed, it seems pie-in-the-sky Carrot can be picked apart but still so often trumped by anti-pie-in-the-anti-sky Stick. losing everything you were warmly encouraged to Belong To growing up? even that could be easy if the faith community only mouthed platitudes the whole time, without actually backing up the notion of ‘community’ with anything direct/substantial/etc.

    • “The invention of religion is absolutely the ideal way to control human beings”

      No, think about it. PLEASURE is the ideal way to control people, abolish sin, abolish morality encourage PLEASURE. And make the fat corporations and governments rich. Don’t you think it’s easier to sell products and services that way? Who will buy a deo if Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad or anyone endorsed it?

      • Kodie

        You have the ultimate Brooklyn Bridge for sale, eternal life, forgiveness. From where? From an imaginary friend who can see you all the time even when nobody else can see you. It’s continual surveillance, in trade for an extra life that’s better than this one. AND YOU BOUGHT IT! Probably with money, not only your time, or your life.

        • Come on, what would sell more? Look around. It’s much easier to control via pleasure. Isn’t it happening around us?

          About continual surveillance should I even bring up NSA? OK OK I will keep quiet, please don’t send drones to my house. LOL JK.

          Aren’t people spending time money life, thinking and working on what satisfying their pleasures?

        • Kodie

          What is heaven?

        • You are changing subject.

          I replied to a person who said “The invention of religion is absolutely the ideal way to control human beings”

          With my opinion that religion is NOT the ultimate way to control people there are too many variables. With PLEASURES it’s much easier to control and it’s happening in day to day life.

        • wtfwjtd

          …and you’ve just missed the point– Kodie pointed out that heaven is the ultimate pleasure, and by saying that it’s easier to control people with pleasure, you are agreeing with Kodie and Ole.

        • 1) When I said pleasure I meant worldly pleasures, which includes food, sex, alcohol, materialistic things and services etc.

          2) Heaven is not the worldly things, it’s the presence of God. Hell is absence of God.

          Now tell me of the two which can be used to control people more easily and which is being used extensively?

        • 90Lew90

          2. American capitalism (described in 1) is just that: American. Capitalism is quite widespread, granted, but not American capitalism, whose principle of a price for everything, even sex, is peculiar to America. Not so with religious belief.

          You’ve also described heaven as the “presence of God” and Hell as his absence. We’re given to believe these are real places though, although possibly not in the dimensions we mere mortals can access. If heaven is the presence of God, that makes the individual believer necessary as a point of reference with regard to God’s “presence”. What happens when there’s no believer, after death, say? An absence of God? I have to say, it all sounds pretty implausible to me. It sounds like this belief must be willed.

        • “Heaven is not the worldly things, it’s the presence of God. Hell is absence of God.” Is my personal opinion, because someone asked me what heaven is.

          It’s on personal experience, how life was before I came to Christ (which I feel was like hell) and life changed after I came to Christ (which i feel is like heaven). Again the change is not “worldly”. (Many confuse heaven with worlds pleasures and hell with worldly fires and lava LOL)

          Again this is my opinion. I wouldn’t say anyone has to believe what I believe.

          But my point remains Unchanged:
          “Religion is not the ultimate way to control people”
          Worldly pleasures is the ultimate way to control people.

        • Kodie

          Your point goes unsupported. Religion is the belief that there is an awesome reward for behaving better than average. I have not noticed religious people behaving better than average, nor an explanation of what is “controlled” about people who are not religious. I think you have a warped idea of atheism? I think you think without god we are just hedonists. You haven’t really explained what you are looking at that is being controlled and what you think it’s being controlled to do.

        • I am not looking for support. I just want to express my opinion.

        • Kodie

          I guess you are unfamiliar with having a discussion where you support your arguments with evidence. You are just making claims and having an opinion. Not to be taken seriously.

        • I am sorry if my opinions offended you. Evidences, I guess simple Google search would help. It’s late in India and I am tired so I am really sorry if I offended you by not providing proof and expressing my opinion.

        • Kodie

          If you could back up your opinion with facts sometime, that would be great. But your whole interjection here was non sequitur. The crucifixion story makes no sense, reason – reason – reason. Your response:

          Reading your article shows humans have lost all sense of humility,
          sensitivity and sympathy, anyways enjoy your continuous greed for
          pleasure, that’s what world wants anyways.

          We’re alive and we don’t like to be in pain or be bored, and we have the time and luxury to do so=economy. If you have a problem with that system, please go ahead and prove there is anything else, prove there is some reward for abstaining from enjoying life, and as a bonus, why Jesus would have endorsed such a thing, seeing as he symbolically, allegedly sacrificed his life in order that we sacrifice ours (i.e. controlling people) over a fictitious promise/threat? How does that even make sense.

        • Ma’am this reply was to a person who said that “Religion is the ultimate tool to control people”

          Could your post that to where I commented. Those are two different topics.

        • Kodie

          I have said everything there is to say to someone who doesn’t back up his claims and opinions. You agreed that religion has the power to control people.

        • Ha ha ha I always have but I guess commonsense should prevail, modern age, religion is no longer useful factor to control people.

        • 90Lew90

          I’d say it remains very potent for reasons already stated.

        • I guess it’s for people to reason and decide. I just express my opinions.

        • 90Lew90

          Is it your opinion that because you felt your life to be hellish before you got religion, the my life without belief in your god must also be hellish?

        • Pofarmer

          “religion is no longer useful factor to control people.”

          Where you are, maybe, but I’m not sure that that’s true overall. Religion, and the promise of an eternal afterlife of joy, are, indeed, very potent messages.

        • 90Lew90

          You appear to contradict yourself with this. Your experience of this life in this world is “worldly”. If it’s not then what is it? But then you say this change in your life isn’t worldly. That seems completely woolly to me. As in nonsensical.

        • “Hell is the absence of God”? So the afterlife for me will be just like my current life?

        • wtfwjtd

          But Christians are promised more of this stuff. I don’t know of any Christian that moderates their intake of food, sex, booze, or stuff simply because of their Christianity; in fact, most Christians I know expect to enjoy more of these things, simply because they are Christians. If this is what you are trying to say, then I would agree.

        • 90Lew90

          It is a simple fact, confirmed in studies too numerous to even try to cite them all, that “watched” people behave better. Most religious believers have a sense of being “watched” or “watched over” by their god. That amounts to a sort of control but sadly it isn’t fool-proof and nor is it in any way objective because what pricks the individual’s conscience is still contingent on any number of factors which we might simply call the life-circumstances of that individual. I see what you’re getting at with “pleasures” as being motivators, but they’re by no means motivators towards “good” behaviour in the way that religious belief is. Quite often an individual’s desire to satisfy his own want of pleasure will lead him to behave very badly indeed.

        • Perfectly explained. But it’s not just the point of people behaving bad or good, that’s individual person’s choice. Worldly pleasures can be used and is used to control people to sell their products, services, lives, time and ideologies. And this is being done more effectively than any religion could do, EVER.

        • Kodie

          I’m sure I read it on cracked, but it seems crime rates* are lower when there are eyes. It could be a picture of a person with eyes or just a picture of an eye, or a cardboard cutout of a security/police officer (that is obviously not a real person), and people will feel paranoid enough to not commit crimes. As opposed to security cameras that everyone suspects are there or are completely visible, but do not strike one as an “eye”. Less likely to commit crimes if a non-recording poster of an eye than a recording surveillance camera.

          *Not sure if it is all crimes or just the petty drug-dealing, breaking into cars, or mugging people in parking garages or train platforms, etc.

        • Pofarmer

          There is a T.V. show called “Brain Games” that has illustrated the same thing.

        • Kodie

          I’m not changing the subject. You are controlled by your desire to go to the ultimate pleasure. I’m not so sure you would weigh obedience as a good end in itself. You could not be controlled if there were nothing in it for you.

          I don’t see the rest of us being controlled by earthly pleasures as much as you imagine. You come from a distorted point of view that is disgusted by normal life, and call it something to overcome, a barrier between you and it. The rest of us are confused with what you are talking about, since it sounds like a projection of exactly how you are controlled. How is anyone else controlled? What are you even talking about?

        • Well like 90Lew90 had explained “there are studies too numerous to cite” ..

