Home > Ethics, Faith, Religion > Is There a God?

Is There a God?

Where Is God?

We can demonstrate that no god exists.  Certainly not in the Jewish/Christian/Islamic omnipotent father-figure image.  Notice the contradictions in observed reality with the image of the loving god that is aware of “every sparrow that falls” and “numbers the hairs of your head”.  Clearly, no such deity exists and there is no divine intervention in either a positive or negative sense.  If there were, at any moment the 27,000 children around the world  dying of malnutrition and starvation be permitted?  Would evil be permitted to exist?  Would people benefit from evil deeds and good deeds go unrewarded?

For that matter, it can be mathematically demonstrated that prayers are not answered, either.  Unless you consider a success rate of .01% to be “answered”.  That’s far below even the rate of random chance.  Even the behavior of religious groups when confronted with practical matters demonstrates that they do not believe in the “power of prayer” either.  If they did, they would simply pray to god to provide their churches with all that was needed instead of extorting money from their members.  If they don’t trust that, they must not have much faith in their “god” either.

About these ads
  1. August 11, 2010 at 8:18 pm | #1

    Sorry to be blunt, but is there any logical premise to your claim? It looks like there isn’t.

    For instance, you justify your belief that no God exists because of the fact that there’s evil in the world. How do we know what evil even exists? And if we were to prove that, how do we determine what is good and what is evil? There has to be some type of measuring stick for this morality. Read C.S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity for more about the concept of Tertium Quid, but the theist’s Moral Argument still stands on firm ground for the existence of a Moral Law-Giver (aka God).

    And where is the logic for “power of prayer” meaning that God does not exist? Theoretically speaking, it could simply mean God chose not to listen to you or that you were not doing what is considered to be real “prayer.” But ultimately, the answering of prayers is not a foundational necessity for a supernatural and supreme being to exist.

    Your arguments against the existence of God are without foundation or premise. I would suggest you read up on the cosmological argument, the teleological argument, the moral argument and the ontological argument to see what foundation for belief really looks like.

    • August 11, 2010 at 11:38 pm | #2

      You think that evil does not exist? You poor deluded fool. Obviously you are a theist and have no concept of reality, truth or rational thinking. Let someone come to your house, rape your wife, murder your children, mutilate you and eat your pets. After your sheltered existence, mentally and physically, has been destroyed, perhaps you will recognize that evil does exist. Or maybe the murder of six million Jews doesn’t qualify as evil in your mind? Then how about the murder of 20 million Russians?

      Demonstrate for me the “power of Prayer. Show me even one prayer that has been answered. It must be something that could not happen naturally but requires divine intervention. You’re obviously one of the millions who think that anything they do not understand must have a supernatural explanation. Good for you. That’s much easier than thinking and you are clearly ill-equipped for that in any case.

      I suggest you lean to think for yourself and not lean on the crutch of superstition and myth. I know far more about “faith” and at least the christian religion and the bible that you do.

      • August 12, 2010 at 2:57 pm | #3

        Sorry, I guess I came to the wrong blog. I think anyone who reads my above statement would know that I was not saying I don’t think evil exists, but that the only way to know what is right and what is wrong is through a Tertium Quid. I’m guessing you haven’t read much C.S. Lewis.

        And I’m not trying to offend here, but what arrogance to think that you know the definition of answered prayer. What you are asking for is for me to show you a miracle. At least call it for what it is.

        I would hope you wouldn’t presume to think that you know more about Christianity and the Bible than I do without even knowing me. That seems a bit like putting the cart before the horse. I suggest before you go making any more bold-faced claims like the one above that you do a little of the research I pointed you to. I’ll certainly do the same for what you said to me. Then maybe we can have a reasonable discussion instead of making ad hominem arguments and mud-slinging.

      • August 13, 2010 at 12:49 pm | #4

        If you could reason with theists, there wouldn’t be any theists. So a rational discussion with someone that has already rejected facts and logic is not possible.

        As far as “answered prayers” are concerned, what you seem to be saying is, they are not possible. I already knew that. So does anyone that is capable of rationally examining the facts.

        What you consider “mud-slinging is a simple observation of your own statements. If you don’t like the observations, reconsider your statements and learn to think for yourself instead of accepting the brainwashing you underwent as a child.

    • Crubb
      August 24, 2010 at 8:24 pm | #5

      It seems you have knocked him down off his high horse and he has landed on his ass. Good for you in exposing this faker, Sabepashubbo! You learned him a lesson he needed real bad and maybe he won’t forget it. This man needs shut his face! It’s good that you tell him how he should learn about things like Gods cosmopolitan arguements. When he learns this he can thank you by stopping his brain from falling out which it clearly has he he!

  2. September 27, 2010 at 9:56 pm | #6

    You say you can demonstrate there is no God. If God could be explained, my friend, He would not be God.

    • October 7, 2010 at 9:30 pm | #7

      First of all, I am not your friend and it is arrogant and presumptuous of you to assume that.

      Your argument is totally without merit, contains not one shred of logic or truth and is exactly what I would expect from someone as ignorant as you seem to be. You believe with no proof and try to squirm away form rational questions with silly statements as you posted here. I say, show me even one tiny proof of the existence of any god. Any god at all. It’s time to put up or slink away as you theists always do. Pretend the question was never asked and then declare victory. Is it any wonder theists are held in contempt and derision by those capable of rational thought?

    • October 10, 2010 at 3:20 pm | #8

      The reason you cannot explain god is that there is not god. How about instead of silly statements, you present some rational proof? You do understand “rational” and “proof”? No? Ah, that’s right, you prefer delusions and lies. As I told Harold (another idiot) look up Horus, Attis , and Mithra. hen you’ll see how christianity was founded upon lies and the lies have never stopped. I warn you, though, it could shake your beliefs and you might have to start thinking for yourself instead of blindly accepting what charlatans tell you.

  3. jennderfer
    September 30, 2010 at 8:54 pm | #9

    The arguments is not that God can’t let such bad things happen. I can see where theists wouldn’t really take your argument as valid. The argument should be that the God of the Christian Bible, who is supposed to be a god of mercy, pure goodness and spotless morale, and has omnipotent power could not exist, or at least in the sense that the Bible professes. His creation of sin and Satan himself, and his wish to exterminate this evil, is proof he is not omnipotent nor good. In fact, there is no evidence for any god, so there’s no reason to conclude he, she or it exists. It’s a non falsifiable claim, and therefore excluded as a possible fact. Period.

  4. Harold
    October 7, 2010 at 8:46 pm | #10

    Dear Brazil Brat,
    It was God’s will to endow us with free will. And to stop us every time we did something wrong would mean there was no free will. God wanted a world of consequences, of moral responsibility. If we could never do wrong, we could never learn the consequences of wrong choices. God could stop every child from being mistreated, but he does not want to do that. He wants human beings to see evil in all its hideousness so that each of us will turn from it. But since he is a God of justice, He will eventually use everything for good in the lives of those who love him, and he will bring every act to judgment.
    Yours,
    Harold

    • October 7, 2010 at 9:42 pm | #11

      What god? I have never seen any evidence of any god. Your circular arguments simply state that, if there were a god that created you, he wasted his time in providing you with intelligence ans you haven’t used it.

      A just god? One that commands people to destroy entire civilizations, when he isn’t doing it himself? One that orders his followers to kill all the men, women, children and destroy the trees and buildings?

      There is NO GOD. Get over yourself. Show me any proof at all, and I will knock it down with facts and logic. Otherwise, just slink away and don’t even try. Your bible is as full of lies and contradictions as anyone should expect from badly-translated legends from bronze-age near savages.

      Look up Horus, Attis, and Mithra. Then you’ll see where christianity stole the jesus myth. Are you aware that there is not even one contemporary account of any jesus? The first record is the gospel of Mark, written over four decades after the “facts.” When you consider that the Romans kept such good records of everything else, isn’t it strange that there is not a single mention of someone who was supposedly a social and political figure of some note. Someone who performed miracles and was executed by public acclaim? Were that the case with any other historical figure, you would insist it was a myth like Paul Bunyan or Pecos Bill. But religion has had a free ride on not asking questions as well as not paying their fair share of taxes and obeying laws that apply to everyone else. Start tasking questions and thinking for yourself. Yes, it is painful at first, but “The truth will set you free.”

    • October 10, 2010 at 3:14 pm | #12

      There is no god! I have been waiting for decades for one iota of proof and no one has ever provided any. You christians are such hypocrites. You claim to be moral, but you need the system of rewards and threatened punishments to do it. Are you so morally weak that you assume everyone else would be like you and run a muck performing terrible deeds without the threat of eternal damnation form a “loving” god? Don’t judge others by yourself. Many people can see the logic in enlightened self-interest. Doing what is truly best for yourself means treating people honestly and fairly while not unnecessarily harming others.

      On that subject, every time I personally have been cheated, robbed, lied to, taken advantage of, or otherwise abused, it has been by a “good christian”. You are evil people and should be deported to the moon.

      A god of justice? One that orders the killing of entire populations, including children, animals and even trees? You ignore the things that make you uncomfortable don’t you? Read your bible, learn what an immature, vengeful, evil god you worship. Then join the rational thinkers of the world in rejecting all religion. The truth shall set you free.

      • dave
        December 18, 2011 at 5:48 am | #13

        “There is NO GOD. Get over yourself. Show me any proof at all, and I will knock it down with facts and logic.”

        Speaking of a circular argument, you’ve just shown your hand, James. Even if you see “proof”, you will “knock it down with facts and logic.” Obviously, you enter the discussion with a closed mind, willing to present your arguments, but unwilling to hear anything. You certainly seemed pretty pissed. Good luck with that.

      • December 18, 2011 at 10:31 am | #14

        Obviously, you missed the entire point. I have asked countless times for any proof of any god and have never been shown any that would stand up to facts and logic. That’s because any “proof” of a god is always based upon emotion, myths, or wishful thinking.

        I have also stated that, if ever shown genuine proof, I would change my position. I have said this for over 50 years and have never been presented with anything remotely resembling proof. That’s not having a closed mind, that’s holding a position based upon experience and facts. Theists have closed minds as they will not accept contradictory evidence or even criticism of their beliefs.

        I am more than willing to hear arguments based upon facts and logic. You have not presented any. Why are you so pissed? Because you have nothing to say based upon facts and logic? Good luck with that.

  5. Harold
    October 7, 2010 at 9:56 pm | #15

    Here is a quotation that addresses your question about extra-biblical mention of Jesus:
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1304954/posts

    Let’s begin our inquiry with a passage that historian Edwin Yamauchi calls “probably the most important reference to Jesus outside the New Testament.”{4} Reporting on Emperor Nero’s decision to blame the Christians for the fire that had destroyed Rome in A.D. 64, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote:

    Nero fastened the guilt . . . on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of . . . Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome. . . .{5}

    What all can we learn from this ancient (and rather unsympathetic) reference to Jesus and the early Christians? Notice, first, that Tacitus reports Christians derived their name from a historical person called Christus (from the Latin), or Christ. He is said to have “suffered the extreme penalty,” obviously alluding to the Roman method of execution known as crucifixion. This is said to have occurred during the reign of Tiberius and by the sentence of Pontius Pilatus. This confirms much of what the Gospels tell us about the death of Jesus.

    But what are we to make of Tacitus’ rather enigmatic statement that Christ’s death briefly checked “a most mischievous superstition,” which subsequently arose not only in Judaea, but also in Rome? One historian suggests that Tacitus is here “bearing indirect . . . testimony to the conviction of the early church that the Christ who had been crucified had risen from the grave.”{6} While this interpretation is admittedly speculative, it does help explain the otherwise bizarre occurrence of a rapidly growing religion based on the worship of a man who had been crucified as a criminal.{7} How else might one explain that?

    Evidence from Pliny the Younger Another important source of evidence about Jesus and early Christianity can be found in the letters of Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan. Pliny was the Roman governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor. In one of his letters, dated around A.D. 112, he asks Trajan’s advice about the appropriate way to conduct legal proceedings against those accused of being Christians.{8} Pliny says that he needed to consult the emperor about this issue because a great multitude of every age, class, and sex stood accused of Christianity.{9}

    At one point in his letter, Pliny relates some of the information he has learned about these Christians:

    They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food–but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.{10}

    This passage provides us with a number of interesting insights into the beliefs and practices of early Christians. First, we see that Christians regularly met on a certain fixed day for worship. Second, their worship was directed to Christ, demonstrating that they firmly believed in His divinity. Furthermore, one scholar interprets Pliny’s statement that hymns were sung to Christ, as to a god, as a reference to the rather distinctive fact that, “unlike other gods who were worshipped, Christ was a person who had lived on earth.”{11} If this interpretation is correct, Pliny understood that Christians were worshipping an actual historical person as God! Of course, this agrees perfectly with the New Testament doctrine that Jesus was both God and man.

    Not only does Pliny’s letter help us understand what early Christians believed about Jesus’ person, it also reveals the high esteem to which they held His teachings. For instance, Pliny notes that Christians bound themselves by a solemn oath not to violate various moral standards, which find their source in the ethical teachings of Jesus. In addition, Pliny’s reference to the Christian custom of sharing a common meal likely alludes to their observance of communion and the “love feast.”{12} This interpretation helps explain the Christian claim that the meal was merely food of an ordinary and innocent kind. They were attempting to counter the charge, sometimes made by non-Christians, of practicing “ritual cannibalism.”{13} The Christians of that day humbly repudiated such slanderous attacks on Jesus’ teachings. We must sometimes do the same today. Evidence from Josephus Perhaps the most remarkable reference to Jesus outside the Bible can be found in the writings of Josephus, a first century Jewish historian. On two occasions, in his Jewish Antiquities, he mentions Jesus. The second, less revealing, reference describes the condemnation of one “James” by the Jewish Sanhedrin. This James, says Josephus, was “the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ.”{14} F.F. Bruce points out how this agrees with Paul’s description of James in Galatians 1:19 as “the Lord’s brother.”{15} And Edwin Yamauchi informs us that “few scholars have questioned” that Josephus actually penned this passage.{16}

    As interesting as this brief reference is, there is an earlier one, which is truly astonishing. Called the “Testimonium Flavianum,” the relevant portion declares:

    About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he . . . wrought surprising feats. . . . He was the Christ. When Pilate . . .condemned him to be crucified, those who had . . . come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared . . . restored to life. . . . And the tribe of Christians . . . has . . . not disappeared.{17}

    Did Josephus really write this? Most scholars think the core of the passage originated with Josephus, but that it was later altered by a Christian editor, possibly between the third and fourth century A.D.{18} But why do they think it was altered? Josephus was not a Christian, and it is difficult to believe that anyone but a Christian would have made some of these statements.{19}

    For instance, the claim that Jesus was a wise man seems authentic, but the qualifying phrase, “if indeed one ought to call him a man,” is suspect. It implies that Jesus was more than human, and it is quite unlikely that Josephus would have said that! It is also difficult to believe he would have flatly asserted that Jesus was the Christ, especially when he later refers to Jesus as “the so-called” Christ. Finally, the claim that on the third day Jesus appeared to His disciples restored to life, inasmuch as it affirms Jesus’ resurrection, is quite unlikely to come from a non-Christian!