          But I could probably give one example:

          The way how AXE (the deodorant brand) portrays women, you can YouTube their ads demeaning women to sex objects. Why? because sex (worldly pleasure) sells. And marketing is type of mind control, it’s scientific. But its easy when more and more people give away morality on sex, encourage more people to embrace worldly pleasure easier it is for them to sell deodorants. LOL

          And the reason you can’t imagine that you have been “controlled” by worldly pleasures is because you are deep into it, just like us Christians are deeply “Controlled” by our religious beliefs. We are all humans aren’t we? 😀

        • Kodie

          Attracting a mate one way or another sells. Nothing works as advertised, think about it. What are women or men being controlled to do by the ads? Buy things they like? Aren’t you in the market to buy something you like? Like heaven?

        • I think you should really do some research on brands such as AXE. Their marketing to financials.

        • Kodie

          I think you are using one brand’s advertising to make a generalization of all people who don’t think Jesus rose from the dead and walked around.

        • No, Please read back, I replied to a person who said

          “The invention of religion is absolutely the ideal way to control human beings”.. Come on now…

          Are you telling me AXE is the only brand which demeans women or uses sex to sell?? Please Google, you will probably find many LOL, I can give another example Playboy… I just gave you one example because my fingers are tired typing.

        • Kodie

          I think the brand of Christianity is the biggest marketer of being demeaning to women. Is that an issue you care about?

        • I am a Christian, I don’t demean women neither do I support demeaning of women. Ma’am I really suggest you do your research. Where did the marketing you mentioned go?

        • Kodie

          Policing women and keeping them in the home, tied down to having babies, and creating obstacles to women’s health, birth control education, and abortion. FOR STARTERS. Are you sure you’re not demeaning to women and trying to control their bodies via your hero endorsement the great resurrector, Jesus Christ? Are you sure you’re not all about keeping women in “their place”?

        • Jesus never said to do what you said. Where are you getting this at? These rules were created by chauvinist males who wanted to control women. This is done in every cultures. The rules you mentioned are human rules NOT rules created by God.

        • Kodie

          Then why do so many Christians use their religion to control other people, and why do so many Christians follow these rules?

        • Ma’am you are going in circles again. I can’t control what other people do. But I follow God’s rules, not rules made up by humans.

          You mentioned, I can’t be taken seriously because I didn’t give proof. But you haven’t given me proof that Jesus said that “you have to treat women badly..”

          Again we are going in circles here.. My point is religion is not the ultimate weapon to control anymore, Worldly desires and pleasures are the best method to control people.

        • Kodie

          You missed it? Because religion has the power to control people, more power than anything else. Aren’t you here only trying to control people from wanting what they want and buying what they buy? Trade it all in for the promise of something you can’t deliver? Religion is the biggest multi-level marketing scheme ever, and you are one of its pawns.

        • Then You misunderstood me, religion is a way to control people I agree.. But modern days where religion having less effect on people, where large percentage of people don’t believe. Controlling people with worldly desires is more effective.

          Calling me pawn or a controlling agent is uncalled for.. I haven’t personally attacked you. I have spoken generally.

        • Kodie

          I don’t see your point, I see you backpedaling. Once people see that religion can’t deliver on its false promises, they begin to live in the real world and enjoy their one and only life? You have a problem with reality.

        • Yes, but people would still want to control other people. So when religion fails. What do they do?

          I think you are forgetting why people want to control other people, money and power are main factors.

        • Kodie

          Do you see yourself free of being controlled? Who are you trying to save and how are you trying to do it? You are pointing out ad campaigns for a men’s hygiene product and how it degrades women, or is it you who are shaming women?

          Why is it all about control for you? You seem to want control over people because you see them being controlled by something you don’t like. That’s what makes it an opinion.

        • 90Lew90

          Yes, money and power. For which read, the evangelical super-churches and the Catholic church.

        • Pofarmer

          He’s using the old No True Scotsman.

        • 90Lew90

          You should probably read your Bible more for some of the distilled misogyny carried in any book. The New Testament is only slightly less horrible, and Paul took a very dim view of women indeed, teaching that their lot in life was silence, submission, obedience and servitude.

        • Pofarmer

          I’m not gonna agree that AXE demeans women. But, even if it did, aren’t the ways many religious demean women much worse? I mean, the AXE commercials that I’ve seen portray a good looking man and a good looking woman attracted to each other, the horrors!!!

        • wtfwjtd

          Is it? I must be missing out.

  • milknhoney

    No he is NOT.

    • And I guess that settles that! (If there is some relevant context, perhaps you want to try again.)

  • Andy

    Humanism / evolution / atheism has no law of science, logic morality, it only
    has relativity. For them to claim it does goes against their very belief / structure.
    They must borrow these laws (when is suites them) from the Bible which says
    the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, knowledge, and despite what
    our views are Gods is higher..
    Atheists cant make a judgement call against the wars in the bible or the laws in
    the bible, or against anything with out once again taken that from the biblical moral code,, they must stand on Christian views to gets a measure of logic, ethics, moral code to even know what right / wrong is. And then using them they will then make an absolute statement ‘God is a murderer’ and ‘it was evil’ etc.. “you cant do that, say that, allow that”.

    How do atheists know the bible has contradictions – thats claiming there is something that must be true, and that there is a law of logic which again goes against these beliefs.
    How can atheists say Jesus never existed, lived, died, rose etc, that sin exists or
    doesnt exits? again, you are borrowing biblical laws to even state
    these.. why ? Because atheists are fixing their feet to the ground and
    saying they are right, indicating there must be also a wrong – making an
    absolute claim these beliefs in atheism is true.. and that goes against
    their beliefs. 🙂

    • Humanism / evolution / atheism has no law of science, logic morality

      There is no morality in chemistry. That’s because they’re two different things.

      Atheism says “I see no evidence for a god.” That’s it. Atheists have no problem finding morality or using logic.

      They must borrow these laws (when is suites them) from the Bible

      I disembowel the Transcendental Argument here.

      Atheists cant make a judgement call against

      Are you saying that atheists can’t point to objective morality? Some claim they can, but I don’t. I see no evidence for objective morality.

      And then using them they will then make an absolute statement ‘God is a murderer’ and ‘it was evil’ etc.. ” you cant do that, say that, allow that”.

      I make those statements, but I don’t flatter myself that I’ve tapped into some absolute truth to do so.

      How do atheists know the bible has contradictions – thats claiming there is something that must be true

      When 3 gospels say that Jesus was killed on the day after the Passover meal and John says that he was killed on the day before, that’s a contradiction. Sorry.

      Thanks for your input, Andy. You do need to imagine that the commenters here are a little smarter than you’ve given them credit for.

      • Andy

        I see what you mean, but i dont agree with, hence evolution cant add information to something it never had in the first place.. and water never ever concentrates matter into life… any student can try that at home…
        Anyway; Can you please provide me the accounts in the gospels of this contradiction… for there were many feasts that week, and Sabbaths too..

        • any student can try that at home…

          With the ingredients of the typical kitchen, you can uncover the answers to the tough questions at the edge of science?

          Evolution is the scientific consensus. We laymen will just have to accept that it’s the best explanation we have at the moment for why life is like it is.

          Can you please provide me the accounts in the gospels of this contradiction

          John 19:14 says that the death was on the day of preparation (the Passover meal would’ve been eaten that night).

        • Andy

          Many assumptions are made by those who have concluded an answer to things before really studying the question.
          John 19:14 says it was Prep. day of Passover, and the assumption is made out of context that this is a different day to Passover. It does not make a contradiction to the other gospels, nor does it break the story and truth of the Roman crucifixion of Jesus.
          In context with in John we learn:
          Jn. 13:18 + that Jesus held a Passover feast before He died (in agreement with the other 3 gospels).

          Jn. 18:28 makes the point clear that it was also Passover day because those Jews didnt eat with non Jew that day.

          Jn. 19:31 also mentions it was prep. day for High Sabbath, which was also on Passover. (See Mark 15:42)

          Therefore discluding Jn 19:14 for the time being, John agrees with the other 3 gospels that Christ Jesus died on Passover. John is making a point in 19:14 that Jesus who was the Lamb of God was in alignment with the Hebrew sacrifice of lambs by stating, that as Jesus was being prepared for crucifixion, the temple lambs were being prepared for Passover.

          This is no contradiction at all, just a assumed guess that “Preparation day of the Passover” was some different day to Passover. John and the other 3 gospels make it real clear that Jesus’ disciples made preparation for Passover and continued to hold Passover the same day – which always starts as sun down.

          I recon its a translation thats its not made clear, where in the context it also could render “on Passover preparation day [of Sabbath]” as its was the high Sabbath prep. day held on Passover. The other 3 gospels also mix and match this word arrangement – Jewish prep day, prep day, day of prep etc.. all pointing to the prep of Sabbath.

          The Greek used in 19:14 “παρασκευὴ τοῦ πάσχα” which can mean “παρασκευὴ [Prep] τοῦ [this, the, it, that]πάσχα [Passover]”, so if the major translations noted that, it is also true, being in context that τοῦ = this, would say, “prep. day this Passover” being in agreement with the other 3 gospels.

          So there is no contradiction here, what ever way we look at it *in context.* The Holy Bible has no contradictions at all. People who attack the Bibles authenticity always claim such so called mistakes because they have predecided that no way are they going to live a life in need of or under such a God, and having already rejected that possibility, set out to disprove it.
          The Bible is backed by archaeology and history. The only contradictions seem to be are those declared by people who have already made up their minds of not believing in the Creator and therefore read the Bible with the their conclusion already made for them. There will always be contradictions or some excuse not to humble to Him so they can keep their loyalties and faith in the Evolutionary / humanistic leaders who declare we formed in water even though reality declares that water destroys and dilutes chemicals..
          “We laymen will just have to accept that it’s the best explanation we have at the moment for why life is like it is.” Is the best example of this. By faith on that, you believe the beginning happened according to Evolution, just as by faith I believe in the testimony of the one (God) who was there at the time of the beginning.. so whatever way we see it, everyone has faith in something or someone.

        • In context with in John we learn: Jn. 13:18 + that Jesus held a Passover feast before He died (in agreement with the other 3 gospels).

          Shouldn’t you be letting the Bible speak for itself without making it talk like a sock puppet?

          My point stands. Jesus died on the Day of Preparation in John. John draws a parallel between Jesus and the perfect lambs that were slaughtered on the Day of Preparation. The synoptic gospels say that the Last Supper was the Passover meal, so the death was the day after.

          The Holy Bible has no contradictions at all.

          And how do we know? Because you’ve told us.

          Well, I’m convinced.

          People who attack the Bibles authenticity always claim such so called mistakes because they have predecided that no way are they going to live a life in need of or under such a God, and having already rejected that possibility, set out to disprove it.

          Oh, it’s me who has a presupposition that I’m desperately trying to adjust the facts to support. Weird—all this time, I thought it was you.

          There will always be contradictions or some excuse not to humble to Him so they can keep their loyalties and faith in the Evolutionary / humanistic leaders who declare we formed in water even though reality declares that water destroys and dilutes chemicals.

          Yeah. Atheist just too proud to bend the knee and all that, eh?

          As for leaders and water, we laymen don’t get to pick and choose our reality. Science tells us how nature works. That’s our best guess. Sorry—the Bible has no track record in teaching us about reality.

          By faith on that, you believe the beginning happened according to Evolution, just as by faith I believe in the testimony of the one (God) who wa s there at the time of the beginning.. so whatever way we see it, everyone has faith in something or someone.

          Precisely. Except that that’s completely bullshit. Evidence backs up science, not religion.

        • Anne

          No. You actually believe in the testimony of men who were not there but claim to speak for God. Imperfect, sinful, freewilled men who have passed down God’s word without any regard to their personal agenda. Okay, if you say so.

    • MNb

      “They must borrow these laws (when is suites them) from the Bible”
      Yeah, Pythagoras’ Theorem, the value of pi and the Golden Rule totally depend on that book. Without it no atheist would have known about these three.

    • Pofarmer

      Fwiw, pointing out that a text has contradictions doesn’t necesarily imply that any of it is true. The rest of your post is equally poorly thought out gibberish.

    • wtfwjtd

      “they must stand on Christian views to gets a measure of logic, ethics, moral code to even know what right / wrong is.”

      Oh, you mean the Christian views that endorse God’s atrocious behavior, like genocide, slavery, misogyny, murder, and theft? Hmmm…no thanks, I’ll pass.

      “How can atheists say Jesus never existed, lived, died, rose etc, that sin exists or
      doesnt exits?”

      Easy, ’cause there’s no evidence for any of this crap. Although, many historians say that Jesus may have been a historical person, and if so, I’m sure he died, and stayed dead. No need to “borrow” any Christian nonsense for this straight-forward conclusion, it’s simple and obvious.

    • 90Lew90

      “Humanism / evolution / atheism has no law of science, logic morality, it only has relativity.”

      Perhaps you mean relativism?

  • Mike 666

    With just one blog post you have managed to take out the entire army of apologists like William Craig, wupp their sorry asses, rape their asses, and then hand their asses back to them on a silver platter, and then spit on their sorry faces to add insult to injury, and then piss on them to put out the fire. This by far is the best critique of the crucifixion I have seen.

    • That sounds like a compliment, so I’ll (with some hesitation) take it as such. Thanks.

      • Mike 666

        It’s a complement. You’re welcome. I also liked the asymmetrical point of number 4. Wasn’t jesus that zombie dude on Scooby Doo? Oh wait, now I remember. He is that teenager who cuts my grass every weekend XD. Its 3AM here so I will be on tomorrow. Cheers.

  • Reddy

    I find the entire idea of vicarious redemption utterly ridiculous.

    • Pofarmer

      Even the faithful can’t really explain how it is supposed to work.

  • Reading your article shows humans have lost all sense of humility, sensitivity and sympathy, anyways enjoy your continuous greed for pleasure, that’s what world wants anyways.

    • Kodie

      I didn’t see that in the article. It just says the story makes no sense.

    • Reddy

      Yet another non-sequitur from yet another theist. Woolly language? Check. No describable point? Check. An air of aloofness and condescension as if they know something we don’t? Check. Distraction technique and failure to address the points raised? Oh most definitely check.

      • Kudos, You have me all figured out.. Here, You get a internet cookie 😛

    • TheSquirrel

      Reading your comment shows you can’t escape cognitive dissonance. How about responding to the article? Or do you have nothing to say?

    • Roland Lawrence

      Yes not like the good old days of pure slaughter in the name of the church. All those crusades? The Spanish Inquisition? Not to mention keeping education for only the religious elites. Peasants too had no quarrel when they rented the land they farmed from the church and gave them their toil. I’m ingredient by your statement about “what the world wants” being greed for pleasure. Are you not part of the world?

  • John

    1. Because a price had to be paid for humanity’s
    transgressions. A unique, one-of-a kind price. A perfect human.

    2. Hell is a place chosen by those living in sin. God will not send someone there against there will; just as he will not send someone to heaven against their will.

    3. He died to pay a price and was resurrected to a reality we cannot
    comprehend to prove who he was.

    4.” Taking
    on the sin vs. removal of sin aren’t symmetric” Why not? Who are you to say what God requires to pay for our injustice? Why
    complain about a free gift?

    5. We need redemption from our current sinful nature…who has not sinned? Not
    understanding it has no relevance.

    6. Jesus suffered so that you might live. Jesus was fully human when the sacrifice was made (enter the mystery of the Trinity). It is a big deal. Who are you to claim
    understanding of cosmic justice?

    7.Your misunderstanding of cosmic justice does not negate it. So what if there is a
    bit of mystery? We are talking about the creator of the universe. You may be
    misguided in thinking you will understand it all. Every worldview is a bit
    foggy. Science seems to say we all came here as a result of some chemicals colliding… and “voila” we are here.

    8. Prometheus was a fictional character. There is a difference between reading about a spear in your head and actually having a spear in your head.