    But even if we disregard the questionable parts of this passage, we are still left with a good deal of corroborating information about the biblical Jesus. We read that he was a wise man who performed surprising feats. And although He was crucified under Pilate, His followers continued their discipleship and became known as Christians. When we combine these statements with Josephus’ later reference to Jesus as “the so-called Christ,” a rather detailed picture emerges which harmonizes quite well with the biblical record. It increasingly appears that the “biblical Jesus” and the “historical Jesus” are one and the same! Evidence from the Babylonian Talmud There are only a few clear references to Jesus in the Babylonian Talmud, a collection of Jewish rabbinical writings compiled between approximately A.D. 70-500. Given this time frame, it is naturally supposed that earlier references to Jesus are more likely to be historically reliable than later ones. In the case of the Talmud, the earliest period of compilation occurred between A.D. 70-200.{20} The most significant reference to Jesus from this period states:

    On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald . . . cried, “He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy.”{21}

    Let’s examine this passage. You may have noticed that it refers to someone named “Yeshu.” So why do we think this is Jesus? Actually, “Yeshu” (or “Yeshua”) is how Jesus’ name is pronounced in Hebrew. But what does the passage mean by saying that Jesus “was hanged”? Doesn’t the New Testament say he was crucified? Indeed it does. But the term “hanged” can function as a synonym for “crucified.” For instance, Galatians 3:13 declares that Christ was “hanged”, and Luke 23:39 applies this term to the criminals who were crucified with Jesus.{22} So the Talmud declares that Jesus was crucified on the eve of Passover. But what of the cry of the herald that Jesus was to be stoned? This may simply indicate what the Jewish leaders were planning to do.{23} If so, Roman involvement changed their plans!{24}

    The passage also tells us why Jesus was crucified. It claims He practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy! Since this accusation comes from a rather hostile source, we should not be too surprised if Jesus is described somewhat differently than in the New Testament. But if we make allowances for this, what might such charges imply about Jesus?

    Interestingly, both accusations have close parallels in the canonical gospels. For instance, the charge of sorcery is similar to the Pharisees’ accusation that Jesus cast out demons “by Beelzebul the ruler of the demons.”{25} But notice this: such a charge actually tends to confirm the New Testament claim that Jesus performed miraculous feats. Apparently Jesus’ miracles were too well attested to deny. The only alternative was to ascribe them to sorcery! Likewise, the charge of enticing Israel to apostasy parallels Luke’s account of the Jewish leaders who accused Jesus of misleading the nation with his teaching.{26} Such a charge tends to corroborate the New Testament record of Jesus’ powerful teaching ministry. Thus, if read carefully, this passage from the Talmud confirms much of our knowledge about Jesus from the New Testament. Evidence from Lucian Lucian of Samosata was a second century Greek satirist. In one of his works, he wrote of the early Christians as follows:

    The Christians . . . worship a man to this day–the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. . . . [It] was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws.{27}

    Although Lucian is jesting here at the early Christians, he does make some significant comments about their founder. For instance, he says the Christians worshipped a man, “who introduced their novel rites.” And though this man’s followers clearly thought quite highly of Him, He so angered many of His contemporaries with His teaching that He “was crucified on that account.”

    Although Lucian does not mention his name, he is clearly referring to Jesus. But what did Jesus teach to arouse such wrath? According to Lucian, he taught that all men are brothers from the moment of their conversion. That’s harmless enough. But what did this conversion involve? It involved denying the Greek gods, worshipping Jesus, and living according to His teachings. It’s not too difficult to imagine someone being killed for teaching that. Though Lucian doesn’t say so explicitly, the Christian denial of other gods combined with their worship of Jesus implies the belief that Jesus was more than human. Since they denied other gods in order to worship Him, they apparently thought Jesus a greater God than any that Greece had to offer!

    Let’s summarize what we’ve learned about Jesus from this examination of ancient non-Christian sources. First, both Josephus and Lucian indicate that Jesus was regarded as wise. Second, Pliny, the Talmud, and Lucian imply He was a powerful and revered teacher. Third, both Josephus and the Talmud indicate He performed miraculous feats. Fourth, Tacitus, Josephus, the Talmud, and Lucian all mention that He was crucified. Tacitus and Josephus say this occurred under Pontius Pilate. And the Talmud declares it happened on the eve of Passover. Fifth, there are possible references to the Christian belief in Jesus’ resurrection in both Tacitus and Josephus. Sixth, Josephus records that Jesus’ followers believed He was the Christ, or Messiah. And finally, both Pliny and Lucian indicate that Christians worshipped Jesus as God!

    • October 10, 2010 at 3:06 pm | #16

      Harold you are a total moron. As always with you ignorant theists, you ignore the question and answer something completely different and claim you have proved your point. Either that or you are just so completely stupid that you don’t even understand the point. Probably the latter as your own rambling post proves my point. You did not quote even one contemporary account. So despite all the nonsense you posted, you only succeeded in reinforcing my point. There was no jeeezzzuuuus, and your entire religion is founded upon a lie. Did you research Horus, Attis, or Mithra? I suspect not as then you would have to start to question your religion and questions are not permitted.

      What did jesus teach? “I come not in peace, but with a sword”. In any case, jesus taught nothing because he did not exist. Your lying religion has taught hate, intolerance and disrespect. Is it any wonder that you reap what you sow? All trligions are false, but yours is the all-time worst. I despise all religions but christianty has been responsible for more hate and misery on earth than any other source.

      Tell you what, go away, I have no time for total idiots and you are obviously a typical hypocrite, liar and fool that I have come to expect from theists.

  6. January 7, 2011 at 1:36 am | #17

    There are plenty of Gods running around. They all exist. It is the attributes that are all wrong, the attributes, man.

  7. April 6, 2011 at 8:44 am | #18

    The argument about god/no god is a fallacy in itself.

    The fact that we’re alive and conscious and the everything existed before we were born proves that there is an intelligence working that is unfathomable.

    Something is playing with itself as everything.

    • April 6, 2011 at 10:38 am | #19

      That is a ridiculous circular argument. How does any of that prove an unfathomable intelligence is working? Does the fact that you have proposed a totally ignorant circular argument prove that you are hopelessly ignorant about everything? Well, maybe it does if you wish to credit your “reasoning” as having any validity at all.

      You ignore all science, all facts, all rational thinking, to cling to the willfully stupid idea of a creator. Come up with some independently verifiable facts o]r go back to the children’s table.

      • April 6, 2011 at 1:59 pm | #20

        Nothing is ignored but acknowledged.

        Everything came out of something.

        Some call it god and some call it science.

        By creator it’s meant something infinite, unbounded, faceless but Conscious.

        It’s consciousness that is You writing this blog. And so is everything else.

        This is not argument but something that You eventually realize on your own if You Allow it to be…>>> http://integrallife.com/awaken/spirit/always-already-brilliant-clarity-ever-present-awareness

      • April 6, 2011 at 2:26 pm | #21

        There is not creator. No gods, get over it. Show me some real proof. Just because you don’t understand something doesn’t mean it’s supernatural. But that is easier than thinking, isn’t it? Especially when you aren’t really equipped for thinking.

        YOu still make no sense, you have no argument and you are grasping at the impossible.

  8. April 6, 2011 at 2:59 pm | #22

    At least you acknowledged one among the infinite aspect of consciousness- impossible -.

    It’s something that cannot be grasped but observed.

    “This simple, ever-present awareness is not hard to attain but impossible to avoid, and we simply notice that.” -http://integrallife.com/awaken/spirit/always-already-brilliant-clarity-ever-present-awareness

    • April 6, 2011 at 5:20 pm | #23

      Like many delusional people, you only see what you want to see. I never said I acknowledged anything of the kind. In fact, I specifically said exactly the opposite.

      OK, I will type very slowly so that even you can understand. There is no god, no cosmic consciousness, no creator, no universal intelligence. Those things only exist in the fantacies of people too unintelligent and too lazy to think.

      I asked you to provide proof and you evade the question. That’s no surprise to me. It’s far easier to pretend the question was never asked that to risk giving up your illusions. Illusions are a person’s most precious possession. People will surrender their property, family, even their lives before their illusions.

      Better you go find someplace that shares your fantasies than continue to subject your self to the humiliation of being shown to be irrational and willfully ignorant.

      In other words, “Go away kid, you’re wasting my time and yours.”

      • April 6, 2011 at 5:45 pm | #24

        Provide proof of your birth. Unfalsifiable, testable proof. This means birth certificates, video, testimonies, your current existence, these are all off the table.

        Prove to me that you were born using this method, and then we’ll talk. Until then, amend your standards.

      • April 6, 2011 at 5:54 pm | #25

        I don’t have to provide proof of my birth because I am clearly visible and can be seen by anyone. The very fact that you are addressing me give the lie to your statement. Your god though, has never been seen by anyone, ever. Those that claim they have or either mentally unstable or simply liars.

        How about you provide some proof that you are not a total idiot? So far, all the evidence from your own posts is in the other direction.

        I would think that you would be embarrassed to try such an amazingly stupid ploy. But nothing no matter how ridiculous seems to embarrass theists. But, when someone has rejected truth and rational thinking, what should something as common as stubborn stupidity bother them?

      • April 6, 2011 at 7:59 pm | #26

        You being here doesn’t prove you were born. It just shows you exist. The issue is with your asked method of proof, which is clearly flawed.

        It would really help your case if you didn’t just attack everyone that didn’t agree with you and call them stupid. Provide a logical case for your opinion, and people might listen. Otherwise, you just look like an ignorant person with an agenda, which may work for you but convinces nobody.

        When you ask for someone else’s proof, try having some of your own too. Otherwise, be nicer and state your opinion reasonably. Other people are engaging you because it makes you look foolish when you respond in this way. I don’t think you’re really that way, but don’t give ‘em any ammo to work with.

        Respectfully yours,
        Sabepashubbo

      • April 6, 2011 at 8:15 pm | #27

        You are certainly an idiot that does not understand the rules of evidence or logic. I don’t have to prove a thing. I am here, you just admitted I exist. How else do you think I got here? Do you think I am god? Compared to you, I am.

        As far as calling people idiots, what you see as insults, are l statements of observed facts. That you cannot recognize the difference is further evidence of your lack of mental prowess.

        That you keep coming back for more derision and contempt, no matter how well deserved, is also an indication that you are either a mental masochist or just too stupid to know when you have been outed as a simpleton.

        Somehow, you seem to have received the impression that what you think (using the term loosely) is important to me or anyone else. If I have inadvertently done something to give you that impression, I apologize. That was never my intention. The words of mental midgets, such as yourself, are of no importance to me or any other person capable of rational thought.

        If you think I have been harsh with you, try posting something with evidence, rational comments, and stop dodging direct questions. That only shows that you have no answers or are incapable of understanding a simple English interrogative sentence. Personally, I think i is not more than intellectual cowardice. To quote Albert Einstein, “Never assume evil intent to that which can be accounted for by simple stupidity.”

      • April 6, 2011 at 8:51 pm | #28

        Well, can’t say I didn’t try. Best of luck to you, and I hope you can surround yourself with people who meet your “standards.”

      • April 6, 2011 at 9:42 pm | #29

        Yes, you can say you didn’t try. You never posted anything that even faintly resembled facts, You totally ignored direct questions and stubbornly maintained your ignorance in the face of overwhelming evidence.

        As far as meeting my standards, that’s pretty easy. If you bothered to read and tried to overcome your massive comprehension deficit, you see that many people meet my standards. All anyone has to do is present some verifiable facts in a rational manner. Because you were unable to do so, that doesn’t mean others cannot.

        Before you ask, yes I have had theists present verifiable facts. For example, many of the historical events described in the bible can be verified through other sources. Archeological studies, writings that predate the bible, and records kept by various civilizations confirm that either the bible was written by direct observers of events or at least taken from records by direct observers. That doesn’t mean the bible is true in all respects. I can tell you that too much alcohol is bad for you and most would agree that is true. If I also say that space aliens are causing earthquakes and volcanoes, that is clearly not true because the sources of both are rather well understood. So a true statement in one area doesn’t verify the truthfulness of another.

        This is called logic and you would improve your own credibility if you learned something about it.

        Until you do so, all further comments by you will be deleted. It’s an insult to my other readers (if I have any) to subject them to the meanderings of a delusional mind.

  9. April 6, 2011 at 5:36 pm | #30

    My last post made God look silly (if you are a Creationist), but it was meant only as satire. Let’s say that there may be something in the universe more powerful than man, but there is nothing that I Am, Adonai, Allah do not exist. Neither does Zeus, Ra, or any of those Fellows. No being is omnipotent, omniscient, perfect, or all anything.

    Now, my religious brethren, if you want to believe that a “god” that is not any of these things exist, perhaps we heathens will grant you that is it possible, so long as you don’t start making up attributes to stick onto your hypothesis.

    This sounds like a perfect compromise to me. An electronic handshake if ever there was one.

    • April 6, 2011 at 5:48 pm | #31

      What you propose would be excellent if the theists were content to sit in the puddles solemnly ribbing blue mud into their navels. Unfortunately, that doesn’t happen. Theists insist upon demanding a free ride on everything, imposing their beliefs upon everyone by enacting them into law, and demanding “respect” when they are incapable of earning it.

      The “live and let live” philosophy seems to be restricted to non-believers. Even when theists mouth the sentiment, they do not practice it. That’s hardly surprising as they usually give no more than lip service to their own beliefs. This happens so often that “theist” and “hypocrite” have become semantically equal. This is why accommodation as proposed by some atheists does not work.

  10. April 6, 2011 at 10:00 pm | #32

    I can give you facts and verifiable evidence. But since you were the original poster, can you give me some too?

    For starters, this is a quote from your post: “If there were, at any moment the 27,000 children around the world dying of malnutrition and starvation be permitted? Would evil be permitted to exist? Would people benefit from evil deeds and good deeds go unrewarded?”

    How do you know evil exists? Where are your verifiable facts to support that this isn’t just subjective opinion? I’m not saying it doesn’t exist, but how do you know for a certainty? Common sense isn’t really a valid argument in this sense, since you’re asking for verifiable proof to the alternative. So what is the verifiable proof that evil exists?

    If you would be willing to give me that, I’ll present facts in support of God’s existence.

  11. April 7, 2011 at 8:29 am | #33

    What exactly do you mean when you say There is no god?

    What kind of a proof are you looking for?

    • April 7, 2011 at 11:35 am | #34

      “There is no god” means exactly what it says. Unlike you theists, I do not engage in distortions, delays, distractions, and outright lies. There is no god of any kind. How hard is that to understand?

      But if you are accustomed to denials of evidence, tossing out rational thought, and never stating anything in plain words, perhaps you can be forgiven for thinking there must be other meanings to a simple declarative sentence.

      As for proof, it would take something that was completely outside the possibilities of the natural universe as we know it. A personal appearance from a god performing genuine miracles unexplainable by any other means.

      First, you will have to define what you mean by “god”. Then you will have to provide the proof I have mentioned. But keep in mind, I prefer thinking to automatically assuming anything I don’t understand is supernatural. To quote Arthur C. Clarke, “Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” See my post here about “Flying Pharaohs”. They would have thought a simple glider was magic. I’m a bit harder to convince.

  12. April 7, 2011 at 12:15 pm | #35

    Hi,

    You’re an intelligent human, you don’t have to prove that.

    I’m not an atheist. I am not trying to convince you. Obviously there’s no such thing as god as the atheists claim.

    All i’m trying to do is state the fact that there is a realty beayond this stupid archaic arguments about god/ no god.

    Step out of this argument. Lets think about the nature of reality instead.

    Questions about god/no god is kiddy stuff.

    The real question is “What is reality?”

    I’m not taking any stance. I’m out of this never ending loop, arguments, debate.

    Scientific principle states that “To every assertion there is an equal and opposite reassertion.”

    And this argument, debate, battle will continue.

    I’m not asserting anything.

    All i’m saying is instead of wasting time in worthless debates let us contemplate the nature of reality.