    9. He DOES “just forgive us” through a free gift. We do have to accept it though.

    10. Why have children, knowing life is hard, filled with problems, cancer, disease,
    heartache? We live in a challenging world, fallen because of us. God provides
    eternal life and redemption through His work, not ours (because we are
    imperfect and he is not). Straighforward to me. Coherent, yet mysterious. You are
    the one bringing up the stone age literature. Why don’t you grant some
    confusion because the texts were written at a different time in a different
    culture. The basic redemptive narrative is quite simple: You are a sinner, separated from God because of your sin. God (not you) provides a solution. That solution is not in a behavior, it is in the work of a person, the only person who could do the work…God. All He asks is that you accept the gift. Pretty simple. A child can understand it. It takes a prideful adult to confuse it with “worldly philosophies.”

    • John: thanks for the thorough reply. I don’t think we’re on the same page, though.

      1. Because a price had to be paid for humanities transgressions.

      Sure, to a Bronze Age sadistic god. But to the enlightened creator of the universe? I’d have thought you’d have a higher standard.

      2. Hell is a place chosen by those living in sin. God will not send someone there against there will

      Yeah, that whole “gnashing of teeth” think was just hyperbole. And the story of Lazarus and the rich man? The rich man was in a nice spa—he wasn’t in agony as the story implies.

      3. He died to pay a price

      You don’t know what “die” means? He didn’t die.

      Who are you to say what God requires to pay for our injustice?

      I’m evaluating the claims to see if they make sense. If they do, then I conclude that God exists. (So far, it’s not looking good …)

      Why complain about a free gift?

      What gift? It’s not offered to me. (Or am I bound for heaven and didn’t even know it?)

      who has not sinned?

      Uh … that’s not original sin. My objection remains.

      6. Jesus suffered so that you might live.

      Cool. Tell him I said thanks.

      Who are you to claim understanding of cosmic justice?

      Who are you to claim that you know that God exists? Big claim; no evidence.

      7.Your misunderstanding of cosmic justice does not negate it. So what if there is a bit of mystery?

      What? You don’t understand either?? How do you know this makes sense then?

      We are talking about the creator of the universe.

      Nope. That’s a possible conclusion. Show me the evidence points there.

      You may be misguided in thinking you will understand it all.

      I make no such claim. I claim that I will follow the evidence to the best of my ability. But that works for you, right? You just provide me the evidence, and I’m there.

      Science seems to say we all came here as a result of some chemicals colliding… and “voila” we are here.

      Good point. Science is complicated; therefore, I get to pick and choose what I like.

      8. Prometheus was a fictional character.

      Hmm—good point. Now, about Jesus, you don’t suppose …

      9. He DOES “just forgive us” through a free gift. We do have to accept it though.

      Ah, the fine print always gets you, doesn’t it?! I can’t just believe by will power. Hence, the insane story of Jesus is out of my reach. Hence, your religion consigns me to hell.

      Thanks.

      God provides eternal life and redemption through His work, not ours

      This is theology, not evidence. I only care about evidence.

      You are the one bringing up the stone age literature.

      That sounds harsh! I would’ve only called the Bible Iron Age literature.

      Why don’t you grant some confusion because the texts were written at a different time in a different culture.

      Is that your attitude toward the Koran? Written in a different time and culture, so you cut it some slack?

      • kso721

        Well, this argument is solid in the framework of the bible’s perspective on Jesus being the answer to the prophecies of the old testament foretelling the arrival of the redeemer, but fortunately enough we have evolutionary biology thank for unseating the entire plot line leading to the reason Jesus was sent.

        why?

        1. There was no adam and eve and therefore no original sin, or fall of man. thank you paleontological evidence for that.

        2. If there was no first perfect human plopped down out of the aether, then there was no fall of man and there is no need for a redeemer. this invokes “sin is an imaginary disease invented to sell you an imaginary cure. ” and sin is a subjective concept to different cultures nonetheless.

        3. Isn’t it SUSPECT that you HAVE to go a christian church or read a bible in order to receive Jesus?

        such arbitrary and insular idea implantation.

        If worship of Jesus as god is an apparent crucial and necessary “thing” in the grand scheme of existence, the cosmos and our relationship to a creator and finally to make it into heaven, why were two, if not three very specific biological things like literacy, sight, and hearing dependent on both of those points? …because not everyone is born with these things in all human population… perfect design versus congenital birth defects comes into question here… but let’s put aside the FACT there are indigenous tribes and various geographically separate cultures who will never be in contact with christianity, modern literacy, and let’s not forget all the various populations that arose concurrently separate from the evolution of christianity… such muddy theology

        • John

          “we have evolutionary biology thank for unseating the entire plot line” That is pretty charitable to the challenges to evolution to “disprove” adam and eve.
          Your understanding of salvation and its relation to Jesus is misinformed.

        • kso721

          Really? Please illustrate evidence outside of the biblical narrative that there were:

          1. two original human beings,
          AND
          2. a fall from grace.
          OR
          3. that the bible’s assertions have anything whatsoever to do with any other non-christian culture in existence.

          So, #1 is not backed by science at all because we’ve actually found neanderthals with evidence of cancer so there goes the idea of a fall of man. And then, there’s the fossil record of humans and all hominids prior to them backed by BONES and paleontologically/anthropogically cataloged fossils via cladistics and phylogenetic trees using EVIDENCE.
          http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-family-tree

          And, simply put the biblical narrative regarding jesus goes like this: incorrect order of creation, adam and eve, fall of man, boring and tedious genealogies, a non-existent exodus, a mythical world flood, people living to be 900 years old, super powered hair, god commanding the murder of entire swaths of humanity including women and children, a man living in a fish, a prophecy saying there was going be a redeemer, the advent of the new testament, Jesus born of a teen virgin in the middle-east, a false resurrection (which, because of SCIENCE we understand that biology is unbiased regardless of what time period you’re from)1 and POOF! after 3.4 billion years of evolutionary biology, somehow after literacy and reading comprehension arise, (a bad fire at the library of Alexandria destroying any evidence of what could have had actual evidence of a man named Jesus (which is now speculative that he actually existed)), countless rounds of edits of the bible by the roman church and the Council of Nicea, apparently there’s this new savior to help the Inuits of Alaska and the indigenous pigmy tribes of south africa and all the eastern cultures atone for the sins of the “fall of man” in which they had absolutely nothing to do with?

          It’s incoherent and muddy theology at best.

          Apparently based on christian assertions, every human being over the previous 200,000 years of homo-sapien evolution prior to Jesus’ birth was lost and destined for hell and had no idea how to live a loving existence, be empathetic, or function as part of a group. How did humanity ever make it to 2000 years ago with out Jesus?

          Meanwhile, the rest of ALL geographically separates cultures of the world arose concurrently developing their own theologies completely ignorant of what was happening in the minds and beliefs of ancient desert-locked shepherds who already worhsipped men as gods (pharohs) and guessed at the nature of existence writing on papyrus before the invention of the wheelbarrow…

          oh, did i mention the passages where jesus said he be back AGAIN before the passing of matthew or mark’s generation passed, or the other biblical passages that contradict that?

          Your understanding of reality is misinformed. Or, did you skip and forget biology, anthropology, geology, psychology, natural history and world religion studies just to accept one religion as the only answer?

        • Kodie

          I love how charitable you are asserting we’re only misinformed but then not using the words to inform anyone. We don’t have private access to your secret source of information?

        • oracle

          Kodie, are you an epistemologist?

        • Kodie

          What’s the right answer.

        • TheNuszAbides

          oh, but Witnessing to the Nonbeliever is, like, brave and dangerous and rilly brain-hurtingly hard, okay guys? surely we can’t ask too much charity of a run-of-the-mill internet exemplar.

      • John

        Of course we are not on the same page. You are an atheist and I am a theist.

        Most, if not all, of your complaints are theological in nature. How can you complain about theology when you don’t believe in a theos? You even say, ” This is theology, not evidence.” If God exists, then the Bible becomes clearer. If God does not exist, the whole thing makes no sense. Your caricatures of hell, substitutionary atonement, et al speaks to selective skepticism: you work to understand and respond to the arguments for God’s existence (in other posts), then build straw men with regards to the nuanced Christian doctrine; not intellectually honest or respectful of the deep thinking in this arena.