    “Is There a God?” question is irrelevant.

    What is required is an Integrated approach. Everything is happening for a reason and its for us to discover that reason thru scientific means or thru contemplative(not religious) practices or both.

    Should you decide to continue this fight with people who don’t agree with you here’s a link:

    http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/read-prove-god-exists/

    Or, If you decide to step out of this stupid, archaic arguments here’s a link:

    http://integrallife.com/learn/-deep-end/writings-ken-wilber-essays-forewords-and-works-progress

    The choice is yours.

    • April 7, 2011 at 12:31 pm | #36

      “I’m not an atheist and a theist. I am not trying to convince you. Obviously there’s no such thing as god as the theists claim. And i’m not taking sides with atheists.”

      Sorry for the confusion. I’m not that fluent.

    • April 7, 2011 at 12:41 pm | #37

      You make several assumptions that do not seem to be true to fact. First that I am an intelligent human. How do you know I am not a space alien or a super-computer such as the one that defeated the champions on Jeopardy?

      “No such thing as god as the atheists claim?” The sentence doesn’t make sense. Atheists state that there is no evidence of any kind of god. Perhaps if you understood more about atheism, you could state your premise more clearly.

      There is a reality beyond what we see? Where is your evidence of that? I’m not saying you are wrong, I am saying you do make an assertion without any supporting facts. There are many things we do not yet understand. The ancients did not understand germs or bacteria, either. But they are a reality, not supernatural. They are only something they did not have the tools to examine and understand. We don’t have all available tools, either.

      Questions about god/no god is only kiddy stuff to you. To theists trying to impose their sick ideas on everyone and to rational thinkers trying to maintain freedom from religion, it is not kiddy stuff. It is the reality of the here and now.

      What is reality? It is the natural world/universe. As I stated before, we are not necessarily equipped to accurately perceive and understand all aspects of this reality any more than people without microscopes were equipped to understand germ, and bacteria.

      What scientific principle states, “To every assertion there is an equal and opposite reassertion”? Are you thinking of “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.”? That is not the same thing.

      Yes, you are asserting things. Denial does not change it.

      Atheists do contemplate the nature of reality. That is because we know that reality is what we have and the more we learn about it, the better we can experience it. What is wasting resources and preventing that is religion. Consider the time when religion controlled most of the European world. It was called “The Dark Ages”.

      “Everything is happening for a reason”? That’s another assertion That you claim you don’t make. You are as inconsistent and contradictory as the bible. What is the reason? Why do you think this? What is your evidence?

      Your links are simply more religious bullshit under a thin disguise.

      You are typical of arrogant theist that think because they say something, no proof is required or even desirable.

      I fight with people that disagree with me? If by that you mean I point out the fallacies and lies in their statements, I have no intention of not using facts and logic against those that reject them. OK, it’s not fighting fair to do that, but remember, you theists started it.

      You can continue to live in a fantasy filled with your delusions or you can start thinking for yourself and use logic, verifiable facts, and truth to learn what this reality actually is. The choice is yours.

      • April 7, 2011 at 1:58 pm | #38

        slrman :
        You make several assumptions that do not seem to be true to fact. First that I am an intelligent human. How do you know I am not a space alien or a super-computer such as the one that defeated the champions on Jeopardy?
        “No such thing as god as the atheists claim?” The sentence doesn’t make sense. Atheists state that there is no evidence of any kind of god. Perhaps if you understood more about atheism, you could state your premise more clearly.
        There is a reality beyond what we see? Where is your evidence of that? I’m not saying you are wrong, I am saying you do make an assertion without any supporting facts. There are many things we do not yet understand. The ancients did not understand germs or bacteria, either. But they are a reality, not supernatural. They are only something they did not have the tools to examine and understand. We don’t have all available tools, either.
        Questions about god/no god is only kiddy stuff to you. To theists trying to impose their sick ideas on everyone and to rational thinkers trying to maintain freedom from religion, it is not kiddy stuff. It is the reality of the here and now.
        What is reality? It is the natural world/universe. As I stated before, we are not necessarily equipped to accurately perceive and understand all aspects of this reality any more than people without microscopes were equipped to understand germ, and bacteria.
        What scientific principle states, “To every assertion there is an equal and opposite reassertion”? Are you thinking of “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.”? That is not the same thing.
        Yes, you are asserting things. Denial does not change it.
        Atheists do contemplate the nature of reality. That is because we know that reality is what we have and the more we learn about it, the better we can experience it. What is wasting resources and preventing that is religion. Consider the time when religion controlled most of the European world. It was called “The Dark Ages”.
        “Everything is happening for a reason”? That’s another assertion That you claim you don’t make. You are as inconsistent and contradictory as the bible. What is the reason? Why do you think this? What is your evidence?
        Your links are simply more religious bullshit under a thin disguise.
        You are typical of arrogant theist that think because they say something, no proof is required or even desirable.
        I fight with people that disagree with me? If by that you mean I point out the fallacies and lies in their statements, I have no intention of not using facts and logic against those that reject them. OK, it’s not fighting fair to do that, but remember, you theists started it.
        You can continue to live in a fantasy filled with your delusions or you can start thinking for yourself and use logic, verifiable facts, and truth to learn what this reality actually is. The choice is yours.

        I’m using logic, verifiable facts, and truth to learn what this reality actually is. I’ve already made that choice.

        This links are not religious bullshit. I’m not into religion.

        I provided them so that you can take a look at them for your reference.

        I’m also for the reality of the Here and Now.

        The theists are working from inside a circle and the atheists are doing the same.

        Let’s not join them.

  13. April 7, 2011 at 1:38 pm | #39

    Whatever you described i already know that.

    All i’m trying to show is that the so called atheists or theists don’t need to argue anymore.

    Let’s look at everything with an integral perspective. More like the theory of everything.

    By assertion/reassertion thing i meant, you point fingers at the theists and they’ll point fingers at you.

    Get out of it. You don’t have to do that anymore.

    That’s the reason why I said intelligent people like you should consider walking a path that’s above all these stupid arguments.

    May be you should start a post called What is reality? And consider a holistic approach towards defining the same.

    Take into consideration the past, present and the future as a whole, don’t leave out anything. By future i mean the idea of future events based on past and present consideration.

    Integrate all aspects of the reality we live in and find the connection between it.

    I’m not trying to fight you or the theists or any other ‘ists or ‘isms.

    Certainly you’re not an alien even if you’re it doesn’t matter.

    • April 7, 2011 at 1:59 pm | #40

      You already know what? You haven’t made any sense with that.

      Theists need to stop trying to impose their beliefs on everyone by enacting them into law. They should also practice the tolerance that they preach and not condemn atheists, homosexuals, and those of other religions to everlasting torture because they don’t agree with their twisted version of reality. That is the reality. It’s theists that start the arguments and won’t agree to “live and let live.” So what you’re saying is, atheists should just lie down and let the god-nuts rule?

      That’s not what you said. You asserted it is a scientific principle. When I called you on it, you redefined what you said. You forget that anyone can read your post and see what you actually said. So twisting the truth won’t work here.

      You mean walk the path you want not the path that is rational and provides protection from religious bias and intolerance for everyone.

      A post about what is reality would be pointless, as we rational thinkers already know as much of reality as we currently have the tools to observe. It’s true that we don’t have the tools, physical or even mental, such ad mathematics or senses yet unknown, to examine the totality of our universe or to even detect if there are other universes. But we do have the inquiring minds that can accept new data when it becomes available. Unlike theists, we do not reject new evidence because it doesn’t fir what we want to believe. Instead we embrace new facts and adjust our views and understanding to accommodate truths.

      If you are not trying to fight anyone, why do you insist upon continuing to post absurdities without any verifying evidence. You seem to insist upon doing things your way with no reason other than you say to do it.

      • April 7, 2011 at 2:07 pm | #41

        I wish I could be as coherent with the english language as you are.

        I’m being misunderstood because of my poor english.

        I totally agree with you.

        You said- “But we do have the inquiring minds that can accept new data when it becomes available.”

        This exactly the purpose I provided the links to you.

        I say it again I’m not a theist, not an atheist, not a religious zealot.

      • April 7, 2011 at 2:25 pm | #42

        It is not your English that’s the problem. Your English is excellent.

        It is the thought processes that I have pointed out that are in error. Perhaps you have had trouble understanding my replies. That could be my fault for not replying in a more simple manner. Nonetheless, your thinking is the flaw, not your English. I had no difficulty understanding you at all.

  14. April 7, 2011 at 1:39 pm | #43

    I meant this previuosly

    “I’m not an atheist and not even a theist. I am not trying to convince you. Obviously there’s no such thing as god as the theists claim. And i’m not taking sides with atheists.”

  15. April 7, 2011 at 2:38 pm | #44

    Thank you.

    My thinking is not the flaw. I’m unable to explain my thought process clearly.

    I’m into stuffs engaged by people like Ken Wilber, Andrew Cohen and the likes. I’m sure you know them or have read them. They are not religious or theists or atheists and neither am I.

    They’re like Integral Evolutionaries.

    Whatever I said was based on that context.

    In the same context I’m providing another link. It talks about The Meaning of Suffering in an Evolutionary Universe>>> http://www.metanexus.net/magazine/tabid/68/id/10995/Default.aspx

    It’s not a religious link. It’s just for your refrence if you’re into reading and accumulating informations.

    • April 7, 2011 at 2:48 pm | #45

      It is still total nonsense. It isn’t into reality. Nor is it rational, believable, or even interesting. Please don’t waste any more of my time or yours. If you are unable to explain your thought processes clearly, it isn’t your English, which is excellent. It is the thought processes themselves.

      Have a life.

      • April 7, 2011 at 4:39 pm | #46

        What’s Your take on Quantum Theory, The Holographic Universe, Evolution, Enlightenment, Consciousness, Zero-Point Field, Vaccum State, String Theory?

  16. April 7, 2011 at 5:11 pm | #47

    Devasish :

    What’s Your take on Quantum Theory, The Holographic Universe, Evolution, Enlightenment, Consciousness, Zero-Point Field, Vaccum State, String Theory?

    What does any of this have to do with the subject at hand? This is what I mean about your thought processes. I do believe that you are really a theist. You have the same detachment from reality and the same tendency to introduce total irrelevancies to distract from your failure to address the central question.

    I don’t like to block people because that is suppression of free speech. But you are starting to abuse that privilege.

  17. April 7, 2011 at 5:26 pm | #48

    I just asked a plain simple question?

    • April 7, 2011 at 6:00 pm | #49

      You asked questions that have not a single thing to do with the subject at hand. Instead it is intended to distract from the fact that you have not contributed anything of substance. It is becoming clear to me that you are actually a theist and are attempting to simply be an annoyance. That is being a liar and a disgrace to rational thinking.

      One more instance of this and you are banned. This is the last warning you will receive. Also, all of your nonsensical posts will be deleted.

  18. May 29, 2011 at 1:52 am | #50

    I must say, you spend a lot of time defending and trying to persuade people God doesn’t exist in this post – perhaps it is a reflection of your inner battle.

    Whether or not he exists in reality as a Omnipresent being, the very concept of God has undeniably had the largest impact on mankind of anything to date… except perhaps the organisms that first sprung from nowhere as some atheists would like to think…. sure…. that’s logic right there…

    In reality you should live and let live. I have faith in the concept of God and you have faith in the concept of Logic…. either way we are both only believing what we have felt, understood and been educated about…. and either way both Science and Religion are used for both good and evil….

    REBUT THAT :P

    • May 29, 2011 at 2:23 am | #51

      I couldn’t care less what people believe. As long as they don’t impose their delusions on me. But theists never, ever are willing to “live and let live”. Theist always work to pass their beliefs into law. So it does affect me and everyone else, too.

      I have asked countless people for any proof of any god. Not one has ever done it. Most don’t even try but engage in delay, distract, and deny tactics.

      Who do you think you are telling me what I “should” do? “Live and let live?” You mean leave you free to discriminate and persecute those who don’t believe as you do? That’s what theists have always done.

      Your faith is based upon nothing but an accident of birth. Had you been born in another time or place, you would be a Muslim, Shintoist, Hindu, or other faith. You would also be just as wrong.

      Yes the concept of god has had a large effect (not impact, learn correct English). But the effect has been all bad. Religion is the greatest scam ever worked upon humanity. Its sole purpose has been to allow one small group of unscrupulous people to control the thoughts and actions of a larger group.

      I do not know of a single atheist that believes organisms “sprang from nowhere”. That’s another lie theists spread to try to discredit the greatest force for truth and good mankind has ever known. Theist know nothing of logic. If we could talk logically to theists, there wouldn’t be any theists. But you cannot reason a person away from a position that they did not reach through reason.

      No, I am not “believing” anything. I am accepting the evidence of my senses and the verifiable proof presented by others. You are accepting a set of myths and lies from a badly-translated, politically edited book forced on you from birth. Prove even one fable in the babble book is true. Show me one bit of evidence of any god. I warn you, I do not play fair. I insist upon independently verifiable proof and will not be deceived by the usual distortions, distractions and outright lies. That’s what you have to deal with when you are debating rational thinkers.

      You have been rebutted. So show some proof of your beliefs.

  19. Tbird
    May 29, 2011 at 5:48 am | #52

    I must have confused you or you may have just concluded on your own, but I never said I follow the bible.

    I have come to understand and KNOW my God through my senses. The same way you have come to understand gravity through your senses. Simply because you are not able to sense God in the same way you sense other things does not mean it is not there.

    Do not call my texts (the ones I follow) myth and lies. One could just as easily present a Science text book as myth and lies. Unless you yourself are doing experiments nothing you are told is adequate. Heresay isn’t even admissable in courts, and yet that’s exactly what you take to believing. That is faith kind sir.

    My parents raised my beliefless – I was raised knowing nothing but the world around me. I was given no doctrine to live by, no rules that go beyond want normal humans would expect. So given my birth time and place, yes I am fortunate, but no I do not think that given another situation I wouldn’t have come to the same conclusion. That argument you use is useless anyhow. If you are able to use that than I could just as easily bring up the problem of induction.

    I mean it was believe the Earth was flat some hundreds of years ago was it not? And was it not science of the day that ‘justified that’…. Or the sample of the all swans being white until the first settlement in Australia changing that concept and presenting black swans to science…. Point is no sample size is adequate enough in contrast to the possible number of sample sizes that have, do and could exist. So therefore your inductive logic is by faith and belief … whether you deny that or not it is true.

    What proof do you want ? What proof can I give you ? I can tell you that no consciousness can be put in a box. Nor can love nor compassion nor an emotion to date. I can tell you that your dreams during sleep and the images you picture in your head are visible because a light must surely exist inside you. A light that I call God, and perhaps you call Neuroscience… Whatever you want to call it, it cannot be put in a box, it is not matter. On the topic of matter so empty and spacious – that is where I believe God is – where God exists, physical yet not.

    Do not tell me I am believing anything, what right do YOU have?

    You have an issue with Religion, but your issue is really the people, the institutionalization. That is not GOD. That is NOT all of religion. I hate atomic bombs, but I don’t hate gravity…. I hate the hospitals, but I don’t hate the doctors…. Do you see what I am saying ?

    Perhaps it is something of the country you find yourself but in Australia there is a huge belief in God, and institutionalized religion is in decline. Religion is the doctrine and the discrimination…. God is but love….

    You needn’t call me delusional – if you truely believe that than you are giving yourself the same title. You have faith that when you walk you will not fly away from Earth, you have faith that the sun will rise. IT IS FAITH – science doesn’t argue that.. You do…

    Why so hateful towards God? What has religion done to make you feel this way? And remember – religion and god and the people of the institutions are not one and the same.

  20. May 29, 2011 at 12:45 pm | #53

    If you have come to know god through your senses, you are deluding yourself. But mental illness of this sort is very common. Perhaps you could seek treatment for the hallucinations, voices, or whatever makes you think you “experience” god.

    Yes, when you cannot detect something or it’s effects, it is not there. Recently, the effects of dark energy were detected and confirmed. We cannot “feel” it or see it, but scientific examination was able to predict it and subsequent evidence has confirmed the predictions. This has never happened with any “god”.

    First you say you do not follow the bible. Then you complain that I point out that they are badly-translated, politically-edited myths and lies. Like most theists, you are inconsistent, and want to have things both ways. That doesn’t work with rational people. Choose one, you either believe the bible, or you do not. Maybe you prefer to cherry-pick parts that are convenient to you and ignore the rest? Most christians do exactly that. Ironically, these are often the same ones that proclaim the babble to be the “holy word of god” and that it must be correct in every detail. Again, they like to have to both ways.

    You could present a science book as myths and lies? No you could not. Science provides verifiable evidence. Religion denies even the need for evidence. I can also provide proof that the bible is full of myths, lies, and contradictions. There are so many I could inundate you with the evidence and it would take you days to even read it. But your belief isn’t based on reason or facts, but emotion and the brainwashing you received as a child. I had the same thing in my youth, but I learned to think for myself. It was after I had read the babble front to back, several times that I understood how ridiculous it all is and that all religions are false.

    “Beliefless” Nice word invention but it doesn’t lend any credibility to your case. My argument is not invalid. It is based upon facts. I have verifiable evidence, All you have are your own statements. It’s obvious that you don’t have any proof or you would give it.

    Yes, science has made errors and admits it. That’s the difference between science and religion. When presented with new evidence, science revised its statements. Religion denies the evidence and retards the advancement of knowledge. Perhaps you have heard of the dark ages? That’s when religion was the government and questions were not only forbidden but punished, often fatally.

    My reasoning is based upon observable facts. They are not “beliefs” but facts. You have not a single fact to demonstrate the truth of your delusions and yes, they are delusions. If it were anything but religion and someone was behaving the same way and speaking the same nonsense, they would quickly be put in an institution for the mentally unstable. But religion has always expected a free ride on everything from taxes to breaking the law.

    I want any proof you have. The examples you give are not proof, they are nothing more that things you have made up to justify your own beliefs. Dreams are not from a “Light inside me”, they are the workings of the subconscious mind. Yes, it’s true that science cannot yet explain all of it. That doesn’t mean it’s supernatural. It means that there are fact yet to be discovered, Read my post here about “Flying Pharaohs”. It’s an excellent example of all of the facts not being understood. But when they are, the “miraculous” becomes commonplace.

    Yes, neuroscience can be out in a box. That’s called education. As more facts are discovered, they are added to the box and changes may be required to the previous body of knowledge. That’s something religion denies. Denial doesn’t change what is true though, does it? Religion denied that the earth revolved around the sun until they were forced into it by undeniable evidence. Religion even killed people for daring to state the obvious truths. They still do so today.

    You use not-so-clever tactics to slip around the obvious fact that you have no proof. But I don’t expect anything else. Denial, distraction, delay has always been the methodology of religion.

    I have the right of having facts on my side. You can believe anything you like, but you may not invent your own facts, nor may you try to force those beliefs on others by voting them into law. Yet, that is exactly what theists do and it is happening in Australia right now.

    Yes, I have an issue with religion because it IS people. People that hate, are intolerant, use others gullibility to profit themselves, and demand “respect” when none has been earned.

    I see that you are using silly statements that only demonstrate your lack of ability to think clearly and logically. You hate hospitals?

    Religion is people. It can be nothing else because god does not exist. Do you believe in Thor, Loki, Zeus, Ra, Aphrodite, or any of the ancient gods? Look up Horus, Attis, and Mithra. Do you believe in those? Why not?

    I beg to differ, there are more and more people in Australia who list themselves as non-religious and atheist then ever. God is love? Is that why he has practiced genocide, approved of slavery, demanded sacrifices of harmless animals, and insisted upon killing people for minor offenses? Is a god of love one that condemned people to an eternity of suffering for not believing in him even if they have lived blameless lives? Some love, some god.

    I am not calling you delusional, you are delusional. I do not “have faith” I will not fly away from the earth or that the sun will rise, I have evidence. That’s far more than you have for any god-delusion. FYI, the sun dos not “Rise”. It is the rotation of the earth that brings it into view each day. You are using the idea that the sun rotates around the earth. That was discredited centuries ago over the objections of religion.

    Hateful towards god? How ridiculous. How can I hate something that has never existed? Do you think environmentalists hate Paul Bunyan for cutting down trees?

    “Hating god” is another distraction that theists use to make theists look like something we are not. But when a religion is founded upon lies and has been lying from then until now, we can hardly expect them to stop can we?

    Yes, religion and the people and institutions are one and the same. God is only an invention of people so they can control other people.

    What has religion done? It has retarded the growth of human knowledge and spirit. It has instilled hate and intolerance in billions. It has caused wars, genocide, and torture. It has caused children to die of curable diseases because their parents believed they could pray for them to live. It has restricted the freedom of anyone that doesn’t share the sick, twisted beliefs of the dominant cult. It has deprived generations of children of an education based upon truth and facts. Religion is the greatest evil ever loosed upon mankind.

    It has convinced people like you that you must have a system of rewards and punishments to prevent you from being evil, murdering savages. What kind of morals are those that depend on rewards and punishments? What about doing the right thing because it is the right thing and benefits everyone? I have a post on this blog about that, too.

  21. Tbird
    May 30, 2011 at 5:32 am | #54

    You have your views and I have mine. At this point I can see that you are as delusional to me as I am to you. We will never persuade one another either way and therefore I find this debate must end only with us agreeing to disagree.

    May you find meaning in your life in your own way. And may you learn to respect other peoples views without needing to degrade them and disreguard them as false.

    God Bless.

    • May 30, 2011 at 10:52 am | #55

      The difference is, my views are backed by verifiable facts. Yours are backed by emotions, mental illness, and a book of myths and lies.

      I have found far more meaning in my life than anyone can find through delusions and an imaginary god. How can I respect views that are as ignorant, evil, and irrational as yours? What you think is degrading your delusions, I say I is pointing out obvious facts. But facts have no place in your world view. I have challenged you to prove your beliefs and. like all other theists, you run. No surprises there.

      “God bless” is offensive to me. Offending others is never a concern for christians. Then you wonder why you get no respect from me but contempt and derision.

  22. Eddie
    December 1, 2011 at 2:33 am | #56

    Man up Jimmy. Put up or shut up!

    • December 3, 2011 at 9:24 pm | #57

      For those that might wonder, “Eddie” has challenged me to come “get my ass kicked” but he declines to prove where he is. Instead, he hides behind fake names, flimsy excuses, multiple fake emails, and posts messages like this on my blog. I have offered many times to come to him at my expense but he will not give any proof as to who he is, where he is, or do anything but make gay insults and brag about his “big house, car, and important job”. Those are clearly the boasts of an insecure little boy.

      He calls me an “uneducated blowhard” but knows nothing about me nor has he proven even one word I have ever said is not true. Truth doesn’t seem to matter to him though. He’s never proven one word he has said is true.

      Because I’ve left the burden of proof on him, he’s run out of even those pitiful comments. If he ever decides to actually prove his real name, location or anything, I’ll go there at my own expense. I am sure this little boy will never be anywhere to be found, though. After all, someone that has shown himself to be so craven for so long, deserves some credit if he finally delivers, right? I don’t recommend that anyone hold their breath waiting for this. LOL

  23. Clint Simpson
    December 3, 2011 at 8:57 pm | #58

    Wow. You are an angry miserable human being, and I don’t pity you.

    • December 3, 2011 at 9:19 pm | #59

      Hmm, you know nothing at all about me and claim I am angry and miserable. Naturally, you have no proof of that and decline to provide any.

      What you consider insults are nothing more than simple statements of observed facts. Just as I observed that you insulted me without any evidence at all. If you don;t like the facts, change your behavior.

      YOu confuse support with agreement instead of independently verifiable facts. I do not seek “support” in gathering agreement. The truth is true, even if no one agrees. Lies are lies even if everyone agrees.

      Where did I say god is all powerful and all good? My premise is there is no god and it doesn’t matter. I’m sorry that you could not understand that. Your lack of comprehension isn’t my fault.

      Your entire response is so contradictory and nonsensical, I am going to delete it. I can only suffer fools so much then I am tired of willful stupidity.

      All you are doing is expressing your own arrogant disdain for something you can’t even comprehend. If you think that’s an insult, read your own post again. Facts, just the facts.

      There are a lot of stupid people and you seem to be one. Are you “Eddie” trying to look smart?

  24. Eddie
    December 6, 2011 at 4:00 am | #60

    “little boy” erm this little boy could bench you, hmm at least 20 times before rest! For the record I provided proof of where I live. You shit yourself. You just wanted to come to my house to frighten my family. That is the measure of a very unpleasant, nasty, cowardly little man. If it’s not on your terms then it’s not happening. Face facts jimmy, you shit yourself from me. Like I said even if I did provide you with my driving licence, you would claim it was fake. LOL Full of excuses, end of. You even claimed the letter I had could have came from my trash. What does that even mean? Why would I have a letter addressed to someone else from another country? LOL Lame excuse. I am too strong for you. Physically and emotionally. You are just a typical cowardly atheist. You can’t help it. It just what you lot are. You are just a very unpleasant man who hides behind a keyboard. No one who has ever known me would ever call me a coward. Yet YOU do! Where is the sense or logic in that? Fact is that letter proved the town where I live. Who else belongs to the letter? As far as your blog goes. You have an opinion on an array of subjects. Unfortunately you have knowledge on very little. What is apparent is if you didn’t own a mirror, you would have no friends to look at. LOL Your bitterness and hate is seeping out your posts. Maybe is you were more of a decent human being you wouldn’t need that mirror.

    • December 6, 2011 at 10:39 am | #61

      As always, you make absurd, irrelevant claims with no proof at all. Even if you could bench press 67+ Kilos, what does that have to do with the fact that you have shown yourself to be a liar, a coward, and have consistently run from me?

      What you have done is make boasts like the insecure little boy you are. You’ve bragged about your penis size, your house, car, and a mythical job where you have “earned more in the last five years than I have in my life.” Have you proved any of these? No, not a one. Now you brag about how strong you are. Have you proved that? No, but you’ve seen my videos of what I do and I can do even more now. I prove everything I say and you have proved nothing except you’re afraid and lying is a way of life for you.

      When have I ever said I would come to your house? I have no interest inn your so-far imaginary family. I have never mentioned them. You brought it up as another excuse to hide from me.

      I provided proof of everything I have ever told you and you have done nothing except show an NHS form with all useful information blacked out. Yes, I do suspect it’s something you pulled from the trash. A letter addressed to someone from another country? You claim you are in Scotland, although you have never proved it. So you might be, but what does that mean? It means there one person in Scotland that’s a coward and a liar.

      If you’re too strong for me, why are you afraid to face me personally? Why are you afraid to even give your real name? Why do you hide behind fake emails, and NHS forms from the trash? Even if that was your form, it doesn’t reveal your name, or anything useful about you. Well, the list of web cams videos of very young girls at the end of your video shows something that you probably didn’t intend, didn’t it?

      As far as it proving the town where you live, so what if it did? I have asked for a way for us to meet. So far, all you have done is demand that I fly myself to a place that you have yet to prove you are, and expect that someone that refuses to show his face, give his name or anything else will “meet me at the airport.” I have offered to fly you here at my expense, not yours, and have conclusively proved where I am, given you my address and phone number, and you have seen my picture and videos many times.

      Maybe if you were not such a lying coward, you could look into a mirror.

  25. Eddie
    December 6, 2011 at 4:15 am | #62

    Oh yeah and you SAY you wouldn’t go near my family YET you reposted my video of my address to the world on yt. What if that had my full address? That would leave all the weirdos of the world an opportunity to post whatever they like and possibly turn up at my house when I’m out and my family are in. You can ONLY vouch for yourself no one else. You are a disgrace. See I think (know) you are indeed an evil little man who is a stick on for hell when you die. But for all your unpleasantness, evil, Godless people are cowards. That is something who cannot run from. That is just in your DNA. That is why you will NEVER face me, because I would crush you. Excuse after excuse after excuse. I have God, youth(ish), power, all round strength, and the heart of lion on my side. I would beat 3 of you in the one sitting. You? You have a keyboard. LOL Coward. 99% of the people who come into contact with you cannot all be wrong. YOU are the problem. Why are you so angry and unhappy? What happened to you?

    • December 6, 2011 at 10:52 am | #63

      Yes, I did post it to show the world that you didn’t prove anything. You haven’t even shown that you have a family. For all anyone knows, you live in your mum’s basement, pretending that you are a useful human being.

      If it had your real address, I wouldn’t have posted it. If it had a genuine address, that still wouldn’t prove it wasn’t something you pulled from the trash. I posted my ID, driver’s license, and lots of evidence. I don’t use fake names, fake emails, or fake anything.

      Yes, I vouch for myself and don’t hide and make up flimsy excuses. That’s because I am not terrified of a little boy that has to brag about non-existent accomplishments to make himself feel like a man.

      “Godless people are cowards?” Then why are you the one running and hiding from me?

      “Beat three of me in one sitting”? More childish boasting. If you are so tough and brave, accept my offers to meet anywhere at any time. Just prove who and where you are. Accept my offer of a free trip here, or that I will reimburse you with a cashier’s check if you fly me there or anywhere that you feel safe to meet me. So far, all you have done is tell me to pay my way to Glasgow where you have never proved you are, and hope that you’ll actually meet me and not hide as you have done up to now.

      I am not at all unhappy. If I am angry, it’s because I care about things like truth, honesty, and personal courage. None of which you have displayed.

      You said “I’m going to end this” and then continue on to pollute my blog. That’s the ethics you have, none at all.

      Yes, I have a keyboard and I do not hide behind it. I use it to demonstrate you for what you are. I know you don’t like it, but then perhaps you should change your behavior.

      What happened to me is I encountered a whining, little coward that claims to be from Scotland but has never proven a single word he’s said.

  26. Eddie
    December 6, 2011 at 4:24 am | #64

    That is exactly right isn’t it? You wanted me to provide you with my full address, just so you would repost it to the world so SOMEONE ELSE would do your dirty work. Actions? Your actions point to that synopsis. That is why you are so bitter and unhappy. You WISH you were the man you profess to be. We can CLAIM to be whatever we like from a keyboard. You’re a psychologist’s wet dream.

    • December 6, 2011 at 10:59 am | #65

      I could not care less about your full address. I’ve said that many times. You always ignore anything that doesn’t fit your delusional bragging.

      Yes, you claim to be a lot of things when you’re behind your keyboard but you have never proved any of them. I have proved all of my statements to you.

      I have offered to fly you here at my expense, and reimburse you for “lost wages.” Then I said fly me there so you don’t have to expose anything of your Identity and I’ll give you a cashier’s check for the flight. Then I said, let’s meet at a neutral location, anywhere in the world you please. None of that would do, you were too afraid. All you would say is “fly here at your expense.” You have never proved where you are, who you are or anything else except you expect me to be as stupid as you are.

      I’ve been ready, even eager from the start. All you have done is engage in childish insults, bragging, and hiding. Those are facts, proven by your own posts here and on YouTube as well as in my emails.