        “What gift? It’s not offered to me.” Sure it is. Why do you think it is not? All have sinned, including you. You can’t “fix” your sinful nature, because you are imperfect. God (who is perfect) must “fix” it, so He reaches out to you through the work of Jesus. It really is quite simple, but only makes sense if 1. God exists (which you don’t accept), and 2. you see yourself as a sinner (and not some biceps displaying big shot). All the rest of Chrisitanity is a sub-plot that cannot be understood without that overarching rubric. You want to complain that Christianity breeds ignorance, which is uncharitable and untrue. You want to complain about Christianity’s intrusion into the public arena, yet that is what a free society is about…battling over ideas, which is not anti-Christian (in fact Paul’s missionary work was all about “reasoning” and “arguing”. In the Weseleyan confession, Christians are called to use 4 sources for authority: Bible, Experience, Reason, and Tradition. I think you would align with at least 3 (perhaps 4 if you consider the intellectual tradition worth considering). Christians just add the Bible, but true Christians would evaluate truth claims using all 4. Unfortunately, the label “Christian” can include anyone now, which makes is unfair and unclear to try to label all Christians as accepting certain doctrinal truths.

        You say science is complicated, allowing you to pick and choose what you like? I am not sure if you are being sarcastic here. If not, why are you allowed to be charitable with regards to science, but I am not with regards to theology?

        You, and most self-proclaimed intellectual atheists love to throw out the “zero evidence,” “not a single shred of evidence” monikers. I do appreciate your thinking and essays in this arena, but the reason you spend so much time writing them is because there is a deep, rich, complicated philosophical tradition with regards to the arguments/evidence/rational for the belief in God. Your claim to have adequately answered all the arguments is a bit arrogant. The length and complexity of your arguments speak to the challenge of the task at hand. If it is so simple and obvious (“there is NO evidence whatsoever”), why is there still discussion at the academic level in philosophy at all?

        Yes, Jesus “died” in every sense we can know it, at least that is what the evidence (gospels, letters, tradition, corroborative non-Chrisitan manuscripts) tell us.

        “the insane story of Jesus is out of my reach” You don’t understand when a comrade dies for his fellow in battle? You don’t understand when a lifeguard risks his life and dies to save another? You didn’t understand Darth Vader sacrificing himself that his son might live? You don’t understand Thor (in the recent movie) accepting death that his companions might live? You don’t connect at all with Aslan’s sacrifice for Edmond? Come on, you are a smart guy. Do you have a heart, or just that big biceps muscle that announces your great intellectual prowess?

        • Kodie

          If God does not exist, the whole thing makes no sense.

          Bingo.

        • John

          Right, so if one assumes God exists, these problems are not problems. So, why not be charitable to those who do hold that God exists, especially since it is difficult to disprove the existence of a being outside of our reality, and especially since the majority of humanity DOES believe in God? Isn’t that what tolerance is all about?

        • Kodie

          I don’t know what tolerance you’re talking about. Why not be charitable to them? Why not be charitable to us? Why tolerate them, they’re the majority? We don’t have a lot of choices.

          If one assumes god exists, these arguments are created to fill gaps because they do not make sense. The article, I mean, do you think pointing out how ridiculous Christianity is, point by point, is being intolerant? You like it better when atheists don’t communicate and just obey the privileged majority? Do you like it better when you can just believe atheists are angry with god, just want to hedonistically murder and rape people with no consequences, or have a god-shaped hole in our hearts? That we’re satanists? That we exist to seduce theists with rationality and let them join us in hell? I don’t find any religious idea to be respectable, not for a basis in law, or for a grown adult to cherish a fairytale ending for their egotistical selves and get really really whiny about when someone has an opposing viewpoint.

        • John

          ” I don’t find any religious idea to be respectable”
          That is too bad and leaves no way to move forward. I happen to respect a number of intellectually honest, charitable, intelligent atheists and non-Christians: Thomas Nagel, David Berlinksi, among others.
          You have lumped a lot of non-sensical ideas into Christianity and religious thought in general. Doesn’t each idea/religious idea deserve to be assessed on its own merit?
          The article/essay makes a straw man of Christian doctrines by ignoring the nuanced and deep thought that has responded to these challenges. And again, the doctrines ARE incoherent if there is no god. I happen to be convinced by the numerous lines of evidence for God, which, I am sure, you do not respect, despite centuries of deep thinking (by theists and non-theists).

        • That is too bad and leaves no way to move forward.

          I suspect Kodie is happy with the rights the First Amendment grants you. Sounds like a pretty good deal all around.

          The article/essay makes a straw man of Christian doctrines by ignoring the nuanced and deep thought that has responded to these challenges.

          Then point out the errors.

          And again, the doctrines ARE incoherent if there is no god.

          Then I wonder why Christians bother trying to evangelize. If their arguments are inherently incoherent to outsiders, save your breath.

          I happen to be convinced by the numerous lines of evidence for God, which, I am sure, you do not respect, despite centuries of deep thinking ( by theists and non-theists).

          Seriously: drop the “centuries of deep thinking” line. It’s not helping. Islam has centuries of deep thinking; does that make it true? Or astrology or alchemy or Ptolemaic epicycles or animal sacrifices to appease the gods?

          If you want to summarize the one or two arguments that you find most convincing, I’d like to hear it.

        • Kodie

          I would be happy enough for Christians to get back on their own turf, of which the premise is a personal relationship with their lord god and savior Jesus Christ. They are intent on adjusting this world to the one they want in some kind of effort to please god? I don’t want that. I thought Christians wouldn’t want that either. The meek shall inherit the earth? We have just seen Christians tell us that they are spokespersons and specially chosen to speak for god and interject themselves into the lives of others.

          I would not say that it is unconvincing – I would say that it isn’t because this system does gain followers by seizing on children and other vulnerable populations, who credit being “fixed” or improved their lives only because some person came and talked to them about Jesus and proved Jesus to themselves. Just because some people manage to convince themselves or convince others doesn’t mean they aren’t selling a product that isn’t real. They call questioning them “prideful”! More propaganda. Sure, some people can be convinced that all this makes sense, and that you are a willing salesman for your church. You wouldn’t want to call people who don’t believe “fools” or “prideful” for doubting you, I mean, that’s persuasion, that’s peer pressure and marketing. Same tactics as this car ad:

          I don’t see how buying a car has comparable rewards to investing in twitter or not breaking up with someone who would eventually be a model/actress. But – you don’t want to miss out! You’ve made crucial errors in judgment before, let’s apply that logic to buying a car as if there won’t be other cars, newer cars, better cars, cheaper cars, or whatever bad reasoning the customer uses.

        • Kodie

          Do you assess all the other religious beliefs on their own merits? What is your method of deciding how plausible any of them are?

          I don’t find the definition of “evidence” to be consistent when used by theists. Personal experience, emotion, and wishful thinking are not evidence. If there were evidence, it would be coherent to anyone, not just people who already believe it.

          Nuanced and deep thought is another way of saying you give a lot of credence to self-appointed experts and scholars, whose main task is taking the scripture and making it sound smarter to an audience who likes to believe they are the intelligent Christians, not a gullible dope, as you are probably familiar with being accused of. No no, you have a nuanced thought! Someone has put it into language that respects your intelligence, and they really do know what they’re talking about wrt theology. That doesn’t make it evidence. They just use the same arguments an actual gullible dope would be convinced by. Like a lot of smarter people do, they give extra credit to people who don’t pander to them. The argument has an air of believability if the expert doesn’t have to resort to condescending to you for you to understand it.

          Luckily, Bob does address these takes on his blog. I think this article does not make a straw man, it just breaks through the apologetic “nuance” that has you snowed and gets to the point. Are these not things you literally believe? You just think you have a more intelligent reason for believing them.

        • hector_jones

          I know you’ll never be able to appreciate just how knee-slappingly funny this comment of yours is, but I wanted to thank you anyway for the laughs it has given me.

        • John

          Another example of uncharitable, disrespectful, intolerant comments. I don’t think it is laughable as much as sad.

        • You start with the idea that we assume God exists. Who would do that?? You start with the evidence.

          If God is the conclusion, great. We don’t start with the conclusion, let alone your preferred conclusion.

        • MNb

          Sometimes I wonder if there is any christian apologist who does not thoroughly enjoy pseudo-martyrdom.