  27. Eddie
    December 6, 2011 at 5:26 pm | #66

    “I could not care about your full address” erm what are you talking about? I have given you my partial address. That is all you asked for dummy. But that isn’t good enough now. You are contradicting yourself. What is the point if you just say everything i say is fake. That is a very child-like way to be dickhead. Ok I am not from Airdrie in Scotland (even though I have proved that). My name is not Eddie. I am actually a computer program and my origin is Mars. Grow up jimmy. I could say everything you have shown and told me is fake. Two can play that game. Stop trying to be something you are not. You have the intellect of a gnat. You are like the lion in the wizard of oz. “Put em up, put em up”. Ok then. “er no I didn’t mean it. You don’t mean it”. Pathetic. You indicated you would surprise me. How could you without going to my house? You have STILL to answer that you coward. Yes i have seen you in your videos and fair play to you it is comendable…for a OAP! You cannot be trusted with my full address. You have proven that with saying you would surprise me and now by publishing it on yt. You can’t have it not even both ways, but all ways. All you are doing is proving how twisted, delusional, and cowardly you are. You are trying to discredit me to deflect from yourself. That is what liars do. Have you worked for FOX news before?

  28. December 6, 2011 at 6:12 pm | #67

    When have I ever asked for your full address? What I have said many times, and you conveniently ignore, is prove who and where you are. Your partial address that doesn’t even prove it is you, is nothing.

    Also, it is blindingly obvious that you ignore anything you don’t want to answer. You have never even commented on how many different offers I have made to you. Now have you ever answered a direct question. I have asked you to prove anything, even your childish boasts about how big and strong you are, what a nice car you have, or what a great job you have. I have posted my videos of my home, my city, me doing push-ups, marital arts, and many other exercises. I can do everything I have said and more. I don’t hesitate to offer proof of anything I have said and I don’t ignore direct questions or challenges. You never have done any of that.

    I have not contradicted myself, as you have. You said you were ending this and, as always, you lied. Instead of revealing yourself to be a cowardly, lying fool on YouTube, you have moved to my Blog. That shows how stupid you are. I can and will delete everything on here because I will not inflict your stupidity on here. You have my real email, not fake like yours, my real address, proven several ways, my real name, yours has never been shown, much less proven, and you have my pictures and absolute proof of everything I have said.

    I don;t know or care where you are from. I would like you to choose a method of proving who you are so we can actually meet. You always evade or outright refuse to do that.

    You cannot say anything I have shown you is fake because it all was proven by verifiable facts. All you have proven is that you’re a liar and a coward afraid to face someone that you consistently insult but are terrified to face personally.

    Pick a way, Pedobhoy. Anything that makes you feel safe. The juvenile bragging and lying only shows you for what you are.

    I have to surprise you by appearing when you don’t expect me. If you know when and where I will be, you’ll make certain that you are far, far away.

    I didn’t say I would publish your full address. That’s another figment of your imagination or, more likely, just another lie. I said that, if you prove who and where you are, I’ll post that as proof that you deserve credit for not being a complete craven coward. I also advised everyone not to hold their breath waiting for that because you will never do anything that makes it possible for us to actually do a face-to-face.

    How can I deflect from myself? I have done nothing but tell the truth and make repeated offers that you always decline for absurd reasons. You’re the liar, coward, and total fool.

    Any other post you put here will be deleted immediately. You have my email, you miserable little worm, use it. and prove you are who and where you say you are. You’ll have to do better than that Fake NHS form. I could make one of those on the computer in about ten minutes. Judging by the quality of your web cam work, it would take you a week, but you have the time, down in your mum’s basement where you live.

  29. December 6, 2011 at 7:10 pm | #68

    Fear of direct confrontation, a sure sign of a coward. I kept my promise. I am also beating your up in the emails, too. What a shame you’re afraid to meet personally.

  30. December 6, 2011 at 7:12 pm | #69

    I said you’d be deleted. Too bad you’re such a dumb SOB that you can’t understand that.

  31. January 6, 2012 at 7:34 pm | #70

    I received this request from a reader in The Netherlands. I agreed to include it for others.

    Dear Mr. Smith

    To promote skepticism/critical thinking I wrote some questions for the Christian believer. Are you able to put the link to these questions at your blog.

    Thank you very much,

    Piet – Rotterdam – Netherlands.

    The original questions

    http://www.freethinker.nl/forum/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=8382
    The translation
    http://www.freethinker.nl/forum/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=10033

  32. Chris Rowland
    June 3, 2012 at 3:21 pm | #71

    I’d address you by name, but I don’t know it. I’m Chris. Hi. I follow what Christ taught. I do not wish to debate his existence. I refuse to do that, because Christ said not to. Actually, he said don’t try to convert people. I promise I will never ride a bicycle to your house, knock on your door, and preach to you. I condemn, with all of the disdain I can summon, organized religion. I don’t intend to seem mean, but the church goers who attack you are wrong. Not just philosophically, but on every level. They disgrace themselves, and show nothing but disrespect toward you.

    I’m sorry they’ve done this to you.

    You state though, that those that follow Christ don’t follow his live and let live credo. I do. My closest friend is an atheist. I will say that I love him. I would throw myself in front of a speeding train to save his life.

    I can’t say that for most who wear the Christian label. I find that sad. I will not be ashamed of my faith, but I am horrified by what people do and say, then blame Christ, and say he said it’s ok.

    Please don’t ask me to share the “why” of my beliefs. I cannot do that. It would feel too much like proselytizing to me. The idea of me trying to tell someone why I’m right, would infer that they are wrong. That isn’t what I am about, and that isn’t what I believe.

    I have a collection of funny pictures (I am ordinarily a very silly person “Y so serious?” <–haha.) I have one of a caricature of Jesus that says in a caption bubble "Stop using me as an excuse to be a narrow minded bigoted asshole!"

    I agree.

    I condemn pseudo-Christians for causing hurt to you, or attempting to. I condemn them for their blatant hypocrisy. I condemn them for distorting the words of Christ to spew their vile hatred. Not just towards you, but towards minorities and the LGBTQ communities. I fight for these groups. I will not stop until we are equal under the law. I oppose attempted lawmaking that harms these groups. I've been beaten by supposed Christians by my advocacy of homosexuals. I was almost beaten to death once. I had a brick thrown at my head once when I was escorting a woman into an abortion clinic. That one hurt. I can only hope that they were aiming for me and not her.

    I'm sorry you've received death threats. I know what that's like. They are cowards. Nothing more.

    I know why you are bitter towards religion. For the same reasons I am. I will not go to their churches. I refuse to associate with them.

    As an aside, I found a few articles regarding same sex marriage rites in the early church in the course of a discussion regarding same sex marriage. If you would like them, I could look them up again (I forgot to bookmark them, like a dumb ass lol. ) I found it to be interesting reading. It makes pseudo-Christians look pretty foolish. Not that they need the help.

    All of that said, I really enjoy your blog articles. Thank you for taking the time to write them.

    Take care.

    • June 3, 2012 at 6:32 pm | #72

      Thank you for your post. I’m sorry that you are not interested in debating anything. You seem like an intelligent, reasonable person and I think it would have been an interesting discussion.

      I do have theist (not all are christian) friends. For the most part, we have agreed not to discuss religion. An “agree to disagree” arrangement. Naturally, we both feel the other is deluded. I know I have facts on my side, so I am comfortable with that. Our friendship is based upon other mutual interest such as martial arts, flying, videos, etc.

      There is no need for you to feel sorry about any of it, you didn’t do it and you’ve made it plain that you do not support any of it. That’s sufficient and more than most would say, even if they agreed with you. I will say I appreciate your thoughts and that you felt strongly enough about it to openly state how you feel.

      I have seen that cartoon and it makes me laugh, too. It would be even more humorous if it were not so often true.

      I can’t speak for your experiences, but for myself, I’ve noticed that none of the “good christians” that actually attempt physical violence ever try it alone, but always in groups. To me, that validates your statement that they are cowards.

      Many times, I have asked someone to explain exactly how same-sex marriages or even being gay harms them or “traditional marriage” (whatever that is, it’s changed many times throughout history). To date, I have never received any answer that doesn’t translate to “It’s an abomination.”

      Thank you for taking the time to write all that you have. You validate my own statement that not every believed has to be a smug, bigoted jerk.

  33. Chris Rowland
    June 4, 2012 at 5:43 pm | #73

    You’re welcome. And thank you for your compliments. I’ve been told by a lot of people I’m intelligent, I just love to learn new things. To be honest, I now a ton about computers and programming, but not really much else haha. I devoted my life to computers after being rejected by my peers (pseudo Christians) as a kid. I’m a social geek, but don’t put much faith in most people.

    I think debating my faith with you would be interesting, but it would possibly push us away from each other, and that’ not what I want. Most pseudo Christians have such a superiority complex that they can’t understand that. Or they just don’t care. Humans have much to learn from each other, but we don’t learn if we’re at each others throats all of the time. I think that if I talked about my faith, that it could devolve into an argument, or at the least would sow bitterness in one or both of us, and there is no need for that. It won’t serve a useful purpose.

    I wanted to commend you for studying the bible when you were younger, so that you could show the pastor you mentioned how wrong he was. Very very little of the bible is “true”. Merely a collection of stories passed down over generations. Like the Epic of Gilgamesh. Of course you know there is no Hell, except in the imaginations of many who don’t understand that the bible was rewritten to include Dante’s version of Hell. No such place exists, it’s a fable to coerce, and nothing more. That’s just one example. Noah’s flood is another. The war loving Israelites blaming God for their blood lust is another. I don’t believe they were told to do those things, I believe they did those things and needed a scapegoat. Bush most recently did that, after the radical Islamists did it on 9/11. People such as that are people that lack the courage of their convictions, and need someone or something to blame. So they say “It’s ok!! God made us do it!!” That is f’ed up. If you compare pseudo Christians with radical Islamists, you’ll see that they are almost identical, except that the pseudo Christians are (luckily for us) cowards.

    The pseudo Christian smug, bigoted jerk….yes, Christ had some colorful names for them. I just call them Pharisees.

    • June 4, 2012 at 6:03 pm | #74

      Chris, I’m sorry but I have to take offense with your posts. Some of the behavior you discuss and the things you say “aren’t true” are not in line with a Christian worldview. If you follow the teachings of Christ, and Christ says He is God, and the Bible is the Word of God, then what is in the Bible is not up for debate if you want to align yourself with the traditional Christian worldview. It is therefore not that position that is “pseudo-Christian,” but your own.

      To say Jesus never said to share your faith goes directly against Matthew 28:19-21. To say hell does not exist is not to follow the teachings of Christ. I can understand that those kinds of things may be more palatable because it doesn’t require any action, but that’s not following Christ by any stretch of the imagination.

      I know this isn’t what Jim is even talking about in his original post, and so nothing that is said here should faze him in the slightest. But as a Christian I take offense to the notion that what you purport to offer is the “real Christian perspective” when it’s not even close to what the Bible or Christ actually said. I would examine your position long and hard before you make such statements.

      And if this comes across as strong or harsh, it’s meant to. I can’t sit idly by while the words and work of Christ is being damaged.

      • June 4, 2012 at 7:06 pm | #75

        Chris, I’ll take this one for you.

        @sabepashup, You can be offended all you choose. That doesn’t make a single word you posted true.

        FIrst of all, the bible is nothing more than a collection of badly-translated, politically-edited collection of myths and lies, tied together by an occasional historically correct place or incident.

        Next, there is no evidence at all of any jesus character. There is not one contemporary record of his existence. The Romans, who otherwise kept very good records never mentioned a figure who was supposed to be socially, politically, and spiritually so significant as well as publicly performing many miracles; then was executed after a very public trial.

        Not until the Gospel of Mark, written from 40 to over 100 years after the supposed crucifixion, (depending upon which biblical scholar you choose to believe) is there any mention of Jesus. If we look at the fables of Horus, Attis, and Mithra, we see amazing similarities. Born in low circumstances on December 25, 12 followers, executed at an early age, son of a god, the list goes on. It would appear that the early church, in need of a powerful central figure, “borrowed” from earlier myths to create a rallying point for their religion.

        When you quote the babble to prove your points, why you are really doing is admitting you have no facts or logic to support your case.

        There are no teachings of christ to follow as the character never existed. Would you follow the lessons of Paul Bunyan and start chopping down trees?

        Show me some proof of hell or heaven. Show me some verifiable proof of anything you posted.

        No, nothing you say here will faze me in the slightest because you are talking unproven nonsense. Again, prove your points with something besides mindless raving.

        If you, or anyone ever provides independently verifiable proofs of any religion, I’ll change my position immediately. I’ve been making this challenge for over 50 years and no one has even come close, ever.

        There are no words or work of any christ. First, you must prove he actually existed. There isn’t one person who actually lived during the supposed lifetime of jesus that has written a single word about it.

        I have no doubt you will avoid answering any of these points. Instead, You’ll pretend the questions were never asked or engage in denial, distort, and dissemble, as always. That’s fine with me as it will only prove my points.

      • June 4, 2012 at 7:57 pm | #76

        Jim,

        You are certainly welcome to believe that. Whether or not Jesus is real, the teaching of “Christ” is still there in the Bible. Love your neighbor as yourself is a truth, regardless of whether it can be attributed to Jesus, Mithra or anyone else you desire. I’m not here to argue as to the truth of Jesus’ existence.

        What I’m saying is that if Chris claims to follow the teachings of Christ, he is claiming to follow the teachings that are attributed to Christ in the Bible, whether Christ existed or not. I’m saying that to “follow Christ” one must take all the words attributed to Christ in the Bible and follow them. Chris is not doing that. Christ said to “Go out and make disciples,” not “Don’t share your faith.” The Christ in the Bible talks about hell as a real place, not as non-existent. Someone who follows Christ for real affirms all of these teachings, whether Jesus existed or not.

        I know you don’t believe any of this stuff. You’re absolutely entitled to your opinion. But my war on this is not with you. Feel free to ignore everything I’ve said. It’s not for you; it’s for Chris, and as a Christian who does believe in following the words of Christ, I feel called to stand up for what that truly means in the scheme of things.

        I’m not here to prove that Christianity is true. I’m here saying that Christianity follows the words of Christ, and that means everything He said, not just the stuff that’s convenient. This is less about the truth of religion, and more about living out a conviction.

        Thanks for allowing me to post on your blog, even though you don’t agree.

    • June 4, 2012 at 7:09 pm | #77

      Nice reply, thank you for that. I’ll take the smug sabepashub post below. I enjoy replying to things so patently ridiculous. They are often a bit too easy so I do some cut and paste from earlier replies to save time.

  34. June 4, 2012 at 8:12 pm | #78

    @sabepashub Again, “What teaching of what christ?” The bible was written by men. The New Testament was written long after the time Christ was supposed to have lived. How could it then be the word of any christ? It is nothing more than things written by men and copied from other sources as well as each other.

    I said you would avoid replying to my direct questions and you have done exactly that.

    Again, I challenge you to prove even one word of what you have posted is true. All you are doing is preaching and hoping to get someone else to agree with what you say even though you decline to prove a bit of it. Read my post here about “Have Faith”. Then tell me you wouldn’t want proof. Then explain how your insistence upon Chris believing what you say is any different.

    • June 4, 2012 at 8:50 pm | #79

      Jim,

      I think you’re misunderstanding me. Again, I say I’m not trying to argue for the validity of the Bible. I’m saying that if one purports to be a follower of Christ’s teachings, these teachings that can be attributed to Christ in that sense are from the Bible. But we must follow all of Christ’s teachings if we claim to be followers of Christ, not just the ones that are convenient. Chris was making the point that following some of these teachings makes one a “pseudo-Christian,” and it is to that I take offense.

      I’m not here to prove to you the Bible is true. My point isn’t dependent on that fact. My point is about the internal consistency of what it means to be a “follower of Christ.” Whether following Christ has any sort of truth claim is irrelevant to this discussion.

      All I’m “proving” is that a follower of any sort of belief must affirm all teachings of that belief. That includes Christianity. Chris’ position is akin to an atheist saying, “I’m an atheist, but I don’t believe in evolution, and I believe that God created the universe, just not man or the earth.” No atheist would affirm that, because to be an atheist one cannot agree that God exists.

      In the same manner, Chris cannot affirm that he is a “follower of Christ” if he does not affirm all of the teachings attributed to Christ. That’s the only point I’m making.

      Please don’t misunderstand me when I say I’m not attempting to prove the Bible here. So I don’t think you need to challenge me on that right now. Maybe that’s a discussion for a different time. But challenge me on what it means to be a follower of any particular belief, religious or non-religious, and that is pertinent, and we can discuss. Thanks.

      • June 4, 2012 at 9:46 pm | #80

        I do not misunderstand you at all. Of course you’re not arguing for the validity of the bible. That’s an impossibility. It’s been proven wrong so many times because of the errors, contradictions, and inconsistencies it isn’t possible to make a rational defense of it.

        Considering that I have demonstrated there is no evidence that any christ ever existed, how can anyone claim to follow the teachings of a mythical character?

        Why must a follower affirm all of the teachings? Christians regularly cherry pick the bible to support their position and ignore anything that does not.

        Again, you evade direct questions by trying to change the point to something else. We can discuss nothing until you rovide proof that anything you claim is “christ’s teaching” is actually from your christ. To do that, you must first prove he existed. That is the point. Each time you try to squirm away from that point, you demonstrate your lack of faith in your “beliefs”.

        Did you read my essay on “Have Faith?” Or do you prefer not to discuss that, too?

      • June 4, 2012 at 10:36 pm | #81

        When you say “Why must a follower affirm all of the teachings? Christians regularly cherry pick the bible to support their position and ignore anything that does not.” you are hitting on an important truth. It’s called hypocrisy. Yes, someone who doesn’t affirm all the teachings of a specific belief cannot be called a true follower of that belief. That’s why not leaving it to interpretation is so important.

        I did read your article, “Have Faith,” and I agree with it. Faith by itself leaves one wonting. That’s why there is a firm rational belief system that must go with it. And I think it’s really there if you’re willing to look for it and listen to the evidence. That’s why I feel confident in my belief as a Christian.

        But the truth is, we all have faith. You have faith that when you jump in the air that you will land and not simply fly off into outer space where you will meet your demise. If you didn’t have this faith, you would never jump. Or you can say you have faith that the next step you take won’t create a huge sinkhole by which your entire town is swallowed up. If you didn’t have that faith, you wouldn’t step.

        We all have faith in certain things, so faith by itself isn’t a terrible thing. I agree with you that it’s not enough on its own, but it clearly is not a bad thing, or no one would exhibit faith in anything, even something so small as taking a step.

        So do I have faith in Jesus? Yes, and that’s not a bad thing. Is pure blind faith by itself enough? No. I think that’s what you’re getting at, and I agree. What I don’t agree with, however, is that Christians believe on blind faith alone. I think that is the contention you are making. There is evidence for the existence of God, and more evidence that points to Christianity as the most plausible worldview to contain truth.

        However, I’m not interested in discussing such evidence with you if you do not express a true willingness to listen and ask questions without retorts. If you can promise that you will be fair and respectful, I have no problem discussing. But we need to start off level. Can you do that? If so, then let’s do it.

      • June 4, 2012 at 11:03 pm | #82

        Are you saying that you are not a true follower? Or are you saying that you accept all of it, contradictions and all? I just posted a long list of those for John Myst.

        I do not have “faith”. That is accepting something at true when there is no evidence to support it and perhaps much evidence against it. I do not have “faith” that when I jump into the air I will “simply fly off into outer space” because I have solid, easily verifiable evidence that the theory of gravity is not, “just a theory” as theist often mislabel scientific facts. Gravity is proven, predictable, and reproducible. Nothing about any religion meets those tests.

        Nor do I have faith about no sinkhole will appear. The facts are those do not happen with no warning. The warnings are often ignored but the indications are well known and predictable. The sad thing is, the most popular human activity is denial. You deny to yourself that your religion is false, based on zero evidence and you insist upon “having faith” even though there is no reason to do it. By contrast, your examples of my “faith” are based upon solid experience and observable facts. That is not the same as your beliefs at all.

        THere is evidence for the existence of god? No there isn’t. You or a million people saying it doesn’t make it true. Where is that evidence? The same place as the contemporary accounts of jesus? In your imagination?

        No, you are not interested in discussing anything with me because it always comes back to the same thing. I as for independently verifiable evidence, a reasonable request. You decline to even discuss the possibility of any evidence.

        What you mean by a willingness to listen is for me to accept your nonsensical statements without questioning them. That’s the only way religion can survive; by protecting itself from questioning or criticism. Those days are over. So it’s prove it or lose it.

        We cannot start off level because I will never agree to accept BS without supporting proof. You will refuse to look at contrary proof or even to answer direct questions. You do not want to “start out level.” You want an insurmountable advantage. You will not get that here. We both prove our statements, that’s called honesty and fairness. Is that too hard for you?

      • June 5, 2012 at 12:41 pm | #83

        Jim,

        I’m not asking you not to question things. I’m asking for civility. Up to this point I haven’t really seen that from you in any of your posts, to me or to others. A reasonable person would be willing to sit back, take in what is being presented, ask fair questions in a nice way and have a discussion. Do you think that’s something you could do with me? If so, let’s talk. If not, unfortunately I’m not interested in a war of words, because as I’ve been learning my God has called me to be slow to anger and abounding in love.

        So please, let’s have a discussion like men if that’s what you want to do. There is plenty of evidence that I can share with you if you have an attitude of willingness, but it means taking down some of the barriers you’ve put up. Can we do that?

      • June 5, 2012 at 12:52 pm | #84

        What you’re looking for is for me to accept anything you say as being true without any proof. That doesn’t work in honest discussions.

        Ask fair questions? Then asking you to prove anything you claim is true or to prove anything I say is not true is not fair?

        You have plenty of evidence? Then why haven’t you provided it? Do you think my repeated requests were jokes? When you say, “taking down barriers,” what you mean is suspend rational thinking and forget little things like independently verifiable evidence.

        What you choose to call be uncivil is me simply stating observed facts. I have freely admitted in the past and do so now. I have a character flaw in that I have never had much patience with willful stupidity.

        If you were not ignoring direct questions and request for proof, we could have a discussion. But your interest is in preaching, not discussing. Be honest, at least with yourself, and recognize that.

      • June 5, 2012 at 1:28 pm | #85

        Jim,

        I have no interest in preaching, only sharing the truth. I haven’t done so yet because I’m not going to start out on a playing field that’s not level. You may call your incivility pointing out faults, but there is a much better way to do that than the way you’re currently using.

        I believe you deserve to be treated with respect, but I think I deserve the same respect. I invite you to ask questions, but what I mean by “fair” is with respect and humility. Abrasiveness is not conducive to fruitful discussions. All I’m asking is that you give me a fair chance without using terms like “willful stupidity.” Again, can you do that? I’m willing to discuss if you are; I’m just not willing to argue.

      • June 5, 2012 at 1:41 pm | #86

        I have to throw the BS flag. You have done nothing but preach. Calling it “sharing the truth” doesn’t change the facts. If it were true, you would have provided proof.

        If you want respect, it must be earned. You have done nothing to earn it. Because you seem to be demanding it, I suspect you know you don;t deserve it but hope to gain some of the advantages of it anyway.

        You do not want a level playing field. As I pointed out, and you did not bother to deny, is that you want me to accept anything you say as being true even though you have never provided any proof. That’s not a “level playing field.”

        What you mean by “humility” is abject surrender to unproven assertions. What you call “abrasiveness” is my refusal to accept anything you say as being true without evidence and my persistence in requiring evidence. Yes, that must be irritating to you when you know you have none.

        When I use terms like “willful stupidity” it is an observation of facts as shown in your posts and refusal to provide facts.

        Frankly, I am really very tired of you. You ignore direct questions, change the subject and demand that I believe you when you refuse to provide any proof. Until you can do that, please do not clutter my blog with your posts again. You are welcome when you truly accept a “level playing ground” and provide proof as I have and answer simple questions phrased in common English.

        BTW, learning how to use paragraphs would go a little way to earning some respect.

      • June 5, 2012 at 3:27 pm | #87

        Jim,

        You have the right to call it what you will, but I feel like I have been very respectful of you up until now in this discussion. Why are you unwilling to grant me the same courtesy as a fellow human being?

        I await your patience,
        SH

      • June 5, 2012 at 6:34 pm | #88

        What do you mean “respectful?” You have consistently ignored my direct questions and requests for proof of anything you say. I have reminded you that lecturing is not discussing, but you continue to do so anyway. To me, that is not respectful but arrogant and uncaring.

        I have also requested that you do not pollute this blog again until you are willing to answer questions and provide proof of your assertion. Arrogantly, you ignored that, too.

        Until you start doing one or the other, I’ll be forced to delete your posts. I remind you, respect must be earned. You have done nothing to deserve any respect. In view of that, I have been very kind to you.

      • June 13, 2012 at 9:40 pm | #89

        Jim,

        I’m not sure if I called you arrogant and uncaring that you would consider me very kind. I’m simply asking for the common courtesy that ought to be afforded every human, particularly on the humanist worldview, and that is not to use negative attacks on me as a person. You can say my argument has no merit, but to call me intentionally deceitful, arrogant, or something similar means you do not feel the need to be courteous and would rather simply attack me as a person. I’m not really up for that.

        And if you’re unwilling to be courteous, it’s not going to be a fruitful discussion at all, and really it just makes you look bad, unfortunately. So again, I await your patience and hope that you’ll re-consider your approach so we can have a meaningful discussion on the evidence you’re requesting.

        Thanks,
        SH

      • June 14, 2012 at 12:00 am | #90

        I have asked you repeatedly for proof of anything and you have ignored that request every time. You only wish to change the subject and lecture me. You do not want dialog, you want to preach. Until you start behaving like a decent rational person, I will delete any further posts from you.

        You have been arrogant and uncooperative. Go away.

      • June 14, 2012 at 1:34 am | #91

        Jim,

        I think I’ve been very clear that as soon as you afford me the common courtesy that one human being gives another, I’m prepared to give you exactly what you’re asking for. I don’t think I’m the one being uncooperative here.

        Let me just ask one more time: are you willing to treat me with kindness and only debate the issue at hand with courtesy and respect? If so, then we can talk about evidence like you want. Otherwise, it’s simply not worth it for either of us.

        I’ll take your next reply to be either an agreement or a demonstration of your unwillingness to be fair and respectful, and then we’ll go from there. I just want you to show everyone what type of man you really are, and only you get to determine what that is: a man of decency or a man who only wishes to cut people down.

        Respectfully yours,
        SH

  35. June 4, 2012 at 10:20 pm | #92

    Slrman,

    Of course you’re not arguing for the validity of the bible. That’s an impossibility. It’s been proven wrong so many times because of the errors, contradictions, and inconsistencies it isn’t possible to make a rational defense of it.

    Is this your opinion, or do you have concrete examples to back it up? As I understand things, not a single iota of the Holy Text is errant. If you have found an errant iota, please, do tell: else, I will accept your gracious concession in the manner in which you offer it, sir.

    • June 4, 2012 at 10:40 pm | #93

      Yes, I have concrete examples. There are thousands of inconstancies and outright lies in the bible. Here are a few contradictions.

      Your smarmy, smug last sentence illustrates the arrogant attitude that is so common in theists. So I’ll accept as inevitable if you simple slink away and pretend you never started this.

      Bible Self Contradictions
         
      The Bible contradicts itself many times over.
These are an example of just a few.

      Ephesians 2:8-9  For by grace are ye saved through faith . . . not of works.

      James 2:24  Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

      Exodus 20:5  For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation.

      Ezekiel 18:20  The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father…

      James 1:13  Let no man say . . . I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man.

      Genesis 22:1  And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham.

      Romans 15:33  Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.

      Exodus 15:3  The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.

      John 14:27  Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you.

      Matthew 10:34  Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.

      Matthew 5:22  Whosoever shall say Thou fool, shall be in danger of hellfire. (Words of Jesus.)

      Matthew 23:17  Ye fools and blind. (Words of Jesus.)

      John 1:18  No man hath seen God at any time.

      Exodus 33:20  Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.

      John 6:46  Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God [Jesus], he hath seen the Father.

      1 John 4:12  No man hath seen God at any time.

      Genesis 32:30  For I have seen God face to face.

      Exodus 33:11  And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend.

      Isaiah 6:1  In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple.

      Job 42:5  I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee.

      Romans 3:23  For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.

      Romans 3:10  As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one.

      Psalm 14:3  There is none that doeth good, no, not one.

      Job 1:1  There was a man . . . who name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright.

      Genesis 7:1  And the Lord said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation.

      Luke 1:6  And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

      1 Kings 4:26  And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen.

      2 Chronicles 9:25 And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen; whom he bestowed in the chariot cities, and with the king at Jerusalem.

      2 Kings 8:26  Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign.

      2 Chronicles 22:2  Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign.

      2 Kings 2:11  And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.

      John 3:13  And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

      Genesis 6:19  And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark.

      Genesis 7:8-9  Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth, There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah.

      Genesis 7:2  Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.
      See Noah’s Ark

      2 Samuel 6:23  Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death.

      2 Samuel 21:8  But the king took the two sons of Rizpah . . . and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul.

      2 Samuel 24:13  So God came to David, and told him, and said unto him, Shall seven years of famine come unto thee in thy land? or wilt thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue thee? or that there be three days’ pestilence in thy land? now advise, and see what answer I shall return to him that sent me.

      2 Chronicles 21:11-12  So God came to David, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Choose thee Either three years’ famine; or three months to be destroyed before thy foes, while that the sword of thine enemies overtaketh thee; or else three days the sword of the LORD, even the pestilence, in the land, and the angel of the LORD destroying throughout all the coasts of Israel. Now therefore advise thyself what word I shall bring again to him that sent me.

      Jeremiah 32:27  Behold, I am the Lord, the God of all flesh: is there anything too hard for me?

      Matthew 19:26  But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

      Judges 1:19  And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.

      God is supposed to be omnipotent.  Apologists say that Judges 1:19 refers to Judah, not God; it is Judah who could not drive out the chariots.  However, the verse also says that God was with Judah.  So therefore, Judah, with God’s help, should have been able to drive out the chariots.

      Matthew 1:16  And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus.
      Luke 3:23  And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.
      Is Joseph’s father named Jacob or Heli?

      Matthew 20:29-34 And as they departed from Jericho, a great multitude followed him.  And, behold, two blind men sitting by the way side, when they heard that Jesus passed by, cried out, saying, Have mercy on us, O Lord, thou son of David.  And the multitude rebuked them, because they should hold their peace: but they cried the more, saying, Have mercy on us, O Lord, thou son of David.  And Jesus stood still, and called them, and said, What will ye that I shall do unto you? They say unto him, Lord, that our eyes may be opened.  So Jesus had compassion on them, and touched their eyes: and immediately their eyes received sight, and they followed him. 
 