        • Kodie

          What are you complaining about? A conversation? You believe and presumably agree that a good god demands a sacrifice, a body, didn’t matter whose. That’s the first part of your problem. You don’t like to be argued with, and then you say we’re being intolerant of your views. We’re not intolerant because they’re true! We’d have to tolerate them if they were true, which is why you can warp rational human ethics to defend your god. Using that belief as both a shield and a bludgeon on our culture is not something anyone should tolerate, either. You are free to believe in fairy tales, and we are free not to. Where you seem to have a problem is mere criticism. Don’t come here with your theistic arguments if you’re not prepared to be criticized for having them. Perhaps you might be more comfortable on a Christian blog that deletes all the comments from atheists.

        • hector_jones

          I can live with it.

        • hector’s right. You get the Silly Comment of the Month award.

          The majority of humanity thinks that you’re wrong. Sorry, not the unanimity that you imagine.

        • MNb

          No. Tolerance is giving them the opportunity to practice their belief and to propagate it. Is there anyone here who prevents you from doing so?

        • How can you complain about theology when you don’t believe in a theos?

          Christianity makes claims. I evaluate them. When they’re stupid, I say so.

          If God does not exist, the whole thing makes no sense.

          I think you’re starting to get it.

          you work to understand and respond to the arguments for God’s existence (in other posts), then build straw men with r egards to the nuanced Christian doctrine; not intellectually honest or respectful of the deep thinking in this arena.

          There was deep thinking in astrology. It was wrong. No, I’m not going to give that any respect.

          “What gift? It’s not offered to me.” Sure it is. Why do you think it is not?

          Because the demand for that “gift” is believing in something I can’t believe in.

          not some biceps displaying big shot

          Those biceps are just pretend, like Jesus.

          You want to complain about Christianity’s intrusion into the public arena, yet that is what a free society is about

          The First Amendment makes clear where Christianity can be in American society and where it can’t. I support it wholeheartedly, which is why I object to Christian excesses.

          You say science is complicated, allowing you to pick and choose what you like? I am not sure if you are being sarcastic here.

          Quite sarcastic.

          You, and most self-proclaimed intellectual atheists love to throw out the “zero evidence,” “not a single shred of evidence” monikers.

          I wouldn’t say zero. I’d say minimal or paltry.

          I do appreciate your thinking and essays in this arena

          Thank you. And I appreciate thoughtful Christian responses.

          the reason you spend so much time writing them is because there is a deep, rich, complicated philosophical tradition with regards to the arguments/evidence/rational for the belief in God.

          Imagine that I were attacking astrology. That’s also a deep and complicated tradition that cuts across cultures and goes back thousands of years. There’s really nothing there. No, the planets don’t rule our fate.

          Just because there’s a lot of arguments and tradition doesn’t mean it’s not all bluster.

          Your claim to have adequately answered all the arguments is a bit arrogant.

          It would be. I don’t think I say that. But more to the point, where you see that I’ve made a mistake or omission in any post, I welcome that feedback. Further, if you have compelling intellectual arguments for God, I’d like to see them.

          If it is so simple and obvious (“there is NO evidence whatsoever”), why is there st ill discussion at the academic level in philosophy at all?

          Did I say that?

          The reason there is an ongoing discussion about the validity of Christianity despite minimal evidence is the same reason that any of the other thousand religions keep on going. Are they well supported by evidence? If not, then understand why they’re still going. There’s your answer.

          Yes, Jesus “died” in every sense we can know it

          My father died a little over 10 years ago. He didn’t return in a day and a half. That’s what “died” means.

          You don’t understand when a comrade dies for his fellow in battle?

          So the lesson from the soldier sacrifice is the lesson of the Jesus sacrifice? I don’t think so.

        • John

          “If God does not exist, the whole thing makes no sense”

          The point here is that from a Christian worldview, your dismissal of Christian doctrine is incoherent and unjustified.

          “That’s also a deep and complicated tradition that cuts across cultures and goes back thousands of years. There’s really nothing there. No, the planets don’t rule our fate.”

          Where are the Astrology departments at major universities? Where are the academic papers on astrology? The age of enlightenment and reason has debunked astrology, but Christian thought and philosophy is still going strong. You have not provided anything convincing here, other than you have no respect for current scholarship in this arena.

          “My father died a little over 10 years ago. He didn’t return in a day and a half. That’s what “died” means”

          You are begging the question here. Can someone rise from the dead? You say no…BECAUSE no one has risen from the dead. You KNOW your dad was not resurrected to another reality?

          “Those biceps are just pretend, like Jesus”

          How come historian, atheist (or agnostic at best) Bart Ehrman accepts the reality of Jesus and you don’t? The evidence is good enough for him, but not you.

        • MNb

          Strawman; only ignorance can excuse you.

          “Those biceps are just pretend, like Jesus”is completely coherent with a historical Jesus who pretended to have a divine father. Are you aware that Judaea and Galilaea were bristiling with messias claimants in the First Century?

        • hector_jones

          From my view, Christian doctrine is incoherent and unjustified.

          Bart Ehrman ‘accepted the reality’ of Jesus back when he was an evangelical Christian. You are being ‘disingenuous’ by trying to make it sound like he was an atheist first who then came to accept that Jesus was a real person.

          But if you want to appeal to the authority of Bart Ehrman, how come you don’t agree with his conclusion that Jesus wasn’t divine? On the other hand, how great an historian can Ehrman be if he can’t see what you think is obvious about Jesus?

          The Japanese believed for centuries that their Emperor was a divine being. Is the ‘reality’ of the Emperor proof that he was a divine being? This is the kind of argument you are making here.

        • The point here is that from a Christian worldview, your dismissal of Christian doctrine is incoherent and unjustified.

          Given the presumption that God exists, the idea that God doesn’t exist is crazy. Yeah, I get it. Kind of a tautology, isn’t it?

          Is the Christian story sensible to an outsider or not? You seem to be admitting that it isn’t. Great: then (1) agree with my assessment in the post above that it makes no sense to outsiders and (2) tell your peeps that they’re wasting their time on the Great Commission.

          Where are the Astrology departments at major universities? Where are the academic papers on astrology.

          Ah, the Academy has rejected astrology, so therefore we can dismiss it? OK, I can play that game.

          Where are the Islam or Hinduism departments at major universities? Why, they’re in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and New Delhi. So what do we conclude from this? There aren’t astrology departments, so that’s crap. But there are departments of many other religions, so therefore they’re true.

          Do I have it right?

          you have no respect for current scholarship in this arena.

          See my “Map of World Religions post for more on this.

          You are begging the question here.

          No, but you are changing the subject here. The question was: what does “died” mean? For our conversation, I’m happy to accept the story that Jesus rose from the dead. In so doing, I reject the idea that he “died,” because that word means “died and stayed dead.”

          How come historian, atheist (or agnostic at best) Bart Ehrman accepts the reality of Jesus and you don’t?

          I have no interest in the Jesus Myth hypothesis. Let’s stay on topic.

          Jesus as the divine Son of Man is false. (Could you possibly have been confused about my point?)

        • MNb

          Yes, he wants to push the non-sequitur through your throat “Jesus is historical hence Jesus is divine”.

        • Kodie

          The point here is that from a Christian worldview, your dismissal of Christian doctrine is incoherent and unjustified.

          That’s not Bob’s fault. He writes a blog to bring up all your points and not simply dismiss them. If it’s incoherent, then you don’t read it, and if it’s unjustified, then Bob has repeatedly invited Christians to do their best and try to justify their beliefs to him and his readers.

          Your defense is there are theology departments at major universities? Yes, that’s pretty silly. It’s like majoring in the study of Grey’s Anatomy (the TV show about surgeons having daily melodramas and taking them to work, and sometimes have sex with ghosts).

        • MNb

          “If God exists, then the Bible becomes clearer.”
          If god is a human invention the Bible becomes crystal clear. The best example – and therefor my favourite Bible book – is Revelations. The assumption it’s divinely inspired has given theologians headaches for 19 centuries. From my secular point of view the only mystery remaining is what kind of mushroom the author had eaten (note: this is a metaphor).

        • subtleinspiration

          a metaphorical mushroom? Where can I get me some of those?!?! 😉

        • TheNuszAbides

          understood. it could have been a smoke-inhaling or toad-licking origin story rather than a mushroom-eating one.

        • TheNuszAbides

          wait, did i just stumble over the first (last?) time that somebody took Bob’s “gun show selfie” seriously?

        • If I wanted to show off real guns, I’d not have a shirt on.

    • MNb

      @1: I cannot remember asking Jesus to pay a price for my transgressions and I do not appreciate him for doing so. Why should I? I prefer to pay the price myself. That’s what a decent human being should do in my view.
      @2: Sin being meaningless to me so are hell and heaven. I don’t want to go to either place as I don’t see much difference anyway.
      @3: How do you know? Because the Bible told you so. How do you know the Bible is correct? Because you think it’s divinely inspired. Circular argument.
      @4: Why would I care what a character from your overheated fantasy requires from me or not? Why am I obliged to accept a free gift I never asked for? Give me a Justin Bieber CD and I’ll start complaining about the junk I have to get rid of. You demand that I appreciate it; I don’t see why.
      @5: No atheist – in fact no human being – has ever sinned by definition, simply because there is no god.
      @6: If Jesus had not suffered I would have lived equally well. ” Who are you to claim understanding of cosmic justice?” Yeah – and who was Jesus to understand something that doesn’t exist? Cosmic justice is just another empty phrase. The cosmos doesn’t give one iota about justice.
      @7: “We are talking about the creator of the universe” ie a product of your overheated fantasy. Why should I care?
      @8: The Resurrection of Jesus – which is the whole point of the story – is as fictional as Prometheus’ story.
      @9: Again: I don’t appreciate free gifts like these, in this particular case because I thoroughly dislike the consequences of accepting it – the main one Jesus being responsible for my wrongdoings. Your doctrine implies that I can sin from Monday until Saturday as long as I honestly repent on Sunday. In the meantime screw my victims, Jesus will take care of them – or not. You confirm this yourself:
      “That solution is not in a behavior” – exactly, screw the victims of my wrongdoings. I can do to them whatever I want, as long as I fall on my knees and repent as I please; every Sunday morning in church suffices. Because the only thing that matters is repairing my broken relationship with your imaginary sky-daddy. Very egotistical, now I come to think of it.
      @10: “God provides eternal life”
      That’s a worse punishment than problems, cancer, disease and heartache.
      Coherent or not, thanks for making clear why christianity sucks.

      • ismael rashiid

        Thanks for the hot debat ,infact its still a hot potato on the current tables..here are my views

        Jesus didnt die..first wats the meaning of sucrifice? Just something you are willing of. Then we see jesus praying for god to forske a deal..

        And if he has equal share with god why did he accept to do smthng he’s not willing to..since they all got equal shares!..god himself would come for it..

        ..If we all have the original sin (adam’s)that means we were all born for hell …bt may be jesus died for us then we are no longr sinners, no hell and no forgvnes,
        …..what i dont undstand is ths what a differnc if he wouldnt die for us coz i find myself responsble for evrythng that was even bfore the crcfxion! Look at the prophets bfore jesus and those followed them, they were promised the kingdom bfore jesus death and many of them ddnt know even the name jesus and crcfxion..now where is the chance of the original sin to these men???

    • Kodie

      1. Because a price had to be paid for humanity’s
      transgressions. A unique, one-of-a kind price. A perfect human.

      What a sense of tolerance and charity.

      2.
      Hell is a place chosen by those living in sin. God will not send
      someone there against there will; just as he will not send someone to
      heaven against their will.

      Tolerance? Charity?

      3. He died to pay a price and was resurrected to a reality we cannot
      comprehend to prove who he was.

      That’s simply nonsense. I don’t say that because it never happened, but I can’t believe a perfect god would hitch up such a sloppy system to make up for his previous errors.

      4.” Taking
      on the sin vs. removal of sin aren’t symmetric” Why not? Who are you to say what God requires to pay for our injustice? Why
      complain about a free gift?

      Is that more tolerance and charity? God requires a death to be satisfied. That’s like your stalker girlfriend cutting off her thumb to give you an anniversary present. Would you say “thank you”? Columbus gave the native Indians blankets!

      5. We need redemption from our current sinful nature…who has not sinned? Not
      understanding it has no relevance.

      If you think you have a sinful nature and require redemption by the death of another person, then you fail at math. God doesn’t tolerate you, he is only so charitable as give you the cure for a disease he gave you, only way out.

      6.
      Jesus suffered so that you might live. Jesus was fully human when the
      sacrifice was made (enter the mystery of the Trinity). It is a big deal.
      Who are you to claim
      understanding of cosmic justice?

      You are just repeating yourself. Jesus martyred himself, according to legend, to feed his father’s ego and blame-shifting.

      7.Your misunderstanding of cosmic justice does not negate it. So what if there is a
      bit of mystery? We are talking about the creator of the universe. You may be
      misguided in thinking you will understand it all. Every worldview is a bit
      foggy. Science seems to say we all came here as a result of some chemicals colliding… and “voila” we are here.

      This is your “charitable” and “tolerant” misapprehension of atheism; how you perceive it all as a mystery is not how we all do. “Well, you don’t know either!” is simply a tu quoque, and trying to discredit scientific knowledge as being equally foggy and strange to comprehend as yours… hey, it’s not a buffet. Some things are true and that means another thing cannot be. Yours is a product of wishful thinking.

      8.
      Prometheus was a fictional character. There is a difference between
      reading about a spear in your head and actually having a spear in your
      head.

      Did you read about Jesus? Did you actually have a spear in your head?

      9. He DOES “just forgive us” through a free gift. We do have to accept it though.

      Then it’s not free. It’s also a ridiculous bargain. God demands a body, so you’re all set?

      10. Why have children, knowing life is hard, filled with problems, cancer, disease,
      heartache? We live in a challenging world, fallen because of us. God provides
      eternal life and redemption through His work, not ours (because we are
      imperfect and he is not). Straighforward to me. Coherent, yet mysterious. You are
      the one bringing up the stone age literature. Why don’t you grant some
      confusion because the texts were written at a different time in a different
      culture.

      Another charitable and tolerant opinion of atheists. What’s the point if there’s no god? Why bother having children? Why live, why not just kill ourselves? Life is so bleak without meeeeeaaaaaannnning!

      The basic redemptive narrative is quite simple: You are a sinner,
      separated from God because of your sin. God (not you) provides a
      solution. That solution is not in a behavior, it is in the work of a
      person, the only person who could do the work…God. All He asks is that
      you accept the gift. Pretty simple. A child can understand it. It takes
      a prideful adult to confuse it with “worldly philosophies.”

      You are right, a child can believe any dumb stuff you explain to them. They ask why, and you don’t know, so you start making up a story that backs you into a corner, just like all the detailed “evidence” parents make up for Santa Claus (like sooty footprints, missing cookies presumed eaten, etc.) and explain errors in this story even a child can see – like, how does he get around the world in one night, why doesn’t he give presents to some kids, why does he appear at more than one store, why does his stomach feel like a pillow. Pretty soon, like by the age of 7 or 8, they catch on.

      An adult, a rational person, can point out the logistical errors, and how it only makes sense once you die and can ask god himself. With all the rationalization to patch up this story, it must be mindblowingly huge. I can’t imagine anything a god who would resort to needing a human sacrifice in order to forgive the sinful humans he created to come up with any good reason a fallible human wouldn’t have guessed, and given the nature of this story, not a very good but fallible human.

      Is that enough charity and tolerance for you, Sir????????

      • hector_jones

        Tolerance is something that the powerful majority of theists get to demand from us infidels. All we get is hell.

      • John Smith

        I can see A so A must be real, But I cant see B so B must not be real, that is what we call logic. so why do you think that people ever believed in God? Are you saying that people long ago were not intelligent enough to think logically?
        Or, on the other side, maybe the reason why the idea of God has lasted so long is because evidence of him has been seen by living people on earth.
        The reason why I and many others believe today is NOT that we were told a story as children and were naïve enough to believe it to this day, rather some people like myself are able to see God’s influence in the world as it is.
        The real question I have is not, ‘how could God exist?’ but ‘How could God not exist?’
        According to science, everything is caused by something else, so either this chain of cause and effect goes on infinitely, or something caused itself. Now the ultimate answer is: either A the particles that exploded into the universe in the form of the big bang caused themselves to exist, or B some outside force created them.
        In my own humble opinion that something has to be God.

        • Kodie

          People’s senses tell them something but they don’t know what so they make up what they believe to be a plausible scenario. If you would not believe in god except for this one thing that’s confusing you, that means you don’t understand what it is, so you say it must be because there really is a god and not that you don’t understand something or bother to look it up.

      • TheNuszAbides

        They ask why, and you don’t know, so you start making up a story that backs you into a corner …

        but it’s backed up by how elaborately and warmly and fuzzily Tradition (TM) has decorated the walls of the corner into which they are painted, and the child can simply return to those pretty (or awe-inspiring, intimidating, or fear-inducing) feelings and images that mitigate their silly bouts of question-asking…

  • I missed this post the first time around. Quite an interesting perspective. My oldest son had a few similar thoughts that he shared with me several years ago, shortly after I first learned he was an atheist. I was devastated. But I appreciate the journey it started me on, which I ended up writing a series on. http://lifeafter40.net/2014/04/20/my-son-told-me-hes-an-atheist/

    • That’s an interesting journey.

      Do you have any thoughts for why Christianity is such a sticky meme? More importantly, how to get rid of it?

      • That is a million dollar question. It has been on my mind quite a bit lately, and I live in the Bible belt. I think the stickiness of this meme is largely tied to the threat of hell that so many of us grew up with. We heard it often (“you’re gonna burn in hell if you don’t…!!!!”). I have a very close friend and co-worker who is a fundamentalist like I was, and I’ve tried to think how to reach him. He’s ripe for a heart attack due to diet and weight issues, and there’s a false sense of security about what a Christian thinks will happen at death that lulls too many into a lack of concern about our own health!! I wrote my blog series, in part, to potentially share with family and friends.

        I wish I had other ideas myself.

        And I forgot say BTW, that I loved your article. [EDIT]: Just saw your book above, Cross Examined, and ordered a Kindle copy. Looking forward to reading it.

        • Thanks for the positive feedback.

          If you get new insights into how people deconvert (fresh in your own mind, I imagine!), share that with us.

          I’ve heard the hell thing is often the last thing to go. The ex-Christian doesn’t believe in God anymore but kinda still believes in hell–weird to believe in something but not in the guy who was supposed to have created it.

        • Something else that was helpful to me in deconverting, which I didn’t include in my blog series…

          In the last few years, I was feeling more and more condemned to hell by the Bible, and that made it easier for me to truly consider the criticisms and contradictions of the Bible. For example, this verse in 1 Corinthians (which is similar to verses in Rev 21:8, Gal 5:19-21): “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.”

          So I decided, “what the hell! I’m feeling doomed so I might as well have a more open mind about it all.”

          But the thought that really just kept eating away at me for a long time was, “what about all those other billions of people with their religious beliefs who are just as zealous or passionate”, etc., and that Brandon Fibbs video that discusses that is just awesome. If more people could be exposed to it, I think it would be powerful. http://lifeafter40.net/2014/05/06/dear-believer-video-brandon-fibbs/

        • If we’re just playing dueling Bible quotes, consider the parable of the sheep and the goats in Matt. 25:

          34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

          37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

          40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

          Are you a good person? No problem then. You will share God’s kingdom.

        • Yes, the contradictory messages of the Bible (e.g., “just believe in me!” and “whosoever believeth!” vs. the sheep and the goats and similar passages sure do keep theologians and Christians busy trying to make sense of the faith vs. works theology.

        • subtleinspiration

          No different than the fans spending time trying to come up with explanations for plotholes in their favorite series.

      • rais~a~ruckus game calls

        If you stick around long enough, and the Bible is correct, you will get to be a part of a world that is Rid of it. Just sayin. Bob, assuming you are still getting these posts… this has been a great thread for a long long time. Quite impressive. You are a polite and very intelligent guy. Thanks for all of that, I have read through a lot of this and noticed you attempt to take a positive spin on many things… thanks for that as well. I’m checking out now, this has consumed too much time for me… If you don’t mind, I am going to pray for you. Since you don’t believe that has any affect on anything I can’t imagine how it could bother you for another human to waste their time talking to no-one about you… Yet, I am going to. If you are still getting these… are there any particular things you would like for me to pray about? I am not being sarcastic. Who knows? God revealed Himself to me miraculously and it removed all doubt I had about Him. Maybe He will do the same for you?? It can’t hurt. So, on wed. I will start praying for you. If you come up with anything you would like for me to pray about, let me know… I am going to try and pray for you for a full week. Otherwise, this should be the last I come back here… great post. Full of a lot good questions/answers/well meaning people. Full of a lot of hate too. That’s too bad. I appreciate that you can have this discussion without that in your own posts… We would likely have a good time fishing together for a couple hours every so often.
        Till later!
        Tim

        • If you stick around long enough, and the Bible is correct, you will get to be a part of a world that is Rid of it. Just sayin.

          Translation: “Pretty soon, I’ll be in Paradise, while you’re in the Hot Place. It’s gonna su-u-u-uck, my friend! Then you’ll be sorry. Then you’ll wipe that smug atheist grin off your face and know that I was right all along!”

          If you don’t mind, I am going to pray for you.

          Presumably you mean that as a generous gesture. Sure.

          are there any particular things you would like for me to pray about?

          Yes. Please pray for him to encourage you to feel comfortable with science and critical thinking. That you would be a skeptic about all supernatural claims, not just those from other religions. That you would truly test the claims made for God (how could that possibly be a bad thing if they’re true and will withstand the critique?). That when you stood before God in Judgment, you would be able to confidently say that you used God’s greatest gift—that big human brain—to its fullest. That you didn’t just accept supernatural claims because they were pleasing or because you were raised that way or because you had to accept them to be in the community you liked but because you checked them out first.

          great post. Full of a lot good questions/answers/well meaning people. Full of a lot of hate too. That’s too bad.

          I’m glad you liked it. I hope it raised new questions for you.

          I haven’t browsed the comments lately, but if there are hateful ones, you can understand that, right? Christianity has badly affected lots of people, and Christians continue to change American society in a theocratic direction—Creationism in schools, prayer in city council meetings, special exemptions that apply to churches but not other nonprofits, and so on.

        • rais~a~ruckus game calls

          [Translation: “Pretty soon, I’ll be in Paradise, while you’re in the Hot Place. It’s gonna su-u-u-uck, my friend! Then you’ll be sorry. Then you’ll wipe that smug atheist grin off your face and know that I was right all along!”]

          Sorry, I really didn’t mean to sound as condescending as you took. it…I was being a little sarcastic as you can tell I am sure…I can clearly see how you derived that though, my apologies.

          [Yes. Please pray for him to encourage you to feel comfortable with science and critical thinking. That you would be a skeptic about all supernatural claims, not just those from other religions. That you ….]

          I meant like…. for you.. like I was gonna pray for something for you… not for what you want for me… but thank you for caring..

          [I’m glad you liked it. I hope it raised new questions for you.

          I haven’t browsed the comments lately, but if there are hateful ones, you can understand that, right? ]

          yes, of course… I know we are not all nice and loving…. we can be a bad people… we are people.. people can be very bad creatures. For me, that shows a need for a Savior, but it’s a needless digression here…

          BTW, how do you do those little bars you do when referencing someone’s comments? I Cannot figure it out.. I just now figured out how to actually GET TO the comment you made so I could actually answer on it as opposed to just some new random comment somewhere along the thread… 😉 I’m old and really belong more in a carpenter’s shop rather than on this crazy thing!!! HAHA. Talk Later Bob.

        • Ignorant Amos

          Try this place for info on html tags…

          https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466253-what-html-tags-are-allowed-within-comments-

          P.s. blockquote is the one you are looking for.

        • Sorry, I really didn’t mean to sound as condescending as you took.

          Likewise, I took it a further than I think you intended, for dramatic effect.

          I meant like…. for you.. like I was gonna pray for something for you… not for what you want for me

          Yes, I realize that, but I don’t care what/if you pray for me. However, I think your praying for yourself, as I suggested, would do you some good. And you can hardly criticize the prayer, right?