      Mark 10:46-52  And they came to Jericho: and as he went out of Jericho with his disciples and a great number of people, blind Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, sat by the highway side begging. And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out, and say, Jesus, thou son of David, have mercy on me.  And many charged him that he should hold his peace: but he cried the more a great deal, Thou son of David, have mercy on me.  And Jesus stood still, and commanded him to be called. And they call the blind man, saying unto him, Be of good comfort, rise; he calleth thee.  And he, casting away his garment, rose, and came to Jesus. And Jesus answered and said unto him, What wilt thou that I should do unto thee? The blind man said unto him, Lord, that I might receive my sight.  And Jesus said unto him, Go thy way; thy faith hath made thee whole. And immediately he received his sight, and followed Jesus in the way.
      The account of this miracle in Matthew has Jesus healing two blind men, while the account in Mark has Jesus healing only one.

      John 10:30  I and my Father are one.

      John 14:9  Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? 
 

      John 14:28  Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

      Luke 18:19  And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.

      Mark 13:32  But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.
      Jesus claims that he and God are the same being, but makes references that they are two separate entities.

      Mark 15:21  A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross.

      John 19:17  And he bearing his cross went forth into a place called the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Golgotha:
      In other translations of the Bible, John 19:17 says that Jesus had to carry his OWN cross.

      Happy now that you asked? Need some more? I have plenty. “Ask and ye shall receive.”

  36. June 4, 2012 at 10:58 pm | #94

    Hahahahaha. Is that all you’ve got?! Of course that will take time to process, but I definitely need more. I have asked, and I assume I shall receive.

    In the meantime, just to randomly select something:

    2 Samuel 6:23 Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death.

    2 Samuel 21:8 But the king took the two sons of Rizpah . . . and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul.

    Clearly there is more than meets the eye and it must be researched. Notice how closely together these statements are. Are we looking for contractions or first trying to explain apparent contractions, and only in our failure will we declare the puzzle to be a contradiction.

    As it is said: “Seek and ye shall find.” If you research with the assumption of errors, then you will find errors and stop your research. What if you knew the Holy Text was error free? Might your research take a different approach? So, I request any other contradictions you have. The more I have, the more complete my understanding will be when this conversation is finished.

    Now, as for this comment:

    Your smarmy, smug last sentence illustrates the arrogant attitude that is so common in theists.

    I was rather proud of my “smarmy comment,” but I cannot take credit for it. It was spoken to me once in a debate with a Catholic for whom I have the utmost respect. While I did not offer my concession, and continued on, I admired the expression so much that I borrowed it.

    Remember, a googled set of supposed contradictions does not finish a war. My head is wringing a bit from the punch. I will wait for your response. I have asked and I wish to receive.

    • June 4, 2012 at 11:25 pm | #95

      FYI, those were not “Googled contradictions” but researched quotations. If you can prove any of them are not true, have at it.

      You’re trying to change the subject by assuming if you look for errors, you will find them. Again, you’re the one that said, “not a single iota of the Holy Text is errant.” Again, if any of those are not true quotations, prove it. You tried to wiggle out of one selected pair, but not at all successfully.

      If I had started out believing the bible was error free, I would still be forced to admit to the demonstrated contradictions. That’s the unpleasant thing about facts. No matter how much we may dislike them, they are still facts.

      I doubt if any amount of proof will affect you at all. Your mind is made up and you do not care to be confused with the truth.

      It doesn’t matter if your smarmy comment was a quote. How was I supposed to know that? That you used it is an indication of your desire to be offensive and smug.

      I will give you a bit more for your edification. This is something I wrote myself. It shows how “holy books” use deceit to try to appear truthful.

      On the 11th of September, 2001, two commercial aircraft flew into the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York City, killing thousands.

      Some people believe that this was an act of terrorism by an Islamic fundamentalist organization.

      It was really the power of my god (he who must not be named) directing those planes to warn the people of the USA and the world to abandon their wicked ways and praise the only true god.

      The first sentence is unquestionable historic fact. The last sentence is a delusional lie but is impossible to prove to be false. The “truth” of all “holy books” is based upon this same technique.

      Oops, here’s one more. It’s more biblical errors. You did ask!

      The Top 10 Shocking Things Christians Don’t Know about the Bible

      From: http://www.atheistconnect.org/2011/07/31/the-top-10-shocking-things-christians-don%E2%80%99t-know-about-the-bible/

      Over the years, I have come up with a few choice points about the Bible that Christians don’t ever seem to know, especially if they are very devout. The following is my list of the top ten things about the Bible Christians don’t know. The point is to demonstrate exactly how shockingly out of touch modern Christians are from the teachings found in the Bible.
       
      1. Despite Mel Gibson’s movie, there is almost no Crucifixion account.

      One thing that stuns most Christians is that there is actually little to no text describing the crucifixion of Jesus. In general, all the Gospels have to say is that Jesus was convicted and crucified. That’s pretty much it. Of the few details that are in the Gospels, they don’t actually relate to the actual crucifixion. There are a few details regarding some comments made by Jesus (each Gospel has a different account), crowds mocking him, thieves beside him, etc. But most folks are surprised at how little there actually is in the Bible regarding the crucifixion of Jesus. So what did Mel Gibson base his grotesque movie on? You’ll have to ask him.
       
      2. There is no Resurrection of Jesus in the Bible.

      That’s right. There is absolutely no resurrection narrative found anywhere in the four canonical gospels. Jesus’ body is placed in the tomb, and three days later the rock has been rolled back and the tomb is simply empty. Nowhere in the New Testament is there a description of Jesus coming back to life. Sorry to disappoint you, but all of the “He is Risen” stickers are just wrong. “He has Disappeared” would be more accurate.
      Now the non-canonical Gospel of Peter (this gospel was at one time part of the Christian Bible), recovered in Egypt by the French archaeologist Urbain Bouriant in 1886, does describe the resurrection of Jesus. In this account, Jesus is crucified by Herod Antipas rather than Pontius Pilate, and when Jesus does come back to life, he is a massive giant who is accompanied by a walking-talking cross. Yes, that’s right. The cross Jesus was crucified on walks out of the tomb and can talk. Could you imagine all the little kids playing with little talking cross-dolls if the Gospel of Peter had been left in the Bible?
       
      3. Jesus is Against Marriage (with anyone).

      Not only is Jesus against traditional marriage, but the Bible itself doesn’t seem to be too fond of the institution either. In the entire Bible, both Old and New Testaments, only Genesis 2:24 orders a man to leave his father and mother and “cleave unto his wife”. That’s it. In no other place in the entire Bible can we find anything else supportive of marriage.

      Some people point to the Marriage at Cana (John 2) Where Jesus famously turned water into wine. The problem with the Marriage at Cana story is that the best one can say is that Jesus attended the party. He doesn’t endorse anything, he doesn’t officiate anything, and he doesn’t even seem to have attended the ceremony. By all accounts, Jesus just stopped by to drink the wine (of which the host ran out). What is seldom told about this story is how cruelly Jesus speaks to his own mother after she complains about the lack of wine, “Woman, what have I to do with thee?” (John 2:4), which doesn’t say much about honoring ones father and mother.

      Jesus himself never marries, and only comments on marriage when he commands his followers to abandon their wives and children to follow him (see Matthew 19:29; Mark 10:28-30; Luke 9:57-62). Yes, that’s right – Jesus orders his followers to abandon their families. What kind of family values do Christians think they are getting from Jesus anyhow? To emphasize the point, Jesus even takes the time to provide instruction to his followers on how to divorce their wives (see Matthew 19:5; Mark 10:8).

      Paul also never marries and quite specifically orders Christians “seek not a wife” (1 Corinthians 7:27). Additionally, Jesus praises those that have made themselves eunuchs (Matthew 19:10-13), which would seem to be more of an impediment to marriage than an enhancement.

      And let’s not even get into the downright horrific things the Old Testament has to say about beating wives, stoning them, selling your daughters into sexual slavery, rape, etc. Needless to say, the Bible treats women like livestock. And if you think the New Testament is better, you should really read about how Jesus routinely treats his own mother, let alone his instructions on beating (Mathew 15:4-7) and murdering children (Mark 7:9-10), his endorsement of beating slaves (Luke 12:47), and his outright statement that he has come to destroy families (Matthew 10:21 & 10:34).

      This point is actually worth commenting on a second time. In Mathew Chapter 10, which is often referred to as the “Call and Charge to the Apostles”, Jesus gives a speech where he passes down instructions that you will rarely, if ever hear in church. Keep in mind that of the 42 verses in this chapter, 38 of them are considered to be the words of Jesus.
      Let’s start with Mathew 10:21 “And the 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.” This isn’t a prediction, it’s an instruction; nor is it out of context with the rest of the speech as you will see. Here are some of the following passages from the words of Jesus that you should take into consideration before claiming that your family values come from Jesus:

      • Mathew 10:34 “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.”

      • Mathew 10:35 “For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.”

      • Mathew 10:36 “And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.”

      • Mathew 10:37 “He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.”

      So why does both Jesus and Paul attack the institution of marriage? Both Jesus and Paul believed that Judgment Day would come in the first century C.E. Why get married when Judgment day is just around the corner? You should be preparing for your judgment by following Jesus, not starting a family.

      One other point worth mentioning regarding Chapter 10 of Mathew is that Jesus’ speech doesn’t simply stop with the order to Christians to murder their own families. With all the bomb blasts and martyrdom we see daily in the papers, modern Christians have come to believe that martyrdom is a message only found in the Quran. In truth, we actually see the roots of the Crusades in Jesus’ instructions for martyrdom right here in this chapter as well:

      • Mathew 10:38 “And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.”

      • Mathew 10:39 “He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.”

      In these two verses we see Jesus instructing his followers to bring their own crosses with them so that they can be martyred on them in Jesus’ name, and his instructions to take the lives of others to spread the faith in order to save their own souls.

      The western world is probably fortunate that Jesus mixed these instructions up with his orders to murder your own family; so Christians throughout the ages have gladly ignored the unfortunate words of Jesus found in Mathew Chapter 10. Apparently Mohammed didn’t mix these instructions up, and we see what that means for Islamic society.
       
      4. Thou Shall Not Kill, is NOT a Commandment.

      One of the most shocking things to Christians and Jews is that the 10 Commandments they have learned in school are NOT the ones God wrote in stone. Do you remember Judge Roy Moore? He was the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama who had a copy of the 10 Commandments etched on wooden tablets hanging in his court room. From 2001 to 2003 there were a number of legal battles which ultimately lead to his removal from office (Roy Moore recently announced his intention to run for President as a Republican for the 2012 elections). What Roy Moore didn’t know (and all he had to do was read Exodus to see), was that the list of commandments over which he lost his job were never written on stone tablets. That’s right, according to the Bible; the commonly known 10 Commandments were only spoken in speeches, and were never written on stone tablets!

      Let’s take a minute to remember the story of Moses and the 10 Commandments. In the story, Moses goes up the mountain and God gives a really long speech (Exodus 20 to 31). In that speech God talks about the not killing, stealing, etc. (Exodus 20), but spends far more time discussing the offerings he wants, how to build his temple, and how he wants his curtain made (check out Exodus 26 for details on Gods curtains). It’s not until the last sentence of Exodus 31 that we even hear about stone tablets. God gives Moses two tablets written by the finger of God (it is not stated at that time what is written on the tablets), and orders him down off the mountain.

      When Moses comes down from the mountain, carrying the stone tablets (that he never read), he finds the people worshipping a golden calf. Moses destroys the tablets in a fit of rage and is eventually forced to schlep back up the mountain in order to get another set. It is not until this second set of tablets, also written on stone and by the hand of God, that we learn what was written on both the first and second set of stone tablets (see Exodus 34). This second set is the only set that is called the 10 Commandments by the Bible (the Decalogue), and it is the set that is carried in the Arc of the Covenant and housed in the Temple on the Mound and worshipped by Jews for hundreds of years.
      So where does the confusion come in? In Deuteronomy 5, Moses calls his people together to remind them about the long speech God had given them many years earlier. By this time most of the people to whom he was speaking were the children born in the desert and had not heard the original speech, and Moses was quite old. What Moses reminds them of is only the very first part of the long speech, the part in Exodus 20. Moses inaccurately states (in Deuteronomy 5:22) that God gave him two tablets of stone with Exodus 20 written on them, when in fact the stone tablets have Exodus 34 written on them.

      So if you believe what the Bible says, Exodus 34 is the ONLY Ten Commandments and the ONLY thing ever written by the hand of God. Exodus 20 is never put in stone and is only given out as a speech along with a very long list of construction activities. So what are the real 10 Commandments? Below you will find the 10 Commandments that were written on stone by the hand of God, were worshipped by Jews, carried in the Arc, and placed in the Temple (a commonly used breakdown):

      1. Obey the commandments. Yahweh will conquer the Amorites, Canaanites, Hittites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites. Be careful not to make a treaty with those who live in the land where you are going, or they will be a snare among you. Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones, and cut down their Asherah poles.

      2. Do not worship any other god, for Yahweh, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous god. Do not make treaties with those in other lands who worship other gods.

      3. Do not make cast idols.

      4. Celebrate the Feast of Unleavened Bread. For seven days eat bread made without yeast during the first month of the Hebrew Year.

      5. Sacrifice the first-born of every womb, including all the firstborn males of your livestock. You can sacrifice a lamb in place of a firstborn donkey, but if you do sacrifice the donkey break its neck. If your firstborn child is a boy sacrifice something else in its place. None shall appear before Yahweh without a sacrifice.

      6. Do not work on the Sabbath, even during the plowing season and harvest you must rest.

      7. Celebrate the Jewish holiday “The Feast of Weeks” with the first fruits of the wheat harvest and celebrate the Jewish holiday “The Feast of Ingathering” at the turn of the year. Three times a year all your men are to appear before the god of Israel and he will conquer surrounding nations before you enlarging your territory.

      8. Do not mix blood sacrifices to Yahweh with yeast and do not let any sacrifice from the Passover Feast remain until morning.

      9. Bring the first fruits of your land to the house of Yahweh, your god.

      10. Do not cook a baby goat in his mother’s milk.

      So, according to the only stone plates that made it off the mountain, that were ever read by anyone, and the last thing ever hand-written by God, killing, stealing, coveting, and bearing false witness are all OK. But boiling a baby goat in his mother’s milk… that’s a sin!
       
      5. The Bible is full of Raunchy Sex.

      I quote from Professor Ben Edward Akerley; “Anyone who doubts that there is much sex in the Bible need only read Genesis to find in just that opening chapter explicit and graphic examples of several varieties of incest, rape, adultery, indecent exposure, pimping, homosexual assault, bigamy, ritualistic circumcision, attempted seduction of a youth by an older woman, prostitution, baby-making by proxy, use of both an aphrodisiac and a fertility drug, fornication with devils, women punished with sterility, husband-swapping, masturbation/withdrawal, and a fertility contest with four female contestants.”
      The Bible has some simply fantastic and interesting stories regarding sex throughout its pages, and I am really tempted to list some of my favorites. But the statement above really says it all. So, I rest my case.
       
      6. There is no “Rapture” in the Bible.

      The word “rapture” does not appear in the Bible at all. In fact the words first known use is in England in 1825 by Mathew Henry who used it to comment on 1 Thessalonians 4. However, the word “Rapture” didn’t really become popular until William Eugene Blackstone’s book “Jesus is Coming,” which was published in 1878, and which sold more than 1.3 million copies.

      In America, the term became associated with the religious group called the Millerites who had predicted the “Second Advent” of Jesus to occur in Missouri between March 21, 1843 and March 21, 1844. The Millerites had formed in a part of upstate New York in the 1830’s which was called the burned-over district. Coincidently this is the exact same place and time that the Mormon’s formed, and they too believe that Jesus’ return will occur in Missouri. The failure of Jesus to return to earth in 1844 was the beginning of the end for the Millerites. Apparently Joseph Smith was the only one smart enough not to stick a firm date to when Jesus would return to Missouri. But out of the ashes of the Millerites, came our modern-day 7th Day Adventists and the Jehovah’s Witnesses. And yes, all three of the “Great American Religions” stemmed out of the burned-over district of upstate New York in the 1830’s.

      Simply put, the “Rapture” is not biblically supported, and is a very modern Christian precept with a history going back only to the 19th century. So where did Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins get their “Rapture” ideas that spawned 16 best-selling novels? Like most Christian dogma it’s pure imagination, and very little Bible.
       
      7. Satan is not a Bad Guy. He works for God, and Jesus wants his job!

      Satan, Lucifer, the devil, whatever you call him, is an employee of God. In both the Old and New Testaments we are told that Satan has been appointed by God to govern the word! This appointment means that one of Satan’s primary jobs is to be the “Adversary.” The Adversary is a position of high-importance, appointed by God, and whose job it is to test man and make sure that they are truly good.

      Remember the Book of Job? In the Book of Job, Satan is a member of the divine council “The Sons of God”. Satan is charged by God to tempt humans and report back to God on those who succumb to the temptations (Nice huh? It’s like an illegal speed-trap set up by the cops). Job is the most faithful of God’s follower’s, so God authorizes Satan to take away everything Job cares for. His family is murdered, his fortune is taken away, and his health fails; all at God’s command to Satan. That’s what you get for following God as faithfully as you can. In the end, Job passes the tests given to him by Satan/God and gets a new family (apparently the new family was as good as the old), his fortune is returned plus some, and he lives an additional 140 years after his ordeal.

      We see the same thing in the “Temptation of Christ”. This is where Jesus spends 40 days and 40 nights in the desert being tempted by Satan. This is seen by Christians as an important test of character for Jesus, and Satan is just doing his job. Needless to say, in the Bible Satan works for God and is just doing what he is told.

      Another thing that shocks Christians is how very little discussion about Satan there even is in the Bible. And what’s worse is that the story is so contradicting it’s hard to even put a cohesive story of Satan together. Some biblical scholars even claim that there is no single antagonist to God in the Bible. This is why the Bible has so many different names for God’s antagonists in use:

      Lucifer, Satan, Devil, Dragon, Serpent, Beelzebub, Diabolos to name only a few. And to confuse things even more, in some cases the Bible uses the word “Satan” to mean obedient angels, and in other times it is used as a negative (an antagonist to God).
      In Professor Henry Ansgar Kelly’s book “Satan: A Biography,” you can see clearly that early Fathers of the Church invented a new biography for Satan that is not found in the Old or New Testament. The idea that Satan as Lucifer, God’s enemy, a rebel who out of pride caused the fall of Adam and Eve, is simply not Biblical. Jesus actually predicts the conclusion of Satan’s rule at the end of the age (see #9 below) because his tactics are too brutal and deceitful. And who replaces Satan when his rule as Governor of the Earth comes to an end?

      Well, Jesus of course!
       
      8. In the Bible there is no Heaven and Hell as it is commonly understood today.

      For most Christians today, their understanding of Heaven and Hell comes from the 14th century epic poem by Dante Alighieri titled, “Divine Comedy” (written between 1308 and 1321), and not from the pages of the Bible. Most people know this epic poem as “Dante’s Inferno”, which is a reference to one of the three main chapters in this long poem. Dante based his work on the “Summa Theologica” written by Thomas Aquinas between 1265 and 1274 (yes, the same
Thomas Aquinas that help start Europe’s 600+ years of terror called “The Inquisition”). It is hard to underestimate how much Dante’s poem changed the Christian understanding of Heaven and Hell, and it lasts to this very day.

      What Christians fail to realize, is that Dante’s Poem is not the Bible. In both the Old and New Testament, when you die, you are simply buried in the ground, waiting for the day you will be brought back to life (Judgment Day) along with everyone else who ever lived. That’s right; the dead merely go to the grave. Furthermore in the New Testament, the “Kingdom of God” is a place here on this planet, and not some magical place existing in a different realm. Of course, when Judgment day does finally come… look out! But according to both Jews and Christians, Judgment Day hasn’t come yet.

      While the Bible does have a few passages relating to Heaven and Hell, there is a lot less than people imagine, and what is described isn’t what people think. For example those passages that talk about “Heaven” discuss things like the peaceful conditions here on earth after the New Kingdom arrives, or the eternal rule by the Messiah, or bodily perfection (no thirst, hunger, death, sickness, etc.), or ruined cities that will eventually be re-inhabited by people. The shocking thing to Christians is that all of these discussions about “Heaven” are about a place here on this planet (earth)!

      Even in the Book of Revelations, the story is about a dream and all the horrors occurring in that dream happen here on earth. All one has to do, is simply challenge a Christian to find the passages in the Bible that discuss Heaven and Hell, and the point will be made.
       
      9. There is no “End of the World” in the Bible.

      Christian Eschatology is an entire branch of study dedicated to understanding the destiny of man as it is revealed in the Bible, particularly the “end of the world”. What is shocking to Christians is that there is virtually no Biblical foundation for any of it. While there is plenty of discussion throughout the New Testament regarding the return of Jesus and Judgment day, there is nothing about the “end of the world”. The New Testament, talks about the end of the “Age,” not the end of the world.

      What is the “end of the age?” It deals with astrology and represents a period of some 25,920 years. Each age is represented by an astrological sign such as Gemini, Aquarius, etc. During the time of Jesus, it was the age of Aires, which is represented by the Ram and, depending on your interpretation, ended sometime between the years 1 and 100 CE (the supposed time of Jesus). The new age, which we are still in today and will last for another 600 years, is Pisces. Pisces is represented by the astrological symbol of two fish, which is still used by Christians to this very day. Most Christians are shocked to find out that the New Testament is full of astrology, and that the end of the age of Aires, the new age of Pisces, and the second coming of Jesus are all quite related.

      What becomes perfectly clear by reading the pages of the gospels is that the writers of the New Testament quite seriously thought that the New Kingdom of Jesus would come in the 1st Century CE when the Age of Aires ended. They were wrong.

      Now, I have met a few Christians that will admit there is no mention of the end of the world in the Bible, but that is very rare indeed. Most firmly believe that the Bible discusses the end of the world. It doesn’t. Even the Book of Revelations with all its horrors does not have an end of the world scenario.
       
      10. There are no “original texts” of the Bible.

      I quote from Professor Bart D. Ehrman, “Not only do we not have the originals; we don’t have the first copies of the originals. We don’t even have copies of the copies of the originals, or copies of the copies of the copies of the originals. What we have are copies made later – much later. In most instances, they are copies made many centuries later. And these copies all differ from one another at many thousands of places . . . Possibly it is easiest to put it in comparative
terms: there are more differences among our manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament.”

      Scholars have collected every possible copy of the New Testament that they can get their hands on. Currently there are more than 5,700 ancient Greek manuscripts, over 10,000 manuscripts of the Latin Vulgate, plus hundreds (if not thousands) of Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Georgian, and Church Slavonic manuscripts of the New Testament. In addition, there are numerous writings from the early church leaders, all of whom quote the texts of the New Testament
extensively. All of this data has been digitally scanned and is now compiled in computers for easy comparison and computer analysis.

      So with all this evidence, what can be said about the number of variations found between the ancient texts of the New Testament? Scholars differ in their estimates, but the number ranges from 200,000 to well over 400,000 differences! These are not simply minor differences such as changes in word order; these are substantial differences, and some of them demonstrate serious theological differences that are nothing less than 180-degrees from each other. As Professor Ehrman put it, “There are more variations among our manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament.”

      Additionally, it should be plenty apparent by anyone visiting a Barnes & Noble at just how many different version of the Bible there are even today. The Religion section has a bewildering array of Bibles available for purchase. I have an App on my iPhone called the “Holy Bible” which has no less than 25 English Language Versions of the Bible at ready access. And a quick Google search shows that there are several more groups actively working on new versions as we speak.

      If you still doubt me, just read Bart Ehrman’s phenomenal book “Misquoting Jesus” and you will quickly come to understand that the New Testament is the most altered document in human history.
       
       
      So there you have it, the top ten most shocking things about the Bible Christians don’t know. Well, I guess it would be more accurate to say that it is “Shocking to Christians,” as anyone who is not a Christian probably already knows most of the above. Of course, there are many, many other things that could have been added to the list; however I think this is a pretty good go at it.

      It is important that when it comes to the claims of the religious, we all set our mental “Bull-Shit Detectors” (as Sam Harris calls it) to the exact same setting’s we have for every other topic of human interest in our lives. Our internal ‘BS-Meters’ should be set no greater and no less than we set them when dealing with Doctors, Lawyers, Politicians or Used-Car Salesmen. Currently, liberals, conservatives and the religious of all types give matters of faith a special pass, and it’s time that it stopped.

      When we hear Christians speak with all their false-certainties, trying to force political changes on to all of our lives, we need to point out just how far away from their own religion they have gone. We need to force them to question their own false-certainties (delusions). The only way to do that is to challenge them by having a conversation. When a Christian says that God is against gay marriage, we should point out that both Jesus and God seem to be against ANY marriage. When they quote the 10 Commandments, we should inform them that they have the wrong set. While it is certainly commendable that Christians, Jews and Muslims choose to use a better set of commandments than what God wrote down in stone, it is important that we challenge their assertions and make them reconsider their dogma’s.

      Even if you concede and give the religious the commonly understood 10 Commandments, we still need to point out that only 3 of the 10 Commandments have even been codified into modern law (thou shall not murder, steel, or bear false witness), and those 3 rules have been understood by mankind and other ancient civilizations for far longer than Bible has been around. It’s not as if Moses ended the raping-murdering-stealing party for the Jews when he brought the plates down off the mountain. You couldn’t even form a small cave-dwelling village if you didn’t understand that murder, theft, and lying were wrong, let alone fight your enemies and survive in the desert for 70 years.

      Today’s Christians are trying to apply 1st Century dogma to 21st Century problems. The truth is that the writers of the Bible, and especially the writers of the New Testament, had no thought about people living 2,000 years later, anymore than you are thinking about your decedent’s 50-generations from now. Think about it; try sitting down and writing a letter to someone 2,000 years in the future. What bit of wisdom could you possibly offer that they wouldn’t already know? What knowledge of the universe could you possibly have that wouldn’t seem quaint to them? Where would our modern morality of discriminating against people for who they choose to have sex with apply in the 41st century? How would that generation benefit from knowing that condom use is a sin? How will people in 2,000 years see any improvement in their lives from adopting any of the preposterous claims of 21st century Christians?

      We need 21st Century reasoning to solve 21st Century problems. A moment’s thought reveals that our descendants in the 41st century will need the anti-wisdom found in the pages of the Bible even less than we do. As Sam Harris put it, “There is no society in history that has ever suffered because its population became too reasonable — too reluctant to embrace dogma, too demanding of evidence.”

      Only when everyone starts pointing out the fallacy of Christian claims and stops tolerating obvious gibberish, will Christians finally start addressing our modern issues with rational thought. If we truly want change in our society, we all have to stand-up to their bullying and ask the hard questions that expose the hypocrisy inherent in the claims of the religious. Only on the day our society makes it embarrassing for people to pretend to know things they simply don’t know, will reason finally become main stream.
      In closing, I would be remiss if I didn’t finish with the words of Jesus in Luke 19:27 “But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.”

      I hope you have had as much fun reading this as I did in writing it. Enjoy!
      David Stockin
July 23, 2011
       
      Acknowledgments
       I would like to thank Joe Hanson of Truth-Saves.com for fact-checking and reviewing the above. Please visit his excellent and informative site at http://www.truth-saves.com.
      I have made every effort to fact-check the above claims, and to the best of my knowledge it is correct. I will happily take constructive criticism and correct any errors that are found.

      Let me know when you have rational, provable answers. I will not be holding my breath.

  37. June 4, 2012 at 11:58 pm | #96

    The thing that jumped out at me, didn’t the resurrected Christ appear before the apostles in Luke and Acts or did I imagine that?

    • June 5, 2012 at 12:31 pm | #97

      If it “jumped out at you” why don’t you look it up?

      My post above specifically says, ” the non-canonical Gospel of Peter (this gospel was at one time part of the Christian Bible), recovered in Egypt by the French archaeologist Urbain Bouriant in 1886, does describe the resurrection of Jesus. In this account, Jesus is crucified by Herod Antipas rather than Pontius Pilate, and when Jesus does come back to life, he is a massive giant who is accompanied by a walking-talking cross.”

      All you would have to do is quote chapter and verse to disprove it. Why didn’t you do so? No bible handy?

      It’s so predictable. When you have no answer, you attempt to deflect that lack by asking a different question for which you have no answer, either. But I’ll play along this one time. Provide the chapter and verse. That will disprove at least one of the points I quoted above. That will have no effect on the validity of the others, though. It’s like I showed you in my example of 9/11. One part being true or false does not prove anything about the other parts.

  38. June 5, 2012 at 4:39 pm | #98

    LUKE Chapter 24 tell of the Resurrection.

  39. June 5, 2012 at 4:43 pm | #99

    And Act 1. I know it is not a Gospel, but it does claim the same author.

    I am not sure why you want to deny the obvious truth of the Resurrection. What does that gain you, sir?

    • June 5, 2012 at 5:24 pm | #100

      I asked for chapter and verse. What does it gain you to evade doing that?

      As far as denying the “obvious truth” there is nothing obvious or true about it. Are you saying because it appears in the middle of other obvious lies and contradictions, it is true?

      It “claims” the same author? Nor is there any proof of any of the claimed authors. You make huge assumptions and assume everyone else will accept those, too? You either know nothing about the rules of evidence or choose to ignore them in the hopes that no one will notice. Seriously, I expected better from you.

      I have asked you to prove any jesus ever existed. You have not done that. If he never existed, then how can any of the rest of it be true?

      What does it gain me? What does it gain you to waste your life and resources in clinging to obviously untrue myths?

  40. June 14, 2012 at 10:09 am | #101

    You have been very clear that you are not interested in debate. You only intend to lecture and now demand to set terms on my own blog. Go away and never return you arrogant jerk.

  41. December 27, 2012 at 10:43 am | #102

    As the saying goes, ‘the burden of proof is on the believer, not the other way around’

    I agree with you, and I just think most religions are a shitty form of crowd control, except maybe the buddhists, but then they aren’t technically a religion, but a philosophy, I’m told.

    • December 27, 2012 at 11:00 am | #103

      I have read the same about Buddhism. Still, they seem uniformly alike in what they say and do, so that does seem to imply some form of control. OTOH, they do not seem intent upon pressing it upon anyone else or demanding they follow the same paths they do. Nor do they make threats of eternal damnation if you don’t comply.

  42. Amber Sharland
    May 19, 2013 at 5:08 pm | #104

    Appreciating the time and effort you put into your site and detailed information you offer. It’s good to come across a blog every once in a while that isn’t the same out of date rehashed information. Great read! I’ve bookmarked your site and I’m including your RSS feeds to my Google account.Fort Worth Roofing Contractors, 5009 Brentwood Stair Rd., #112-C, Fort Worth, TX 76112 – (214) 306-8080

    • May 19, 2013 at 5:11 pm | #105

      Thank you so much for the kind words. I appreciate them a lot. I am not able to update my site or add new material very often as I am involved in other projexs that take up many hours a day. So any new readers are remarks are encouraging.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: