‘If I Hear One Homophobic Word, I Will Arrest You:’ Street Preacher on Trial for Biblical Preaching

OverdTAUNTON, UK — A street preacher in the UK who is charged with making “homophobic” and “Islamophobic” remarks has just completed a two-day trial and awaits a verdict on whether or not biblical speech about the issues is considered a crime in the country.

Mike Overd, a street preacher for five years, is accused of speaking against homosexuality and Islam last June and July on two separate occasions. He is now facing two charges of using threatening and abusive words and a charge of causing racially or religiously aggravated harassment, alarm or distress under the Public Order Act.

A police officer had appeared on local television last fall to urge residents to record Overd’s speech as it had been reported that he was causing offense.

“I’d advise people that if they’re offended to record any incident on their mobile phone and send it to us,” Sgt. Neil Kimmins told reporters.

“It’s clear that this officer is determined to stop me preaching the gospel, which is a terrible attack on freedom of speech,” Overd said following the incident. “I find it extraordinary that the police are trying to make it illegal to preach the gospel in the streets of our country, simply because the gospel at times confronts the sinner.”

Three witnesses appeared in court this week the to claim that they had heard Overd making statements against homosexuality and/or Islam.

“If I don’t tell people about what is in the gospel and that they are sinning, then that makes me a wicked, selfish man,” Overd told the court on Thursday.

  • Connect with Christian News

He presented two videos as evidence to what occurred as he was preaching from the Bible on the street. In one of the clips, a woman with a little boy approaches Overd and says that she wants to ask him a question. The woman then opines that God loves homosexuals.

“Just because I don’t like their sins does not mean I don’t like them,” Overd says as he continues preaching.

In another video, a police officer approaches the street preacher and tells him that he has received complaints for making “homophobic” statements.

“If I hear one homophobic word out of your mouth here today, I will arrest you,” the officer threatens.

According to the Somerset County Gazette, the officer then advised Overd that he has freedom of speech, but may not offend others.

“I do not set out to hate or make people upset,” Overd told the court. “I have no personal hatred. “I have Muslim friends. We don’t agree on certain things … [but] I have every right to bring facts to the table and compare them. I don’t understand what I’m doing wrong.”

Overd’s case is being heard by a Muslim, Judge Shamim Qureshi, who also serves as the presiding judge at the Sharia law-based Muslim Arbitration Tribunal. During this week’s trial, Qureshi reportedly asked the street preacher questions about the death penalty in the Old Testament, as well as whether or not he would take issue with other religions preaching about their faith in public.

“You are in dire trouble. You need to be born again,” Overd replied, according to The West Country. “You’re deluded. I care for your soul.”

A verdict is expected on March 23.

Overd, who faced a similar charge in 2012 and was found not guilty, is not the first street preacher to face charges for allegedly preaching from the Bible about homosexuality. As previously reported, English evangelist Rob Hughes was jailed in 2013 after a lesbian accused him of speaking against homosexuality, but was later released and charges were dismissed as he denied speaking on the topic that day.

American evangelist Tony Miano was also jailed earlier that same year after speaking against sexual immorality on the streets of London. Miano states that he was preaching from 1 Thessalonians 4:1-12 when a woman became agitated by his message and began to curse. He was placed under arrest and marched down to the police station where the was then questioned about his beliefs.

“It was surreal because I was interrogated about my faith in Jesus Christ,” Miano said. “I was asked if I believe that homosexuality is a sin. I was asked what portion of the Bible I was reading. I was asked if a homosexual was hungry and walked up to me, would I give them something to eat.”

“This idea that open air preachers only preach about homosexuality is fallacious. We talk about all forms of sin,” he further explained. “We usually take people through the Ten Commandments. We explain to people that no liar, no thief, no fornicator, no blasphemer, no homosexual, will enter into the kingdom of God.”

Like Hughes, Miano was released and went back out on the streets to preach the following day.


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • Gary

    If it ever becomes a crime to utter anti-sodomite words in America, without repealing the First Amendment, such a law would be unconstitutional. But given that most federal judges today don’t care what the Constitution says, and issue rulings according to what they want, it could be that such a law would be upheld. But, if that were to happen, then I would consider the US Constitution to be dead, and all laws to be invalid.

    • Better AndBetter

      Calm down, Gary… nobody’s coming after you for being a hateful bigot in public.

      • Vic Christian

        How can you think that a person believing different from you is a “hateful bigot'”: There is no Biblical basis or even historical civil evidence to support what you are saying.

        • Paul Hiett

          Ask Gary what he would like to do to homosexuals.

          Then tell me he’s not a bigot.

          • Bruce Morrow

            So tell me what would Gary do to homosexuals Paul.

          • Paul Hiett

            Ask him yourself. It’s quite enlightening.

            I’ll give you a hint. It involves a rope and a short drop.

          • MelanieWaffle

            He wants to push them on tire swings? That sounds fun! Or maybe it’s something more sinister…… nope definitely tire swings.

          • David Cromie

            What an apt name – ‘waffle’!

        • Better AndBetter

          Sweetie, Gary wants the death penalty for homosexuals cuz that’s what his sky monster demands.

          Stick around a while… you’ll see that disagreement has NOTHING to do with it.

          • MelanieWaffle

            That’s actually really sad… I’m begining to see why atheists hate us

          • KenS

            Gary is wrong, it is not what God demands, hate the sin, love the sinner. God wants us to share the gospel with the sinners, not kill them.

        • David Cromie

          You obviously know little, if anything, about the history of religion.

    • Joe

      I love the 1st Amendment. It allows me to point and laugh and mock and ridicule people that spread hatred this way. Don’t worry. I don’t preach violence like many religious bigots do. Just good old fashioned mockery.

      • chrisleduc1

        Joe says “It allows me to point and laugh and mock and ridicule people that spread hatred this way.” Joe by your own confession you are a hater and a scoffer. A biggot and intolerant. Congrats!

        • Joe

          I prefer the term “Anti-Theist”. I see no problem with me not wanting people to teach children that a fairy tale is true and that if you don’t belief in that fairy tale then you are going to burn for eternity. That is child abuse plain and simple, and I will fight anyone that thinks they have a right to that.

          However, there is no doctrine that tells me that you as a person are evil. Actually I see you more as a victim of indoctrination. You have been taught to ignore ANYTHING that contradict your beliefs. I on the other hand challenge anyone to change my mind. That is because if the evidence no longer supports the views I have of the natural world, then I will change my opinion. That requires evidence however, which religion has none.

          As I have said, it is the belief, the teachings and the organization that is damaging to our society. Its teachings literally promote ignorance by filling questions we do not have answers for with “GOD”. When you think you have the answer, you stop looking. Science is about constantly defining what truth is, and it promotes challenges to existing scientific theory. You can not challenge God. It isn’t allowed without you being called a heretic or worse.

          Ignorance is dangerous to anyone trying to make a rational decision.

          The teachings of the Bible (regardless if you are Jewish, Muslim, or Christian) have teachings that if taken literally can cause violence against others for their beliefs. It doesn’t matter what you as an individual believe, because the Book teaches a specific way. It is the 41,000 different interpretation that makes up Christianity that keeps it from becoming the terrorist religion that it has the potential for. Basically, the people worshiping the religion pick and choose what they want to believe from the Bible. The same way they treat science.

          Truth doesn’t work that way. The evidence points to specific conclusions, and not matter what you believe, the truth is the same.

          • jen fon

            ^In other words, “F**k you, dad!”

          • MelanieWaffle

            Whoa language…. also wat

          • Joe

            Nope. More like, “Your not my father!”.

          • chrisleduc1

            So let me paraphrase what you said.
            ” I see no problem with indoctrinating children with what I believe is true. I see no problem with me wanting people to deceive children by teaching them that truth (the Bible) is actually a fairly tale and that if you dont repent of your rebellion against God who created them, that all with be just fine. I have no problem with lying to children and spreading my self-refuting materialist naturalism and abusing children with these lies. Just as long as only what I believe to be true is taught – because I am extremely intolerant and I cannot stand for anyone else to be entitled to believe or teach something that contradicts what I think. I think everyone who disagrees with me is a biggot, and am therefore one myself. I will fight against anyone who teaches the truth because it is child abuse and nobody has a right to do anything unless it aligns with my own subjective imaginary standards that are grounded in nothing but my imagination.”
            I think think summarizes your position very nicely.

          • Joe

            Incorrect. Atheism isn’t taught in school. Science is (and math, reading, etc.). According to many Christians, religion can co-exist with science. Science is based on facts. You are a lunatic if you believe that we should not be teaching science.

            Schools shouldn’t teach anything about the Bible, or tell children that the Bible is not true. None of that has a place in school.

            I think you do not understand basic English. Once again you distracted from the argument to make an attack “summarizing” things I never said. You have proven yourself ignorant as well as a coward. Hide behind your Bible if you will. It can not protect you from the truth that is coming.

          • chrisleduc1

            Joe you’re quite the name-caller eh? As to your comment ” It can not protect you from the truth that is coming.” Joe what is coming is the judgment of God. Deny it all you want, but your denial of truth and reality does not negate it. Joe know for sure that you will stand before God and you will either be convicted for all of your sins in thought, word and deed, or you will be granted pardon for the sake of Jesus who paid your penalty should you have trusted in him. But its inescapable. Judgment is coming. Whether its after you die or during your life time, you can be sure of it. I hope you’ll repent of your suppressing the truth of God in unrighteousness and trust in Christ. He’s your only hope.

          • Joe

            “Joe. You stand before the gates of heaven. It has been determined that you have a potty mouth. I am afraid you are being sent to he…. a really really bad fiery place (cant use the hell word).”

            ~ God

          • David Cromie

            What is the point of referring to an imagined entity, which you term ‘god’, if no believer in this so-called supernatural entity has ever produced the necessary and sufficient evidence for its existence. Nor has said entity come out of the woodwork and exclaimed ‘Behold, here I am, the fabulous thing the world is looking for’!

            Having mere ‘faith’, or a sincere hope, usually termed ‘belief’, that something is the case does not make it so, however ardently you externalise your mental delusions and project them onto the real world.

          • Joe

            There are a collection of books. These books tell a story of god and myth, of the evils we should watch out for. It speaks of the differences of the old teachings and the new. It speaks of the evils that await us if we are unprepared. The stories included ones of politics and betrayal, the rising of the dead, and preaching of the pagan gods. It speaks of the threats of heathen barbarians and the theats they pose.

            Sounds like the Bible? Nope.

            Winter is coming.

          • KenS

            Dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible, read the book of job.

          • Joe

            Behemoth = Dino? I guess there would be no direct translation because the word dinosaur would not exist. However that is an unproven translation that could have other legitimate conclusions.

          • David Cromie

            “I think think summarizes your position very nicely”. Wrong, and you know it. Is this the method you follow when ‘teaching’ from your bible?

          • chrisleduc1

            Are you the user “Unrepentant Atheist”? If not, by what authority do you tell me that my interpretation of what he is saying is less accurate than yours? This poster is guilty of every claim it makes against Christians. It’s totally self-refuting.

          • David Cromie

            Interpreting fairy tales makes no difference to the real world, only to the idiots who take these tales seriously. Do you see scary hobgoblins and foul fiends everywhere you look, or just a nice god-thingy which promise you a better lifestyle somewhere else, but only when you shrug off this mortal coil? Religious beliefs are nothing if not self-serving, and very detrimental to human sanity, or do you have evidence to the contrary?

      • MelanieWaffle

        I was following your logic dude, then you said this.

        • Joe

          What is the alternative? To ignore it would be to allow the hatred to fester. To stop the speech could end up silencing myself in the future. Is it provocative? Sure. The point is, we do not have a right to not be insulted. Freedom of speech also means we have to have thick skins as well as be able to understand that our speech has consequences.

          I can be a nice guy, but I don’t tolerate ignorance and bigotry well.

          • MelanieWaffle

            Oh, I’m not saying we should ignore it. Hone stay we need more people like you to speak out against it. However, purposely degrading those people put you in a bad light and takes away from your position. Honestly I have trouble myself not making fun of idiots. I know I’m wrong when I do and I’ve found my argument has more merit when I don’t mock people but hit them with logic bombs instead. Granted on this site, you are fighting a losing battle sadly.

      • Gary

        So what.

        • Joe

          Cookie?

    • MelanieWaffle

      So Gary what would you do to homosexuals?

      • David Cromie

        I expect Gary is the type of person who would incite others to do his dirty work for him, and then deny any culpability in the matter. He might also be the sort who claims, at the same time, that he hates the ‘sin’, but ‘loves the sinner’. Anyone who hates homosexual acts should really try to give them up, for the sake of their sanity.

  • The Lone Ranger

    They will try to make as much truth as possible illegal seeing how truth offends ones conscience you see we inherited the knowledge of good and evil from birth because of Adam.

    • Joe

      That is why freedom of speech is so important. We can not even decide in this basic comment box what is “truth” so how are we capable of creating a filter of what we can say or not.

      That is why, despite his foul repulsive message, I will stand up for his right to say it. Because without that right, it is only a matter of time till my words are stifled because someone deemed them “wrong”.

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    Life of homosexuals must be protected, but peaceful homophobia is human rights. People have rights to openly detest sins. That’s liberty. Christians should not be bullied by sinful people in the society. What a warped, immoral society that is.

    • Joe

      He should have a right to speak his mind without legal litigation.

      However, not being bullied? I disagree. His message is putrid and should be mocked openly and publicly to the point where she should hide his face in shame. Freedom speech does not protect you from public opinion. Just the law, at least in the US. I always thought of the UK as a “free” society. At least til Snowden.

      • Angel Jabbins

        Right up there equal to the Klu Klux Klan, huh? Those terrible, mean, evil bible people…the haters! How dare they warn sinners about the coming judgment of God and eternal punishment in hell? How dare they give them good news about a God who loved them so much He sent His Son to die for them if they will only just repent and trust in Him? How dare they!! So mean, so despicable, so cruel of those haters!

        They dare because they love people enough to confront them with truth, that ‘s why.

        Bet the people suffering in hell right now just wish someone had cared enough about them to confront them and give them that message.

        • Joe

          Well. You have a right to speak it despite its lies and evil teachings. Warning? Its a threat. Join us or burn. Not very loving. At least the Muslim fundamentalists don’t hide their intentions with false flowery words.

          • Angel Jabbins

            One difference Joe…we Christians only do the warning part…not the burning. We are not out to kill you. Yet the Christians’ ‘flowery words’ are more offensive to you than the harsh threats of the Muslims who WILL burn you just as soon as they get the chance…or chop off your head….or cut off your fingers…for not believing in their god.

            The Muslims….”Convert to Allah or you DIE!”

            The Christians: “You have sinned against a Holy God. But He loves you so much He wants to pay the penalty your sin deserves Himself through the death of His Son. Repent of your sin, trust alone in Christ so you can escape hell and live forever in heaven with God.

            I think I prefer the second message. 🙂

            Thanks for the discussion….it has been enlightening.

          • Joe

            God forgets his love when he burns people for not worshiping him. Doesn’t sound like someone I’d want in my life.

            Oh, btw. Have you tithed lately? I hear the Church doesn’t have enough gold candles yet.

          • Angel Jabbins

            And what kind of God would He be if He just let sinners go free? That is loving? For God to be a merciful, loving God, He also must be a just God. Actions have consequences even in this world we live in. You commit a crime, you will go before a judge and he is not just going to let you go because you say you are sorry or if you tell him he’s not fair. You will receive whatever the punishment is for your crime. God is the Judge of the whole universe and He sets the rules, not you. Since you are not God, how can you claim to judge him? What moral standard are you using to claim He is unjust? The standard according to Joe? That won’t cut it on the day you die and stand before the Holy God who made you and therefore has the RIGHT to judge you.

            As to tithing, it was an Old Testament law applying to the Jewish nation. There is no command to tithe in the New T, yet Christians, out of gratitude to God, often give much more than 10%. And it doesn’t go to pay for candles. People of faith give to assist people here and all over the world. My own tiny church of 50 people supports 11 churches in the Philippines and as well as assisting needy families at home.

            Statistics:

            Arthur C. Brooks wrote in Policy Review regarding data collected in the Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey (SCCBS):“The differences in charity between secular and religious people are dramatic. Religious people are 25 percentage points more likely than secularists to donate money (91 percent to 66 percent) and 23 points more likely to volunteer time (67 percent to 44 percent). And, consistent with the findings of other writers, these data show that practicing a religion is more important than the actual religion itself in predicting charitable behavior. For example, among those who attend worship services regularly, 92 percent of Protestants give charitably, compared with 91 percent of Catholics, 91 percent of Jews, and 89 percent from other religions.[8]”

            ABC News reported:“…the single biggest predictor of whether someone will be charitable is their religious participation.

            Religious people are more likely to give to charity, and when they give, they give more money: four times as much. And Arthur Brooks told me that giving goes beyond their own religious organization:

            “Actually, the truth is that they’re giving to more than their churches,” he says. “The religious Americans are more likely to give to every kind of cause and charity, including explicitly non-religious charities.”[9]

            In 2009, Pew Research Forum reported that a comprehensive study by Harvard University professor Robert Putnam found that religious people are more charitable than their irreligious counterparts.[11][12] The study revealed that forty percent of worship service attending Americans volunteer regularly to help the poor and elderly as opposed to 15% of Americans who never attend services.[13][14] Moreover, religious individuals are more likely than non-religious individuals to volunteer for school and youth programs (36% vs. 15%), a neighborhood or civic group (26% vs. 13%), and for health care (21% vs. 13%).[15][16]

          • Joe

            Burning for eternity for not believing is not just. I choose my morality over the Bibles everyday of the week and twice on Sunday.

          • Angel Jabbins

            Who is to say burning for eternity is not just? You really have no basis, as a created being, to ‘choose your own morality’. None of us gets to choose our own morality. Even in the secular world, we don’t get to do that.There are consequences if we break the law and rarely are we exempt. There are consequences when you break God’s laws too…much stiffer consequences. If you slap a man on the street, you might get a few days in jail and an anger management referral. But, if you slap the President of the United States, that is an even bigger deal and the punishment will be much greater…probably spend a few years in jail. Offending a holy God, the Creator and Maker of all things is really, really huge. That is why the punishment is so much worse. It is WHO the offense is done against that matters.

          • Joe

            Well that explains Hilter then.

            I disagree with your entire premise.

            Just because you cannot make decisions for yourself does it mean you get to impose your rules on everyone else. I am perfectly capable of thinking about, analyzing, comparing, weighing, and defining my own morality. I am sorry you are not.

          • Angel Jabbins

            I don’t know how what I described explains Hitler, but what you just said certainly does explain him. He felt he was ‘perfectly capable of thinking about, analyzing, comparing, weighing and defining his own morality’…and look what happened to millions of people because of his evil beliefs and actions. I am glad there is a just God who will punish him.

            You have no basis upon which to make moral decisions. Morality is outside of us…transcendent and originates in God. He is the Law Giver and God has placed within each of us a conscience so we inherently know what is right and wrong, good and evil, even if we fight again it. We know it instinctively. But man thinks He doesn’t need God and wants to become a law unto himself. It doesn’t work, never has, and we see so much evidence of that in our sick, chaotic world today.

            The 10 commandments are God laws for mankind. The first four deal with our relationship to God as our Maker and the last 6 with our relationships with others. All the ills of our society originate from our disobedience of God’s Law.

            No, I do not decide my own morality. God has already given us the best standard to follow in the 10 commandments (which no mere man can improve upon)…. and we will answer to Him one day because we all know what He expects even if we deny Him.

          • David Cromie

            Perhaps you should start observing all the other OT ‘commandments’, then, so as to escape the wrath of your ever loving ‘god’.

        • MelanieWaffle

          Believe me as a member of the LGBT community, this message makes me sick and not even want to be a part of Christianity. Your message of love is pushing people away from the church. I know you will argue with me on this but you aren’t showing love. Your pushiness is causing dangerous him phobia as well as terrible pain in people’s life. You don’t have to agree with us, but would it kill you to leave us alone?

          • Angel Jabbins

            If I believe the bible is true when it says that sinners are on their way to hell come judgement day…then I would be totally unloving not to warn them. Real love cares enough to confront people with the truth, even when it seems offensive to them.

  • Better AndBetter

    The UK is a wonderful example of how lucky the US is for the first amendment.

    • ter ber

      I am so sorry to be the bearer of bad news. As far as I know. The hate crime legislation in the USA did past a couple of years ago. They just have not started to enforce it completely. It will overrule our Bill of Rights, by the fact that judges and police already ignore it. It will not be long…

      • http://www.OpenAirSeattle.blogspot.com/ OpenAirSeattle

        Sorry, Truth will be the bearer of BAD NEWS for all that hate it.

        • Joe

          Hmm…. random guest speaker… lets see. How does it go? WWJD?

          Oh yeah. He would realize that since we do not know who Guest is…. HE MUST BE GOD! Let us all bow down to the almighty God, who shows himself in mysterious (and anonymous) ways.

      • http://www.OpenAirSeattle.blogspot.com/ OpenAirSeattle

        Fail… your wrong TRUTH will never fail.

      • Better AndBetter

        Hate crime legislation is not the same thing as hate speech laws.

        Please research.

        As for your fear, it’s funny.

        • ter ber

          It is just a matter of time. But don’t worry you will have front row seats. As a matter of fact google just announced they are going to determine what is truth. And our govt. Will tell us what is hate. Please take your head out of the sandbox, unless you are happy about losing the Bill of Rights. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTn6skhq-08

      • http://www.FascistDykeMotors.com/ Katy

        Better and Better is correct, “hate crimes” laws and late speech laws are two very, very different things. I would be happy to discuss the difference if needed.

    • David Cromie

      Would you be referring to the Bill of Rights, which Geo. Dubya Bush dismissed as a mere ‘scrap of paper’?

  • OldArkie

    Speaking Bible truths offends the lost, just as Jesus offended many people and they murdered Him. So if we speak the truth, the same may happen to us. And if it does it should make us happy to suffer for the sake of our ‘Wonderful Savior.’

    1Pe 3:14 But and if ye suffer for righteousness’ sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled;

    1Pe 4:16 Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.

    Yet many of us refuse to suffer for the sake of our Savior, we do everything possible to keep from suffering for His sake.

    No, we are after the pleasure.

    Heb 11:25 Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;

    • Paul Hiett

      So why aren’t you over in Syria/Iraq preaching the good news?

      • Brad Hayman

        Its because the good news wasnt preached enough in the west that there even is a Syria or Iraq (knowing as we do that these are proxy wars started and funded by the US)

      • Rebecca Bonfield

        There are people who need to hear the gospel everywhere in the world, not just in Iraq and Syria. The church in Syria is actually thriving and the underground church in Iraq despite the persecution. Plus not everyone is called to go to these places. When you have a relationship with Christ you hear his voice and you know where you have to go. He directs your paths.

      • bowie1

        No doubt they already, most likely, already have locals preaching the gospel.

        • cheesemaster

          Surely you don’t believe that.

          • Angel Jabbins

            Yes, I do. Christians in those countries are being driven from their homes… some have been crucified, some have had their heads chopped off, some sold into slavery and others sit in squalid prisons because they dared to express their Christian beliefs and to share their faith with Muslims.

          • cheesemaster

            I wasn’t talking to you. His comment was obviously sarchastic. Why defend him?

          • Peter Leh

            there are but not as in a street preacher model

          • David Cromie

            This just goes to show what a real danger religion is to the peoples of this world. A very potent example of ‘My ‘god’ is greater than your ‘god’, and my ‘truth’ is more truthful than your ‘truth’. Sounds like two idiots fighting over their relative penis sizes, if it were not so deadly serious.

      • jmichael39

        There are plenty of people preaching the gospel in every area of the earth. Asking someone why THEY aren’t doing is to question the calling of the Holy Spirit as well. If God wants me going to some other place to preach I will go, but if I go because someone questions my faith for not going, that’s plain foolishness.

        Those who ARE called to go are having great success in Muslim nations.

        http://www.worldmag.com/2014/07/the_rising_tide_of_muslim_converts_to_Christianity

        http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/sina31103.htm

        http://www.crosswalk.com/blogs/christian-trends/millions-of-muslims-converting-to-christ.html

        http://www.christianaid.org/News/2014/mir20141204.aspx

        https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2014/11/04/350-million-muslims-are-secretly-living-lives-as-christian-converts/

    • Adam Abramowitz

      So, let me see if I understand you correctly. Genocide, incest, murder, rape, slavery, and child abuse is just fine, as Jesus condoned it, but loving certain people is WRONG. If your god is so fucking awesome, why all the other religions? If you thank your god for your meals, then you accept that your god allows millions of others to starve to death. Well, any tragedy that strikes your family and friends, be joyous, it’s your god showing his perverse love for you…

      • OldArkie

        Why put words in my mouth, I never said that, those things are illegal.

        Yet, its your choice, to believe or not believe, no one is forcing you, God forces no one, its your choice to live in sin, or live for God.

        Ro 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

        Yet I see that you hate my opinion, and probably have hate for me.

        • Joe

          I don’t think you had to say it. The moment you claimed the Bible as a moral resource you made the assertion that it was acceptable to you. The Bible preaches all those things. So you didn’t have to “say” it directly.

          • OldArkie

            Ro 1:16 ¶ For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

            And

            Ro 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

          • Joe

            What does that have to do with the morality of the Bible? Do you have no excuse?

          • chrisleduc1

            Joe, what is your obective moral standard by which you judge the Bible?

          • Joe

            I have an internal sense of morality on top of what I learned from my parents, my community and my own interaction with humanity in general.

            Not one person on this Christian site has attempted to defend the Bibles teachings. Slavery is wrong. I don’t care what era it is. Raping children (or anyone else for that matter) is wrong. I don’t care what era it is. Sacrificing your child FOR ANY REASON is wrong. I don’t care that it was God that supposedly did it. Christians actually worship this act so they can ALLOW themselves to dump the guilt and actually BELIEVE they should go to the special theme park in the sky.

            You worship this, and have the gall to question my morality? What is it that I have said, done, or mentioned that is even close to what in canon in your Bible?

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            Joe,
            Your knowledge and understanding of the Sacred Scriptures is severely lacking, I’m afraid.
            The Bible does not teach that ALL slavery is justified (slavery in biblical times was not the same as chattel slavery, as seen in Roots). Neither does the Bible teach that child sacrifice, or rape (where’d you get that one?) are okay.

            The Mosaic Covenant changed, radically, the rights of a slave and the limits of the master, compared to the rest of the world at that time. Later, Saint Paul changes the slave-master relationship even more radically by telling Philemon that his slave, Onesimus, is “a beloved brother” in Christ. Again, slavery at this time was more akin to indentured servitude, not chattel slavery.

            God’s command for Abraham to sacrifice his only, begotten son, Isaac, was a test, and unique to them, only. It was a foreshadowing of God sending His only, begotten Son to be THE sacrifice for ALL so that every nation, Jew & Gentile, would be saved. What God didn’t require from Abraham, He did Himself.
            Plus, the Scriptures condemn child sacrifice over and over again. Manasseh was the most wicked king of Judah precisely because he sacrificed babies to the pagan deity Moloch. (Reminiscent of abortion, today.)

            If you’re going to hate the Bible, and those who profess belief in it, shouldn’t you study it first? So, that you know what you’re talking about?

          • Joe

            Biblical slavery was complete and utter ownership. They were owned as possessions. The only people protected from slavery were the Jews themselves according to the Bible.

            “Now these are the rules that you shall set before them. When you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing. If he comes in single, he shall go out single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master’s, and he shall go out alone. But if the slave plainly says, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,’ then his master shall bring him to God, and he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost. And his master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall be his slave forever.

            “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. If she does not please her master, who has designated her[b] for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has broken faith with her. If he designates her for his son, he shall deal with her as with a daughter. If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights. And if he does not do these three things for her, she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money.

            “Whoever strikes a man so that he dies shall be put to death. But if he did not lie in wait for him, but God let him fall into his hand, then I will appoint for you a place to which he may flee. But if a man willfully attacks another to kill him by cunning, you shall take him from my altar, that he may die.

            “Whoever strikes his father or his mother shall be put to death.

            “Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death.

            “Whoever curses[c] his father or his mother shall be put to death.

            “When men quarrel and one strikes the other with a stone or with his fist and the man does not die but takes to his bed, then if the man rises again and walks outdoors with his staff, he who struck him shall be clear; only he shall pay for the loss of his time, and shall have him thoroughly healed.

            “When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. 21 But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money.

            Exodus 21:1-20

            That is pretty damn specific. You can beat your slave and if he dies then you are in trouble. That is unless he lives a couple of days, then its not your fault. What??????

            As for child sacrifice, there are two occasions. The story of Abraham had God testing Abraham by offering up his child. Abraham agreed. Regardless of the fact that God let him off the hook, he still agreed to this. The act of agreeing to it to show faith made it irrelevant that God let him off the hook.

            The second is Gods “Child”. Jesus himself. The ultimate sacrifice that Christians deem as a holy act. I can not trust any being that is willing to give up their child as a sacrifice for ANY reason. The reason provided, that is to cleanse man kinds sins, is even more convoluted.

            The Mosaic Covenant as you references is just two chapters before the quote I printed above. I do not see how that is supposed to be a good thing.

            The “indentured servitude” argument is ridiculous, because indentured servitude wasn’t in place until around the 1600’s. If you have a Biblical quote in the New Testament that specifically lays out slavery is somehow temporary and contractual with the “slave”, then by all means do share.

            Moloch is a pagan deity so you wont get me defending them either.

            PS. I was raised Catholic, and I actually read the Bible. In many cases, it was asking questions of it that gets priests ticked off at me. Guess I was never good at worshiping myth.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            “Biblical slavery was complete and utter ownership.”
            This is not true, Joe. Did you read what you pasted? People could sell themselves into slavery. If he was Hebrew, he would be released in the seventh year. The rights that slaves gained in Ex.21 was radical for its time. They were to be treated as people, not possessions. You need to study this more, I’m afraid.

            “Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death.”
            That is chattel slavery. The Bible condemns it.

            “You can beat your slave and if he dies then you are in trouble.”
            Flogging was allowed in the U.S. Army and Navy until the the time of the Civil War. Caning is still practiced in many nations around the world. Its basically spanking for adults. The Bible is teaching not a master not to beat his slave out of anger, lest he die. Again, radical at the time. You can’t judge people of the past as if they lived in our times. Try putting yourself in their shoes, okay?

            “The act of agreeing to it to show faith made it irrelevant that God let him off the hook.”
            No, it’s not. Abraham had so much faith in God that he thought He would bring Isaac back to life (cf. Hebrews 11:17-19).

            “I can not trust any being that is willing to give up their child as a sacrifice for ANY reason.”
            Well, Christ was also God, so, He willingly gave Himself up to be sacrificed. This was not God’s original plan, which changed after the Fall.

            “The Mosaic Covenant as you references [sic] is just two chapters before the quote I printed above.”
            No, Ex.21 is also part of the Mosaic, or Sinaitic Covenant. This covenant was amended several times, because of Israel’s sin, in Lev., Num., and Deut.

            “The ‘indentured servitude’ argument is ridiculous, because indentured servitude wasn’t in place until around the 1600’s.”
            Which is why I wrote ” was more akin to.”

            “If you have a Biblical quote in the New Testament that specifically lays out slavery is somehow temporary and contractual with the ‘slave’, then by all means do share.”
            I don’t, but, that’s irrelevant. Christ and the Apostles dealt with society as they found it. Christ didn’t come to lead a revolution. He changed the Roman world from within. The point that you’re missing is “For as many of you as have been baptized in Christ, have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is nether male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal.3:27f).

            If you were raised Catholic, as I was, in the 1970s & ’80s, you weren’t taught the truths of the Sacred Scriptures as the Church has taught them for the past 2,000 years. We were ripped-off, so to speak. Reading the Bible is not the same as understanding it. Now, you can find Catholic teaching & Scripture studies easily on the web. So, you have no excuse, Joe. Happy Easter!

          • MelanieWaffle

            No matter how you put it, they were still allowed to buy people and then after 7 years let the people go with no money and lose their family. Firther, it was legal to sell their daughters into slavery…. I don’t like looking at the old testament as a way to live by. I think it provides a r8ch and fascinating history as well as sets up the new testament, but the old is not a good place to get your morals from

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            The Old Covenant came from God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, MelanieWaffle. To separate the Old from the New is to flirt with the heresy of Marcionism, which is not good.
            You have to study the Old Testament with an understanding of how the ancients lived. The whole Old Testament points to the Incarnation of Christ, so, it is very important to know and understand. God Bless!

          • MelanieWaffle

            I agree it is important to understand. I believe the New Testament is the fulfillment t if the old testament. Simply put I don’t think the old testament is a great way to guide your moral compas or laws

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            I don’t understand why not, MelanieWaffle. The moral laws, i.e., God’s natural law, is written in our hearts. Christ did change the moral law of the Old in the New. The Decalogue is still binding on Christians.

          • MelanieWaffle

            So all the slavery passages as well as killing people for having homosexual intercourse or killing people for going against their mother and father? I think there is some great moral teaching in the old testament t. I also think a lot of it is no longer applicable. The two biggest things for me are love God and love your neighbor. By following those I follow the ten commandments and more! I still screw up alot, I’m not going to say I don’t and for all I know my I terpretation can be wrong. If that is so I will be judged by God not men.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            So all the slavery passages as well as killing people for having homosexual intercourse or killing people for going against their mother and father?
            I don’t understand this question, MelanieWaffle.
            Are you asking about the punishment of committing those acts? Or, if they are immoral?
            As I explained to Joe, the slavery passages dealt with the Israelites, and the other nations, as they were at the time. God was not saying that slavery was good, nor, did He command slavery. He was telling the Hebrews to treat their slaves as human beings, not animals or property.
            The prohibitions against homosexual acts and striking/cursing one’s parents were for the peace of society. Since, they were a nomadic people, the punishment had to be death, because they didn’t have prisons. The immorality of these acts were affirmed by Christ and the Apostles, so, they are still in effect.

          • MelanieWaffle

            Where were they affirmed by Christ and the apostles?

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            He answered, “Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, 5* and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one’? Matthew 19:4-5

            “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church; 33 however, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband. Ephesians 5:31-33

            Marriage between one man and one woman is God’s plan, because it symbolizes Christ and His body, the Church.

            9 And he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God, in order to keep your tradition! 10* For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him surely die’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man tells his father or his mother, What you would have gained from me is Corban’ (that is, given to God) *– 12 then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother, 13 thus making void the word of God through your tradition which you hand on. And many such things you do.” Mark 7:9-13

            Christ affirms the command to “Honor Thy Father and Mother,” because the Pharisees have, in their man-made tradition (not Moses’ Law), given the Jews a loophole not to take care of their parents.

            9* Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, * 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Cor.6:9

            8 Now we know that the law is good, if any one uses it lawfully, 9 understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 immoral persons, sodomites, kidnapers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, 11 in accordance with the glorious gospel of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted. 1 Tim.1:8-11

            Saint Paul, an Apostle chosen by Christ after His death and Resurrection, affirms that homosexual acts are contrary to God’s Law and the Gospel of Christ.
            I hope that helps. God Bless!

          • MelanieWaffle

            All right, sorry about the wait, I needed to be by a computer to best answer this. To make things easier, I’m going to post all the url’s where I’m getting this info from up front so it is easy, then I will list them as I find them relevant in the discussion. I apologize now for the excessive reading. Before clicking on the links, please read what I have said first as I explain certain biases found in some of these articles, mainly the one called the god article. While it is the easiest one to read, there is a bias to it so I would recommend the first link, although personally I really like the god article logic.

            http://www.christianbiblereference.org/faq_homosexuality.htm

            http://www.thegodarticle.com/faith/clobbering-biblical-gay-bashing

            http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/biblical_evidence/born_gay.html

            For the first part, “He answered, “Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, 5* and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one’? Matthew 19:4-5” I give you the verse

            Galatians 3:28New International Version (NIV)

            28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus

            (I think I may have clipped off part of the verse) For the biblical view of homosexuals and transgenders, here is a link to an article which will make it easier to show my view.

            http://www.thegodarticle.com/faith/clobbering-biblical-gay-bashing

            Please note, the guy who wrote this does seem a little jaded, but the logic still stands in my opinion. This will help to argue against . There is exclusive mention to 1 Corinthians 6:9 as well as many other popular “clobber” verses for lack of better words. I also want you to know, I totally think honoring your parents is an awesome thing. I’m saying killing the person for dishonoring them is wrong. As for the first two verses you quoted, the society at the time did not know what homosexual marriage would have been, thus they would have gone to the default of man and woman. However as the verse in Galatians I posted above, this leave a lot less merit.

            Personally I think this website has a lot of good explanation as well. http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/biblical_evidence/born_gay.html

            Sorry for all the websites, but these people argue my point much better than I ever could. Finally this article is much like the first but, it is a much longer read and a bit more complex, although it is not written from such a jaded perspective.

            http://www.christianbiblereference.org/faq_homosexuality.htm

            So sorry for the long post, but tell me what you think of these arguments.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            I’m sorry, MelanieWaffle, but I only had time to get through your first link. Although that site is fair in many ways, I think the author is splitting hairs, which would take an electron microscope to distinguish, by separating homosexual acts with idol worship, as if these acts were not forbidden absent the presence of pagan idolatry. If anything, homosexual acts are conflated with pagan idol worship, e.g., the Golden Calf and the orgy which Moses found when he came down the mountain.
            Scholars are agreed that homosexual acts, along with all sexual immorality (i.e., all sexual conduct outside of marriage) are contrary to God’s Law and plan for His children.
            I was glad to see that the website author quoted from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, accurately. Since, I’m Catholic, if you want to know my beliefs vis-a-vis homosexuals, just read that excerpt. I agree with every word.
            May you, and your family, have a blessed Easter.
            p.s. Did you get a chance to read my refutation on Galileo?

          • MelanieWaffle

            Sorry, I’m just getting back to you, it’s been hectic. I did research on Galileo and I admit I was wrong. I learned a lot about this situation actually. As for your comment about atheists targeting Christians, without further research I can’t argue against it so I will take your word for it. However, I would continue to point out just because there was a horrible person in power doesn’t mean all atheists are like that. Yes it may have been all leaders, however this doesn’t mean all atheists are this way. As for the other links, the first one isn’t all that great in my opinion. I’d implore you to look over the other two. You say scholars agree homosexual acts are wrong, yet other scholars would disagree with those scholars. as for the other link you disregarded all together, I admit I didn’t read through it all that much and as I have never been a Catholic I was not aware it was wrong. However the point still stands, atrocities were made in the name of God and some were influenced by high up officials in the church. Also, I promise the other articles are shorter. Either way I’ve learned a lot more about the church and thank you for showing me I was wrong about Galileo. I hope you have a great Easter as well!

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            MelanieWaffle,
            Thank you, for taking the time to get back to me. It’s very much appreciated. I’m glad that I was able assist in informing you on Galileo. I thank you, too, because our discussion informed me of this new “homosexual acts and idolatry” argument. The last attempt to dismiss God’s prohibitions against homosexuality, i.e., that Sodom & Gomorrah was only about being “neighborly and hospitable,” I’d heard about years ago. I was unaware of this new meme.
            Now, when you have example, after example, of atheists taking control of the government and then murdering and imprisoning Catholics/Christians, a pattern starts to emerge. A pattern in which conclusions can be formed, when the only common denominator is that they were all atheists.
            The opposite is also true. When only a small number of Christian tyrants can be produced from the thousands of Christian princes and kings who have ruled throughout history, a conclusion can be made. Christianity formed Western Civilization as we know it.
            I will look at the other two links as soon as I get a chance. God Bless!

          • David Cromie

            Why did Jehovah not condemn slavery outrightly, if it was considered wrong?

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            Because, not all slavery is immoral. Indentured servitude is not immoral. It still isn’t. The root of the employer/employee relationship is the master/slave-servant relationship, according to Black’s Law Dictionary.
            Under the Mosaic Law, Israelites were required to free their slaves every 7 years (cf. Exodus 21:2). Hope that helps, Mr. Cromie. God Bless!

          • David Cromie

            Thanks, Nick, but renaming slavery with a variety of evasive, official sounding, names does not mean that slavery is not still slavery. It seems that any god thingy with the welfare of his ‘creation’ in mind, and remembering that it claims we are made in its image, would even consider slavery as just.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            I didn’t rename anything, Mr. Cromie. I provided examples to prove my point. Where did I claim that it wasn’t slavery? Try reading my comment again.
            The fact that you would invoke the “image” part of God creating us in His image and likeness as some kind of rebuttal to the Sacred Scriptures, only shows that you are very ignorant of said Scriptures.
            Besides, God never said that slavery was just. He just accepts that, in those ancient times, man’s fallen nature would ensure that he will always try to enslave his brother.
            Christianity finally abolished slavery from the Christian world. It still exists in non-Christian societies, of course. And, atheists, like Stalin & Castro, reintroduced slavery to their former Christian nations.

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            The Law of Moses, although no longer binding on Christians, embodies divine moral principals and as such, has framed the legal systems of the Christian West for over 1500 years. Execution for sodomy was practiced in Western countries, specifically England, as recently as the 19th century. We’d have a lot fewer deaths from AIDS if we would simply criminalize the disorder of homosexual acts, like we did in this country until fairly recently.

          • Joe

            You put up your interpretation of this which is fine. The problem is not which is the right way to interpret it but how it can be interpreted. The Muslims have shown how religious texts can be used to promote violence when interpreted in a certain way. There are passages in the Bible that someone can choose to interpret in a way that promotes violence and other immoral acts. The behavior of the Westboro Church is one modern day example of interpretation gone wrong.

            With all of the different denominations, interpretation seems to be one of the most controversial aspects of Christianity. Even within yourselves no one can seem to agree. Followers claim that the differences in society makes certain morality ok for the time, but it isn’t the religion that changes, it’s the followers that choose to interpret differently.

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            While I appreciate your attempt to correct Joe’s error, your characterization of biblical slavery is simply not correct.

            Slavery in the Classical Greek/Roman world was NOT akin to indentured servanthood. People were enslaved for mult-generations, simply because they were born a slave and deemed to be a of a slave class. Slaves were considered by the Romans to be simply “tools with voices”, e.g., things, which could be disposed of at the master’s whim. Thos. Jefferson recounts the story of a Roman nobleman whose slave dropped a valuable dish or goblet while the Emperor was visiting and ordered the slave cut into pieces to feed to his fish. Only the Emperor’s order stopped him.

            This is in distinct contrast to American slavery ( which was NOT chattel slavery, but rather domestic slavery) where slaves had certain rights, protected by law. A master could not kill a slave; he could not even harm a slave except to administer discipline and could be held liable for injury. Slaves in America could take legal oaths and give testimony. In short, American/English slavery reflected the Christian idea that slaves were human beings, moral free agents, with consciences and had to be treated as such. It was a radical improvement over slavery as practiced in the Classical world when Paul wrote to Philemon.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            Thank you, for your corrections, Rebel. I certainly do not claim to be an expert on all of the different forms of slavery, throughout history.
            But, I do know a little. That is why I purposefully referenced “biblical slavery,” because it’s not limited to the Greco-Roman world. Abraham and Moses predate that period. The Torah was radical compared to Israel’s neighbors (e.g., Egypt, Hittites, Canaanites, Philistines, etc.), vis-a-vis treatment of slaves. This was my point. God Bless!

          • chrisleduc1

            So you have no external objective moral standard, only an internal subjective that is essentially no more and no less than an eclectic mix of what you like and what you don’.t from what youve been passed down and what you’ve experienced. But then you think you have the right and authority to judge other people based on your subjective standard, as if you standard is objective and you are God. That would be funny if it wasn’t so sad and delusional.

          • Joe

            And you don’t? Oh that’s right… you believe in the man in the sky that told you what to believe.

            Well guess what, your morality is based on a book written by men. Those men had opinions too and you are reading about them. Your book is THEIR vision of God. So you are getting someones internal subjective moral standard and using that standard in place of your own.

            That is what scares me. You are so impressionable based on what your religion tells you that if you thought God told you to charge into Iraq and start killing everyone that you thought was Muslim, you would do it happily. I mean, you aren’t allowed to judge for yourself, right? That would be internal and subjective. No, it is better to do what you are told and not ask questions about what is right and wrong, because doing so would be questioning your faith, and you don’t want to do that.

            I will take my “internal and subjective” moral standards over your filthy book any day of the week without losing a wink of sleep.

          • chrisleduc1

            “That is what scares me. You are so impressionable based on what your religion tells you…..” Thats a funny comment because in your own mind and in your own little world you think you are God and get to set the standard by which to judge everyone. But there is only one God and one Judge and know for sure that you will stand in front of that God and Judge and you will confess the He, Jesus, is Lord. Whether you do it after you have been convicted of all your rebellion and sin against Him and your fellow man, or whether you repent first and trust in Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, know for sure, you will stand in front of Christ and confess He is Lord.

            “No, it is better to do what you are told and not ask questions about what is right and wrong, because doing so would be questioning your faith, and you don’t want to do that.” Thats a pretty ignorant and presumptuous statement considering what you know about me. Im willing to bet you dont go out on the street and talk to people like that, though you’d like to, so you do it here on the internet where you can hide. But as I said, know for certain, there is no hiding from God. I hope you will repent of your worship of your own self and your fallen “intellect.”

          • Joe

            The only thing we have control of in this world is ourselves. You give up even that control. I am no god. I don’t worship myself. However, I have to get up in the morning and look in the mirror and decide if I am being the person I want to be. You can not understand that because it requires looking at reality in the face.

            I’d talk to them if they care to enter the conversation. However, unlike this comment section, it often is an inappropriate place, such as at work. For the most part, the people I interact with never speak about religion, regardless of their belief, so it is really irrelevant. Its not about hiding, its about the right place and time. Considering the subject matter of the article and the replies I have gotten, I don’t think it is out of place.

            I have long determined you can not out reason faith, because faith doesn’t allow for reasoning. I write for the people who haven’t made up their minds. So when they read my posts, and then they read yours, they think. Comments like yours do not represent your belief well.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Do me a favor, and throw the word “objective” out. It doesn’t exist in the world of morality. Why? Because even if your God somehow exists and the Bible is his word, then it is God’s subjective morality you are conforming to.

            More likely, you are following the subjective morality of multiple iron age people who happened to write a religious book and convinced people it was truth.

            So no matter what morality you believe in or follow it is ALWAYS subjective. I don’t know where anyone gets the idea that there is objective morality.

          • chrisleduc1

            Ok, so let’s see if you really believe what you are saying . . .
            If what you are saying is true, then it is not always morally wrong to rape and sodomize little children? Do you really want to take that position?

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            The great majority of people think it is wrong (probably along the lines of 99.99% or better). Of course, that number is probably higher among Atheists (many believe in subjective morality) than Catholics (who believe in objective morality) considering news reports of child molestation spanning the last 20 years. The religion further shamed itself when it moved them to avoid prosecution. So you may have picked a bad example.

            On top of that, we have a history of marrying children off at a much younger age than what is acceptable in today’s society. Many of these children became mothers before age 14. This was acceptable to many at the time. These days, a person would did this would be brought up on statutory rape charges.

            We have what we believe is right and wrong, and then we have the laws of society that are usually (in a free society) made up of a consensus. It is important to take into account that variations in morality is usually held in check by societies legal system.

          • chrisleduc1

            Simple yes or no – is it always wrong for all people at al times and in all places to rape and sodomize a 5 year old boy?

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Read above answer. It is pretty obvious for those that have at least a 3rd grade understanding of English.

            The first sentence says it.

          • chrisleduc1

            “There is never a point where that is right. ”
            Then you believe in absolute morality. It does not matter whether or not people agree with you that it is wrong, you’ve asserted that there is an absolute moral standard and sodomizing a 5 year old violates that moral standard. Whether others agree or disagree with the moral standard, or adhere to the moral standard or deny its existence, does not negate the fact that the standard exists. It’s written on your heart by God, like an alarm system. Your conscience is part of the alarm system. It designed to let you know when you’ve broken God’s moral law. No person need be taught, they have a conscience that tells them when they’ve done wrong. God’s moral standard is like a glass window – once its broken its broken. It’s like trespassing, it does not matter where you crossed the line, once youve crossed the line you are a transgressor. And you have broken God’s law. Your conscience testifies to this. Your innate deseire to see justice served among humans is also put there by God. Nobody had to teach you the concept of justice. One of the first things you were able to express was “thats not fair!” and thats because God is a just God and while your concept of justice is not perfect, because you are a fallen creature, its still hardwired in you. The conscience and sense of justice are there to tell you something is wrong. And let me assure you, something IS wrong. Believe it or not, you’ve rebelled, and are currently involved in active mutiny against your creator. You can deny His right to rule over you, or even His existence, but that will not negate it. If you’ll come to Him in faith, through His Son Jesus, the way which He has provided for man to be reconciled to Him under His terms and conditions, you can be forgiven of your rebellion and you can be adopted into His family. I plead with you, dont harden your heart. Listen to your conscience. Confess you are a sinner and deserve hell. Cry out to God to save you in accordance with what He did to reconcile sinners through His Son. He forgives rebels. Repent and believe.

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            Enough with your biblically illiterate non-sense. You may have read the bible, but you clearly have closed your mind to any attempt to understand it.

            Slavery is wrong in any era? Well that’s an insight that mankind seems to have missed for the past 6000 years or so, but perhaps the ancients lacked your wisdom. Meanwhile, here on Planet Earth, slavery has been practiced by pretty much every civilization, on every continent, in every era. The Bible recognizes the existence of slavery in a fallen world, just like divorce and war, and sets out standards for its humane practice, including injunctions for masters to treat their slaves fairly. You have a problem with that?

            Child sacrifice is nowhere sanctioned in the Bible; instead it consistently condemns it. Jesus laid down his life voluntarily to provide redemption to fallen man.; he wasn’t sacrificed by His Heavenly Father.

            Make an effort to learn the subject if you wish to be taken seriously and avoid rebuke and ridicule.

          • MelanieWaffle

            I think what Joe is saying is the fact the Bible doesn’t flat out tell people not to do it, but simply provides stipulations to be more humane is wrong. He is saying that even though people back then didn’t think slavery was wrong, it was still wrong.

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            Well, that’s a pretty empty statement. Just what standard are you applying that everyone is supposed to be familiar with to know that slavery is always wrong?

          • MelanieWaffle

            The fact that putting another human in subjugation is not what I would want done to me and therefore the do unto others verse comes in. I’m not going to argue with you how slavery is wrong. Always.

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            I think you would change your tune if you were captured by an invading army that offered you either life as a slave, or summary execution (a common practice in ancient times). You would probably change you tune is you and your family were starving to death and the only hope was to sell yourselves into slavery to survive (a situation that the Bible recognizes and regulates). So, there are just two examples that disprove your notion that slavery is always wrong or that you would never opt to be one.

          • MelanieWaffle

            No, I don’t think two wrongs make a right. While it may be the “better” choice, it doesn’t mean it is morally correct. The people forcing one into slavery is wrong. Society is wrong if we aren’t helping people live well enough that to survive they have to go into slavery.

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            Well, the simple fact is that throughout most of the history of the world, people disagree with the assertion that “slavery is wrong”. As I stated above, slavery – just like divorce, warfare, lawsuits, etc – exists because we live in a sinful world. The Bible recognized the reality of this existence and provides guidance for its humane practice. Simply stating over and over again that “slavery is wrong” is both incorrect and accomplishes nothing.

          • Joe

            I’ve posted the quote on child sacrifice on another post. Either way God saying “just kidding” doesn’t cut it.

            I noticed your support for slavery. Anything else I should watch out for? Not going to commit genocide and keep the virgins to yourself are you? Since it is moral and all.

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            If I were an ancient Israelite, under Joshua or David, with a mandate to conquer the land promised to Abraham and destroy the Caanites because of their unrepentant wickeness, then I would faithfully join in the campaign of genocide as ordained by God. Not because I enjoy killing people, but because, in that instance, God chose to use the Israelites as the instrument of His wrath upon the wicked. He does this from time to time throughout history and doesn’t need or seek your approval

            However, I don’t live in the 2nd millenium BC, so those commands no longer apply to anyone alive today and your quibbling with them as an excuse for you to hold the Bible in contempt is simply asinine. Ditto the other provisions of the civil and ceremonial aspects of the Law of Moses which you keep bringing up. Your critique is groundless because those stipulations were written for the ancient nation of Israel and no one else.

          • Joe

            Past results predict future returns.

            I have to apologize. I wasn’t aware that you had personal knowledge of gods plan. Who knew that you already know that there is 0% chance that god will not command his followers as a tool of his vengeance again, despite having record history of him doing it before in your holy book.

            I also was not aware that there was an expiration date on Gods commands. I guess we don’t need the commandments since that was a different time as well.

            You consistently pick and choose what you want to believe from the Bible. I don’t mind. It would be bad if you did start slaughtering people but don’t claim you have an external source for your morality when you pick and choose what you want to believe.

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            I do have personal knowledge of God’s plan, at least in the case of the extermination of the Canaanites, because I bothered to pick up the Bible and read it, rather than bloviate about it. It’s free and open knowledge to anyone who bothers to read it. Deut. 7:1 – 3 is a pretty clear reference, but there are several others.

            The command was given to the Israelites and was pretty much completed by the reigns of David and Solomon, except for areas like Gaza, but then the mandate for it elapsed when the Jews were banished from the Holy Land and Jesus fulfilled the Law. I’m not going to bother to provide you with the NT references on this; you can look them up yourself.

            Pick and choose? I’m calling BS on that comment. I don’t pick or choose anything. I’m defending the entirety of the Bible, including the bits governing slavery and the mandate for the extermination of the Canaanites. You are not just a fool, but a bloody fool if you think your pipsqueak opinion in any way detracts from the holiness and reliability of the Word of God, which stands forever.

          • MelanieWaffle

            I think Joe’s concern is that if God told you to commit genocide now a days, you would do it again. As far as I know there is nothing in the Bible saying God won’t do this. In fact in Revelations it talks about God coming back with a vengeance

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            If we had direct revelation from God to do so, then I would. That’s the point about Divine Revelation; it’s to be obeyed. However, we won’t have any further direct revelation until Jesus returns, and when He does, there is going to be one HUGE campaign of genocide at Armageddon.

          • Joe

            That is terrifying not because I fear your God, but instead I fear the ignorance that many religious have. I find it very easy to believe that a charismatictic leader could appear and convince enough of you that he speaks for God. With the wrong motivation such a situation could turn very very bloody.

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            Actually, that scenario is only possible when people remain ignorant of the Bible, which clearly teaches (by Jesus own word) that not one jot or tittle is to added or taken away from it. The only way we can obtain new direct revelation is for Jesus Himself to come back, and when he does, I’ll be listening.

          • Joe

            Charismatic Leader: “The Muslim’s are a blight and it is God’s command that we meet them in battle and send them to final judgement.”

            Well, lets check the Bible. Well there is precedence for this in the Bible (Canaanites), so there is reasonable expectation that “God” may decide this is a viable plan again. Thus people may consider this Gods word.

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            Regarding scripture, you were an ignoramus when this comment thread started, and the situation has not improved.

            Anyone who claims the Bible calls for an all out war against the muslims is a false teacher; I don’t know any reputable Christian leader that dumb. The precedents in the OT are irrelevant and no longer applicable; the Old Covenant is done, and we have no equivalent command under the New Covenant. In fact, the situation is quite the opposite now with injunctions to love thy neighbor and live in peace, as much as possible.

            Do yourself a favor and stop embarrassing yourself with your imbecilic attempts to apply scripture to current events.

          • Joe

            Oh, how “Christian” of you. You have the symptoms of being a True Believer. First insult when you can’t understand or don’t like a point of view. Second the obvious fact that you lack reading comprehension.

            I never said the Bible claims all out war on Muslims. I gave a hypothetical scenario. Look up the words if you don’t understand. You can Google right?

            According to your Bible, God has commanded the slaughter of an entire ethnic group. Since it has happened before it can happen again. And that is assuming you are right and God exists. If God doesn’t exist, then the followers have been gullible for centuries, and all it would take is a charismatic leader to convince the followers that his chosen target of slaughter was “gods will”. Denying that logic only puts you in the blind sheep category.

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            We’ve covered this point about new revelation before, so in addition to being a biblically ignorant, you appear to be a pretty slow learner as well. The specter of someone calling for a new campaign of genocide based on OT scripture is exactly the point you raised, so no need to get prissy when I call BS on it. There can be no new revelation from God until He comes back to earth. In the meantime, the Divine Revelation we have on hand in the Bible is complete and unalterable and it absolutely forbids genocide, so whatever point you are making, it certainly has no basis of support from the Bible.

            Invoking Hitler only makes your argument all the more ridiculous. His justifications for war and genocide were based on the humanist, nationalist ideology of 19th century nutjobs like Houston Stewart Chamberlain and Friedrich Nietzsche and had nothing to do with Holy Scripture. The nazis were neo-pagans who sought to establish a new religion because they correctly saw that Christianity would never support or justify their policies.

            If, on the other hand, when Jesus does return, He calls for a war of extermination against the wicked, then I will join in, if I’m still here.

          • Joe

            All it takes is someone to believe on “faith” that my hypothetical is true, for that nightmare to begin.

            Just because it might not be “your” chosen belief (not all Christians are created equal to each other, hence denominations), does not mean someone wont believe. You believe in such a way that someone else could believe with equal fervor.

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            Should be easy enough to prove your point then. Just name a known Christian denomination who’s teachings endorse genocide based on application of OT scripture.

          • Joe

            Westboro comes to mind. However, it is more complicated than that. You see, there are tens of thousands of different denominations, so I can not know all of their teachings. Also, who’s to say it’s not a denomination that will form in the future based off the Bible. I do not think it is reasonable that the only denominations we will have are the ones we have right now.

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            Westboro Baptist church is not a denomination; they are a single church, which some would claim is more like an extended family based cult. In any case, they do not advocate genocide based on ethnicity or race, but rather capital punishment for sodomy, which would be nothing more than a restoration of the previous legal punishment for the crime that was in effect until the 19th century in the English speaking world.

          • Joe

            Oh? A supporter?

            Well, you are right about it not being a denomination. However it doesn’t change my point. The Bible can be used to promote evil acts. The harrasing of widows and their families is not exactly what I would consider “moral” activities.

            Whether it is an individual, a church, a cult, a denomination, or the whole belief system, it can be abused.

            Hitler was one person.

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            Hitler was one person? Hard to argue with that kind of logic. Just which elements of Biblical Christianity did Adolf invoke to support his policies?

          • Joe

            “We hold the spiritual forces of Christianity to be indispensable elements in the moral uplift of most of the German people.”

            Translated. Adolf Hilter, Mein Kampf

          • MelanieWaffle

            Hitler cough cough

      • Devon

        Speaking of hate and bitterness…wow Adam you fill the bill…if you could, you would gladly open the Gulags that your ancestors did for Stalin…..

        • Joe

          I hate murder.
          I hate child abusers/rapists.
          I hate genocide.
          I hate slavery.

          Why don’t you?

          • Gary

            You have no reason to hate any of those things.

          • Joe

            Well, the good news is that I am not required to check my morality with you and get it justified or approved.

            The other good news is your likely assumption that as an Atheist without the Bible’s moral structure, that I am rampaging maniac unable to control my base urges, is false. You wont find me raping and pillaging and murdering etc.

            You still haven’t answered my question however. Why don’t you hate those things?

          • MelanieWaffle

            Meh, don’t listen to him, I thought you nailed your answer. Although, check out my earlier reply to Gary because I don’t think we should look at the old testament for our rules or morals. The people back then we’re stupid. I think it provides an interesting history and story but honestly, the way of living should come from the new testament and even then it needs to be scrutinized To see the view God wants us to see and not the blatantly sexist patriarchal view often spit out. I think there is underlying truth in the Bible, but I think the authors were only human and espoused the values if their day and not quite what God wanted them to do.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            “You wont find me raping and pillaging and murdering etc.”
            Well, not yet, eh, Joe?
            Every time your fellow anti-theists gain the power of incarceration and life and death (e.g., Robespierre & The Terror, Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Mao, Ho Chi Min, Castro, Pol Pot, etc.) the always go after the Christians. And, always the Catholics first. Why is that?

          • MelanieWaffle

            What about the theists who went after non believers, the crusades, how we treated the Indians, how people were killed because the church didn’t agree with their science, if you say these people weren’t using Christianity then don’t compare those terrible people to all atheists.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            There’s a lot of myths and lies in your examples, I’m afraid.
            The First Crusade was a call by the pope to protect Christian pilgrims on their way to the Holy Land. There were kings and princes who committed atrocities, I fully acknowledge, although, not because their religious leaders told them to do so. The Moslems were the unjust aggressors.
            Indians, who wouldn’t accept the treaties their leaders signed, committed many atrocities against European settlers. And, settlers retaliated just as badly, sometimes. The period of the Indian Wars is much more complex than you make it.
            I’m unaware of anyone killed because of “their science,” MelanieWaffle, sorry.
            Please, name the atheist/anti-theist who completely took over the power of government and didn’t imprison and kill Christians?
            (I left out Hitler and the nazis, because I didn’t want to be accused of violating Goodwin’s law, even though many nazis were anti-theist as well as anti-Catholic/anti-Christian.)

          • MelanieWaffle

            Galileo is just one off the top of my head. Check out this site.http://markhumphrys.com/christianity.killings.html also my entire point is to say sure atheists have done evil, but that doesn’t make all of them evil. Atheists have been kinder to me than most Christians. As for the Indian issue, I agree there is more to it. However, there were plenty of people still killing for God. I think my point still stands, #notallchristians #notallatheists

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            MelanieWaffle,
            Galileo was neither put to death, nor imprisoned, for his “science.” He was put under house-arrest in a plush villa for breaking his promise not to teach heliocentrism as a scientific fact. Also, he greatly insulted the pope. Not very smart.
            Galileo was also…wrong.
            First, he held that the sun was the center of the universe.
            Second, he couldn’t get his math to work, because he stubbornly held to his theory that the planets’ orbits were circular, when, in fact, they were elliptical.
            Finally, he couldn’t show stellar parallax, which is why most scientists of his time rejected heliocentrism. Their error was that they couldn’t conceive of how far away the stars really were. The Catholic Church has gotten a bum-rap for this, for centuries.

            My point is that there are no benevolent atheist dictators or kings in history. If you can name one, I’d love see it. Whenever anti-theists gained complete control of a country, they went after the Catholics/Christians. They were responsible for over 100 million deaths, murders actually, in the 20th Century. Your moral equivalence with the crimes of a fairly small number of kings, who happened to be Christian, in the past, does not agree with the historical record.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            One more thing, MelanieWaffle.
            Your link begins with the egregious error that the “Church” began killing non-believers in the 4th Century, A.D. The Church has always prohibited Her clerics from shedding blood.
            It was the secular authority who would execute offenders. The Church’s only role was to determine if the offender was truly holding to heretical views, or not. If the offender recanted, nothing would happen to him.
            If Mark Humphrys can’t get this simple fact correct, why should I read anything more that he has to say?

          • karlotious

            Not one of those people are atheists….

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            Excuse me? Of course they were. Only a loon would attempt to say otherwise.
            What were they, then? Episcopalians?

          • karlotious

            pol pot theravda buddhist, christians, several were held up as gods as well, etc etc Please enlighten me which one killed people in the name of “no god”. You cant wage a war in the name of atheism but you most surely can in the name of a god

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            Pol Pot was communist, karlotious. Ya’ know? As in God-less communist? Or, atheistic communist?
            All communists kill in the name of “no God.”
            Pol Pot also persecuted Buddhists, Einstein. Don’t your info from websites by hacks, like Dawkins & Harris, okay?

          • karlotious

            Oh how wrong you are but then again you had the sense to live in Detroit so how much credibility can anyone put in you.. Do more research

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            Detroit was ruined by God-less, atheist liberals, karlotious.
            Even the New York Slimes and wiki say that Pol Pot was an atheist. Physician, heal thyself.

          • karlotious

            bwhahaha detroit was ruined by the collapse of the auto industry. Its pathetic that someone who lives there doesnt understand basic economics lol Pol Pot was an theravada buddhist…. In any case not one war has ever been waged in the name of atheism. To fight in the name of a non belief is the same as fighting for the non existence of unicorns. There’s a reason the smartest people on earth are atheists

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            The collapse of the auto industry was caused by the God-less, communist control of the UAW and the God-less democrat CAFE standards of the 1970s. Detroit was ruined by 50 years of God-less liberal control of mayor’s office as well as the city council.
            Pol Pot was a God-less communist, not a Buddhist.
            It’s funny that you began with your bogus claim that none of the atheists on my list were…atheists, but, now, you just wan’t to continue to falsely claim that Pol Pot wasn’t an atheist.
            What about all of your other atheist buddies, karlotious?

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            Hey, did you see the auroras on Tuesday, karlotious?
            God turned the sky green for Saint Patrick’s Day!

            http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/imageo/2015/03/17/solar-eruptions-cause-st-patricks-day-aurora/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A%20DiscoverTopStories%20%28Discover%20Top%20Stories%29#.VQkYsCn0-0A

            There’s a reason the smartest people on earth are Catholics!

          • MelanieWaffle

            He made it very clear. If you need the Bible to tell you why things are wrong, then you aren’t a good person to begin with. The Bible is used to show us the truth and give us our history so we can come To believe. The people back then weren’t the brightest so God had to literally spell it out for them. Now a days people have greater understanding and don’t need the Bible as a moral compass. This is great as the Bible is no longer just a rule book but a book about salvation and a book which provides hope!

      • Gary

        Why are incest, murder, rape, slavery and child abuse wrong? And keep in mind that if those things are wrong, it is not because you think they are.

        • Joe

          Incest is wrong because of the danger of bringing kids into the world with serious genetic defects that can be passed down to future generations. It damages our ability to mix DNA and propagate humanity.

          Murder is wrong largely because I don’t want to be killed, so I understand that it would be wrong to kill someone else. Everyone has a right to live, so taking a life away is not a righteous act.

          Rape is wrong because you are taking away the choice of intimacy and assaulting the body. It is extremely violating and tortuous as the attack is exerting power over someone else, and taking away any freedom of choice they have. It can permanently cause physical and mental damage. Once again, I wouldn’t want to be a victim of this, and find it horrifying that someone would do this to someone else.

          Slavery the same thing. You are taking away freedom from someone else. You can not live in a free society if you enslave your fellow man.

          Child abuse imposes many of the above damages on someone that is still developing and powerless to stop a grown adult. When in the developmental stage, this can leave permanent damage to the growth of the child and can scar them for life.

          If you look at it as a whole, it is about power over the weak. These evils are often addressed in law to prevent anarchy and lawlessness and to make the people feel safe.

          Now I am no psychiatrist/psychologist. Nor am I an expert in sociology. This is just my opinion working out with observation and what little studying I have done on the topic. I don’t think I am very far off the point, but there are likely reasons that I have missed.

          I am going to assume, that many people here are going to say these morals come from the Bible. However, they are wrong. They were wrong before the Bible was written as civilization was already in the process of being developed. Other religions that pre-date the Bible had codes of morality that were strikingly similar to what the Bible has. The problem is where there are some “good” morale lessons in the Bible, there are many lessons that are self serving to the religion itself and have nothing to do with actual morality or in some cases are plainly immoral.

          • Gary

            I didn’t see anything in your answer other than your opinion. And you have no authority to define morality.

          • Joe

            How many slaves do you own? Are they Hebrew? If so, make sure you let them go on the seventh year, otherwise God might be unhappy. Also if you beat them, don’t beat them so they die right away. If they die after a day or so, you cant be held responsible (Exodus 21 for reference).

            I have every right to define my own morality.

        • Peter Leh

          incest:

          Gary did you know that incest was the way of propagating the earth for us creationists and pro earthly flood christians?

          If fact (even if one is not a creationist) the Jewish nation was formed by incest.

          slavery:

          Gary did you know there is no prohibition of slavery in the Bible?

          child abuse:

          Would you consider stoning a belligerent child as prescribed in the scripture “abuse”?

          keep in mind, as these are wrong for various reasons, they may not be wrong for the reasons YOU THINK THEY ARE. 🙂

      • Brad Hayman

        You haven’t read the Bible…. maybe the OT when the Jews were stewards of God’s natural covenant… but trying to help you rightly discern even those events is clearly a bridge too far…

    • Joe

      I read the Bible, and I would be ashamed by preaching it. The evil absurdities in it are only second to the ignorance of the people who believe it. It is so ridiculous, that there are over 30,000 branches who interpret it differently so as to avoid that which that particular belief was deemed immoral or indefensible. Heck, Southern Baptists was formed to give religious backing to the slave owners during the American Civil War. The ends always justifies the means, right?

      • OldArkie

        2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

        So your ashamed of God, who created this earth and everything on it, including us who by holy men inspired them to write this wonderful Book called the Holy Bible.

        So your ashamed of God who gave His Son to die on the cross to pay your sin debt so you could have that wonderful blessed hope only if you would repent, confess your sins to God through Jesus Christ.

        Joh 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

        Turning down what Jesus can give you, the resurrection of life for the resurrection of damnation.

        Like I said earlier, your choice.

        • Joe

          Well, I don’t believe in “God”, so I can’t be ashamed by him. The message about him in the Bible that was written by men, and the morality included with him is atrocious. So it is the message I’d be ashamed of.

          This idea of worshiping the act of someone killing their own child all so the rest of the world can shirk the responsibility that should be rightfully theirs is atrocious as well. To me, whoever wrote this Harlequin romance, added this not only to ensure his deification but to make the religion appeal to everyone. I am sure this boosted revenue for the church.

          Quoting from a fantasy novel does little to sway me. Just like the Quran doesn’t sway your belief.

          • chrisleduc1

            Joe what objective standard do you have for judging morality? You have called things evil and atrocious. By what objective standard are you judging things?

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            Hey, Chris, long time, no speak, eh?
            You never got back to me, in our previous conversation, after I left all those responses for you. If you’re interested, you can still read them, here:
            http://christiannews.net/2015/01/01/pope-francis-roman-catholics-worldwide-observe-solemnity-of-mary-the-mother-of-god/

            I hope that I hear from you. I enjoyed our discussion. God Bless!

          • chrisleduc1

            Hi Nick. Theres no way for me to find those questions in that thread. If there is something specific you’d like to me address, feel free to post it here. If I have time over the weekend (depends on how complex your question is and how much research is required) I’ll reply as soon as possible. I will say that unless its foundational to the Gospel itself, or of the absolutely authority of written Scripture in contrast to the claims of the Bishop of Rome, I really dont have time to deal with it right now. If its a matter of the Gospel, I’ll make time as you know that I believe you are trusting in a different Gospel that what the Apostles taught and are thereby condemned, so I am more than happy to try to sort through that matter specifically with you. I think you want to be right and worship God rightly as much as I do, and one of us must be wrong as we believe contradictory things, and Ive given my life for this one great truth, so if I can help, let me know.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            Chris,
            If you go to that link, and set the “sort by” to “newest” you will find my replies in the first group of comments. Right after “Julie” and “John Mark IB” and addressed to “Chris” about 8 comments from the top.
            I only bring it up because I spent several hours compiling the information, and was really looking forward to your response. I knew that you had said you were headed back to school, but, I kept checking every once in a while to see if you’d replied. I was bummed that you hadn’t.
            Anyhow, I hope you check them out. I’m curious if your Hebrew class has covered the terms that I brought up in those comments.
            May you, and your family, have a blessed Easter, Chris.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Why do you imagine that there were “apostles” and how do you imagine that you know what they taught?

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            There are no “objective standards”, all you can be sure of is that you think that you exist. Everything else is subject to uncertainty.

            We can judge morality, which is genetic, epigenetic, environmental and reflexive, or ethics, which are considered and often superior, on the basis of how well they support our nature, that of social animals, projecting their effects from ourselves, through our family, friends, tribes, neighbours, countrymen and fellow humans and determining whether they, on the whole, appear to avoid resulting in harm and possibly do some good.

            Viewed like that, all of the Abrahamic religions, from the Judaic to the Islamic, including the tens of thousands of christer variants have been a disaster, and practically anything else, but particularly the default, of n ot vesting belief in imaginary god thingies, would be an an improvement.

          • chrisleduc1

            You said: “There are no “objective standards”, all you can be sure of is that you think that you exist. Everything else is subject to uncertainty.”
            Really? You do realize that you just made an objective statement regarding reality, don’t you? When you can make a statement that is not self-refuting, go ahead and post it. In the mean time, the truthfulness of your own statement is uncertain and cannot be known, by your own standard.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            A fail on your part. My statement is not an “objective statement regarding reality” but a properly constituted provisional, falsifiable prediction of the lack of sustainable intersubjectively verifiable evidence for anything beyond the fact that we think that we think, including the idea of a “reality” which you imagine you can know, which you are welcome to attempt to counter by leading evidence to the contrary.
            You will in all probability fail, but it might be slightly interesting to watch you demonstrate the consequences of Dunning-Kruger syndrome.

          • chrisleduc1

            You asserted two propositions. It’s really just that simple.

            1. “all you can be sure of is that you think that you exist.”

            and

            2. “Everything else is subject to uncertainty.”

            If you’d like to resubmit those statements as provisional falsifiable predictions, go ahead, but I know you’re not stupid enough to keep asserting that thats what they currently are.

            Dunning-Kruger? Project much?!

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            I don’t mind explaining things if asked.

            You are mistaking an appropriately evidential approach for a logical one. There are indeed two statements involved. From my perspective, both are already grounded in intersubjectively validateable evidence (in this gedankenexperiment you can use neural imaging to establish whether one is thinking or communicating about the self or others, making one’s thinking about thinking subject to criticism). One statement speaks to the self about which one know very little (one thinks that one thinks, whether one exists as one thinks or not, and whether one does or does not actually engage in thought is a question for another day); one statement to everything else, including to statements about statements and is a perfectly formed provisional falsifiable statement based on a total lack of any compelling evidence to the contrary, including compelling evidence as to the nature of anything that one might imagine that one perceives.

            Any other interpretation would be obtuse. So no “resubmission” is required. The statement is provisional, there may be some evidence that could persuade one of something else from what has been stated, or falsifiable, in that there may be evidence of some thing that would make one reject either of the statements made, or both. So far you have not done so.

          • Breckmin

            how about the reality that matter has to exist before you can even have beings with perception? Either you admit absolutism or you have no valid claims at all because you hide behind everything being provisional. Logical conclusion based on reason is often what accompanies evidence and observation. To deny this, is to resort toward the inability for any valid assertion. So let’s start with a foundational epistemology: Do you believe/acknowledge that there are absolutes?

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            I reject belief, always the hallmark of assignment of a truth value in the absence of sufficient compelling evidence or in the face of compelling confounding evidence, and am sceptical of acknowledgement of what seems obvious, preferring weyken, “data internalized as supportable knowledge with a sustainable provisional truth value ascribed to it through the medium of critical rationalism and reasoning based on intersubjectively verifiable evidence (for example – and ideally, through the scientific method)”.

            As demonstrated by e.g. Bostrom, Nick; 2003; “Are you living in a computer simulation?”; Philosophical
            Quarterly Vol. 53, No. 211, pp. 243-255, the existence of matter is not a prerequisite to “beings with perception”.

            As Gödel/Turing/von Neumann showed, “absolutes” are only possible in simplistic logical systems of significantly less complexity than the natural numbers.

            While logic and absolutism have been known to be unsupportable since the 1930s, as shown by Popper, von Neumann, Kuhn and Feyerabend, approaches based on the intersubjective verification of provisional falsifiable predictions and probability are, contra your unsupported assertion above, capable of returning useful results and indeed, are the underlying basis for all modern science. This may be why “philosophy is dead” [Hawking; 2010 ; The Grand Design].

          • Breckmin

            are you saying you reject that you believe the evidence?

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            I am saying that “belief” (assignment of an internal truth value) is superfluous and unhelpful, particularly as believers have deliberately confabulated gnosis (unsupported) and dogmatic (required) beliefs with reasonable (supported by observation) beliefs.

            It is always preferable to articulate this clearly, to oneself and others, in order to eliminate such equivocation. The vesting of “belief” is totally unnecessary to perform appropriate evaluation of observations, to formulate predictive models, and to criticise predictions about intersubjectively verifiable observations in order to assign provisional falsifiable truth values on the basis of weyken.

          • Breckmin

            I absolutely disagree with your last sentence so it is clear that we have equivocation on what is meant by belief/trust/faith and reliability. To define belief as an internal truth value is evasive to the external testing of truth and/or truth claims via both reason and falsifiability. When you are engaged in observation… you still have to “believe” what you see and observe… regardless of an alternative/contemporary philosophy which attempts to readdress the reliability of the senses. Trusting your senses (and the consensus of others who share the exact same observation(s)) is a form of belief/faith as is trusting on one own metaphysical experiences which are also corroborated by others’ identical experiences.

            Your attempt to differentiate weyken from religious belief here is problematic (the word creation is problematic). It fails to address falsifiable evidence which leads to the corroborative conclusions of necessity as it relates to certain causation(s) which are subject to external and rigorous scrutiny. This is one of the differences between truth and political correctness (error). The truth encourages criticism and vigorous polemics to test that it is rational… whereas error demands tolerance and multiple competing truth claims to stand as somehow equally valid moral equivalents. Nothing could be further from the “truth.” Truth is synonymous with facts. Facts are objective slices of that which “is.” Truth, facts and reality are all objective in their cosmic actuality regardless of who believes them… or whether you get it/them right. (If) There is a Creator (and there IS a Creator)(then)the Creator would set the standard for objectivity by the Creator’s very absolute and perfect knowledge of all that “is.” Truth, facts and reality are objective actualities open for subjective discovery. When belief (subjective faith as a result of discovery) lines up with objective facts… then the person is subordinate to more truth.
            We clearly have two different philosophical worldviews here which need to be identified.
            Faith and belief are NOT independent of evidence…they should be the result of it.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            It looks as if te reply is loast, so here is as good a recreation as I am capable of, minus the links, but with sufficient data to allow you to find them with a little work 🙂

            Outside of simplistic logical systems of limited applicability, “truth” is an unattainable illusion.

            Belief is always the assignment of a truth value on insufficient compelling evidence (or in the face of compelling counter evidence, because when there is sufficient compelling evidence, provisional acceptance is sufficient and the vesting of belief is unnecessary.

            Belief is unhelpful when engaged in observation, as it leads directly to the vesting of a false sense of credibility to what is purely an internal signal, which may be non-invasively induced and observed at the neuronal level today, in a brain which has no error correction, and no way of differentiating between actual, induced and delusional sensations. For an idea of what I mean, you might try searching on YouTube for the “selective attention test” and attempting to complete it.

            And perhaps watch the following videos which convey rather nicely why you should be cautious about what the perceptions in which you think you should vest belief:

            “Michael Shermer – Why People Believe Weird Things TED 2008”, “Michael Shermer: The pattern behind self-deception” and “Michael Shermer – Why People Believe Weird Things TLT 2013”. They will likely fascinate you – and your daughter.

            The lesson to take away is that trusting one’s own senses is a mistake, let alone trusting somebody else’s alleged perception filtered through language.

            The reality is that metaphysics were obsolete by 1930. Philosophy as a field by the early 21st century. It failed to keep abreast of the developments in mathematics, physics and cosmology and so became irrelevant. Even if many philosophers still have not recognised or acknowledged this ;-P.

            Your recourse to logic fails. While logic is a component in the construction of models, it is nothing more than a notation of limited applicability which may be used to describe anything, real or imaginary and like any model, its utility lies in the competence of the predictions it makes as validated through intersubjective criticism. Neither more not less. Historically logic has not done very well.

            Causation too is overrated. Looked at from the perspective of M-theory, everything ultimately apparently depends on the probability of vast numbers of strictly uncaused events.

            Weyken is the result of insisting on a strict correspondence between the use of words and the emergent self-referential scientific method. Weyken eliminates the equivocation, deliberate and accidental, pursuant in vesting in belief.

            All alleged truths are necessarily relative, because “truth” always depends on perspective, a product of genetics, epigenetics, environment and location, impossible to duplicate in every detail; because truth depends on the complications of reality, some of which is occluded (event horizons, Planck limits, Heisenberg’s uncertainty), much of which cannot be fully and accurately defined in finite time (Gödel, Turing, von Neumann); some of which is buried (Shannon, von Neumann); all of which
            is provisional (Popper, Kuhn, Feyerabend); which can only be validated using limited and flawed communications (Gorgias, Russell, Peirce, Chomsky, Dennett); and because General Relativity precludes any “God’s Eye” view. Which doesn’t leave you much outside of trivial systems of limited applicability.

            Alleged “facts” are even worse than supposed “truths”, because, outside of trivial systems of limited utility, “facts” are merely the fiction that something is so well established that it should not be questioned. A resounding fail.

            The idea of a “creator” is almost as absurd as the idea of “absolute and perfect knowledge of all that “is.” This would require information about all aspects of the Universe which would require every particle in the Universe to evaporate in order to preserve uncertainty. As the Universe has not yet evaporated, we know that “absolute and perfect knowledge of all that “is.” has never existed. In addition, such knowledge would require more energy than is in the Universe to communicate (as it takes energy to transmit information and the size of the universe now precludes communications between its extents due to speed of light limitations), so any attempt to learn such information would require the Universe to be at (or at least very near) absolute zero. The fact that the Universe is not at (or at least very near) absolute zero proves that this has never happened. In addition, much of te information in the Universe relates to quantum particles, virtual and real, which is random and so inherently incompressible. Therefore the storage of the state of the Universe at any instant would require twice as many storage locations as are present in the Universe, and the same again for the next insant, and so on. Therefore any entity attempting this would be instantly amnesiac due to information overload. So it hasn’t happened and will not happen and good luck with any “logic” claiming that it has or will happen.

            Morality is irrelevant to this conversation. Morality is always reflexive and learned.

            Faith and belief have no place here. Not only do they contaminate communication, reason and observation, but they are utterly inimical to the pursuit of better models describing what we think we may be observing through induction of well known cognitive biases; and the very act of observation makes both irrelevant and unnecessary. We simply need to provisionally accept what is confirmed through intersubjective criticism – and reject what is falsified.

          • Breckmin

            TLTRT

          • Breckmin

            “Looked at from the perspective of M-theory, everything ultimately
            apparently depends on the probability of vast numbers of strictly
            uncaused events.” The phrase “brilliant nonsense” comes to mind when physicists talk this way. NOT all of them do…some of them are wise enough to identify that to ever say “uncaused events” is utterly fatuous.

          • Breckmin

            ” We simply need to provisionally accept what is confirmed through intersubjective criticism – and reject what is falsified.”

            I can agree with this… but I also believe that the scriptures are confirmed through various intersubjective criticism and they have never been falsified. (other than already identifiable minor error)

            To say “Faith and belief have no place here.” is to ignore just how much faith you have…. if you believe what you see (observation) that is one level of belief. It is important to agree with the reliability of the senses (via intersubjective confirmation). If you believe in abiogenesis (o.k. biopoieosis), then you had tremendous tremendous faith (in something that never happened). Question why you have so much faith.

          • Breckmin

            “As demonstrated by e.g. Bostrom, Nick; 2003; “Are you living in a computer simulation?”; Philosophical Quarterly Vol. 53, No. 211, pp. 243-255, the existence of matter is not a prerequisite to “beings with perception”.”

            Are you saying that you can have a simulation without energy/matter? What is your point, here. You lost me.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            In short, you cannot tell whether you are a brain in a vat, a subroutine in a quantum computer, an idea in the mind of something you might call a god if you knew about it, and so on. All you know for sure is that you think you exist because you can think, and, as Bostrum showed, if it will ever possible to build such a simulator in any way,
            then it is significantly more likely that we are in such simulator than
            that we are not.

            Everything else, including the thinking you think you do, and the fact that your brain seems to experience stimuli. may not exist, or may exist in a way very different to how you imagine it. You could not tell the difference. Naturally that includes the possibility that baryonic energy/matter does not exist, indeed, there are some indications that this may be the case.

          • Breckmin

            so in this schema you can exist without energy/matter?

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            It is not probable, but you cannot eliminate the possibility, which means that it cannot be a prerequisite to “beings with perception”.”

          • Breckmin

            how do you know it is “possible?” Please be specific?

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            It is possible because, even though we are slow, limited, unreliable and prone to instabilities, we are essentially Turing machines. Computers. These may be implemented in a vast number of ways and it is certain that we have not yet thought of, let alone explored more than a tiny fraction of them. What we do know is that we could be instantiated as elements in a computer (or brains in vats, etc.) and that if we were, we could not tell the difference between inputs which were provided by other routines and inputs we currently imagine come form our senses. Either would take the form of external signals to be interpreted, or misinterpreted, by our software. We know this because of things that we have seen and done, e.g. phantom limbs, limb adoption, sympathetic pain and pregnancies, hallucinations and psychoses, vision inversions, experience in virtual environments, neuron reading and retargeting and so forth. The last is the most indicative. We have for example allowed blind people to see by using the tongue or back as an input device, stimulating it with electrodes or vibrating pins conveying a processed image, and the brain will learn to reinterpret this as vision. From here it is a small step to convert the input to a virtual environment, and it is then hard for the user to tell the difference between the virtual environment and reality. The use of virtual environments also allows us to prove that a user who has identified with their avatar will respond to insults to the avatar, e.g. unprotected falling, as if their body were exposed to the same experience, gasping, adrenaline, heart rate, seeking to rebalance, proving the malleability of the mind and its ability to function and persuade itself that it is able to make sense of the environment in which it is found, irrespective of any degree of distortion of input signals – or output signals (e.g. paralalia patients are often unable to identify its presentation). This means that what we think of as “energy or matter” could easily be something different, and we could not necessarily tell, because all we know for certain is that we think that we think.
            That being the case, we cannot say that anything which does not contradict the idea that we think that we think is impossible, nor can we say that it is impossible for other people, who may or may not exist. The best we can do is explore what appears to exist to us by making predictions, sharing and receiving feedback on them, allowing us to gradually build predictive models about the Universe in which think we find ourselves, and say that things are, or are not compatible with that intersubjective assessment.
            Fortunately the Universe in which we think we live is remarkably consistent, even if it has limits which strongly suggest the kind of processing optimizations which would be sensible in a simulation. Physics appear to be the same in all frames. Everything which can interact with baryonic material (like us) is baryonic. All interactions between baryonic material is mediated by gauge bosuns and we can measure these interactions. All energy flows involve information exchanges which are subject to known laws, and so forth. However, the fact that this is the case in the Universe we perceive does not mean that it musty be the same in all possible Universes, although we cannot interact with any Universe other than our own, and in other Universes, the rules probably are different, making it completely impossible to make predictions about what is necessary for the existence of “beings with perception”, and the rules of our Universe preclude obtaining feedback from predictions about other Universes, so the best we can do is say that it is not impossible that such Universes with different realities exist, but that “of which we do not know, we cannot speak.”

          • Breckmin

            computers or Turing machines without matter or energy?

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            What such simulators could operate on is unknown to us as we only know that we think that we think and seem to have reached intersubjective corroboration that we are competent to make remarkably accurate predictions about what we think we perceive as being matter and energy.

            Some kind of computer capable of hosting a simulation is much less unlikely than a “creator” producing all the matter and energy in this Universe from not even a hat.

          • Breckmin

            Not all intelligent Christians hold to creation Ex nihilo. The idea that you believe that a “Matrix” without matter and energy is more likely than a Creator is very telling about your BIAS against the Creator. Perhaps your real bias is against creation Ex nihilo or your lack of historical understanding about it (in relationship to creation Ex Deo).

            Reading between the lines… you are very biased against
            the idea of a Creator/God Who made you and loves you.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            I am sufficiently cognisant of current work in AI, simulation, machine learning and physics to consider the above (which is hardly, a “Matrix”) not just a strong possibility, but a probability greater than zero because, unlike creator/god thingies, it would call for an extension of current capabilities, not a replacement of current known physics.

            Likewise, considering the weight of compelling evidence, I find it not just likely that the Universe could have evolved naturally, but that it most likely did. This, and the wealth of reasons to reject “creator” myths and god thingies, including the plethora of such myths invented by men means not that I am “very biased against the idea of a Creator/God”, but astonished that anybody could take such concepts seriously in the 21st century (and don’t take it seriously, and suspect that you are just pretending to certainty for which you have no grounds, but that dissonance will force you to reject this idea). So I am not sure what you imagine is “telling” or what you imagine it is “telling” you – but suspect it is of a one with the other cognitive failures disclosed here.

          • Breckmin

            appeals to possibility are the devil’s workshop when you don’t even know if such things are really even possible… and then start acting like they are and using them in a discussion.

            exploring possibilities is a GREAT thing in scientific discovery… but NOT in knowing philosophical truth/reality. Truth should be concluded systematically based on logic… it should NEVER be based on an appeal to possibility (which leads to demonic deception).

          • Meepestos

            Very Interesting.. Never a dull post. Καλή λόγια, αδελφή.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Ευχαριστω. Τα μεγάλα πνεύματα συναντώνται.

          • Breckmin

            btw, I eliminate the so called “possibility” just like I eliminated the absolute ridiculous and absurdities of Solipsism from my mind years ago….

            and I only read articles occasionally from Philosophical Quarterly for humor as they are often completely missing any practical wisdom and how to process cogent rational thought…. It is not that philosophy is dead…. philosophy is never dead… but ridiculous modern theories in philosophy have corrupted what was once a great area of academia. You have to go back before the 19th Century or at least read Plantinga or someone with a tiny bit of practical wisdom.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            That is the first thing you have said that makes perfect sense in the context of somebody as caught up as you seem to be in the throes of denial and dissonance.

          • Breckmin

            Why should have have any cognitive dissonance? BTW, I was wrong! And I gladly admit that I was wrong. I look forward to the times when I get to correct myself and admit that I was wrong…. …. Then I’m no longer wrong but now get to be right/correct.

            I haven’t read Philosophical Quarterly from Oxford until today. I got it mixed up with the International Philosophical Quarterly from Belgium which used to publish a few Christian articles here and there from William Lane Craig and Alvin Plantinga, etc. And I really don’t usually read for the humor. That was wrong of me to say that. Rather I’m often saddened by what is often not published from systematic theology and theodicy. I agree with some of the recent criticism of Stump’s book. It does not at all provide a comprehensive theodicy for human suffering… so once again… the unbelievers stay in the dark and don’t even get a fraction of the complexity.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            You must be a very happy person then. So many wrongs to admit and celebrate. Now about those “creator” god thingies of yours 😛

            The reason that you don’t see any serious articles about “systematic theology” and “theodicity” is that “god” is a dead hypothesis even in a morbid discipline, because the exercise of either “omnipotence” or “omniscience” would result in the death of our Universe, and even though there are better approaches to the elimination of god thingie infestations, including the fact that humans require a competent independent ethical sense to determine whether alleged god thingies are in fact good at all, eliminating the Abrahamic garbling of the Sumerian creation myth, where the snake, a good goddess of wisdom, frees the people from the slavery of the evil gods that created them, simultaneously eliminating any validity to assertions of the alleged goodness of god thingies by those claiming dependence on the same god thingies for an ethical (or cruder, reflexive and learned moral) sense, making theodicy redundant; but, in any case, the evidential problems of evil and apathy have utterly defeated the theodiots including Platinga.

            And WC is a joke. Watch any of his devastating debating defeats by Sean Carroll to understand why.

          • Liberal Kuhn

            Bytch
            C_nt

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Perfectly charming. The love your religion inspires oozes from every festering pore.

          • Breckmin

            I don’t agree with many of Bill Craig’s arguments as being the most persuasive, but I don’t find him personally to be a joke either. I’ll check out the Sean Carroll debates… but the issue is not one Plantinga or Lane Craig getting more publication… it is an issue of content and what is missing from the spiral of degeneration that has “infested” philosophy (i like the use of that word you used) since the days of David Hume, John Stuart Mill and particularly Bertrand Russell. For the philosophical world to buy their arguments and not provide comprehensive rebuttal to dismiss so much of the nonsense is VERY telling…. just like Flying Spaghetti Monsters being compared to Being which exists necessarily and the logical of an Infinite Creator and Originator Who is ignored in too many dark corners of philosophical banter.

            Unless we address specifics and point for point rebuttal.. the generalizations here will continue to keep us at an impasse.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            I quite like Russell. He was one of the first to recognize that the naïve certainty and reliance on logic which philosophy had depended on for millennia was no longer sound – even though it destroyed the basis of what had been his life’s work.

            And I fail to see that the FSM is different in any significant ways from any other god thingies that men have invented only much nicer and somewhat more sensible than some.

          • Breckmin

            appeals to unsubstantiated so called “possibility” is one of humankind’s worst enemies. Subterfuge flourishes from it. Question everything

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Damn. Sometimes I feel like every time I read one of your posts, I see something I am not familiar with and I have to look it up. Ha!

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            There is a beautiful Russian proverb, “You know too much, time for you to die!” Stay young, keep learning.

          • David Cromie

            I have always been of the opinion that Descartes’ ‘Cogito ergo sum’ is mistaken. Why? Because I know I exist since, as I act on the world, the world reacts to me. Therefore, the Cogito really should be expressed as ‘Faceo ergo sum’. Some people even posit that the world is merely a dream in the mind of some unknowable extra-terrestrial entity (as if). However, if this were to be true it would make no difference for us, as far as I can see, since nothing about our current existence would be changed by it. So, what if I am the figment of some thing’s imagination? Descartes thought differently, since he identified the mindful ‘thing’ as ‘god’, but this was possibly to obtain the imprimatur of the church hierarchy, and thereby avoid censure.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Descarte was wrong about a lot of things, but on this one he was sort-of correct.

            Whatever else is not as we imagine, and there are many reasons to think that we may be living in a simulator of some sort (chiefly uncertainty and information boundaries), and near certainty that if a simulator like this ever will be possible, that we are almost certainly living in one (cf Bostrum, Nick; 2003; “ARE YOU
            LIVING IN A COMPUTER SIMULATION?” in Philosophical
            Quarterly
            ; Vol. 53, No. 211, pp. 243-255.), each of us can at least be sure that we exist in some form able to establish the illusion of cognitive capability. Everything beyond that is potentially very different from how we imagine it to be, we could be subroutines, brains in vats, whatever.

            That said, we can assess what we think we perceive (irrespective of what it may be, how we perceive it and what distortions may exist), try to derive underlying mechanisms, and make testable predictions based on our assessment. We can then share these predictions with others (irrespective of what these others are, simply assuming pro temps that they function similarly to ourselves ), who can then criticise, confirm or reject our predictions and by sharing their assessments and criticisms, close a negative feedback loop allowing us to improve the ability of our models to make good predictions.

            This may be not just the best we can achieve, but all we can achieve, yet it does allow the development of very effective models and the perception of a range of associated rewards. Just as if we were rudimentary, limited, slow and error prone A.I. systems 😛

          • David Cromie

            Thank you for your reply. Computer simulation or not (who could have built the computer, and when?) As I said, there is nothing we could do about the locus of our seeming existence, except suicide (?), so we might as well get on with our lives, in this world.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Repost omitting useful links to avoid the permanent loss of this post to automated moderation. So much for the claim to be “showing both sides.”

            The simulation argument was developed by inter alia, Nick Bostrum, who developed a beautiful articulation which is summarised as a trilemma:

            “A technologically mature “posthuman” civilization would have enormous computing power. Based on this empirical fact, the simulation argument shows that at least one of the following propositions is true:
            The fraction of human-level civilizations that reach a posthuman stage is very close to zero;
            The fraction of posthuman civilizations that are interested in running ancestor-simulations is very close to zero;
            The fraction of all people with our kind of experiences that are living in a simulation is very close to one.
            If (1) is true, then we will almost certainly go extinct before
            reaching posthumanity. If (2) is true, then there must be a strong convergence among the courses of advanced civilizations so that virtually none contains any relatively wealthy individuals who desire to run ancestor-simulations and are free to do so. If (3) is true, then we almost certainly live in a simulation. In the dark forest of our current ignorance, it seems sensible to apportion one’s credence roughly evenly between (1), (2), and (3). Unless we are now living in a simulation, our descendants will almost certainly never run an ancestor-simulation.”

            While the nature of our Universe appears to preclude definite answers to questions like yours about any form in which we might exist, we do seem able to infer things about what we think we perceive; but, while those perceptions seem to be reasonably self-consistent, they are also not at all inconsistent with a sensibly constructed simulator. Marcus Arvan has written peer reviewed papers on this issue and a search for “Simulation Universe” will return many useful links that this site is too cognitively-impaired to post.

            I don’t see why “suicide” would be an appropriate response to anything we might infer about the Universe or ourselves. All life forms from the simplest (viruses, Mycoplasma or possibly endoparasites, depending on definitions used) to the most complex (speaking genetically, the protozoa) are merely atoms obeying physics and life appears to have evolved simply to perform the complex synthetic process of hydrogenating Carbon Dioxide, in other words, to process otherwise useless atmospheric Carbon Dioxide into methane, parasitic upon the copious amounts of low-entropy insolation reaching our planet; and we continue to perform that task as well as might be expected from inefficient biomechanisms distracted as we often are from our first priority by the complexities of Maslow’s pyramid. Life evolved brains to move around, and not needing the full capacity of our brains for motion, we have learned how to abuse them for other purposes. That does not mean that we are not useful. If we ever feel useless, all we need to do to optimise our primary function is to eat baked beans, or perhaps Brussels sprouts. On the other hand, knowing that we are just assemblies of baryonic particles obeying the well understood elementary laws of physics, nothing stops us from creating meaning for ourselves, accepting the joy of being self-aware social animals, and investing in living lives that are very much worth living.

            For an inspirational lecture related to the last, you might find Sean Carroll’s soliloquy on “The Meaning of Life” at YouTube helpful.

          • David Cromie

            “…knowing that we are just assemblies of baryonic particles obeying the well understood elementary laws of physics, nothing stops us from creating meaning for ourselves, accepting the joy of being self-aware social animals, and investing in living lives that are very much worth living”.

            For my part, I think I will just stick to that, and leave the rest to those who have more time on their hands to hypothesise (but to what end?). As for suicide, for some, sadly, that seems to be their only way out, their only way of taking control, when they feel that things weigh too heavily upon them (being poor, disabled, or infirm in Cameron’s Britain, for example, and baked beans would be a luxury), and worrying about whether we are living in someone else’s, or some thing’s, dream is of no relevance, whatsoever.

          • David Cromie

            P.S. I am on holiday in Holland, at the moment, and I will try to read Carroll’s “The Meaning of Life”, when I have time. Thanks for the reference. I am about half way through “God’s Bankers”, but forgot to bring it with me, and so cannot give you the author’s name. Well worth a read!

          • magormissabib

            tell us about it when youre on fire.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Threats?

          • magormissabib

            No. Comfort for me in knowing your day is coming.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Yep. Hateful Christian bigots come in the trolling variety it seems. I shall feed you no longer.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Ahhh… the loving part of Christianity. I love it when they throw all pretense aside and let the inner bigot out.

          • magormissabib

            What you talkin about. God hates atheists,

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            If God exists, I doubt he gives a damn. Its the followers that want something to hate and make them feel special.

          • magormissabib

            blah blah. you cant change God. Obey and be blessed do not obey and be cursed. Dont blame God for your choice.

          • truthisnotevil

            No you can shame yourself by writing “I can’t be ashamed by him.” Did you mean to write “I can’t be ashamed of him?” or “I can’t be shamed by him?” Either way, it is not God, but ourselves that create our own shame. Holy mother of mercy, God did not kill Jesus, the non-believers killed him. God resurrected him and offered forgiveness.

          • Joe

            Wasn’t it all part of God’s divine plan? Or does the divine plan get thrown out of the window when it is inconvenient?

            If it was his divine plan, then he planned Jesus to die like he did, making his action evil.

          • Breckmin

            self-sacrifice is not the same thing as an evil action. You also have to be careful not to be over simplistic when it comes to theological taxonomies. There is a difference between the moral evil that was committed by the Roman soldiers or by Pilate or by the Sanhedrin and the allowances and guidance’s of the Holy Creator (through what I would call a sanctum flexibus). The dual reality of moral evil is that God can use it for good (like with the story of Joseph being sold into slavery). When God judges sin/moral evil and those who have committed it, this also will be a righteous act which will glorify God’s justice and Holiness. All things will glorify God in the end. The danger here is “concision” and the failure to be more precise when explaining differences. Intentionality is one of the many differences. God’s intentionality through what He allowed through the sum total of all circumstances (and His sanctum flexibus of events) is quite different from the intentionality of those who murdered/killed Jesus. Question everything.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            My definition of “good” has nothing to do with God’s plan. Good in the Bible equals serving God whether he is healing or committing genocide. It essentially allows any action as good so long as it is used to serve God. This is the ultimate enabler that allows religious leaders the leeway to manipulate and control its followers. Need to wipe out Muslims? Well it is God command. Need to improve morale? Well soldiers can “take” virgins as their wives…willingly or not. The Bible is full of evils because to me, since God is fictional, I don’t have the motivation to see the Bible or those that control the message. I can look at a scenario and see the good it can do and choose the “good” option for me and humanity as a whole. Only religion puts its interests above that.

          • Breckmin

            Let’s suspend “religion” and even “the bible” for a moment. When it comes to you personally, assuming (you should be concluding) that there is a Creator (that God is real), what has God (the Creator) ever done against you? Do you have any personal reason as to doubt why there is a Creator (independent from your reading of scripture…let’s assume there is no Bible for a moment).

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Well, I wouldn’t say I have anything against him other than I don’t have any reason to believe he exists (not any specific evidence). However if I would assume he exists, he is either arbitrary to the point of his actions appearing coincidental or is a completely noninterventionist god. Nothing about him justifies worship.

          • Breckmin

            “*IF*” The Creator did at one time actually become a Man and suffer and die on a Roman cross for your sins so that YOU personally could have all your sins forgiven and this allowed you to have a loving relationship with God “THEN” would you want to thank and praise the Creator?

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            No. First there is the price of never ending servitude. The there is the fact that the only thing I was being “saved” from is the rules he set in the first place. Thirdly I find I have a personal responsibility to bear the mistakes I make and shouldn’t pawn them off on another. Requiring servitude in exchange for forgiveness and love is not love in my eyes.

          • Breckmin

            <<>>

            What if you can’t pay for them and you have to spend the rest of eternity approaching payment in a place that is separated from those who are forgiven?

            <>
            I agree. And every Christian should agree. Forgiveness is a free gift that comes as a result of God serving you (becoming a Man and paying your price) and not you serving God. You do not serve God in order to obtain forgiveness. That is a works based soteriological structure which is contrary to the free gift of salvation. Question everything.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Interesting interpretation. I would say many other Christians do not share your views in that regard. However the “separated” part is still a part of the carrot and stick approach for a choice you have to make with limited information.

          • Breckmin

            sorry, I didn’t know I responded twice to the same comment (till now)

          • David Cromie

            Forgiveness, in your god-infested scenario, is anything but ‘free’. Belief in the forgiver is first obtained by menaces, from the ill-educated, the poor and vulnerable, and the morbidly superstitious.

          • Breckmin

            “No. First there is the price of never ending servitude.”

            The creature serving the Creator. The son having a relationship with his Father and wanting to please his Father. The (already logical) slave serving the Creator instead of an “idol” (himself or satan – without knowing it because he doesn’t believe in satan’s existence). The absolute GIFT of being able to worship the Perfect Holy Creator forever (yet instead of exciting it is “boring” and somehow torture to those walking in the flesh).

            Personally, to be able to worship God forever is an incredible GIFT. It will be beyond
            awesome. We can not even imagine the incredible things God is planning for heaven.

            “Then there is the fact that the only thing I was being “saved” from is the rules he set in the first place.”

            What if the rules are logical? Cosmologically logical and innate the the principles of the universe in a way that they will not be changed? If God is a Holy God and sin corrupts you then it is logical for you to need to be made morally Perfect again (in Christ’s Perfection). Without such Perfection…. you can not fellowship with God… but you remain corrupted in your moral corruption (which we all have and need to be saved from).

            “Thirdly I find I have a personal responsibility to bear the mistakes I make and shouldn’t pawn them off on another.”

            What if your sins remain in the historical record from this temporary creation FOREVER (unless paid for by God Himself) and are therefore eternal sins? What if all you can do is infinitely approach payment forever….but never fully reach payment?

            “Requiring servitude in exchange for forgiveness and love is not love in my eyes.”

            This is NOT what the Sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross is about…. and it demonstrates a misunderstanding of Christianity and salvation. Salvation is a free gift…. but it must be received by faith/belief. Servitude is a RESULT of salvation …. NEVER a means “to” salvation. We serve God because we want to… and we understand how logical it IS to serve the infinite Creator….

            We do NOT serve God to obtain salvation or forgiveness. Jesus obtained such salvation in exchange for His life and suffering… we need only to receive it as a free gift of Mercy to us.

            Then we will WANT to serve God out of the desire of our own changed heart.

          • David Cromie

            What a load of superstitious mumbo jumbo.

          • Breckmin

            General. And deals with nothing specific.

            IOW, you are just heckling and attempting to poison the well by
            hasty generalization and name calling specific comments.

            Unless you engage in point for point rebuttal… there is really no
            substance to your responses.

          • Apostaste

            The whole concept of vicarious redemption (scapegoating) is immoral or at very lease amoral by definition.

            If this god is all powerful then why not just forgive without the grotesque sadomasochistic.

          • Breckmin

            sin requires some sort of justice….. some sort of payment… similar to jumping off a cliff “results” in gravity pulling you down. Everything in life teaches us that there are “consequences for actions.” God was willing to become a Man and pay for those consequences (separation from heaven and affectionate fellowship with a Holy Perfect Creator) by giving His Perfect Life (Jesus Christ lived a perfect life).

            There are several problems with your assertion. One is “by what standard do you appeal to to say that something is “immoral or amoral?” If there is no Creator then there is clearly no “justifiable” morality since everything is relative and the result of conventions (easily shown to be circular and either ad populum or consensus gentium appeals).

            You can NOT analyze the system of Christianity as though it is true
            and then make accusations against the Creator as though the Creator
            is making an immoral act. Once you grant that the Creator is the Creator (the Owner of the universe Who “sets the standard for good in the universe) then you can NOT logically criticize His actions as immoral….and critical thinking will actually lead you to this philosophical conclusion (once you grant the God-concept in analysis).

            You have not provided any persuasive argument as to “why” Self-Sacrifice on God’s part is immoral.

            All powerful does NOT mean God should go against the order of the universe which is consistent with God’s Own attributes/character.

            If God forgives everything and everyone (omniforgiveness) then there is NO non-forgiveness (justice) by which to contrast forgiveness or demonstrate what forgiveness is. The truth about forgiveness will not be hidden for all of eternity by having it turned into “inevitable fate” just to satisfy your misunderstanding about what it means to be all-powerful. Grace/forgiveness/mercy are very real… and contrasted with justice.

            You also provide no persuasive argument that God’s Self-sacrifice is somehow “scapegoating.” Missing: It fails to address the LOGICAL need for moral perfection (or in this case – substitution of moral perfection) in order to fellowship with a morally perfect God/Creator. Question everything.

          • Apostaste

            Evidently you have confused authority with morality, a rather psychopathic paradigm. Frankly your comment is too stupid and closed minded to bother engaging.

          • Breckmin

            Cosmic authority (absolute authority) and objective standard is sine qua non in order to even justify any sort of morality (moral code). You can never appeal to the concept of “as long as you aren’t hurting anyone” as a basis for anything because it can easily be demonstrated as circular reasoning in pure logic analysis.

            The truth always encourages rigorous scrutiny and critical thinking and analysis… error demands tolerance of contradictory views.

            Question everything.

          • Apostaste

            You just confirmed that you cannot tell authority from morality. That’s how psychopaths think.

            Please proceed with your “circular reasoning in pure logic analysis.” demonstration, this should be good.

          • Breckmin

            easy… all you need is 1 (as in ONE) sadomasochistic who believes in hurting people, contrary to the rest of society and it easily becomes an argument ad populum (which is circular) fallacy.

          • Apostaste

            Well done you just invalidated the biblical golden rule not secular morality.

          • Breckmin

            there is no biblical golden rule which basis morality on the concept of “as long as you are not hurting anybody.” Capital punishment hurts… so does spanking a child for corrective behavior. The biblical golden rule is based on obedience to God (Who owns and created the universe).

          • Apostaste

            Okay you don’t seem to know what the golden rule is. ““So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them”. Seriously man you are on the internet there is no excuse for your blatant ignorance and lack of humility.

          • Breckmin

            You seem to be missing the concepts here which require careful intellectual taxonomy. Like I said earlier, all you need is ONE sadomasochist who believe it’s ok to hurt people, (or someone who believes it’s ok to hurt even them personally), and the “secular” basis for “as long as you’re not hurting anyone” is in dispute. Now you wish to change subjects to Luke 6:31 (or something) and say that “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” (What Jesus said) is a basis for “all” morality from the Bible (it’s not). Yes, it is clearly *one* of the commands… but it has nothing to do with (specifically)worshiping God with prayer and thanksgiving, nor does it have to do with not taking God’s Name in vain, nor not working seven days a week, nor private (thought) sins such as hidden jealousy in the Decalogue. But even if you said the Decalogue was the basis for all morality… you would still have to address different types of gluttony and other sins (which also are not based on Luke 6:31). Eating too much, drinking too much and getting drunk, drugs, etc are NOT based on Luke 6:31 which you are thinking has been invalidated because I’m demonstrating a completely different point regarding NOT having a basis for morality.

            Yes it is true that – in your schema – gluttony, getting drunk, taking drugs, getting stoned could easily fall under the category of “as long as you’re not hurting anyone” because the person/anyone that you are hurting is “you,” But without an appeal to an objective moral standard or code (something from the Creator or something that an objective Creator disagrees with) it can still be demonstrated as an appeal to conventional consensus.

            When you said “Well done you just invalidated the biblical golden rule not secular morality.” you demonstrated that you were not getting my point (IOW, your point was an incongruous rebuttal) because the Biblical moral code is NOT based on consensus, it is based on the belief that it is divine revelation (from God). Therefore, the “golden rule” that Jesus said in Luke 6:31 is NOT the basis for all morality… (because it doesn’t apply to everything) but rather God’s commandments are. That is the standard… the golden rule you are talking about is NOT based on consensus. Q.E.

          • Breckmin

            there is a missing comment I posted here so perhaps there will be confusion regarding my edit (after my comment)

          • Breckmin

            Apostaste said, “You just confirmed that you cannot tell authority from morality. That’s how psychopaths think.”

            When I was talking about distinguishing concepts in intellectual taxonomy below, it was really in response to this response from you “telling the difference between authority and morality.”

            In “morality” you are confusing two concepts. Identification of morality (which is something anyone can do) and specific *justification* for morality which is something an atheist can’t do.

            There is no valid justification for good and evil other than conventions (which can be shown to be ad populum).

            All moral epistemological axioms are vacuous of any valid justification in relativism.

          • Joe

            Yeah. I suppose I could have written that better.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Anything that you claim was “resurrected” was never dead, because death is the irreversible cessation of the emergent properties of life (homoeostasis, order, metabolism, growth, adaptation, response (to stimulus), reproduction).
            If there was a prototypical “Jesus” (not a Jewish name), a zealot for the law (of Moses) as reflected in the fables of the so-called “New Testament” and the beliefs of the community of the poor (in spirit) at Qumran, then he was probably executed by the Romans for insurgency, and the so called resurrection of the physical body made-up centuries later.

            As for “forgiveness”, there is no need for it.

          • Breckmin

            “Anything that you claim was “resurrected” was never dead, because death
            is the irreversible cessation of the emergent properties of life…” Is this an absolute statement? What about miracles that go against the natural order?

            “As for “forgiveness”, there is no need for it.”

            Are you saying that you have never asked anyone for their forgiveness?

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            “Anything that you claim was “resurrected” was never dead, because death is
            the irreversible cessation of the emergent properties of life…” Is
            this an absolute statement?

            It is definitional. If you reject the definition of death, you cannot have resurrection because that depends on death, and if you do accept the definition of death, then you cannot have resurrection because death is, by definition, irreversible.

            “What about miracles that go against the natural order?”

            Can you provide compelling evidence that any “miracles that go against the natural order” have ever occurred? If not, why do you assume their existence?

            “As for “forgiveness”, there is no need for it.”

            I wasn’t speaking of human forgiveness but, as I denoted with my quote marks, of your claim that some alleged god thingie supposedly forgave somebody (quite who is not clear), for something (unstated) in your claim that, “God resurrected him and offered forgiveness.”

          • Breckmin

            I never made that last statement. That must have been Bingo. As far as your definition for “dead” I plainly disagree with it. Historically, from a different worldview and culture, death was the separation of the spirit from the body… OR spiritual death…the separation of the soul from God’s affectionate fellowship. Something that is “irreversible” for the natural world (physical humankind) does NOT mean that it is irreversible for the Creator or for an agent of supernatural power. So, yes. I reject your definition of human death. It may apply correctly to arthropoda or chordates but as for mammalia and specifically Homo sapiens I would disagree that death is summed up by your definition.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Correction applied re “truthisnotevil.” Thank-you.

            When you abandon common definitions, particularly when dishonestly redefining common terms like “death”, you lose the ability to communicate effectively. If by “resurrection” you meant merely “spiritual death” (whatever you meant by that), I might waive my objection. A “spiritual death” (whatever that might mean) presumably need not imply, as a physical death does, any degree of permanency, though even that would not make the unlikely Jesus myth more sustainable, given that the physical resurrection appears to have been appended to the second century fables only sometime after the mid-fourth century, like the various ecumenical councils, primarily in response to various disagreements between the sects of christers, with the losers deemed “heretics” and often slaughtered. A practice which became a celebrated christer tradition until the recent advent of humanism.

            The question of whether there are some thingies which, if we had sufficient evidence that they possessed attributes necessary and sufficient to regard them as being worthy of being regarded as god thingies remains open, as does the more complex question of whether the existence of any one such entity would make the likelihood of other such entities more or less probable.

            You may find my “simple questions” helpful in considering the matter. Please note that in the following, where evidence is sought, that this means that the evidence is in a form which may be intersubjectively verified.

            1) What attributes make your god thingies deserving of being regarded as gods and why?
            2) What evidence do you have that possession of these attributes is necessary and sufficient to regard a thingie as a god thingie?
            3) What evidence do you have that such attributes may exist in this Universe?
            4) What evidence do you have that your god thingies possess such attributes?
            5) What evidence do you have that other thingies do not possess these attributes?
            6) What evidence do you have that your god thingies exist?
            7) What evidence, however hypothetical, might lead you to change your mind over any of the above?
            8) Can you provide a single falsifiable prediction made by the alleged existence of your god thingies that would be falsified if they did not exist?
            9) Consider that anything that has a significant affect upon the Universe may be detected through its affect upon things in the Universe. If there is evidence that your god thingies have affected the Universe, where can that evidence be evaluated? If there is no evidence your god thingies have affected the Universe, then why should they be regarded as deities?
            10) Why should anyone take your ideas about god thingies seriously if you don’t know enough about them to be able to answer the simple questions above about them?
            [v 0.40]

          • Breckmin

            What do “you” mean when you say “god thing” or “god thingies?”

            Common definitions are often WRONG…. especially when a reductive materialist enters into the conversation, or a naturalist/humanist with materialistic assumptions. If physical death for a human is different than physical death for another species this also needs to be addressed.

            These truths are not isolated… they are the result of accumulative case.
            Cumulative case argument provides the progression for which to make conclusions that have both theistic and religious implications.

            The claim that Jesus rose from the dead was immediate… and you can’t rewrite history with sources which are not credible. The raw tonnage of apocryphal writings corroborates the canonized new testament books … regardless of the creeds.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            See above for god thingies.

            Definitions, as in from dictionaries, reflect words as used, wrong or not. Better results may be found in appropriately edited tertiary sources, where subject and language experts suggest appropriate referenced interpretations and appropriate usage. The elements of “death” are defined across most encyclopedias are exactly as I stated it.

          • Breckmin

            Q is not the primary source for Matthew and James…. it is believed to be a source text for the gospel of Matthew and *Luke*… but the reality is we don’t even know if there actually “is” a source text we call “Q.”(quelle) It’s invention (conclusion based on pure inductions) was in beginning of the 19th Century and wasn’t heard of prior. Evangelical conservative scholars have gone along with the theory…. I for one change my position years ago to reject the Q document.

            Where are the contemporaneous writings of more than half the things we believe about history? Do you believe in the historicity of Buddha or Muhammad? Early Christian writing all corroborate historically the reality of Christ, just like the writings of Celsus, Tacitus, Josephus and others. The denial of the historical Jesus has no credibility among historians… anymore than denying the existence of Buddha or Muhammad.

          • Breckmin

            “I have never seen any grounds to assume religious or theistic implications….”

            Theistic implications in science are NEVER assumed…. they are logically CONCLUDED based on the evidence. If you are not award of the evidence or how “implications of intelligent causation” “theistic implications” and “religious implications of theistic implications” are all 3 DISTINCT from each other, then you will not understand science as a true discovery of truth.

          • Breckmin

            it is this post that you said Matthew and James instead of Matthew and Luke

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Thank-you.

          • Breckmin

            I have to suspend my conversation here because one of my daughters who is in college needs help with cosmology, existentialism, and a proper homosexual perspective.

            Hope to answer you in a few days,

          • Breckmin

            I would like to address the questions you propose… but not with the subterfuge that is present within them. Until you define “god thingies” perhaps i can rewrite your questions correctly for you.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            God Thingies, noun plural. God thingies are anything claimed as possessing attributes qualifying them to be regarded as deities by anyone at any time, including by referring to any god thingies as deities without proving that such god thingies possesses such attributes, or indeed identifying what attributes would be sufficient and necessary to regard god thingies as deserving of being regarded as deities. In this Universe things may occur as objects (comprised of energy or matter) about which intersubjectively verifiable predictions may be made or as imaginary objects for which this is not the case. Until somebody explains what intersubjectively verifiable evidence there is for an attribute or attributes qualifying something possessing such an attribute or attributes as a deity, and then shows intersubjectively verifiable evidence that a particular god thingie or thingies exist and possesses those attributes, all god thingies will remain imaginary. God thingies are plural not only because mankind has introduced hundreds of thousands of such god thingies (billions if we include the various forms of ancestor worship) all of which are equally as valid only as imaginary objects, at least until the above conditions are met for one or more of them, but also because until the attributes of such a god thingie are fully qualified, it cannot be known whether or not such a god thingie is congruent with other god thingies.

            At some stage it may be helpful to know that Godities are god thingies where their supporters though repeatedly challenged, still cannot provide any evidence that their god thingies possess any attributes that earn them the right to be regarded as deities and where they are prima facie= ridiculous, in that they cannot assist their supporters in any way in this process, no matter the cost to their followers of their belief.

            PS I am responding to you, but keep hitting “awaiting moderation”, perhaps due to included links.

          • Breckmin

            The problem with your use of “god thingies” is that it fails to distinguish between logical candidate creators and fatuous mythological constructs. In other words, not all deities are “created” equal…. (not all Deity claims are created either). It would be the same has though you generalized about “religion.” If you said “all religions are the same” you would fail to understand how all religions are clearly not equal. You might as well continue your own self-deception (with words) and just say “imaginary thingies” since this appears to be your derogatory approach with such terminology and implication via nomenclature that generalizes. I’ll bite on your questions…but I will translate (re-word) them back to reality.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Until I know the necessary and sufficient attributes to qualify a being as a god thingie, I don’t know how you expect to differentiate between “logical candidate creators” and “fatuous mythical constructs.” Indeed, a creator not being necessary, let alone qualifying the creator as a gtod thingie, I see all god thingies as “fatuous mythical constructs.” It is your job, to persuade me otherwise if you can (I doubt it).

            And all religions are the same in that they are delusional, intended to increase UTic behaviour, and so, harmful to mankind, but not the same in that some, e.g. the Abrahamic, are historically far more effective at promoting war, abuse and the brutal treatment of those not in their communities, no matter how small the differences are.

          • Breckmin

            “It is your job, to persuade me otherwise if you can (I doubt it).”

            Why is it my job to persuade you that there is a Creator? Are you entitled to this? Does the Creator owe this to you? (to have me to persuade you?) If there IS INDEED a Creator… and The Creator has already shown the evidence of such Being and Glory through the Creator’s creation…. why should I have to be the one to persuade you?

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            It is only your job if you seek to attempt to persuade me that you are not suffering from religious psychosis.

            There is, as far as I know (and am writing a substantive post to you on the topic), no reason to assume a “creator” thingie, no necessity to assume one, no cause to think that if a creator were involved in instantiating this Universe as opposed to all the other Universes suggested by M-theory that it could be in this Universe or could interact with it in any way, and and even if I were wrong about all the above (extremely unlikely) then there would be no reason to regard it with anything but horror.

            You believe differently, but, on the basis of your expositions to date, have no evidential basis for your belief, making it irrational and unsupportable.

          • Breckmin

            The Creator is never “assumed.” The Creator is clearly concluded based on an HONEST examination of the evidence without the blinders( of the circular reasoning) of naturalistic/materialistic ASSUMPTIONS.

            If you look at the natural world and define it materialistically then you have assumed.
            If you look at the natural world and say “I don’t know whether I am studying creation or not” then you will allow theistic implications in science…. and that is a LOGICAL place to “start.”

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            The bizarre idea that some “creator” established this planet, circling one of 500 billion stars in this galaxy, which is one of some 500 billion galaxies, in this Universe which is some 13.78 billion years old and will continue for some 200 billion years for the benefit of a species that evolved into one that talked about 100,000 years ago and seems likely to eliminate itself and its biosphere in the near future, requires more than a few assumptions.

            This “creator thingie” is not the conclusion that the non-religiously indoctrinated reach, nor is it supported by any evidence, nor is it supported by known physics, no matter how many invalid capitals you insert into your stentorious paragraphs.

            We are all born atheists. It is the default position. Anything beyond the knowledge that we think that we think requires indoctrination (belief) or evaluation (science). That can be based on intersubjective criticism (“reality”) or imagination. Only imaginary things require you to assume that for which there is no evidence. or to believe in “things unseen.”

            So apparently you are the one labouring under a series of rather severe misapprehensions.

          • Breckmin

            ” nor is it supported by any evidence,”

            What is the *alleged* evidence for the/a Creator?

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            There is no evidence for an alleged “creator thingie” – that is the point.

          • Breckmin

            It appears as though you really have no interest in learning the scientific reasons for how people know there is a Creator… instead you wish to continue to claim there is no evidence like the Struthio camelus that hides its head in the sand…. every time you say there is no evidence you display your incredible knowledge of how arguments for general theism are constructed. So like a broken record I ask “what is the *alleged* evidence… over and over …. alleged evidence that a theist would claim is very clear evidence and you respond like a broken record back “there is no evidence…” And we wonder why you remain an atheist.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Again, I recommend Lawrence Krauss’ 2012 book, “A Universe
            from Nothing
            which deals with the physics o modern cosmology
            in a very accessible fashion containing no “scary math”, in-or-out of
            “scare-quotes”.

            You are welcome to try to argue your case, but there is no evidence for any “creator” and certainly less compelling evidence for an undetectable continuous creator thingie than for a continuous meta-verse the effects of which we seem to experience every day. Beautiful things like snowflakes, rainbows and viruses emerge all the time without requiring the attention of a creator. Virtual particles instantiate (and evaporate) all the time too. They instantiate as pairs of matched matter and anti-matter, and (usually) evaporate the same way. They last for too short a period to affect energy balances. We know by projecting the Feynman path integrals back through negative time into the pre-space-time era that one of these instantiations could have (and probably did) produce a gravitational fluctuation resulting in the release of vacuum strain energy which resulted in the instantiation of this Universe, and, from M-theory, that similar Universes are probably produced all the time (in other words, there is nothing special about our Universe). We know that the Universe was folded and compressed, with an almost inconceivable energy density of approximately 2 x 10^42 MeV/m^3 (easy to remember) and a temperature of approximately 10^11K that precluded any organisation and that everything currently in the Universe originated in that initial plasma.

            None of this requires a creator, and it is unarguable that religion and theology have at many times posed an active obstacle to investigation of these matters, one plausible explanation is that religiots, including christers, are quite aware of the threat to their god thingies status posed by such investigations. How else would you explain it?

          • Breckmin

            You’d find I like what you call “scary math” so I can analyze the actual data and ALSO the assumptions behind it (particularly anything Reimann). The problem with the use of the word “nothing” to describe anything prior to “the instantiation of this Universe” is that it defies basic logic. If ever there was a time when there was nothing… there would still be nothing… for scientists like Robert Lawrence Kuhn to talk about nine levels of nothing or nothings fully demonstrates where intelligent people have gone to sleep when it comes to logic. You are fooling yourself if you actually think “We know that the Universe was folded and compressed, with an almost
            inconceivable energy density of approximately 2 x 10^42 MeV/m^3 (easy to
            remember) and a temperature of approximately 10^11K that precluded any
            organisation and that everything currently in the Universe originated in
            that initial plasma.” We don’t know anything of the sort…. the pseudo science that looks like science and passes for science today has also degenerated. I’m not certain if you would understand how it is brilliant nonsense, since you appear to buy into it. Mathematics is falsifiable… the assumptions behind the math is always the problem… any time you have people saying that something is coming from nothing…. just wait for the subterfuge. It’s not far behind.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Let’s begin withy something simple, how do you explain the phenomena of virtual particles?

          • Breckmin

            That’s an awfully general question since if I could perfectly explain them then we wouldn’t call them a phenomenon.

            First, we don’t even know if they should be labeled “particles” or disturbances. Second, it’s sort of like asking me to explain atomic
            electron transition…. no one knows how to explain it completely.

            I’ll tell you what I DON’T do.

            I don’t make absurd statements which defy basic logic such as to
            ever imply that they are somehow “uncaused” or that they are “from nothing.”

            Here is where intelligent people have gone to sleep when it comes
            to basic logic. (I also do not use the phrase creation ex nihilo either).

          • David Cromie

            Who, or what, created the ‘creator’ – and so on, ad infinitum?

          • Breckmin

            To even ask the question “Who made the Creator” demonstrates that you do not understand the God-concept for any logical candidate creator for general theism. God by very definition and concept would have NO creator…. or such Creator would be God! God is the Supreme Being. God is uncaused. God is NOT an effect. Look up Aseity and perhaps you will see why to even ask “where God came from?” is a pseudo (or complex) question.

            As to “what stuff” is God made off? No one knows for certain. Someone may have a theory about pure energy…. but it would only cover tangible existence (self-existence)….. it would NOT cover consciousness, intelligence or mental attitudes. Question everything.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Do snowflakes have a “creator”?

          • Breckmin

            The process by which they are formed is what has a Creator. This should be axiomatic.

          • Breckmin

            “We are all born atheists. It is the default position.” Are these assertions absolute just probable? What is the probability of them being *wrong?* I think I could give a percentage…

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Probable and falsifiable.
            How could they possibly be anything else.
            They are, however, unlikely to be overturned. Our knowledge of brain development and the consequences of exposure to religious psychoses is sufficient to preclude the alternatives of which I am aware. And I have a fair amount of time available for research.

          • Breckmin

            I remember when my son met a kid on a plane that was 10 years old whose parents were both atheists. He (the boy) was a theist. He said that he just knew that everything could not have come into being without a creator.

            Now if he had had the nonsense deception of certain physicists today perhaps he would have been under the delusion that some sort of self-creation was possible… or that something could come from nothing…
            fortunately the boy had not yet been dis-educated into believing a bunch of poor (ridiculous) theory that **looked like** physics.

            I don’t believe for a second that any right thinking individual believes we are born atheists. Too many cultures had a tendency to worship and it was innate in their consciousness to look for a higher power.

            I knew there was a Creator when I was 4 years of age, but there was an emptiness (like living in a clear bubble with no real identified purpose) until when I was older I heard the gospel and the reality of salvation.
            Then there was joy, love and relationship with my Heavenly Father through Jesus Christ. Did I ever doubt Christianity…of course… but
            the more I questioned the more I learned what the best answers were and eventually something happened which confirmed the fact that born-again Christianity (the Lordship of Jesus Christ) was factual.
            Since that event, everything has made perfect sense to me (as far as my personal questioning (which I welcome all questions always)) and I encourage questioning questioning questioning. If you don’t question what you believe or how it fits together systematically, then you will never know why you believe what you believe… or how it is logical and rational to continue believing it. After 1987 it is pretty much impossible for me to deny the Christian faith, but God still requires faith from me in other areas (am I actually saved, etc). Why does God require trust, faith, belief? If you are a parent you understand the joy of your children trusting you and believing in you when you have the truth or what’s best for them in mind. How much more does God the Father have the truth for His adopted children?

            Bottom line: I don’t just believe there is a Creator I KNOW factually that there is a Creator. Just like the people at the end of a movie like Raiders of the Lost Ark would know that there is something supernatural going on with the Ark of the Covenant, so also I “know” that there is a Creator…. and I know that Jesus Christ is Lord. I can not deny my own personal experience with the Creator nor what I have witnessed. I can’t deny the miracles I’ve seen nor the demonic power encounters I have witnessed with other people (or myself even).

            All I can do is explain to you how you can know the obvious (that there is a Creator) and know the not so obvious (that Jesus Christ is Lord).

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            I must have lead a sheltered life. Until I first met christers in my early twenties, I had thought that superstition had largely been eliminated, and was certain that anyone so primitive as to vest belief in ancient myths about god thingies was stupid and ignorant. I’m a little more sophisticated now, but my underlying opinion has been reinforced by most of the religiots I have met.

            I’m married to a physicist (among other things), and have no trouble understanding the implications that the Universe requires that particles be instantiated “from nothing” all the time, in order to maintain uncertainty in vacuums, and that these instantiations have been measured in practice. Why do you attempt to reject these facts when you earlier claimed to enjoy learning from your mistakes?

            You should know that arguments from personal incredulity are a fallacy, as are personal anecdotes, no matter how sweet.

            Like all children, you were very vulnerable at about age four, because, again like all humans, your cognitive capacity developed before your visual memory, leading to the situation when you knew that you existed, but you couldn’t remember that you had existed before. Some adult religiot took advantage of that vulnerability to implant religious delusion into your mind, creating cognitive deficiencies which you have evidently still not overcome.

            I am a parent and would never abuse a child as you were.

            As for your argument from happiness, Shaw addressed with that rather robustly in the Preface to Androcoles and the Lion:

            Now though the state of the believers in the atonement may thus be the happier, it is most certainly not more desirable from the point of view of the community. The fact that a believer is happier than a sceptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality of happiness, and by no means a necessity of life. Whether Socrates got as much happiness out of life as Wesley is an unanswerable question; but a nation of Socrateses would be much safer and happier than a nation of Wesleys; and its individuals would be higher in the evolutionary scale. At all events it is in the Socratic man and not in the Wesleyan that our hope lies now.

            .

            Your “creator” seems to me delusional, and the so-called “Jesus” (not a Jewish name) christ (not a name, but a hellenised messianic Hebrew title adopted by Roman anti-Semites) an anachronistic invention, but I am addressing the former more fully in another post and the latter would take a book to address, a book that Professor Robert Eisenman has gone some way towards writing.

            Miracles I discount entirely. If they could exist they would leave an indelible mark on the fabric of the Universe, but so far as I am aware, the gods still hate amputees.

          • Weasel1886

            Lesbo airhead

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Precious baby. A pity that when your delusional god thingies inspired you to attempt to insult me, that they didn’t grant you the evidence, wit or wisdom to support your cretinous assertions, or even the cunning to disguise your bigotry against the GSD community.

            Your challenge is that insults need to be perceived as containing some truth to be anything but idiotic, and that I am far to smart to allow losers like you to disturb my equanimity by taking offence at your blathering. It merely confirms my opinion of your cretinous religion (and the etymology of “cretin” is fascinating and amusing, confirming as it does my opinion) and the kinds of noxious creatures who find it appealing.

          • kccoallday

            Tyrd

          • David Cromie

            If ‘creator’ is the logical place to start, I fail to see why it is necessary to assume one creator, in the first place. When confronted with the myriad of realities we know of concerning the universe, why not a myriad of specialist creators, albeit not always working in harmony? I suppose you know that mankind has already been down this route, when science was not at hand to give it the lie until relatively recently in our history. So what makes your monotheistic creationist assumption more worthy of serious consideration than any polytheistic assumption about the origin of the universe?

          • Breckmin

            The Creator is concluded… NOT assumed. A cumulative case argument for general undecided theism is quite different and distinct from the further cumulative case argument for monotheism. There is no cumulative case argument for polytheism.. nor finite deities.

            There is only a cumulative case argument (shared by Islam, Christianity and Judaism) for the God of Abraham… because only the God of Abraham fits when taking theism to its logical ends in cumulative case… and what is necessary from various Creator (God concepts) and candidate creators. IOW, there is a cumulative case argument which connects general theism to orthodox monotheism.

            God is desirable as our Heavenly Father because He demonstrated love when Jesus became a Man and Sacrificed Himself for our moral imperfect and evil actions.

          • David Cromie

            You may conclude anything that takes your fancy, and then justify your conclusion as being ‘desirable’, from your point of view.

            I suppose the believers in the Classical ‘gods’, for example, were equally convinced of the reality, and desirability of their favourite ‘god(s)’, and no doubt thought them very ‘desirable’, for one reason or another.

            Mumbo-Jumbo + more Mumbo-Jumbo is still nonsense.

          • Breckmin

            Incredible lack of wisdom… not to distinguish between mythology and cumulative case argument…. cumulative case argument for general undecided (agnostical) theism does not include candidate creator concepts from mythology. Higher powers, invisible or infinite force, deistic type God, “a” Creator, or the God of Abraham are specifically different from ancient Roman and Greek mythologies. To “not” see this is to miss is to MISS the fact that there is no cumulative case argument for Apollo… but you are welcome to provide one.

            There IS indeed a cumulative case argument for the God of Abraham that connects general undecided theism to orthodox monotheism. Question everything.

            “The truth always encourages rigorous scrutiny and critical thinking…. error demands tolerance of contradictory views.” – MB

          • David Cromie

            What is the ‘cumulative case argument’ for your version of a non- mythological ‘god’?

          • Breckmin

            just saw this… it’s long to go through both set of steps to undecided general theism…and then to the God of Abraham (I think 15 small steps).

            The God of Abraham is not my version of anything. The God of Abraham had a relationship with people like Abraham and Moses long before I was ever a twinkle in my parents eyes.

          • Breckmin

            I’ll try to find one version and C & P it later, Lordwilling.

          • honeymonster

            “If ‘creator’ is the logical place to start, I fail to see why it is necessary to assume one creator” The Creator must be a singularity. Ideas of God did not coalesce into monotheism, but monotheism corrupted into polytheism.

          • Breckmin

            “I don’t know how you expect to differentiate between “logical candidate creators” and “fatuous mythical constructs.”

            I expect you to start using your God-given common sense and practical wisdom to tell the difference between “higher powers,” “Deistic type Creator candidates,” “an Infinite Creator” and Invisible Infinite force etc. from fatuous flying spaghetti monsters, Greek and Roman finite deities, etc. (and also the difference between pick unicorns, invisible dragons in your garage and orbiting teapots vs. necessary existences or self-existences).

            If you can not tell the difference of how a higher power would be a candidate creator for agnostic/undecided theism, but a Flying Spaghetti Monster would NOT be…. then I would not be able to help you.

          • Breckmin

            1) What attributes make your god thingies deserving of being regarded as gods and why?

            Translation:
            “What attributes make the Creator deserving as being regarded as God and why?”

            Ability to create all things, (there are more attributes based on
            logical conclusion of identified Being)
            The Creator owns what He creates….just as you as a little creator in God’s universe own what you create (unless it is done under work for hire). God by very definition is the Creator and Supreme Being in the universe. He created all matter and energy in the universe and owns it all.

            2) What evidence do you have that possession of these attributes is
            necessary and sufficient to regard a thingie as a god thingie?

            Translation:
            What evidence is there that possession of these attributes is necessary and sufficient to regard the Supreme Being and Creator as God?

            Logic, reason, practical wisdom… and the refusal to give a detailed answer to what should be a rhetorical question.

            3) What evidence do you have that such attributes may exist in this Universe?

            One attribute not yet discussed is the logic of Aseity and the necessity of being itself to have always self-existed.
            The logic that “being” (something) must have always been or we would
            have nothing now. (if ever there was a time when there was nothing
            there would still be nothing)
            The necessity of there not being an infinite regress of causes…
            The necessity of original cause which itself had no cause…
            etc.

            To answer precisely, however, I could not use the words “may exist in this universe.” I would have to say instead, just “self-exists” and leave the “universe” out of it…. and then explain to you the corruption of human logic with respect to the Special Pleading fallacy and how it is a false accusation and horribly abused by atheists.

            The Creator self-exists out of logical necessity.
            The Creator is concluded by observation of order.
            The Creator is concluded by observation of designs.
            The Creator is concluded by observation of what is the
            result of intelligent causation.
            The Creator is of necessity to explain the origin of Information,

            etc. etc.

            4) What evidence do you have that your god thingies possess such attributes?

            Translation:

            What evidence is there that the Creator possesses such attributes?

            How about this? “intersubjectively verifiable logic among others with the same practical wisdom” others = theists… who actually possess practical wisdom and don’t use their biases to stay stuck in the
            blindness of humanism and materialistic assumptions (circular) in science.

            5) What evidence do you have that other thingies do not possess these attributes?

            Translation:

            What evidence is there that other deities are not also the Infinite Creator/God?

            There is only One Infinite Creator. This is part of the cumulative case argument, btw, which progresses from undecided/agnostical general theism to monotheism before progressing to Orthodox monotheism and the God of Abraham in the progression. Islam, Orthodox Judaism and historical Christianity all share the same cumulative case argument up to that point, btw.

            If any other deity possessed the attributes/characteristics that God had then they would just be another name for the same conceptual God… or another name for the same Infinite Creator.

            6) What evidence do you have that your god thingies exist?

            ah…. now we are getting somewhere… next post

          • Breckmin

            6) What evidence do you have that your god thingies exist?

            Translation:

            What evidence is there that would lead any honest person to the
            conclusion that there is a Creator? (undecided/”true”(historical)
            agnostic theism).

            With bated breath I planned on spending a half hour listing evidences
            for how we know there is a Creator… but now I have changed my
            mind and I’ve decided to first turn this around and test your knowledge
            about evidence(s) for theism…

            What “alleged” evidence are YOU aware of for why there has to
            be a Creator?
            If you are going to engage in polemics against theism, you should
            first have some idea of what evidence there is for the Creator.

            Theists will not accept accusations of appeals to ignorance or any
            other poorly formatted explanation. Now we are in the trenches of
            scientific discovery…. why would someone like Stephen C, Meyer
            say there is clear evidence? And which evidence(s) for the Creator
            would he use?

          • Hogmanay

            This poor sad delusional lady is always “right” in her mind. she believes she’s a Doctor, not only does she, as a doctor(LOL) spend most of here time here (DISQUS) misleading people, she still has time to save the children that are suffering from cancer in the wards she believes she is queen of. Her mentalness knows no bounds. She is very good at amassing immense studies on defending all sorts of wacky ideals through the most long winded and intensely scientifically heavily loaded arguments……none of which she completely understands herself. You see hermits trick is to know just enough to tromp the argument of the humble and innocent mind while never understanding the picture herself.
            Do not worry about this chook, she was cooked long ago.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Per se defamation, and blatant violation of Disqus’ terms-of-service from a loser who has acknowledged faking qualifications, and while claiming advanced degrees, proves incapable of writing coherent sentences let alone paragraphs.
            He still doesn’t have a clue about me, or what I do, but hates how I run-rings about him and his fellow god-thingie fanatics, so he makes up transparent lies trying to find some way to annoy me.
            Offence being taken not given, and me not yielding that kind of control to Internet bullies, he will not succeed.

          • Hogmanay

            Ha ha LOL
            Really!???
            Addio til next time.
            From a person with a real job with real qualifications..

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Delusional as ever.

          • Apostaste

            Specifics please or you are just childishly slinging patheitic insults.

          • Hogmanay

            She has claimed to be an oncological pediatrician when addressing others who have continuously hit her with facts so hard she thought she was surrounded. After a prolonged period of time she felt inclined try to slap people around the head with her imaginary qualifications cause 7- 12 hrs a day of debating was not working for her.
            I always find it amusing when I come across Hermeroids astounding multiple 20 page essays. I really dont have time to read them, and as much as I would love rebute them, I can only address a smidgeon of what she packs the net with as I have work to do with my own job to make sure the family is happy and content.
            Be well.

          • Apostaste

            Can you cite the specific exchange you refer too, given you say you haven’t bothered to read her comments I’m not inclined to just take your word for it.

          • Hogmanay

            I have read all Hermits rebuttals to me and replied with the answers she has requested, I am not able to read all of her daily essays is my meaning……if you missed that point……not I can’t be bothered to read her comments, I have been nauseated by too many debates to count most were over 8 months ago but we have had a few verbal fistycuffs in between, especially when I do occasionally read her tooting on a pipe that she does not know how to play. I find her militant and repugnant in several topics here she is just another loose cannon. I can quite plainly see once again that she reads books with out understanding. She can quote but misses the point , whether it be science, history or religion. Breckmin is opening up things that she can’t even see in front of her own eyes.
            It is really quite astonishing.
            Be well.

          • Apostaste

            Sorry mate, I can’t just take your word for it. I have found here to be well informed, passionate, honest and patient in all my dealings with her. If you have a specific issue with her then by all means address the issue, it will prove more productive then vague mudslinging and gossip.

          • Hogmanay

            Their are many well informed people on Disqus, that are honest about their careers and so forth hermit is not one . This is through personal experience with discussions with her over the last 2 years..
            You may agree with a lot of her opinions. I have occasionally in topics, thought, yes indeed I agree with her but I dont feel the need to weigh in . But every now and then I will come across her and she is shouting her mouth off trying to fool people. I cant accept that. She is no Oncology Pediatrician. How may you ask do I know that. 1. I am a professional, I work for the mining industry and have for decades. I have loads of free time between jobs, I also have a family ……I must have balance, Disqus aint part of that balance. It is solely opportunistic….. here and there.
            2. My wife is a Doctor.. a GP…and we know 1 pediatrician very well (not an oncologist) we also friends with many Doctors including 2 siblings and an Uncle) and none of them have the time or inclination to crap on ..on topics that will not help their patients or families or friends…….especially the topics that Hermit continually visits.on a forum like Disqus………not even the retired Doctors……
            I know it might not have crossed your mind but I have argued and debated hermit well before her revealing herself to be an oncologist and It sits very very very crooked on the wall. I am just straightening this up. This aint mudslinging or gossip. I leave that to the woman down the road. Fraud is fraud.

          • Hogmanay

            Please feel free to go to my past arguments with Hermit and browse our conversations they go back quite a ways look at the ones from especially 12 months on.
            Just click on my avatar.

          • Breckmin

            ad hominem never addresses content… it also indicates an inability on your part to defend a particular position

          • Breckmin

            “and the so called resurrection of the physical body made-up centuries later.”

            How can it be made-up centuries later if it is written in the gospel of Mark? (16:6)

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Because if you look at the earliest extant bibles, including Codex Sinaticus and Codex Vaticanus, printed in the mid fourth century, Mark ends at 16:8. The supposed resurrection of the body, as opposed to the “spiritual resurrection” of Saulus/Paul, Peter and James was invented after that.

          • Breckmin

            I gave you Mark 16:6 for a reason. The resurrection is clearly implied in the first 8 verses of Mark if you actually read them.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            No it isn’t. The body was missing and an unidentified young man was standing at the grave. Rather than understanding a “physical resurrection” the women fled and “said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid”. The implication of a “physical resurrection:” is entirely projection on your part – and the church felt the same, because they found it necessary to add the ending making their preferred outcome explicit in order to combat the idea that this was a “spiritual resurrection” which, by that time, was perceived as a heresy requiring an answer. So like the rest of the story, they made it up and wrote it down. So easy, and not requiring any “supernatural intervention” once you understand the process.

          • Breckmin

            you are getting bad information from someone/people with “tunnel vision.” Go back and read Mark 8: 31, Mark 9: 31, and Mark 10: 33-34. What does Mark record and predict that will happen 3 days after Jesus’ death??? If you don’t employ scriptura scripturam interpretatur, then you will never understand a book and its author by its “whole.” Your conspiracy theory (you are repeating) holds no weight because the other gospels have the same narrative… “the temple of His body” would rise 3 days after His death.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            And you are leaping to (faulty) conclusions you cannot support about me, and are making multiple assumptions about your nonsensical scriptures, including the idea that documents written by unknown authors long after everyone involved was dead could possibly be “predictive” and that any of the other references you cite related, when they were written long after the deaths of anyone involved, to provide a backstory for the noxious Herodian Saulus/Paul’s “spiritual messiah”, to anything other than a “spiritual resurrection.” As it is well accepted that Matthew and Luke were based on Mark (and probably the lost ‘Q’) and that John is a very much later work, your attempts to drag them into the arena in your defence without offering any specific claims based on the earliest more-or-less complete bibles which date no earlier than the mid fourth century CE are as spurious as your belief that there was an historical prototype for the anti-Semitic Graeco-Roman religions which supposedly evolved from Semitic god thingies. For academic support, I refer you to e.g. Prof Robert Eisenmann’s more recent writings (I won’t put in a link as that seems to get posts onto a moderation queue from which they are never released by the shifty-eyed creatures running this circus, but you can find him on inter alia, Wikipedia).

          • Breckmin

            You are attempting to claim that the bodily resurrection isn’t implied in the book/gospel of Mark. Go back and read Mark 8: 31, Mark 9: 31, and Mark 10: 33-34. And THEN read Mark 16: 1-8.

          • Breckmin

            Where is our “Correction applied re “Luke” not “James.” Thank-you.” ??? We are beginning to think that you are losing your willingness to admit when you were wrong….

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Can you provide a link. I’m not sure to what you are referring?

          • Breckmin

            You wrote this statement earlier “To my knowledge, Mark, the first so-called gospel to be written, and
            with Q, the primary source for Matthew and James, still did not contain
            this fable any more than they contained the virgin birth mith in the mid
            fourth century. I’d welcome any sustainable information to the
            contrary.” and I responded to it citing Matthew and Luke not Matthew and James.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Brainfarts (James) and fingerglitches (mith) on my part I’ll be bound (I swear, English may be my fifth language, but my spelling is usually way better than that). I still don’t see my original post or any mention of it by you prior to this, but I’m sure you are correct and that it is just Disqus, my browser or the operator (me) goofing up that prevents me from seeing them. If I had seen anything I would have addressed it.

            The Gospel of James is, like all the gospels including the so-called canonical, a much later invention, fabricated long after any hypothetical protagonists were dead, probably in Rome (due to his familiarity with “sacred virgins” and projection of this to Judaism), by somebody unfamiliar with Hebrew and Aramaic working through an Attic Greek copy of Isiaah, presumably looking for post-hoc “prophesies” to “retro-fulfill” and making heroic efforts to convert the brothers of James and the so-called “Jesus” (not a Jewish name) into step-brothers via Joseph, as it is the earliest protochrister writing we know of to focus on the mistranslation of “almah” (Hebrew “young woman) to “parthenos (Greek “virgin”) (from 3:17), and relates primarily to the life of Mary and including birth and infancy myths similar to those later added to Mark, rather than derived from it.

            We? Royal plural? You and your dog/imaginary friend? Whatever.

          • Breckmin

            FTR, there was no printing in the 4th Century

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            The printing was performed by humans using majuscule lettering.

            Mechanical printing, which is probably what you mean, has been performed since the Egyptians invented seals by at least c 3500 BCE, while the Chinese were printing with woodblocks from at least 220 BCE. Perhaps you regard moveable type, again invented in China (in about 1000 CE) and introduced to the West in about 1450 by Gutenberg as the first printing, but that would also be both parochial and incorrect.

          • Bingo

            People who proudly announce their unbelief can’t be expected to know the scriptures or understand them. You have no clue, so why do you even come here except to stir up contention?

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            So, your source of belief comes from the Bible in which you can only understand if you believe it’s contents? I’ve read the Bible and I claim it is you that doesn’t understand its contents. You have a glorified version of it in your head that you opt not to let go. You do not accept basic reasoning and logic instead you put your lot in with emotional fairy tales.

          • Bingo

            You will never understand the scriptures without the influence of the Holy Spirit (God) on you to interpret the powerful truths therein to you. A cursory reading can’t do that for you. It is a supernatural, living document and if you are not the least bit open to God, it will be a dead document to you.

            Only those who are spiritual can receive anything from it. Those who live in the head and in the flesh will be confused by it.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Well since you cannot prove that God exists at all then the Bible is a work of fiction. So understanding the Bible with the Spirit of God, is essentially saying you have to be insane to understand it.

          • Bingo

            God says that no one has an excuse to deny He exists because His existence is plainly observed by His handiwork, so He has done all He needs to prove Himself. If you want more proof and are serious about that, then all you need to do is ask Him, and He is eager to show you.

            As long as you are in a mindset of unbelief, your heart is hardened toward anything He could ever do to open your eyes, apart from a major shakeup in your life.

            It is the rather unbalanced and insane folks who speak like yourself about the truth.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Sorry. I don’t talk to the voices in your head. Your arguments are.always flawed by assuming the answer before you ask the question. ‘His” works cannot prove ‘him”. Because you haven’t proved the works are created by anyone.

            Every single explanation by the Bible of anything having to do with the natural world that we.have scientific answers.for has been proven to NOT be supernatural.in nature. God is always retreating into the unknown as science learns more about the universe. Your quotes from an archaic book will not stop.that.

          • Bingo

            The problem is that you have voices in your head. I do not.

            You spend all your energy believing false concepts and man-made arguments against truth. God is the Creator of all we are discovering through our construct of science!

            What a waste of a life.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            False concepts? Like math and logic?

            God is a man made concept you believe in so in that regard I view us the same. What you believe in, is your opinion. Once you make the claim that it is truth, you have the burden of proof.

          • Bingo

            Nope. God is THE GREAT MATHEMATICIAN AND LOGICIAN. These concepts are not human…they are from God’s mind to you!

            You want to worship the created rather than the Creator. You have missed the truth.

          • Bluesman1950

            Putting unsubstantiated assertions in capital letters doesn’t make them true.

          • Bingo

            Ahh, but it is true, nonetheless. You just don’t know Him.

          • Bluesman1950

            Just saying that it’s true doesn’t make it true either! And I don’t worship anything. The need to worship is a religious failing.

          • Bingo

            When one knows God and knows the truth, we need to speak it.

            We are created to worship. You do worship something.

          • Bluesman1950

            There’s no proof that we were created. I don’t worship anything. Why should I?

          • Bingo

            God is the Creator. The universe didn’t create itself. you can spin your wheels all you like on the fake story of evolution, but deep down inside you—and everyone—already knows that such an intricately working wonder such as the entire universe cannot happen by itself out of nothing.

            We are created to worship. If you reject God, something takes His place—most likely it is yourself, or an idol of some kind.

          • Bluesman1950

            “The fake story of evolution”. What, the one supported by the vast body of scientific evidence? As oposed to the real story of the creation, in a book full of talking snakes, 900 year-old men, virgin births and the dead coming back to life?

            We are not ‘created’ for any purpose at all, we have evolved, like every other animate creature on the planet. Worship is your fetish, not mine.

            As ever, you say that the Universe cannot happen by itself out of nothing, yet you believe in a totally unestablished ‘creator’ which apparently did just that! Please refrain from using that silly and self-defeating argument if you want to be taken at all seriously.

          • Bingo

            Funny how all of a sudden in this generation, the THEORY of men called “Evolutionary Theory” has now become what they hope to be fact. What a load of crap! It has rushed in to fill the vacuum of unbelief in the truth.

          • Bluesman1950

            Do you understand what a theory is in science?

          • Bingo

            Do you? Theory is not fact. Evolution is merely theory, but this godless culture has latched onto it as fact. Dumb.

          • Bluesman1950

            “Merely theory”. Like Gravity you mean? As I said, you obviously don’t understand what a scientific theory is.

          • Bingo

            I know that Evolution is only a theory and cannot be proven. It’s a story, and godless man gravitates to it because he has nothing else. True faith KNOWS what the truth is, and that is that God is the Creator of all things.

          • Bluesman1950

            Well present your disproof of evolution and claim your Nobel Prize!

          • Bingo

            We who know God are beyond that kind of silly argument, because it serves as a stumbling stone to the real truth that Jesus Christ, God’s son has come to save you from vile sin, and to bring you into a relationship with Himself that is beyond anything you could comprehend.

            You have a heart that is stone cold against God today. You need faith in order to KNOW what truth is. Until such time, you can never appreciate truth. God needs to do a work in you first. He may already have given you your opportunities, and you have kept rejecting them. There will come a time when your continual rejection and hardness of heart will be allowed to remain. Eternal condemnation is a LONG time to suffer.

          • Bluesman1950

            So no actual proof then?

          • Bingo

            The proof is in the word of God–it is alive with power to change people. Read it and believe it. By the living faith that He gives you, God will solidify the truth in you so that it is unmistakeable and undeniable.

          • Bluesman1950

            You say that proof exists, yet you cannot produce it. It’s your proof, you produce it. It’s not down to me to find it for you.

          • Bingo

            You live among the proof. Look around you. You have no excuse.

            Romans 1:18-20
            But God shows his anger from heaven against all sinful, wicked people who suppress the truth by their wickedness 19 They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them. 20 For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.

          • magormissabib

            All you ever get from atheists are the same old boring lies and excuses.. All they do is talk about what they DONT know, what they dont see and what they dont understand. Well duh, If they would actually really read the Bible they would know that Jesus said, that unless a man be born again he cannot SEE understand, comprehend the kingdom of God. GOD gives insight, enlightenment and illumination by his spirit to those who call on him from a sincere heart. No man can do for another what he must do for himself but that is the same old thing they demand time and time again. Proof. Like I say , they will have the proof they wan when they are on fire and when its too late.

          • Bingo

            They will have no excuse when they stand before the God of the universe. It will be a horrendous day for them. They will remember all these encounters and experience monumental regret.

          • Breckmin

            many scientists over the years have presented evidence against universal common descent and I guarantee you that there was no Nobel Prize waiting for them. Quite the opposite. ridicule and persecution or the claim that they were engineers instead of biologists rather than looking logically at their objections. The biggest problem here is that that the word “evolution” contains too much equivocation to be used within the discussion on whether beneficial mutations can result in new types of genes (without the template for such information) can emerge within a population of species. No Nobel Prize will be given that stands against conventional infrastructures.

          • Bluesman1950

            The fact that many people have argued against evolution and presented evidence of varying degrees of plausibility does not mean that it has been disproved. It is simply the case that their evidence was not sufficient to outweigh the vast body of evidence which supports evolution.

            Creationists, particularly in the USA, often portray evolution as some giant conspiracy, known to be a lie by its scientific proponents, but maintained for various wicked purposes! That is false. If sufficient evidence of sufficient rigour and quality disproves the theory as it stands, it will be modified or even replaced. No such evidence has yet been produced.

          • Bluesman1950

            Like most religionists, you appear to be confusing scientific theory with a guess or hunch.

            A theory in science, is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses.

            Gravity is merely a theory, you would be well advised, however, not to jump from the top of any tall buildings on the strength of the fact that it’s ‘only a theory’.

            Dumber.

          • Bingo

            What on earth makes you think I am a “religionist”? I am a child of God through faith in Jesus Christ, which has nothing to do with religion.

          • Bluesman1950

            “I am a child of God through faith in Jesus Christ…” That sounds a tad religious to me!

          • Bingo

            There’s NOTHING religious about it. It is all about the Father-child relationship that God desires with us.

          • Bluesman1950

            Reminds me of the comment from Sigmund Freud “I cannot think of any need in childhood as strong as the need for a father’s protection”.

            Of course that’s just a theory!

          • Bingo

            We all need a father, and earthly father, but we have an even greater need of the perfect, heavenly Father who loves us more than our earthly fathers ever could.

          • Bluesman1950

            Your need, not mine.

          • Bingo

            False. Every single human being needs a father. God is the perfect Father that everyone needs even more.

          • Bluesman1950

            False. My late father is the only one I have had or needed. He had the advantage of being an actual, real person and not some imaginary character.

            I can cope with life without the need for a fictional replacement father. I certainly don’t need your genocidal pervert of a’god’.

          • Bingo

            Everyone needs to become a child of God, the perfect Father who loves us perfectly and deeply.

          • Bluesman1950

            The perfect loving father who, according to his alleged ‘inerrant word’ wiped out all of the world except Noah’s family and menagerie; whose words authorise slavery, rape, genocide and the murder of enemies, including babe’s in arms! I’m glad my actual father wasn’t that ‘loving’!

          • Bingo

            Yes, because we are a wicked lot, and He is our Creator and can do what He pleases. Everything He does and has ever done is just and righteous. You ar enot in any position to lord yourself over God and judge Him. You merely prove how foolish and arrogant you are by trying.

          • Bluesman1950

            You really do feel the need to be dominated don’t you? By an imaginary monster too! Grow up and take responsibility for your own life in the real world.

          • Bingo

            Uh…no, because I have a dominant kind of personality, being partly choleric. However, I have been forgiven of all my sins and I am grateful to God for His plan of salvation for me. Because of His great love for me, and what he has done for me, I love Him back.

            Because I am His child, I am now His ambassador to the dying world of His great love and plan. That is what I am responsible for. It’s a heavy burden, but he helps me carry it easily. Walking with my loving Father through this life is what living in this real world is all about.

          • Bluesman1950

            Good luck with that!

          • Bingo

            There is no such thing as luck.

            God is with His children and He empowers them in all they do,

          • Bluesman1950

            There is probably no such thing as god, but go ahead and waste your life if you want to.

          • Bingo

            Your lack of conviction runs directly against the millions of people who have been given the revelation required to know of God’s existence. Yours is a place of powerlessness.

          • David Cromie

            The state of the world argues the opposite.

          • Bingo

            The world belongs to Satan. That’s why it is in such a state.

          • David Cromie

            Yet, in the same breath, you claim that it is ‘god’s’ creation, according to Genesis. Make up your mind! Or could it just be that ‘god’ created Satan to do its dirty work for it, and then claim to have clean hands, so to speak?

          • Bingo

            This is so basic, and it is so foreign to you! This planet is God’s creation, and it was very good, but man has given over his dominion to Satan. It is his domain, now, but those who love God and belong to Him through Jesus Christ are busy taking back what that enemy has stolen—on various fronts.

          • David Cromie

            How, exactly, do you go about taking back that which your ‘god’ created in the first place (its dominion), and thus is not yours to take? Sounds like attempted theft, to me! If your ‘god’ could not control its creation, known as Satan, what makes you think you could?

          • David Cromie

            So that is why your ‘heavenly Father’ tortures his ‘creation’ with bigots, wars and disease?

          • Bingo

            God doesn’t torture anyone. Satan is the author of sickness and disease and hatred and wars. It’s so typical of his followers to blame God! You march right in step with them all.

          • David Cromie

            As pointed out previously, Satan is the product of your supposed ‘god’, the ‘maker’ of all things, so you cannot split the one from the other, since there is no proof of the existence of either. Is your ”almighty god’ helpless in the face of its own creation? How could that be, unless it is very weak and cruel, and in league with Satan?

          • Breckmin

            The complication here is that concision is often the enemy of precision. When the Christian says that “satan” is the author of evil or that “Adam” brought sin into the world, what they are really talking about is an abuse of free will and the ability to choose between options that has brought about a judgment or a reaction from the Creator to the creation. Yes it is true that God sustains the natural order and this includes diseases… however, the question you have to ask yourself is “Are God’s actions justified?” in some way? The unbeliever misses so much of the complication that the immediate reaction in their mind is “no.” The question you have to ask yourself (if you are contemplating theism or in this case Christianity) is whether or not God is ever obligated to stop His judgement against the human race or stop allowing the wars, killings, rapes, murders, etc. (basically stop human free will). If God is planning on judging satan as His enemy then we must understand the logical reasons for this (satan’s actions are morally evil and how they are the product of disobedience). Humans also are corrupted with sin and disobedience and we have to see the complication here regarding human disobedience and God’s logical judgement against the world and more importantly the consequences of sin and disobedience which are being ignored in this discussion.

          • David Cromie

            I fail to see any hint of logic in this. If your ‘god’ manifests his will to Christians, if not to the whole world, why does it do so, arbitrarily, to each version of Christianity, including the various sects, over time? For example, the Roman church proclaims itself to be semper idem, but any informed person knows that to be untrue.

          • Breckmin

            all Christians have different experiences and are at different stages of learning. The non-essential details are not as important as the basics (the Deity and Lordship of Christ, salvation by faith/grace, monotheism, etc) which unite all Christians. The Roman Catholic church became corrupt on many things, but historically the basic Christology and theology proper was Orthodox. So many people within the Church are not spiritually regenerated… they are part of the physical church but they are not part of the invisible church (the Kingdom of God in the hearts of men/women) or the Body of Christ. This makes it more confusing for people who wrongfully apply the No True Scotman’s Fallacy that is at times a corruption in human logic (just like Special Pleading and the Natural Fallacy are also corruptions in logic when they are misapplied). When it comes to the NTSF, it does not take into account spiritual regeneration, the dynamics of walking in the Spirit verses walking in the flesh as well as basic belief which would define a person or category. If I say a Christian would never die being a devil worshiper this has to do with definitions that categorize people on belief as well as behavior. The NTSF when wrongfully applied does not always acknowledge what a Christian would not do by definition of being a Christian…. or more importantly what a Christian “walking in the Spirit” would never do…but a Christian still “walking in the flesh” would possibly do. It gets confusing for the unbeliever.

          • David Cromie

            This mumbo-jumbo does not address the question posed. Would you like to try again?

          • Breckmin

            When I used “logical” it was in reference to consequences for actions. You asked a question regarding versions of Christianity and I addressed why there is disagreement with peripheral theology. Any two people who think alike on everything…..

            one of them isn’t thinking. (so you have cults like J.W.’s)

            mumbo-jumbo is general and deals with no specific point, btw.

          • Breckmin

            The logic, here, btw, was regarding the consequences for sin. Everything in life teaches you that there are consequences for actions. Why should moral decisions be the exception? There are consequences for moral decisions which go against a Holy God… forgiveness is sine qua non.

          • David Cromie

            You are right, of course, “that there are consequences for actions”, and moral decisions are not the exception. But what has the presumed existence of a ‘Holy God’ got to do with anything, since neither you, nor any other deist, has yet produced a convincing argument, much less any evidence, for believing that such a supernatural entity actually exists, outside of biblical folklore?

          • Breckmin

            you clearly are not familiar with arguments for the Creator and cumulative case arguments which connect theism to the God of Abraham. The fact that you so quickly dismiss that there could be evidence for “a” Creator when you are not even familiar with the falsifiable evidence for such… is somewhat troubling and indicates a bias.

            O.k. What about the “alleged” evidence for “a” Creator???
            What evidence are you familiar with that points to the necessity of there being a Creator? Please be specific and don’t generalize about I.D. or design arguments.

          • David Cromie

            I know of no alleged evidence (scientifically falsifiable or otherwise) for a ‘creator’, do you? Nor have I ever seen any cumulative case arguments for the necessity of such an entity, apart from the Scholastics, such as Aquinas, or the suggestion that ‘if ‘god’ did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him’ (Voltaire – Epitres) – not very compelling arguments, really. It is more likely that because no ‘god’ exists, there was thus an opening for its invention, by those who would control the minds of mankind, often for their own ulterior purposes.

          • Breckmin

            you are correct in that the revelation of God being a “Holy God” is indeed a result of the writings of scripture. (which you wrongfully assert as biblical folklore). A convincing argument is a rather vast one… since you first have to go through the cumulative case argument for undecided/agnostic general theism and then have to go through the cumulative case argument for the God of Abraham from general theism before you even get to the Torah/Tanakh, let alone the New Testament. The question was answered synthetically and systematically within the closed set of assumptions assuming Christianity were factual… this is the reason why things are the way in which they are. I understand that I have not performed the huge task of substantiating Christianity or systematic conclusions from the belief structure. The point was address in concision with the understanding that “if you understood Christianity to be true, etc” here is why.

          • David Cromie

            The whole Biblical narrative surrounding the ‘God of Abraham’ is folklore. The history of the OT, and its authorship, would confirm that. On the question of Jehovah, or whichever name you prefer, it is instructive to look up the name in the ‘Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible’, by van der Toorn, Becking. and van der Horst, Eds. 2nd Edn. 1999. There are no valid reasons for assuming that the mystical passages of the Bible are factual, without proof that the ‘God of Abraham’ actually exists, and no Jesuitical verbal gymnastics will obviate that necessity.

          • Bingo

            Satan was created with a will of his own. He willed to rebel. Evil was found in him and he was kicked out of the presence of God.

            God is in control.

            You have a very perverse way of seeing things, and that is because your true father is Satan, the father of lies, the enemy of God who lives to kill, steal and destroy. You are in league with him.

          • David Cromie

            If you say so, but you will need to prove the existence of any such entity as ‘Satan’, first.

          • Bingo

            You think I NEED to? Who needed to prove God to me? No, God proves Himself to those who will receive Him. Those who are hardened against Him and have made their choice, He will harden even more. That just may be you, so you do not need me to prove anything, for you will never believe it.

            To those who deny God, they will also deny Satan’s existence, a mere angel, and he loves that he has duped them about that. But they belong to him and will spend eternity where he goes.

          • David Cromie

            Mankind has been imagining all sorts of ‘gods’ for millennia, what makes you think your imagined, and then reified, version is in any way more believable than the rest?

          • Bingo

            Sure, mankind on its own is incredibly sinful and does its own thing, including fashioning gods for itself. However, there is ONE God, Jehovah or Yahweh, who has created us to have relationship with Him. He is able to reveal Himself to us. He has done so as Jesus, and through His written message to us. He also goes beyond this to those who are in desperation and desire the truth and He comes to them in various ways, revealing Himself. He is able to soften and convince the most hardened heart of those He knows will come. Those who are completely closed off to Him and will not come (because He knows every heart and the future), He will seal that deal and close Himself off from them completely, and leave them in their condemnable state.

          • David Cromie

            I asked for reasons, not a rehash of your unsupported beliefs.

          • Bingo

            My reasons are that God has proved Himself to those who place their faith in Jesus Christ. No revelation comes to those who are not seeking Him. No faith, no revelation.

          • David Cromie

            This is akin to saying that once anyone has convinced him/her self that unicorns, for example, exist, then they must exist, with all the attributes that have been assigned to them, including the power to ‘reveal’ themselves to believers. This is just another circular argument.

          • Bingo

            It’s only circular to those who make it their life’s work to deny truth.

          • David Cromie

            As a child you still believe in fairy stories, because your father told you to? ‘Except ye come as a little child…etc.’? It is nice to know that intelligent, questioning, adults are excluded from your god’s grand plan, and you speak of ‘truth’? How puerile!

          • Bingo

            Nope. God invites questioning. Go ahead and honestly question…that is, if you can.

          • David Cromie

            Even if one were to accept that your imaginary ‘god’ invites questioning, you certainly don’t, since you ignore all questions about your ‘god’ and your beliefs. You have been honestly questioned time and time again, but all you can do is waffle crap, or cut and paste your favourite bits from your book of favourite fairy tales.

            I expect you object to the bible (the word means nothing more than ‘book’, in case you think it means something else) being referred to as a book of fairy tales, but you have yet to produce any convincing argument as to why it should be considered as anything else. Now there is a challenge for you, remembering that quoting from said book is proof of nothing about the reliability of the contents of the book, no matter how hard you may try to convince yourself, or others.

          • Bingo

            I refuse to divulge deep things because you have no heart to receive it. We are not to cast our pearls before swine. If you truly want to know something, you need to prove you are willing to have a respectful dialogue…but you prove time and again you do not.

          • David Cromie

            So, questions about the existence of your ‘god’ are ruled out of court, ab initio?

          • Bingo

            They do not help you, for you have a closed heart already. You have made your choice and are locked into it. Your destiny is sealed.

          • David Cromie

            Are you saying that proof of your ‘god’s’ existence would not be in any way helpful?

          • Bingo

            My list of proofs of God would not help you. You would have to be open to Him and He would reveal Himself to you like He did to me and millions upon millions of others.

          • David Cromie

            So I have to, firstly, believe in your ‘god’ before I am able to believe in it? Not very logical or intelligent, is it.

          • Bingo

            No, you need to simply believe in the ONLY God there is. He is more than able and eager to prove Himself to you, but you must be sincere in asking Him to do so, and open to His movement in your life. That is both logical and intelligent, as opposed to your very childishly impudent and baseless rejection.

          • David Cromie

            What you are arguing is that all one has to do is to ‘simply’ believe that Apollo, say, exists as the one true god, and lo and behold there he is, in all his glory.

          • Bingo

            Nope. We need to believe that God exists as He proves every day by His handiwork around us. You are free to deny Him, and you must be prepared to pay the price for that choice.

          • David Cromie

            On what grounds do you assert that what we see around us is not the work of Apollo, if others do?

          • David Cromie

            Poor deluded Bingo seems to think that a rehash of the discredited ‘Argument from Design’ will solve all his ‘creation’ problems. Even the author of the ‘Five Ways’ had his doubts!

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            “God is the Creator” No proof of that.

            “The universe didn’t create itself”. Please provide evidence to support your claim. Current science doesn’t have any definitive answer on the creation of the universe, though current evidence points to the Big Bang theory, though we are still trying to determine the nature of that particular event. Just because we don’t know doesn’t mean you can answer God. How humble is it to assume you have an answer that no one else can figure out?

            The ONLY thing in this world I am 100% sure of is that you are certifiable (or a natural troll). You have no basis to claim what anyone else believes deep down. At this point, you haven’t proven that you should be allowed out in public and around young children, because who knows when your figment might start giving you orders to kill people in the name of God.

          • Bingo

            I don;t need EVIDENCE, except that God Himself provides the firm conviction of the truth of His word concerning Creation. We can only know the truth through our very real faith. without faith you have nothing, and nothing of substance…just man’s fleshly thinking.

            When people like yourself come into these kinds of threads of publications such as CHRISTIAN NEWS NETWORK, insisting on your anti-God views, you prove yourself to be a troll. Move along, little dogie!

          • Bluesman1950

            A god job that you don’the need evidence, as there is none.

            If you want these websites used to whinge when bigots are called out on their bigotry, expect reasonable people to respond to you.

          • Bingo

            You are the bigot, and you and your kind never fail to show up to bring it. You lot are a very angry, sad and unfulfilled lot.

          • Bluesman1950

            Thanks. I don’t stand in the street inflicting my views on anyone.

          • Bingo

            LOL! No, but you do the cowardly thing and infiltrate christian-themed articles and threads with your hatred and bigotry. How ugly is that? Go get your friends and play in your litter box.

          • Bluesman1950

            Bigot-themed and relished by the religious.

          • Bingo

            Bigot R U.

          • Bluesman1950

            Try English.

          • Bingo

            Try reading the bible.

          • Bluesman1950

            I had to as a child, being brought up as a christian. I soon realised that it was a self-contradictory collection of ludicrous fantasies.

          • Bingo

            You may have been brought up with some Christian values, but you were never a Christian by virtue of your family.

          • Bluesman1950

            I was a baptised and confirmed catholic. I went to mass, served as an altar boy and sang in the choir. I went to confession and received communion. I believed in and prayed to god and jesus. I believed in the existence of heaven, hell, angels and the devil.

            How was I not a christian?

          • Verisimilitude

            Obviously, you were a Christian, Bluesman…

            …but I seriously doubt Bingo is.

            All he’s done is fallen for the Christian Church’s view of Christianity…

            …in other words, he’s abandoned Yeshua for the pipe-dreams of a megalomaniacal bunch of priests, prelates, bishops and popes…

            …but there’s one born every minute, and Bingo’s just another…

          • Bingo

            Christians are not Christians by virtue of baptism and confirmation into some religion. A Christian is one who has received Jesus Christ into his/her life, as personal Saviour and made Him Lord. There is nothing you can do to receive salvation…no works…but only believe in Jesus and to allow Him to live His life in and through you. You become a new creature in Christ based on your activated faith.

            Ephesians 2:8-10
            God saved you by his grace when you believed. And you can’t take credit for this; it is a gift from God. 9 Salvation is not a reward for the good things we have done, so none of us can boast about it. 10 For we are God’s masterpiece. He has created us anew in Christ Jesus, so we can do the good things he planned for us long ago.

          • Bluesman1950

            I had. Then I grew up.

          • Bingo

            You didn’t have, or you would not grow away from Him.

          • Bluesman1950

            “You didn’t have…” I did have!

          • Bingo

            No, you had some religion. People who really know Jesus Christ and have walked with Him cannot renounce Him.

            What happened to you is that you were instructed about salvation but when you became of age enough to comprehend it and to be accountable for your sins, you rejected the gospel. We all have been afforded that choice.

          • Bluesman1950

            I rejected the gospel in favour of truth.

          • Bingo

            Nope. You’ve rejected the truth in favour of nice, ear-tickling lies.

          • Bluesman1950

            You keep thinking that and don’t forget to grovel.

          • Bingo

            There is no grovelling when one is part of the Royal Family. Christians are joint-heirs with Jesus Christ. All he has, we have.

          • Bluesman1950

            You are sounding less and less connected to reality. Anyway, time for me to go to bed now. Goodnight your majesty.

          • Bingo

            Reality is knowing God through Jesus Christ, and building one’s life on the solid Rock of who he is. Everything else is sinking sand.

            It is only in knowing Jesus that anyone can truly live and know the meaning of life.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Infiltration 101:

            Step 1: Google atheist news.

            Step 2: Pick article and read it.

            Step 3: Comment in article.

            You are now prepared for international espionage.

          • Bingo

            You are the one who insults people. That’s what gets your rocks off.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Hey, it was your word. I just painted the picture to show you how silly you sounded with that statement.

          • Bingo

            It’s not me who comes off asinine. That you, an atheist would think it fitting to come here and spout off in your ignorance of God and His ways, proves ignorance knows no bounds.

          • Verisimilitude

            Good for you, Bluesman! But, Bingo’s not too tough to defeat in debate…his points are so weak, the hardest part is to stop laughing so hard when I counter-post him,

          • David Cromie

            It must make you very happy and fulfilled to have an ancient fairy story to keep you company on scary, cold, winter nights.

          • Bingo

            There’s nothing fairy-talish about God. You must be a very sad and unfulfilled individual to feel as though you MUST denigrate people who live by faith and who experience much success in life because of it. Fear is not a part of our lives, knowing Jesus.

          • David Cromie

            So your ‘god’ is really the ‘god’ of Mammon? Go on, explain what is not ‘fairy-talish (sic)’ about your particular ‘god’.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Of course you do not need evidence. Because without evidence you can happy jump from cloud to cloud along side of rainbow ponies while eating magical candies without anyone to disturb your fantasy.

            You have consistently told everyone within comment-shot, that in order to understand your God, you have to believe. I want to use that in other places, where evidence is lacking, yet belief is very real. Walk into your local insane asylum, and ask people there to tell you their stories. I think the conspiracy stories will be the most fun. Then sit back and put yourself in our shoes. Do you, without evidence, try to believe the person in front of you when they tell you that old mother hubbard was an alien that kidnapped him for studies, and the old stories we read are meant as a form of mind control to forget these experiences that many children supposedly had as a kid, and that she does even like ginger bread, is afraid of tin foil, and lives in a space shoe?

            The only way to understand that non-sense is to “truly believe” it.

            BUT IF WE BELIEVE IT WE ARE TAKING PART IN THE INSANITY!

            That right. If you claim something as truth without evidence, then that is insanity. You can believe what you want, but it is never truth until you can provide the evidence required to make that claim. It is a belief.

            Any time a blog/news site/publication opens itself up to comments, it….. opens itself to comments. If they don’t want me here, they can shut down the ability to comment altogether, or block me from replying. Blocking is notoriously a useless tool, because it is easy to make new accounts (not that I would do that), but beside the fact, that I make rational arguments. Its not my fault that you have no real basis in reality for your belief and so can not effectively defend it in a public forum. I’m not sure if you notice, that despite the fact there are MANY Christians here, you are the one making the most extreme and ridiculous claims. Most people have reasons for their belief, but none take it so wacko as you. As an Anti-Theist myself, you are the prototypical example of why religion is so dangerous. You believe so deeply, and refuse to be influenced by outside sources so adamantly, that IF YOU BELIEVED (not saying that you do) that killing people served your God, you’d be the first person scooping up automatic weapons to go on a shooting spree. Normal people don’t do that.

            Good people do good things. Bad people do bad things. But only religion makes good people do bad things and think it is good.

          • Bingo

            I have all the evidence from God I need. It is solid as a rock and is found in faith. Those of us who know and walk with God are given assurance in our faith that what he tells us is truth. Nothing can shake it. God is BIG…bigger than your silly notions about what you think is true.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            And that is that.

            The thing I love about our little chats is it has little to do with changing your mind. Its about challenging myself and learning more about the subject. Every once in a while, someone comes up with a point that is worth while to read up on, or takes an approach I didn’t think of. It allows me to learn and grow. You however have afforded me no such luxury, other than the fact to witness first hand what it means to be a fanatic.

            There is however another benefit. You see, in a church setting, followers and those trying to learn more about the religion are surrounded by people that parrot each other. It is a great method to reinforce what otherwise might be a shaky belief. The peer pressure to go along with the crowd think is immense.

            But here, on the Internet, there are places, like this where beliefs like yours meet beliefs like mine (or other beliefs). No longer is it contained to closed doors and community shaming. Here real deep conversations can be had, and people can actually learn even if they are not participating.

            So other than you or I many people come by and comb through these comments. They see your arguments, and they see mine. Which do you think is compelling? “Believe in my belief or you will suffer for eternity!” or “Learn and think for yourself.” Atheism doesn’t teach anything. It doesn’t tell you what to think. It just asks people to use their critical thinking skills to come to any conclusions. Even then, it really isn’t asking anything at all. It is in itself a conclusion with no doctrine whatsoever.
            I love these conversations. I have had some enjoyable ones one this very article with people that were very reasonable about their beliefs, and put a lot of thought it in. For these I am pleased to have had the chance to discuss it with them for despite their beliefs, they haven’t forgotten how to use their brain, nor came at everyone unlike themselves a bigoted hateful way.

            Then there is you. You rely on your personal (albeit deluded) experience. With a force of textual personality that would rival the loudest of the Westboro Baptist Church, you try to preach your belief and somehow win over believers (or kudo points) via some kind of commentary persuasion and threats. You however don’t have the charisma of the modern day evangelical. Instead, to my pleasure, you do more damage to your religion and belief, than I ever could. I don’t have to say anything. Because in a forum, where you do not have the solitude to let your belief stand on its own, you do not have a leg to stand on, so to say.

            I think I am pretty much done here. I’ll comment on other sites and will probably run into you again. However, this article is a bit old to keep resurrecting like your aforementioned deity.

            Good luck in your belief. Hopefully, you just might have learned something, though you might not admit it.

          • Bingo

            You cannot change my mind, as I have the mind of Christ about these matters.

            If one isn’t a fan of Jesus, Satan, he is a fan of Satan. It’s your choice who your father is.

            Your pretty little bundle of paragraphs extolling your own pride in your personal measure of tolerance and seeking to understand is as phony as the day is long.

            The gospel message is simple:

            Romans 10:9-10
            If you openly declare that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is by believing in your heart that you are made right with God, and it is by openly declaring your faith that you are saved.

            John 10:9-10
            9 I am the Door; anyone who enters in through Me will be saved (will live). He will come in and he will go out [freely], and will find pasture.

            10 The thief comes only in order to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have and enjoy life, and have it in abundance (to the full, till it [a]overflows).

          • Bluesman1950

            “If one isn’t a fan of Jesus, Satan, he is a fan of Satan. It’s your choice who your father is.”

            I love the way (if not the grammar!) that theists decide what we must think or be tortured for all eternity.

            Why can’t I be a ‘fan’ of Thor, or Ra? How do you presume to tell me that I have only one choice. What if, as is actually the case, I don’t want to be a ‘fan’ of any imaginary being?

            I actually have no choice who my father is as that was decided when I was conceived. If you, as an adult, still require an imaginary ‘father’ to make you feel better, that’s your problem.

          • Bingo

            I rarely make grammatical errors. I don’t decide what you think or where you end up. God does, and He has told us clearly. As a Christian, it is my job under God to tell you.

            There is only ONE way to eternal life and to certain blessing in this life before the grave.

          • Bluesman1950

            There’s always a first time!

            As an atheist it’s not my job to do anything. However, when the religious feel it’s their job “under God” to tell me that I am either a fan of jesus or satan, I’m quite happy to respond that I don’t have to be a ‘fan’ of either.

            One is, if he really lived, is dead, yet credited with some highly unlikely magical powers by the gullible. The other is a bogey-man, made up to scare those same gullible people. Fortunately, the trick doesn’t work on the rational.

          • Bingo

            Outside of Christ the default is that you would be a follower of Satan, even if you are not overtly a satanist.

          • Bluesman1950

            I don’t ‘follow’ any invented beings. Your attempt to define the debate in terms only of your own superstitions is crude, obvious and silly.

          • Bingo

            LOL! You follow your own personal inventions.

          • David Cromie

            Since no deist, not even the most ardent, has come up with the necessary and sufficient evidence for the existence of any deity, it follows that the default position is atheism.

          • Bingo

            God Himself has provided proof of His existence, but the empty-headed lovers of self cannot see it.

          • David Cromie

            No matter how much you may twist and turn, your ‘god’ is responsible for creating Satan, together with all the other evils which a ‘loving god’ could dream up, if we are to believe that it created everything. That being the case, as attested to by those who believe the OT, then this ‘god’ of yours has a very sick sense of humour indeed. Why would anyone bow down to, or worship, any such an entity?

          • Bingo

            God made you, too, and you speak for Satan, who is your father at this point. Outside of faith in Jesus Christ, you will “enjoy” the same destiny—eternal punishment.

            Evil doesn’t come from God. You are so ignorant.

          • Bluesman1950

            “Evil doesn’t come from God. You are so ignorant.”

            So god did not create everything then? Who did? Is that other creator more powerful?

            Was it part of god’s plan that evil should be created? If so then ‘he’ is responsible. If not, then the Universe does not run according to ‘god’s plan’.

            So basically, all things bright and beautiful, the good lord made them all; all things foul and terrible are, somehow or another, entirely nothing to do with him!

            Alternatively, perhaps there is no god, no creation and things just go along without anybody at the controls, as the processes of cosmology, biology, physics and chemistry etc. etc. etc. act upon the matter of the Universe, however it came to be, without any great plan or planner.

          • Bingo

            You expose your lack of understanding. God’s creation included the angelic orders—all with their own wills. Satan/Lucifer, the most beautiful archangel with a very important position before God used his will to try to rob God of His glory and to take it to himself. Evil started within him. God has allowed it, and created a wonderful plan for mankind to be redeemed from the curse of evil and death.

            You have the choice to be redeemed or not.

          • Bluesman1950

            So god is not in charge then.

          • Bingo

            God is sovereign over all the universe, but He has given man dominion over earth. However, man has given up that position to Satan. Christians are taking what he has stolen back, bit by bit.

          • David Cromie

            Who or what created/invented evil, then?

          • Bingo

            Evil is not a thing to have been created. It is the absence of good, of light. Lucifer had darkness and sin in him—by the act of his will.

          • David Cromie

            I would advise you to check out the history of Satan and Lucifer, before bandying these names about willy nilly. To point you in the right direction, see the entry for ‘Satan’ at p. 726, ‘Dictionary of Deities and Demons’, van der Toorn, Becking, and van der Horst, Eds. 2nd Edn. 1999, and for ‘Lucifer’ at pp. 203 and 246, op cit.

          • Bingo

            Oh yeah…you know ALL about that, do you? Moron.

          • David Cromie

            Not interested in the origins of your beliefs, then? Too many big, difficult to understand, words for you? Who is the real illiterate moron here, who claims to read, understand, and discern ‘truth’ from reading a book of fairy tales? You are obviously afraid of the real truth about the world, in case you might be forced to face reality, and that would be so upsetting, and unnerving because you are actually quite insecure in your self-imposed mental prison.

          • Bingo

            I know what I believe and why. However, you do not have any belief, but all you can do is insult and mock those who have faith in God, and enjoy Him.

            They did that to Jesus too. I am in grand company.

            I am not afraid of anything, least of all this world. However, the day is coming fast that you will find yourself knocked off your pins and without an anchor to hold you fast. Jesus is that anchor.

          • David Cromie

            Since you are unable to adduce any proof that your ‘god’ exists, your imaginings in respect of it are nothing more than mere delusions.

          • Bingo

            That is always what delusionary people say. It’s a lie, of course.

          • Breckmin

            moral evil is the potential byproduct of self-generated free will therefore what you have is “little creators” in God’s universe who create this evil NOT God. Yes, God created the little creators who have free will, but God does NOT create the moral evil (disobedience) that they create (self-generate). Free will is an entirely different type of causal system than all other causal systems…. that is why so many people get confused. Evil/sin was never “invented” but was rather an action of disagreement or disobedience against a Holy Perfect Creator. FTR, good and evil are NOT exact opposites. Good is the standard by which evil is judged… evil is never a standard by which good is judged. God created individual moral agents (cognitive beings) who could love and have real relationships via self-generation (free will). Sin (moral evil) was a potential byproduct which God is dealing with through a temporary creation. In heaven, all will have free will, but will have loyalty and knowledge and other spiritual dynamics which could only have been attained by the temporary creation and God’s perfect plan for redemption. There is something about the quality of love that comes from forgiveness and restoration. This is only one aspect of what is multifaceted. Seeing God’s self-sacrificing love demonstrated by Jesus dying on the Cross is another.

          • David Cromie

            See my remarks on the relationship between your supposed ‘god’ and the ‘devil’, passim.

          • Breckmin

            you are not understanding what the temporary creation accomplishes…. not only with rewards in heaven and perfectly just punishment (exact consequences for exact actions) for those separated, but also how God is dealing with the real problem of evil (not in explaining it, but rather how moral evil would have been a danger to His adopted children because of His absolute Holiness. The dynamics of the temporary creation are multifaceted. Evil angels are just one small piece of the puzzle (which first brought about the potential byproduct of their ability to choose…and disagree with God (moral evil). You can’t agree with God if you can’t potentially disagree. You can’t say yes if you can’t say no. Saying no to an absolutely Holy God will taint you as a creation unless you are restored and made pure/holy again. Question everything…. especially your misunderstandings about the history and the development of the adversary who was once referred to as Lucifer.

          • David Cromie

            I find your answer unintelligible since there is no proof of any ‘god’ or ‘angels’, etc. Lacking any reason to believe that there is such an entity as a ‘god’, all talk of what it might be like, say, or do is obviously meaningless. Since I expect you do not believe in all the other ‘gods’ worshipped over the course of human history, what reason could you have to select only this particular version?

            On Satan and Lucifer, I refer you to the very comprehensive academic study of their history, among many other entities mentioned in the Bible; “Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible”, by van der Toorn, Becking, and van der Horst, eds., 2nd Edn., 1999 (some 960 pp. long!). Well worth the cost, if you are seriously interested in the Bible.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Outside of Allah the default is that you would be a follower of Satan, even if you are not overtly a satanist?
            Outside of Zeus the default is that you would be a follower of Satan, even if you are not overtly a satanist?
            So you are a satanist?
            If not, why is it different for christers? There are, after all, hundreds of thousands you do not believe in , including the Canaanite El, lord of lords and god of hosts, and the 69 of his sons and their consorts, the Yahwehs and Asherah of hills not adopted by the Israelites, and later taken up by the anti-Semitic inventors of a religion about an alleged person, the alleged Jesus (not a Jewish name) who the so-called bibles rather horrible Saulus/Paul and James apparently did not even consider to be human, but divine.

          • Bingo

            Anyone who denies Jesus Christ belongs to the devil.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            So, why is this so called “Jesus Christ” different, which “devil” do you mean and where do you think these god thingies originated?

          • Bingo

            Jesus Christ is God incarnate. He lived among us, sacrificed His life for us, and rose again and lives today. No other “god” can make such a claim, let alone love us enough to lay down His sinless life for our sins.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Which god thingies? How do you know your god thingie actually exists and deserves to be regarded as a god thingie? What evidence do you have that attributes exist in this Universe that are sufficient and necessary to serve to qualify some thingie having such attributes as a god thingie?

          • Bingo

            I know God because I have a relationship with Him, which he desires with everyone. You have the right to choose not to, and you’ve made that choice, so why so dumb?

            Go about your business.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Unresponsive. I asked some really simple questions designed to allow others to establish whether you are talking of some real entity with identifiable attributes earning it the right to be regarded as a god thingie, or merely a religious delusion. So far I am leaning to the latter, as you seem to be asserting that you experience religious delusions of a relationship with an undetectable imaginary god thingie whose attributes you do not know.

            Again, why do you imagine that the “him” with whom you claim to be in a relationship deserves to be regarded as a god thingie? What evidence do you have that attributes earning anything the status of being regarded as a god thingie exist?

          • Bingo

            Your questions are couched in the spirit of mockery. You’ve made your choice against God. You are the delusional one who thinks he can escape Judgment.

          • David Cromie

            You claim, now, to be the ‘christ’, do you, having appropriated its mind? You are a ‘literally’ unbelievable crackpot!

          • Bingo

            No, I have Christ living in me, and He does with every believer. He says we have the mind of Christ.

            You are just ignorant of God and His word, and your silly insults are from a darkened mind and heart.

          • David Cromie

            It would be difficult to know anything of a mythical figure, or of anything ascribed to it; voices, words, etc.! Provide proof of its existence, otherwise you are nothing but deluded.

          • Bingo

            Jesus Christ is not mythical, but a true historical figure. he did die and He did rise from the dad, and was here for a few weeks and witnessed by over 500 people.

            Just denying it takes no intelligence whatsoever.

          • David Cromie

            Have you interviewed any of the 500 people you refer to? To believe, without any inkling of proof, that any supernatural entities exist anywhere, just because a book of fairy tales says so, most certainly requires a lack of intelligence.

          • Bingo

            The historical record is in the scriptures.

          • David Cromie

            Books of fables are not a very reliable record of history, for obvious reasons.

          • Bingo

            Nothing in scripture can be proven to be a fable. It is truth and historically correct.

          • David Cromie

            If you say so, then it must be true, and all of the biblical historians have got it wrong. If only they had come to you for insight!

          • Bingo

            Yes, indeed. Some of us really do have the truth. You could use people like that in your life.

          • David Cromie

            How very smug! On what basis would anyone claim to have sole access to the ‘truth’, when some other sincere believers, in exactly the same sky fairy, claim that they have privileged access to a very different ‘truth’?

          • Bingo

            There’s nothing smug about it. There is truth and many have it—many do not. There is only ONE Truth and that is found in Jesus Christ.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Faith simply means pretending to know stuff that you don’t, or perhaps can’t.

          • Bingo

            That’s only your juvenile take on it.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Give me an example of “faith” not being synonymous with a false pretence to knowledge?

          • Breckmin

            Conclusions are believed to be knowledge. Historically the word “faith” in Christianity was synonymous with the knowledge of things about God and about Jesus Christ…. nothing was a “false pretense to knowledge.” Christianity was never about fideism… it was about believing the evidence and the reasoning. Knowledge of one’s own personal experiences with the Creator are what are included in “faith” yet for the rational person who experiences such … it is knowledge. If I witness a healing or a demonic deliverance, for example, I have faith that it is supernatural. Is there alternative explanation? Not likely ones.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            I didn’t ask for your beliefs about faith, I asked for an example. Try to construct a sentence, any sentence, on any topic, using the word “faith” expressing a knowledge claim as opposed to a hope or desire, where your faith is not an example of pretending to know something you do not or cannot know.

            Assertion of knowledge is a claim about the world, but such claims may be true, false, or, unfounded, depending on the method used to develop them and the quality of the intersubjectively validateable evidence supporting them. When alleged knowledge is founded only upon faith, then the claim is specious and the supposed knowledge is unfounded as may be shown, through neural imaging, to originate in the speaker’s personal experiences or preferences. This is, because, unlike science, faith is not self-correcting, leaving it a failed epistemology of, at best, questionable value.

            That is how I know that if you claim to have “faith that [something] is supernatural” then you mean that you have no evidence that that thing is natural, not that you have evidence that it is supernatural, and don’t even have evidence that anything supernatural exists, or even what the qualities of something would need to be in order for it to qualify as “supernatural”.

            So your faith is not a valid knowledge claim, whatever else it might be.

          • Breckmin

            eye witness accounts can still lead to knowledge as can personal experience. Just because YOU can’t test it…does NOT make it untrue NOR does it disqualify it as knowledge. Moses can have knowledge about things God did… you have no access to test it…. it doesn’t make it any less knowledge. When “faith” lines up with objective reality or objective fact(s) it is actual knowledge. It may be esoteric knowledge to the individual who experienced it/ knows about it… but it is still knowledge. IF the supernatural (or what we call supernatural) exists as objective reality, then whatever assertions which are true and consistent with this objective factual reality are knowledge. If you don’t “know” something as basic as “there is a Creator” then this is where we need to start on knowledge claims. What evidence are you familiar with as to why there is “a” Creator (undecided/agnostic theism). (agnostic here is its historical derivation and not the modern evolution of the word). O.K. What is the “alleged” evidence that would lead us to the basic knowledge that there is “a” Creator?

          • Breckmin

            When belief lines up with objective reality… it is knowledge.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            What does “conclusions” have to do with anything”? In any case, believing (assigning a truth value in the absence of evidence (or, as here, in the face of the evidence)) a thing to be something, does not make that thing a some thing. So conclusions are not shown to be knowledge even if they were relevant.

            Faith is not knowledge. Nobody knows if a god thingie or the so-called Jesus (not a Jewish name) christ (not a name at all) exist (extremely unlikely) or ever have existed (improbable). So any assertion of knowledge about them is a false pretence to knowledge. Which is all that I said.

            As far as alleged personal experiences are concerned, neuro-imaging research reflects that when people consider experiences with god thingies, as opposed to experiences with other people or things, the parts of the brain related to the self are involved, rather than those related to external phenomena, confirming the probability that so called god experiences are most likely delusional.

            If you imagine that you could “witness a healing or a demonic deliverance” and further imagine that this is “likely” to be anything but delusional, then you would almost certainly benefit from modern anti-psychotic drugs.

          • Breckmin

            Conclusions are consistent with observations. This is what you do not understand. Looking at SPET (single photon emission tomography), PET (positron emission tomography) and fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging) are often looking at RESULTS and not causes….this is what you do not understand….and neither do the people doing the research. The reductive materialists do not have the wisdom to understand the metaphysical aspect/component/dynamic of human consciousness … so their conclusions often lack godly wisdom to navigate through the data. What is called knowledge can also be referred to as “faith.” Because you have been given pseudo definitions for faith you do not understand that faith and reason AND evidence go hand in hand in Christianity. The Christian faith is based on corroborative evidence as well as reason and the elimination of cognitive dissonance. Faith in the evidence… just like any jury examining evidence and making CONCLUSIONS. Your use of “god thingy” or “thingies” makes it difficult to understand where you are coming from. When I say, “God” or “Creator” what do you think this means? How would you define “Creator” or god thingy within the context of this discussion?

          • Bingo

            Faith in God gives us wisdom and knowledge. He is the source of it. There is nothing pretentious about it.

          • David Cromie

            Perhaps you might like to share this irrefutable evidence with the non-christian world, when you have formalized it for we ignorant humans?

          • Bingo

            Suffice it to say that God has met my every need in my life, and then some, and has used me in people’s lives for His good purposes—for freedom from addictions, and healing. You will have to allow God to reveal Himself to you–ask Him. I am not about to open myself up to you, in obedience to God who says we are not to cast our pearls before swine.

          • David Cromie

            I am not sure fake pearls would be of any interest to swine. On a more serious note, how many people have you raised from the dead? I ask this because, some time ago, I listened to a claimed committed christian avow that he had been present when several such feats were performed.

            As for ‘opening up’, I should point that you have done so already, sufficiently enough for any reasonable person to realise that you have a head full of superstitious claptrap, for which you cannot produce a rational explanation.

          • Bingo

            I am sure by your inability to grasp spiritual truths, that you cannot even distinguish real from fake.

            I have the power within me—His name is Jesus—to raise the dead, but I’ve not had the occasion present itself.

            Your judgments are ludicrous because they are based in ignorance. having a relationship with Jesus Christ doesn’t include superstition, which is an antichrist issue.

          • David Cromie

            How does a ‘spiritual truth’ differ from the real truth? Must I first believe in ghosts, to get in touch with the spiritual? If you believe that there are unseen entities, whether good or evil, ‘out there somewhere’ that require propitiating, then you are, ipso facto, a superstitious person. Simple as that!

          • Bingo

            Physical truth is another truth, such as water is a liquid, solid or gas. Spiritual truth pertains to our spiritual selves and pervades all parts of us—body, soul and spirit.

            Superstition has nothing to do with those who know God and walk in His ways. Superstition is rooted in fear and based on lies.

          • David Cromie

            Do you really believe that humans are some form of mini trinity? ‘Body’ is true by definition, ‘mind’ is a description of what occurs in the brain, but it is not clear what you mean by ‘spirit’.

          • Bingo

            We are created in the image of God Himself as he says. he is three and we are three: body, soul (mind will and emotions) and spirit—that part of us reserved for the presence of God when He is invited, but is dead or inert until that time. Those who live outside of faith in jesus Christ are operating on only two levels: body and mind. There is a third dimension to us that we are created to enjoy and that makes us complete, firing on all cylinders, so to speak.

          • David Cromie

            You have a very fertile, although screwed, imagination indeed!

          • Bingo

            No, my very good imagination is strong and active and highly normal, empowered by the Spirit of God. All good.

          • Bluesman1950

            Ah, the good old theist excuse when faced with a request for evidence, ‘I have plenty of proof but you wouldn’t understand it / you are unworthy of it…etc.’ Wriggle, wriggle, wriggle!

          • Bingo

            The proof is all around you.

          • Bluesman1950

            Typical nonsense. The Universe is all around. No god to be seen.

          • Bingo

            God says His handiwork, the universe He created is enough to provide the truth of His existence to men. those who ignore it or know it and deny it are in peril for their eternal destination.

          • Bluesman1950

            So does the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Why not believe Him?

          • Bingo

            Your replies are typical juvenile nothingness.

          • Bluesman1950

            Just another example of unsubstantiated nonsense, like your imaginary friend.

          • Bingo

            Actually, your juvenile denials are unsubstantiated.

          • Bluesman1950

            You assert that there is a god. A god who, among all his other alleged wrongdoings, justifies the persecution of people according to their sexuality.

            When challenged to produce any evidence of this alleged weird being, you ask us to accept that the existence of the Universe must be taken as proof of its being. Your only evidence to support this is a confused, ignorant, self-contradictory collection of ridiculous fables you describe as ‘scripture’ and the “inerrant word of god”.

            And you accuse me of “juvenile denials”! Irony is not really your strong point is it?

          • Bingo

            God has never committed a “wrongdoing”, so there you go with a thwarted view of what is perfect and good, and that makes you imperfect and not good—as we all are. So, you are not one who has the wherewithal to judge God. Only people persecute other people. God doesn’t.

            That you call God a weird being is proof that you have a completely hardened and darkened heart, and as God says, a dead spirit that has yet to become quickened to life. He also says that people like yourself can never comprehend spiritual truths because your carnal mind cannot perceive those things. You are at an incredible disadvantage, with a disability in spiritual understanding. You can ONLY deny with a childish, immature rejection, for you really don’t know any better.

            1 Corinthians 2:14-15
            But a person who denies spiritual realities will not accept the things that come through the Spirit of God; they all sound like foolishness to him. He is incapable of grasping them because they are disseminated, discerned, and valued by the Spirit. 15 A person who walks by the Spirit examines everything, sizing it up and seeking out truth. But no one is able to examine or size up that kind of spiritual person,

          • Bluesman1950

            Read your bible for an account of how your god, if it really existed, was a narcissistic, genocidal pervert.

            Fortunately ‘he’ has never “committed a wrongdoing” since, as far as can be ascertained, ‘he’ does not exist.

            My only problem with ‘god’ is that bigots use it as an excuse for persecution and slaughter.

          • Bingo

            How dumb of you. God is not a narcissist, nor genocidal, nor a pervert. Your mind gravitates to the most evil of insinuations, parroting the one who embodies all those evil qualities: Satan. Your father. He is whispering in your ear, and you think it’s all you. Well, some is and some isn’t, and you both are liars. Only evil people who do not know God become bigots and can actually slaughter anyone.

          • Bluesman1950

            Not a narcissist? ““I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me” (Exodus 20:2-3 …” God is everything the narcissist ever wants to be: omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, admired, much discussed, and awe inspiring.

            Not genocidal? The Worldwide Flood; Death of all Egyptian first-born; Slaughter of the Israelites (Chronicles 13:15-18); God gives Samson the power to destroy the temple and kill 3000 ( Judges 16:27-30). etc etc. etc.

            Not a pervert? Murder and rape of Israelites and women of Shiloh (Judges 21:1-23); God accepts Jeptha’s sacrifice of his daughter burned alive (Judges 11:30-39); Approval of murder, rape and enslavement (Deuteronomy 20:10-14); Payment for rape and forced marriage of the victim (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

            Read your bible. That’s only a small selection. The full indictment is far too long to post here, Basically, most of the bible! Fortunately, since god is only imaginary and most of these things probably didn’t happen, there is no need for a cold-case investigation.

          • Bingo

            What makes the ONLY God a narcissist? All worship belongs to Him alone. That is who He is! There is no other beside Him. Narcissism is a human sickness and mindset and it is sin.

            He is not genocidal nor a murderer. He is the just Judge and all His judgments are perfect and righteous. He hates sin and wicked people. His interest in early history was to contain and preserve the bloodline of His people, Israel. Paganism is something he detests, and any mixture is a reproach to Him.

            You read YOUR bible! But you need to know that God is holy and righteous. He will reveal that to you. You, an imperfect person and a sinner, sitting in judgment of the most high and holy God is laughable.

            Every event that is mentioned in the scriptures is history, except for events that have been prophesied and have yet to occur.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Disqus is used by sites to bring eyes to the advertisements that monetize their content. Many of them, including “CHRISTIAN NEWS NETWORK”, invalid capitalization and all, cross post links to contentious claims to other sites in order to encourage new visitors,

            Don’t begrudge them their cpm income, and, if you imagine that you have a right to tell other people in a public place about your silly beliefs, you should not become annoyed at people sharing their opinion about those asinine beliefs about god thingies that only a cretin could imagine represent anything positive.

            In any case, what evidence do you have that any attributes exist which are sufficient and necessary to qualify the holder of such attrributes as a god thingie?

          • Bingo

            You come here like the others to show off your stupidity, only.

          • magormissabib

            Apt description of atheist trolls doggies:

            Rev_22:15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Current science has adequate evidence to conclude that god thingies were not necessary to form the Universe, and strong evidence that nothing with cognitive capacity could have survived the establishment of the Universe.

            Belief is always the assignment of a truth value in the absence of sufficient intersubjectively validateable evidence, or, as in this case, in the face of compelling confounding evidence, because, where there is sufficient compelling evidence, belief is not required, only acceptance.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            I reject your beliefs, premise and everything you stand for good sir. I find it immoral, repugnant, and absolutely detrimental to society. Your belief is so evil and wrong, that child molestation pales in comparison. Created to worship? You’d have all of humanity be a slave to a figment of YOUR imagination.

            Man I want to vomit after reading that….

          • Bingo

            You can reject God all you like, but you’ll be wrong in the end. What you live in in this godless, secular culture is immoral, repugnant and detrimental. Only God is good, and those who receive Him and His ways through faith in Jesus know this. Our beliefs are only good and nothing evil can be found in them. It is the mind so bent on evil that can call God and His ways evil. That, of course is the mind that has been heavily influenced by the evil one, Satan, who speaks constantly in the ear of those who have no faith…and he makes it seem like it is your own thoughts—but it isn’t, although God says that men’s hearts are desperately wicked all on their own.

            Yes, man has been created to worship god, but those who have a vacuum where God should be, worships something else, and mostly it is themselves, mixed with many other things. It is all idolatry and putrid, and brings no good thing to one’s life that lasts. There is only eternal condemnation in the end for a life lived according to one’s own personal compass, and that has not been transformed by the free gift of righteousness offered.

          • Bluesman1950

            Which god are you referring to? There have been so many.

          • Bingo

            There is only ONE God.

          • Bluesman1950

            Thor, Ralph, Bastet, etc. etc. etc. have been the delusions of the superstitious and gullible for millenia.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            I’m sorry. My neighbor its the epitome of all evil. What? You want to ask him his side of the story? Oh. Sorry. I locked him in the basement. And if I decide you are evil too, I’ll send you there as well.

            Nice.

            Tell me more. But this time, have some Oompaloompas sing it. It might make more sense then the chocolate river Stix.

          • David Cromie

            I have found that Christians love to worship Mammon, above all else.

          • Bingo

            What a lie. I take it you don’t know any true Christians.

          • David Cromie

            Ah, the ‘No True Scotsman’ fallacy! So the close connection between Christianity and money has escaped your attention? If you were to take your nose out of your book of fables you would find that there is a real world out there waiting to be discovered.

          • Bingo

            No fallacy. Your false notions are laughable. You truly don’t know what you are yammering on about.

          • David Cromie

            Check out the hordes of christian evangelists, for example the US variety, and especially the TV/Radio types, and you will find multi-million dollar hypocritical tycoons, with their tax-free Crystal Cathedrals, fleets of luxury cars, private jets, nepotism, etc., preying on the superstitious, and gullible who are taken in by tales of occult etherial ‘gods’ and demons. These charlatans desperately need their flock’s money to spread the ‘good’ news, apparently, but it mostly ends up in their guru’s private bank accounts, and those of their nearest and dearest.

          • Bingo

            It’s all about money to you…is that your excuse for not receiving the truth about Jesus? You have no clue about the promises of God’s abundance as a blessing to those who do His will. sometimes He blesses those who have no problem with the love of money with financial wealth. That is because He trusts them to do with it what He desire—which is to serve others with it.

            You are hardly one who can detect a charlatan.

          • David Cromie

            Are you for real?

          • Verisimilitude

            Your belief is mere speculation, but I imagine you yourself think it is real.

            If it comforts you, why not?

          • Bingo

            There is nothing speculative about knowing God. What is speculative is claiming He doesn’t exist.

          • Verisimilitude

            The expression ‘god’ has been applied to too many notions, too often, to have any real meaning.

            The use of the English-language expression ‘he’–whether capitalized or not–adds more confusion and ambiguity.

            While there is possibly ‘something’ ‘higher’ than ‘I/We/Us’…

            …the chances of it being the Christian ‘god’ as described in the bible…

            …approximate zero.

            Good luck with your further speculation…

          • Bingo

            It’s God. That you find Him confusing is only due to your unbelief. those who believe in Him have none of your confusion. What you think is zero chances simply reveals that you like to gamble with your life. Hence your “good luck” comment. There is no such thing as luck. Life is far too precious for that.

          • Verisimilitude

            I don’t find your ‘him’ confusing at all, just wrong-headed.

            Your comment about ‘zero chance’ and gambling is b.s., driven by desperation at the total lack of proof for the resurrection, virgin birth etc etc.

            In sum: Your post is drivel.

            Good luck…and you have significant room for improvement…insh’allah

          • Bingo

            Everything you’ve said so far is drivel. It is obvious you cannot grasp the true and living hope we have as Christians. So be it until God does a real work in you.

          • Verisimilitude

            I very much appreciate your use of the term I used i.e. ‘drivel’

            Clearly, you intend to flatter me by that usage.

            But, sadly, I cannot reciprocate, as I see your views on religion to be primitive in extremis.

            No doubt you ‘believe’ in the so-called ‘resurrection’, the ‘virgin’ birth, the miracles…and so on and so forth…

            …the whole gamut of Christian myths.

            Thus, there’s nothing more for you and I to discuss, and I bid you…

            …a good night, and good luck in seeing through your own delusions….you’ll need it…

          • Bingo

            It’s kind of sad that you claim flattery in my use of a term I use frequently in this kind of discussion.

            It’s typical of unbelievers to spew all sorts of nonsense and unfounded criticisms against the wall to see what sticks, but nothing does. You have no basis with which to speak your views, except that you have yet to experience God. I pray that he reveals Himself to you–that you would be willing for Him to do that. Failing that, you will meet Him face to face and it will not be a good thing for you.

          • Verisimilitude

            Please, save your prayers for those more gullible than I.

            Your christian ‘god’ or ‘gods’ can no more reveal itself/themselves to me than can Pontius Pilate, or the Senate of Rome circa 60 B.C.E.

            And you are as wrong about my spirituality as you are about your own, which is a double strike-out for you, but something I’m very much accustomed to from the Abrahamists.

            By all means respond to this post, but I am off and will not trouble to read anything further you might have to say…our ‘dialog’–such as it is–is at an end.

            P.S. And don’t get hung up on this ‘sadness’ you feel…a few words with your gods should make you once more a contented acolyte.

          • Bingo

            No. Prayer is necessary for you. God is able to do far more than you could even think or imagine. He loves it, though, when people don’t require signs and wonders to believe.

            I am absolutely in possession of the truth, and can easily see that you have a huge spiritual hole in the middle of you that only God can fill.

            I have no sadness for you. God has given you a sovereign will, and you have a choice in life: either choose salvation in Jesus Christ and enjoy eternity with Him who loves you, or reject salvation in Jesus Christ and spend your eternity with Satan in utter torment eternally. It’s all up to you.

          • Verisimilitude

            I’ll break my silence in honour of your courage in being willing to be entirely wrong in every–that’s ‘every’–aspect of your post.

            Well done that man…

          • Bingo

            I am not wrong in anything I am saying, which is in accordance with God’s holy word.

          • Verisimilitude

            Incorrect. You–and your church–have fundamentally misunderstood the teachings of Yeshua…

            …and you even call him Jesus, to boot…

            …a name he was never called and never called himself.

            You don’t even get his name right!

          • Bingo

            Not true. You have gotten the wrong end of the stick, and merely love to play the game of semantics.

            Jesus and Yeshua is the name of the Son. He answers to the name whatever language is speaking. Your unbelief cannot help you. We have been given the authority of Jesus/Yeshua to ask for anything in His name, believing, and He will do it. That you play around with His name and identity just negates your faith.

            John 14:12-14
            12 “I tell you the truth, anyone who believes in me will do the same works I have done, and even greater works, because I am going to be with the Father. 13 You can ask for anything in my name, and I will do it, so that the Son can bring glory to the Father. 14 Yes, ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it!

          • Bluesman1950

            You might as well quote Harry Potter to prove the existence of wizards.

          • Bingo

            I am sure you place more credence in a fictional character than you do to the holy scriptures.

          • Bluesman1950

            About the same!

          • Bingo

            Yes, and you will die in your sins.

          • Bluesman1950

            Thanks for the love!

          • Bingo

            If I had no love, I wouldn’t be bothering to tell you the truth.

          • Verisimilitude

            Luke 17:21

            You folks are always looking in the wrong place…and even ‘your’ very own Yeshua tells you so.

            And please: Get his name right, from now on.

          • Bingo

            You have no clue what you are talking about.

          • Bluesman1950

            That doesn’t stop you opining on evolution.

          • Bingo

            I may speak about whatever come up here, and speak with the truth behind me.

          • Bluesman1950

            The truth is, unfortunately, several thousand years ahead of you.

          • Bingo

            No. I am a holder of the truth.

          • Bluesman1950

            Just you, or did god appoint any others?

          • Bingo

            Millions of others who have received Jesus as their Saviour and Lord join me as holders of all truth. God calls us the salt of the earth—bearers of healing and stinging truth, and He also calls us the light of the world—beacons of the light of the word of God that reveals the path to righteousness in Christ.

          • Bluesman1950

            But you still can’t understand evolution!

          • Bingo

            What’s to understand? It is a lie that you’ve swallowed—hook, line and sinker. Anything to plug the hole left by unbelief in the truth.

          • Bluesman1950

            “What’s to understand? ” Sums up your level of comprehension and capacity for self-deception really!

          • Bingo

            LOL! Hardly. You, like so many godless wonders, love to subscribe to what you think are deep and complicated matters, but God has made it simple for us. He created all things, and we are here to enjoy them, and with the good minds He has given us and our inquisitive nature, He leads us to that understanding through the tool of scientific method.

          • Verisimilitude

            Well, at least that means I’m ahead of you.

          • Bingo

            That’s only your meager opinion. I know what I am talking about at all times.

          • Verisimilitude

            You’ve yet to show it…

            …but, don’t let me get in the way of you believing your own b.s.

          • Bingo

            I believe God’s word and what he says. You lack belief in anything substantial.

          • Verisimilitude

            Again, you demonstrate how clueless you are…

            …it’s a point of pride with you.

            I am on a substantively different spiritual path to yours…on my path, I follow in the footsteps of the great, doing in practice what you simply…

            …read about.

          • Bingo

            Your path leads to hellfire. There is only one path to life–through Jesus Christ.

            John 14:6
            Jesus told him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me.

            Romans 6:23
            For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord.

            John 3:16
            “For this is how God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.

          • Verisimilitude

            Sadly for you, there is no ‘hellfire’…it’s just a quaint notion dreamed up by desert sheep herders a coupla thousand years ago…

            …and yet you, an ‘enlightened’ Westerner, you’ve fallen for it, hook, line…

            …and little lead thingie.

            Good fishy, there’s a good fishy…

          • Bingo

            Sadly for you—hellfire will come soon for those in denial of the truth about Jesus Christ the Saviour of the world, who bore your sin and disease on His body so you would not have to suffer the punishment of your sins.

            They mocked Him just as you do today. I am in perfect company.

          • Verisimilitude

            Look, I have no problem at all with you misunderstanding the nature of Yeshua’s teachings…

            …nor even you calling him by a nonsensical name.

            In fact, feel free to prattle on as much as you like…

            …but, let it be known that what you are preaching is unmitigated tripe.

            So, Bingo: Prattle away…

          • Bingo

            Seeing as I have a relationship with Yeshua, He teaches me well, and I have no problem understanding Him.

            Get to know Him and allow Him to teach you.

          • Verisimilitude

            Excellent point, Bingo! And on this, we are agreed, believe it or not.

            I have studied many of Yeshua’s teachings–and his precise word–in detail, and for clarity, I have sometimes sought out experts in their field to deepen my understanding of what he might have meant.

            Myself, I eschew most–if not all–of the Christian Church’s interpretations of his teachings…preferring instead to go with my own understanding and intuition.

            Any beef I might appear to have had with you is in fact not with you at all, but with the Christian Church itself.

          • Bingo

            Wow! I am glad we agree on SOMETHING!

            Going with your own understanding is a huge mistake. god does help us with interpretation, but if you are withdrawn from fellowship of the local church, then you are in rebellion to God’s word. There are no lone rangers in the Kingdom of God. Personal understanding and fleshly intuition is no barometer of truth.

            There are some wonderful, Spirit-led churches out there. God is more than willing and very able to lead you to the one He desires for you to be fed and to grow to maturity in. You need to come to a place of trust in God that He can lead you to the place where He wants you. Don’t forget that the Body of Christ needs each of us for our particular strengths and gifts, too. We aren’t to withhold ourselves from being used of God in the assembly, either.

            When a person withdraws from the local church, he is really suffering with an inordinate amount of self-importance, and it can also be the result of one being infected with an independent spirit, an evil spirit that is very prevalent today. By separating and isolating oneself from the Body of Christ against God’s instructions, one eventually becomes very weird indeed in his thinking and theology. They do not grow tall and straight, spiritually, as they do not avail themselves of sharpening—you know: iron sharpens iron. The local church is a great place fr security and safety FROM false teaching, and for correction that keeps one from going off on wild tangents, spiritually.

          • Verisimilitude

            Sorry, Bingo, but I did the Chruch’s version of Yeshua’s teachings for a decade and a half.

            In that time, I found myself increasingly dissatisfied with the magick, the miracles and the sheer mumbo-jumbo of the Chruch’s version of things.

            So, I went on my own mission, found myself closer to the real meaning of Yeshua’s teachings–and the teachings of [some of] the other great spiritual leaders this world has seen.

            Yes, Yeshua’s has much still for me to learn. And no, I will not be learning it from any Church.

            And if rebel I be, then I aspire to be a rebel like Yeshua whose shoes I will never fill, but whose footprints I will happily follow…

            So, let’s agree on Yeshua as a great teacher, and have only harmony twixt the two of us from now on!

          • Bingo

            What do you mean, “but”? What’s a decade and a half mean? That’s just a drop in the bucket. You’ve got the wrong idea about the Church and what we are called to do.

            You are obviously determined to disobey God and remain on your independent journey apart from His people. Sad. That is most likely why you are always up against believers and share nothing with us. What good is a soldier in God’s Mighty Army who doesn’t stay in formation? Useless to his brothers who fight over and around his neglectful station, and will he eventually be cut down by the enemy.

            There is not usually much harmony between a strong believer in Christ and one who is on the outside looking in, but if you have placed your faith in Yeshua for salvation, I can only leave it to Him to put His finger on the areas in your life (as He does in mine) where you come up short. The body of Christ needs all believers to stand shoulder to shoulder in this world.

          • Verisimilitude

            Aha…I see you relapsing into your fixed ideas and cliches…

            …the rigid thinking of a church that has taught you its b.s. instead of the pure teachings of Yeshua.

            No worries, Bingo…you cleave to your path…

            …and I’ll follow mine.

            TTFN.

          • Bingo

            There you go again. Rebellion and bad language.

            The “pure teachings of Yeshua” include how we behave as a Church. You know, what Jesus has established?

            I cleave only to the path that Jesus has laid down for me to walk. Not my own…as you have done. You are on the outside looking in.

          • Verisimilitude

            Nope, you’re quite wrong about Yeshua establishing the Church.

            I can understand how some see it that way, but it’s not how I see it at all.

            This Church is a man-made fabrication, loosely based on a mash-up of Yeshua’s life.

            But good luck with your view, I know it sustains you, and I’m certainly not opposed to you and your Church having your own views on Yeshua, no matter how wrong-headed–and false–they seem to me.

          • Bingo

            No, I am not wrong about Jesus establishing His Church. YOU don’t see it that way because YOU are dancing to a different drummer, and it is not Holy Spirit. You are not walking with unity in the Body of Christ according to the word of God.

            Your views are ill-begotten and fleshly derived, and not from the scriptures. They only serve to separate you from the unity that all believers have in Christ. Until you submit to God and His word, and obey Him, you will always be outside looking in.

          • Verisimilitude

            I have nothing to do with this “Holy Spirit”

            With the logos, I am in partial communion, and working to fulfill entirely.

            As I’ve said before, I’m not interested in the Church’s dictates as to how things are, but to the seeing of how things are with mine own ‘eyes’, by my own ‘seeing’…

            …in this, I follow fully in Yeshua’s foot-prints without in any way suggesting I could fill his shoes.

            I do get what you’re saying: You’re suggesting I’m wrong.

            But for you to be correct in your assessment, you’d have to spurn 2,000 years of Christian meditation, and millennia more of other forms of meditation.

            Good luck with your studies, I bear you no ill-will…

            …and I wish you fulfillment in whatever terms satisfy you.

          • Bingo

            Well, then–the truth comes out. If you have nothing to do with the Person of the Holy Spirit, then you are still in your sins and need salvation.

            Yeshua doesn’t know you.

          • Verisimilitude

            errrrr….that’s quite right, Yeshua doesn’t know me…

            …after all, he’s dead…

            Pax vobiscum…

          • Bingo

            Wow…no, Yeshua is alive. It appears you have no understanding of the gospel.

          • Verisimilitude

            It appears you have no understanding of spirit.

          • Bingo

            You have no understanding of Christ, and how He dwells in believers, and works in people by His Spirit.

            Your hatred for what Jesus has established on the Earth for His people is very clear. You are an enemy of Christ by your own admissions.

            Once one has found that pearl of great price—Jesus—one no longer needs to seek, except for more of His presence in intimate relationship with Him.

            One needs humility, and an admission of one’s weakness and sinfulness—not a strong heart or a mighty mind (which are your carnal ideas)—to receive Jesus Christ.

            Your chosen insular existence is an abomination to God.

          • Verisimilitude

            I love the way you project your hatred and your intolerance onto others…

            …in this case, me!

            Look to yourself and find the other ways you project these qualities on to others…

            …there will be much learning for you in the process…

            …and good luck!

          • Bingo

            I have no hatred for you. You are just wrong and need to get things right about God and His salvation plan for all people. You don’t have the gospel message correct.

            Rather than try to understand correction and to take it on board, you’d much rather project that someone hates you. That is extremely defensive.

          • Verisimilitude

            Bingo: “…your hatred for what Jesus has established on the Earth for His people
            is very clear. You are an enemy of Christ by your own admissions…”

            Your own words betray you…you talk of “hatred” and use the word “enemy” when I have said I consider Yeshua one of the world’s great spiritual teachers, on a par with Siddhartha.

          • Bingo

            You have no clue about Jesus. He is the Saviour of the world. My words stand—you are an enemy of Christ.

          • Verisimilitude

            Honestly, I truly don’t mind you being clueless one little bit!

            I doubt there’s more than a handful of Christians who could understand what I’m saying…

            …so the fact you don’t get it is a testament to the brainwashing you’ve experienced at the hands of your Church.

            I sincerely hope you are able to undo the damage that’s been done to your view of the world, eternity and, indeed, Yeshua by your Church’s propaganda and its distortion of Yeshua’s teachings.

            I’m optimistic, but you’ll first have to recognize your issue for yourself…

            …and you’re quite some distance from that point right now.

          • Bingo

            LOL! I’m not clueless. I have the truth—but the truth flies right over your misguided head.

            I have a relationship with the living Christ, Yeshua. You don’t know Him, yet, but He is still calling you in to relationship.

          • Verisimilitude

            And you said you were right about ‘everything’!

            Yet, you cannot fathom how I learn much from Yeshua’s teachings, and nothing from those of the Church which claims to interpret him.

            Again, no worries, Bingo…I imagine your soul is good, and you mean well.

            Here, a helping hand, if you would but see it:

            “All Faith is false, all Faith is true:
            Truth is the shattered mirror strown In myriad bits;
            While each believes his little bit the whole to own.”
            ―Richard Francis Burton 1821-1890

          • Bingo

            You learn from what you choose to learn from. You’ve not learned much from the bible and what Yeshua says there, because you still reject Him.

            Rather than quote human beings, try quoting God. You reveal where your heart is, and it is not in the truth of God’s word. You need a true encounter with Jesus.

            Colossians 2:2-14
            I want them to have complete confidence that they understand God’s mysterious plan, which is Christ himself. 3 In him lie hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. 4 I am telling you this so no one will deceive you with well-crafted arguments. 5 For though I am far away from you, my heart is with you. And I rejoice that you are living as you should and that your faith in Christ is strong.

            Freedom from Rules and New Life in Christ

            6 And now, just as you accepted Christ Jesus as your Lord, you must continue to follow him. 7 Let your roots grow down into him, and let your lives be built on him. Then your faith will grow strong in the truth you were taught, and you will overflow with thankfulness.

            8 Don’t let anyone capture you with empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense that come from human thinking and from the spiritual powers[a] of this world, rather than from Christ. 9 For in Christ lives all the fullness of God in a human body. 10 So you also are complete through your union with Christ, who is the head over every ruler and authority.

            11 When you came to Christ, you were “circumcised,” but not by a physical procedure. Christ performed a spiritual circumcision—the cutting away of your sinful nature. 12 For
            you were buried with Christ when you were baptized. And with him you were raised to new life because you trusted the mighty power of God, who raised Christ from the dead.

            13 You were dead because of your sins and because your sinful nature was not yet cut away. Then God made you alive with Christ, for he forgave all our sins. 14 He canceled the record of the charges against us and took it away by nailing it to the cross. 15 In this way, he disarmed the spiritual rulers and authorities. He shamed them publicly by his victory over them on the cross.

          • Verisimilitude

            As I have said repeatedly, you have a fixed view that has been predetermined by your Church.

            Your are essentially a ventriloquist’s dummy, while the Christian Church’s hierarchy is the ventriloquist speaking through you.

            Nothing wrong with that, as long as you know you have neither a free mind, nor free will when it comes to religion.

            You put me in mind of that great and noble U.S. Vice-President Dan Quayle, who is famed for this quote, among others:

            “What a terrible thing to have lost one’s mind. Or not to have a mind at all. How true that is”
            –James Danforth Quayle 1947-

          • Bingo

            Nothing I believe has been predetermined by some church. I am of the Church, the Body of Christ in the world, and I believe God and am fixed on what He says.

            You’re the dummy, speaking silly, vacuous words of Satan and the empty-headed religious to all who would be impressed by them. I am not. The lies in them are far to obvious.

          • Verisimilitude

            Look, your thorough-going ignorance is OK with me…

            …I expect it from Christians who are nothing more than dummies for their Church’s ventriloquism.

            I get it about you…it’s all pap you’ve sucked up holus-bolus from your Church, with an entirely uncritical mind.

            No problem!

          • Bingo

            I am not ignorant of the truth, but you seem to be proud of yours or completely unaware of it. You despise God and His Son, His gift to you.

            Jesus Christ is my Messiah and it is His life that is lived in and through me. Praise God for His great free gift of righteousness!

          • Verisimilitude

            I wonder how you’ve gotten this entirely false impression that I despise Yeshua.

            After all, I have specifically told you that I hold him in high regard as a teacher.

            Yet, you persist in falsely characterizing my view on this man.

            Oh well, obviously you’re not as omniscient as you like to think you are!

          • Bingo

            You miss who He is, and belittle Him by equating him with false gods. That is translated as enmity.

          • Verisimilitude

            No, that is translated by you as enmity.

          • Bingo

            If you have not received Jesus Christ as your Saviour and made Him your Lord, then you are at enmity with God altogether. He still loves you and desires you to receive His free gift of His righteousness, but until you do that, you are an enemy of God in heart.

          • Verisimilitude

            Man, you couldn’t make this stuff up…

            …OMG…you did!

            Stop it, you’re making a buffoon of yourself!

          • Bingo

            No, you are, claiming Jesus is on a par with some Indian god. Jesus is God.

          • Verisimilitude

            You are very, very confused!

            You think Siddhartha is an Indian ‘god’?

            He was neither Indian, nor god.

          • Bingo

            I was mistaken, but nevertheless, Yeshua is God in the flesh, and cannot be compared to anyone for His greatness or anything else. That you’ve done that is very telling of the fact that you;e missed His message completely.

          • Verisimilitude

            There are many different perspectives on who Yeshua was…

            ….you and your Church have one perspective.

            And I have another.

            With none to know who is right…

            …and who is wrong.

          • Bingo

            There is only one Church and we have no variance of perspectives on who Yeshua is. Those who have never received Him do not know Him.

            John 10:3
            the sheep recognize his voice and come to him. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out.

            John 10:27
            My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.

          • Verisimilitude

            No, Christianity is divided into myriad sects, each with its own acolytes, and each disagreeing with the others…

            …in a similar fashion, Islam is divided into sects also, but to nowhere near the same degree as Christianity.

            In fact, Islam presents a far more unified front than Christianity, which has suffered many major and minor schisms, and is faced now with even more.

          • Bingo

            Haha! Try again!

          • Verisimilitude

            I’ve left you legless…you have no means to counter the point I make.

            The truth has a way of doing that to people.

          • Bingo

            That would be impossible for you to do. You lack the truth. There is only ONE Church and it is comprised of all who have received salvation in Jesus Christ.

          • Verisimilitude

            “A Christian denomination is an identifiable religious body with its own beliefs and practices within Christianity. Divisions… between one group and another are defined by doctrine and church authority.

            “Issues such as the nature of Jesus, the authority of apostolic succession, eschatology, and papal primacy often separate one denomination from another”

            Cute, Bingo, that you think y’all are agreed on the “nature of [Yeshua]” and eschatology.

            That’d be the “one” Church to you…

          • Bingo

            Denominations aren’t as much a problem as people like you spreading lies about them. Every born again Christian is in unity with Christ and each other, despite denominational differences.

            We who belong to the family of God through faith in Jesus Christ are the Church.

          • Verisimilitude

            The usual gerrymandered argument from a Christian defeated in debate.

          • Bingo

            It is not defeatable. It is what the word of God teaches. But of course, you don’t know that.

          • Verisimilitude

            I know that Christians put together any self-serving argument their convoluted and devious minds can come up with…

            …including, but certainly not limited to all that you say and especially all that the The First Council of Nicaea dreamed up and put into what is now called the “New Testament”.

            And yet, even with all that mendacity, I must single out the so-called ‘gospels’ for taking lies and propaganda to new heights or, perhaps as they are more appropriately called, new lows.

            I mean, what a joke: Miracles, resurrection, virgin birth, “holy ‘ghost’ ” assumption…

            …I mean just how gullible do you have to be to fall for all this tripe?

            But I guess you’d know the answer to that last question, as you’re the poster-boy for it.

          • Bingo

            People who walk with God don’t have to “put together any self-serving argument”. We know God and He speaks through us. God can speak for Himself through us and His word. There is nothing devious in Him or His righteous people.

            You are completely ignorant of truth, and you are literally boasting of it!

            There is nothing gullible about having a living faith. As an enemy of God your accusations prove to be nothing more than lies of the devil—so easy to detect. Your words belie exactly who you serve: Satan himself.

          • Verisimilitude

            Pretty much the whole story has been made up…it’s a fantasy, a set of myths….in sum, it’s balderdash.

            But, don’t let that stop you believing…it’s kind of quaint y’all think it’s true.

          • Bingo

            You are a devout unbeliever. Why do you constantly descend on this kind of publication, except to mock and attack God and His people?

          • Verisimilitude

            You’ll be able to answer that question the very moment you answer this one for yourself: Why do you engage with me?

          • Bingo

            The only reason I engage with people like yourself is to spread the truth of Jesus Christ—-even if you don’t believe it now, one day you will, and I hope it is this side of the grave.

            It’s obvious you could be acting out out of desperation for the truth. god has made it simple for you, but so many people like yourself think it has to be hard. It isn’t. It only takes some humility of heart to recognize that one is a sinner and needs saving.

          • Verisimilitude

            I have no interest in the ‘simple’ you’ve chosen.

            I have my own spiritual path, and I’m finding my own way to the Absolute…

            …as did many of the earlier Christians…there’s a rich tradition of meditation in Christianity.

            btw, I do in actuality appreciate your kind thoughts, but I’m not willing to settle for less than finding the truth for myself, even if it is a lot tougher my way.

            Go in peace, Bingo…

          • Bingo

            There is no other WAY. Jesus is “the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except by Me”, He says. Your way ends in destruction.

          • Verisimilitude

            As I have said before: You are utterly clueless.

            You have no content.

            You are an empty hand-puppet, a mouth-piece for the insidious propaganda of your deceitful Church.

            Leaving that aside, I’m sure you’re a great guy, and a wonderful father

          • Bingo

            LOL! There’s NOTHING clueless about me! As for content—I speak the life-giving truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ. That you are clueless enough to reject it is your own doing.

            How foolish you are thinking that you can ever hope to find any truth on the path you are walking. Jesus Christ is the truth. As for content: your container is empty and will remain that way until you come to Christ.

            John 14:6
            Jesus told him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me.

          • Verisimilitude

            Double LOL! Heck, LOL squared!

            You are so clueless you don`t even know you are clueless…

            …now, that’s clueless.

            Yea, verily I say unto thee: You are THE poster-boy for clueless, that’s fo’ sho’.

          • Bingo

            You are completely wrong and make yourself out to be incredibly foolish. You have nothing to say of any value, but some vague, insipid references to your personal path.

            There is a definitive path to truth and righteousness. My hope is that you are of the mind that should you discover that what you’ve been believing is wrong, you would have the courage to admit it. Wouldn’t you want to know if you were right in your pursuit and understanding of truth?

          • Verisimilitude

            I already know I’m on the right path, after 4+ decades of study and practice.

            In fact, my concern is for your well-being, and I hope that you will sooner, rather than later, see the light and recognize Christianity…

            …as espoused by the Christian Church…

            …to be the fraud it is.

            And, I’m not hopeful…

            …but, I shall have to let you go now….

            …as I am no longer willing to continue our sadly fruitless ‘dialog’

            TTFN…

          • Bingo

            Over 40 years of futilely seeking after nothing isn’t much, though, is it? You will reap what you sow. Sowing into nothing yields NOTHING.

            Enjoy.

          • Verisimilitude

            You are truly without a clue…sad.

          • Bingo

            Because of God’s love and provision of a way to Him, I am in possession of all the clues, thanks.

          • Verisimilitude

            As I said: You are totally clueless.

            Your posts are the best indicator as to that…

            …although you not recognizing your own cluelessness is another very clear sign.

          • Bingo

            You have no clue and that is clear.

          • Bingo

            However, the saying, “Ignorance is bliss” doesn’t apply to you in this case, because the longer you reject truth, the more likely you will experience God’s judgment and condemnation.

            You are making solid decisions against truth every time you hear it. Nails in your coffin.

          • Verisimilitude

            You are a purveyor of superstitious tripe.

          • Bingo

            That would be your domain. Superstition is opposed to faith.

          • Verisimilitude

            No, there’s zero superstition on my path….literally, zero.

            Yours depends upon it.

          • Bingo

            Falling into superstition is a sin, so you are wrong on that score. My faith is based on reality. Yours is non-existent and based on only one small part of what life is all about.

          • Verisimilitude

            Of course my ‘faith’ is non-existent, Bingo!

            Faith is unnecessary to my path, but your faith is based on magick…and that’s another item there’s no need to carry on my path.

            Your faith is not based on ‘reality’…it’s based on myths that are unprovable, as everyone knows, including you.

            Further, my path encompasses all elements of life…it’s a sine qua non of the path I have chosen.

          • Bingo

            The path you are on leads to destruction.

            Matthew 7:13
            “You can enter God’s Kingdom only through the narrow gate. The highway to hell is broad, and its gate is wide for the many who choose that way.

          • Verisimilitude

            Wubbish, Bingo…you don’t even know what path I’m on!

            Besides, your Church made most of this stuff up, primarily in the 1st to 4th Centuries C.E…

            …if you don’t already know this, there’s not much point in you and I carrying on this dialog…

            …my bet is, you don’t even want to find out if what I’m saying is true…

            …you’ll just deny it…of course, you’ll be happier that way…

            …after all, Bingo: “Ignorance is bliss where ’tis folly to be wise”.

            And you are living proof of that, Bingo, as are most if not all of your religion’s acolytes in.

          • Bingo

            You have revealed to all your path. What you have to say has no truth in it.

            I am so glad I have found the truth in Jesus Christ and in the word of God, the bible. That you are so solidly against the truth, God says in the book of John that He actually will harden those who are against the truth as a way of confirming your choice of denial. That is a very damning thing for you.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            “He loves it, though, when people don’t require signs and wonders to believe.”

            Which makes him as every bit crazy as you. You claim Truth without a figment of evidence or even REASONING to do so. That is crazy to the “BAT S***” level. What you need to find is Arkham Asylum. A fictional place for your fictional delusions.

          • Bingo

            You’re the crazy unrepentant unbeliever. Faith has its own evidence that goes over the unbeliever’s head.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Apparently in Bingo’s world, “drivel” belongs to God so you can not claim dibs.

            HA!

          • Bluesman1950

            True and living hope, I. E. wishful thinking.

          • Bingo

            You lack understanding, but that is a given. True faith and the living hope we have in Jesus Christ has nothing to do with wishing.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Or that he does exist…. you can believe without proof but you can not claim without proof.

          • Bingo

            God exists and He proves it to us every day—that is, if you are looking and listening.

          • Bluesman1950

            Show us some of this proof that you say we have missed.

          • Bingo

            You have the same opportunity I did many years ago when I placed my faith in the Creator. He reveals Himself. Ask Him, but mean it, and He will not fail to show you.

          • Bluesman1950

            Ask your imaginary friend? I’ll try Father Christmas first!

          • Bingo

            No–ask God. Numbskull.

          • Bluesman1950

            Insulting obviously strengthens your case, in your mind anyway. It would be great if you could actually provide your proof.

          • Bingo

            You are the one who insults Christians and God with one fell swoop. You do not have the upper hand, because you do not have the truth. That is why you substitute with arrogance.

          • David Cromie

            ‘Arrogance’ seems to be deists’ middle name. What entitles you to claim you have especial access to ‘truth’?

          • Bingo

            Everyone who knows and walks with Jesus Christ has the truth. That is not arrogance. It is fact.

            1 John 2:20b
            … for the Holy One has given you his Spirit, and all of you know the truth.

            John 16:13a
            When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all truth.

            Romans 1:18
            But God shows his anger from heaven against all sinful, wicked people who suppress the truth by their wickedness.

          • David Cromie

            Everyone who walks with fairies, or rides unicorns, is equally in possession of the ‘truth’, and there is a lot of fabulous literature to back this up. Why don’t you try it, it is very liberating and enlightening to have a variety of invisible, supernatural, entities to fall back on when others fail in particular instances. This will provide you with an ‘explanation’ for every eventuality in your impoverished life.

          • Bingo

            It’s only God who works all things out in those who love Him and obey His word. There is no arrogance in it. I am a former sinner who has been saved by God’s grace. apart from Jesus Christ, we all are deserving of nothing but eternal condemnation!

            There is no such thing as fairies or unicorns and you know it, but of course, you have nothing but scorn and take delight in mocking the people of God—typical of those who are determined to deny the God who made them. No arguments. Just scorn. That’s proof right there of their dominant evil thinking.

            Jesus Christ is the Saviour of the world. King of kings and Lord of lords, and one day soon, you will kneel and make that declaration—either with joy, or with abject horror.

          • David Cromie

            So it is fear that is at the root of your ‘faith’!

            A fable is a fable, no matter who the author is, or is claimed to be. The only thing that would make one fable ‘truth’ , as opposed to the rest, would be if the supernatural entity entailed, could be shown to exist. No one has yet come up with the necessary and sufficient evidence for any supernatural entity. Merely believing that X exists does not bring X into existence, outside of the mind of the believer. It is a unique ability of human animals to be able to imagine anything they might wish to. It is likewise possible to ascribe any qualities to this imagined entity that the person wishes to.

            No doubt it can be fun to indulge in this exercise, as children’s fairy tales attest, although it is worth bearing in mind that many of these stories were formerly quite dark and sinister before later rewriting. The real problem with such imaginings is when someone actually comes to believe that the imagined entity actually exists in the real world. This is termed reification of ideas, and can lead, for example, self-deluded, Christian, serial killers to claim that ‘god’ told them to kill all prostitutes (there are even Christian voices calling for death for homosexuals), or to kill doctors who perform abortions (ironically, in the cause of preserving ‘life’), or even to annihilate everyone who does not worship their particular version of ‘God’.

            What a wonderful world your imagined, loving, ‘god’ has ‘created’, when Christianity has been the source of so much evil in this, its so-called ‘creation’, throughout history!

          • Bingo

            There is no fear in those who know and walk with God. Faith dispels fear, as fear is the opposite of faith. Knowing God is not a delusion, either, for He reveals Himself to us.

            People who kill are not Christians. Your views are merely skewed by evil human thinking.

          • David Cromie

            “Faith dispels fear…”. So does whistling in the dark, I am informed! Fear is at the heart of Christianity – from ‘Fear God’, to fear of ‘hell’, etc., as a necessary control mechanism for the duped.

            Again you trot out the ‘No True Scotsman’ fallacy, but history proves the opposite.

          • Bingo

            Nope. Perfect love casts out all fear, and God’s love is perfect. So, wrong again, old chap.

          • David Cromie

            Do you not, as commanded, fear your ‘god’, or refuse to believe in the reality of the ‘hell’ into which you might be cast by said ‘god’?

          • Bingo

            No I am not afraid of God. The fear he desires from us is reverential awe. I believe what God says about the Lake of Fire, and as His child, I won’t have to stand in judgement. That day is coming for unbelievers, not believers.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            If I have to look and listen for it, then he obviously isn’t being obvious enough. Can you prey that he just sticks his face between the clouds and goes, “Heeeeelllllloooooooooo”. Make sure his face is big enough to see from miles away too. That would be pretty hard to pull off with today’s technology.

          • Bingo

            Nope. God says in His word that no one has an excuse to not recognize God by virtue of everyone’s observance of His Creation. He is way more than obvious! he is IN YOUR FACE! But He has given you a sovereign will of your own, and He will NOT violate it. You have been given the power to choose, right in the face of His very presence that he doesn’t exist. You choose where you spend your eternity.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Then I have no reason to worship him. I don’t need zealots like you to tell me how to live my life.

          • Bingo

            You have every reason to worship him, but are not in touch with any of them.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            “I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.”

            Galileo

            Me personally do not “worship” anyone. I look for answers to the questions I have. I do not look to the answer for the question, “Does God exist?” because there isn’t even enough evidence to postulate the question.

            Math is the ONLY absolute we can base anything on. Science does not deal in absolutes. Your “God” refuses to be tested in any way, where as science challenges people to test it and prove it wrong.

            You are lost, not because you don’t believe in what I do, but because you have so far deviated from reality that I honestly believe you should seek help.

          • Bingo

            You can join Galileo in hell, then, for all that. Man has no innate wisdom by comparison to that of God, who infuses His wisdom into the minds and hearts of those who love Him.

            Math? Mathematics comes from God, who has created everything with mathematical precision, because His mind is supreme. God is more than willing to be tested, and He comes up golden every time!

            You are lost because you worship the created over the Creator. You’ve missed the plot.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            “I feel obliged to believe that God that has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect, was just messing with us and wanted us to be dumb as bricks.”

            ~ Bingo

            Ghandi, Einstein and Darwin are all supposedly in Hell. Pretty much every great person we know in history today likely failed the Christianity test. Why would I want to go to heaven again?

          • Bingo

            Dummy. Atheists are a dumb as bricks. Your list of men are not great men. Your understanding of great is flawed.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Einstein was not great? He is one of the greatest geniuses of all time.

            Ghandi was not great? He was one of the most peaceful people of all times. More great for India, but still a person to learn from.

            My understanding of great is subjective. There is a difference.

            Your list would be, “God, Jesus, Yahweh, Jehova, etc”. Since everyone else is a filthy sinner.

          • Bingo

            Great intellect has no bearing on the man. Someone who works for his ideas of peace, but not God’s surefire way is not a man of greatness.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Just for the record, I think you set your limits for greatness rather low.

            Greatness to you is how far you can grovel and prostrate yourself. I can almost imagine you with an Igor like voice, “Yesh massster. Right away master.” Wow. Such greatness.

          • Bingo

            God is great. He lifts everyone who loves Him up to carry His greatness. In eternity we will be rulers with Christ. That is greatness! However, it is Jesus who is GREAT.

          • David Cromie

            If everyone in your ‘heaven’ is a ruler, then no one is a ‘ruler’.

          • Bingo

            Every born again believer will have a ruling position the Kingdom over the nations in the coming Millennial Kingdom on earth.

          • David Cromie

            Have you no idea of how stupid and nonsensical your Kingdom Hall ravings are? Perhaps not. In the meantime, where is the ‘greatness’ of JC in relation to the points made previously. Or is that too upsetting for you?

          • Bingo

            I am overcome with how juvenile you are—and old man, to boot. It is you who is ranting. Why do you comment here at a Christian publication? Your offerings are nothing more than senile rants?

            The Kingdom Hall belongs to the cult of Jehovah’s witnesses.

            You are nothing but confused.

          • Bluesman1950

            Speaking for myself, I come to this ‘christian publication’ because it chooses to publish an article criticising the reasonable application of UK law to some ranting homophobe who foists his unwanted opinions on people as they try to go about their business unmolested.

            “Your offerings are nothing more than senile rants?” Now you get into ageism as well!

            I hope your ‘greatness’ is sufficiently impressive for your god! My only sadness is that you will never be able to taste the bitter bile of your disappointment, by finding out that your life has been wasted in futile devotion to a fairy tale. You will die, know no more and never realise the depths of your delusion.

          • Bingo

            What’s wrong with the criticism?

            God is pleased with me, thanks. My life is lived for Him and nothing is wasted. Jesus is Lord.

            Those of you who speak so hatefully about God, His people, and of His ways which are ONLY good, are speaking out of spiritual blindness, confusion and delusion. Because you have nothing of any value to say, all you can do is insult, denigrate and emote in evil, negative ways. Sad people, indeed.

          • Bluesman1950

            Because you rely on ageist, sexist, misogynist insults instead of offering any actual evidence to support your grandiose fantasies.

          • Bingo

            Actually, that’s your schtick, not mine.

          • David Cromie

            “God is pleased with me, thanks”. What a smug claim! The fairies at the bottom of my garden are very, very pleased with me too.

          • CALIGIRL760

            Don’t even reply Bingo, this anti religion asshole trolls every single page so he can talk shit to people who believe in more than science and evolution……he’s a lonely old man with nothing better to do than make other feel less, feel judged, all based on something he has no control over, he can’t handle it, and he has nothin gnarly better to do then hide bejind his keyboard and preach his crap all over FOR WHAT DAVID? ?? WHAT ARE YOU ACCOMPLISHING??? PIECE OF SHIT YOU ARE!!! BINGO HE WILL STALK YOU FOR DAYS, TRUST ME, LET IT GO AND IGNORE THIS ASSHOLE NOW…..

          • David Cromie

            I think you are mistaking me for someone else, with your diatribe.

            When I point out the obvious idiocy of some of the comments posted, it seems to attract abuse, and more illiterate tirades from such as you. I would hardly term that an accomplishment, when all that is required is answers to the pertinent questions posed, and an admission of ignorance, or silence even, whichever you feel is appropriate in the circumstances, and I doubt your honesty will thereby count against you.

            In what way is vituperation the intelligent answer to serious enquiry? If your intention is to try to shut down any serious debate which you find goes over your head, or is not going to your liking, you will fail miserably.

          • CALIGIRL760

            No mistake, you are the one I seek out, the one who hunts down perfect strangers in order to stomp on their belief systems because they differ from yours…..sad and pathetic….

          • David Cromie

            Another example of your paranoia.

          • Bingo

            LOL! That isn’t smug. It’s true. God is pleased with His children.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            So pleased, even Christians get cancer. Isn’t it nice to feel special?

          • Bingo

            Yes, some do, as that is all a part of living in a fallen world with disease and sin all around us. We who belong to Christ are His special people, and we have His promise of healing within us. We also succumb to disease, but we have ultimate healing in our deaths, immediately ushered into His very presence, made whole and perfect, nothing missing—forever.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            well if god doesn’t decide to do something about this sickness here then it will just have to be humanity’s achievement. I don’t wait for God to decide and all his “perfectness”, to do something to make things better.

          • Bingo

            God has provided His children with healing.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Evidence?

            Without all the afterlife stuff that is unprovable.

          • Bingo

            The evidence is in believing and experiencing the healing God promises His kids and provides by our faith. He heals countless people every day.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            If you assume people recovering from illness is Gods work, the you have to assume that is those afflicted with illness is Gods work. You can’t assume coincidence for the bad stuff and attribute only the good to him. At least be consistent.

          • Bingo

            That’s the problem with stalwart unbelievers…they assume all the wrong things. Their thinker is on the fritz. They can only see evil in the only good and wise God, and ignore the evil that is within themselves, and in the world brought about by the enemy of God—Satan.

          • David Cromie

            Only juveniles believe fairy tales. As the NT says, ‘except ye come as little children…etc.’.

            Do you suppose that you are, in some way, superior to Jehovah’s Witnesses, or more to be taken seriously, or less deluded, even? I am sure you would fit in very well, on most theological points, at your nearest Kingdom Hall.

          • Bingo

            I know many juveniles and none of them believe is such vile things. No, it is superstition and the occult that captures people with ideas such as fairies, and old wives’ tales.

            Jehovah’s Witnesses, or Watchtower society is a cult, and because of their insidiousness, they need to be taken seriously for the false beliefs they preach and teach.

          • David Cromie

            “… it is superstition and the occult that captures people with ideas such as [sky] fairies…”. Quite!

            “… false beliefs they preach and teach”. What exactly makes your preaching and teaching superior, more believable, or even to be taken seriously?

          • Bingo

            The bible is God’s message to the world…not the Watchtower.

          • David Cromie

            I don’t think ether of them has anything sensible to say to the real world.

          • magormissabib

            Look around you fool. You seee the greatness of God every day. Start with 9/11, Katrina. boston Bombings. etc, every day God manifests his greatness in pouring out adumbrations of his wrath to come.

          • David Cromie

            How sick your god thingy really is!!

          • magormissabib

            Dont you have a peep hole at the public toilet to be at?

          • David Cromie

            So that is how you spend your time?

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Damn man. You put Bingo in a really tight space. I doubt he wants anything to do with the message you just said, but he doesn’t want to look like he is defending the Atheists….

            You don’t treat your wing man like that…

          • Bluesman1950

            Well Allahu Akbar to you!

          • David Cromie

            WTF!! Do you not realise what you are saying, and the picture you present of a supposedly ‘loving god’?

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Thank you. I’ve been saying Christianity has every bit of capability of doing crazy stuff like that for a long time. You have now just proved it.

          • magormissabib

            lol look t this puny wretch who thinks he knows more about how God should rule his world than God. too funnny. Hey why dont you make a universe and show God how its done. Oh Wait!

          • David Cromie

            You seem to be happy to believe there is a ‘god of love’ which looks after the wellbeing of its creatures, but is content to sit back and see them suffer all kinds of deprivations whilst looking on and dong nothing. Perhaps you are also one of those masochistic Christians who believes that suffering is good for the ‘soul’ – do you self flagellate every day, and don a hair shirt?

          • magormissabib

            Another Bible dumb fool telling us about God. lol. shut up. God hates you.

          • David Cromie

            So it is quite beyond your rather inadequate intellectual powers to reply intelligently, it seems.

          • Bluesman1950

            Neither did ‘god’.

            Perhaps if you pray to him he’ll grant you the secrets of grammar and punctuation.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Why does God only get one capital letter in great, but Jesus get all five?

            Is that blasphemy?

          • Bingo

            You make as much sense as a book on how to read.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            You mean like how you have to believe the Bible before you read it to understand it? Yeah. I get it.

          • Bingo

            No, one can read it and God opens one’s spiritual eyes to the truth, and then they believe it. So far, your eyes are still shut tight.

          • Breckmin

            If God is infinite and we are finite, then humility is a logical response. Humility before a Holy Creator is indeed part of greatness. Obedience to this Creator is to demonstrate your love for the Creator. When you understand the logic of the universe with respect to the Holy Creator it is then that you understand why “greatness” is reserved for the Man God became. If you want to be truly great as a sinner who gets adopted into God’s family then you will desire to exalt Jesus Christ and not yourself.

            Question everything.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            I like your last sentence.

            The problem is you can create a scenario where God exists. You can even make sense of it for the moment. However, without making it so vague as to lose meaning, as time goes on, society and the advancement of humankind will eventually contradict it because it is based on an unproven assumption.

            I don’t worship. I don’t know of anyone or any thing that is deserving of such a act. There are people I follow, that I find traits in them to have them step above others, but like all humans, they are flawed in the sense that no one is perfect.

            By worshiping the God of the Bible, you are in essence claiming the people that wrote and ratified the Bible (many many people) are perfect, that there are no biases, mistruths, or exaggerations to promote their belief. They could not have made a mistake.

            You must also believe you yourself are perfect, that you have not in the slightest incorrectly interpreted said book. Despite millions of other Christians in other denominations that follow different interpretations and beliefs.

            The only thing I see that is the same across the board, is God and Jesus. Even the description of them is different. Some believe they are one in the same, some believe in the parent son role. In the end, it is obvious to me, that it has become a mall of religion, and people merely shop for what they want to believe.

            If God/Jesus really does exist, at this point I would have to say they have their hands full with messed up followers to worry about me for questioning the thousands of different versions of belief in the first place.

          • Breckmin

            First of all, you can worship the God of Abraham and have never even heard of the biblos/the scripture. All you need is Yeshua/Jesus/Isa and the knowledge of His unique Deity and Lordship as your Savior. Just ask yourself about all of the Christians who had no access to the Latin Vulgate for all of those hundreds of years before bibles were distributed. Second, you don’t have to believe the bible is perfect or that the prophets and apostles are perfect. Perfection is reserved for God…. practicality exist among men/humankind. You seem to be reacting to biblical inerrancy rather than to Jesus Christ alone Who is Lord. Biblical inerrancy is a new position which is less than five or six hundred years old. It is the result of concision not the product of precision. The early Church and the Church of the middle ages never believed that scripture was equal to logos (the bible was not exactly equal to the Word of God), but rather the claim was that the Word of God was contained within scripture. It was the Word of God that was prefect….scripture was not (neither was human language which was evolving). Scripture was indeed the authority, but it was not inerrant. No human authority was ever considered inerrant except Jesus Christ Who was/is uniquely God Incarnate.
            Third, interpretations about peripheral theology are going to vary because everyone is at different stages of learning. Essential beliefs such as the Lordship of Jesus Christ and His unique Deity are what unites all Christians. You seem to be reacting to some form of evangelical conservativism or fundamentalist theology rather than to historical Christianity. Identifiable error from the prophets does NOT invalidate everything they said and claimed took place historically… nor does it invalidate the true logos (Word of God) which is communicated throughout all of the various languages of the flesh. I encourage you to keep questioning… but when you question… pray for protection from deception. This world is a market place of ideas … most lead to destruction rather than to Jesus.

          • David Cromie

            Were there Christians before there were Christians?

          • Breckmin

            there were Orthodox Jews who followed Abraham and Moses. Christianity is a fulfillment of Orthodox Judaism according to Jesus (even though an non-Messianic Orthodox Jew would disagree…. (because they rejected their own Messiah.

          • Breckmin

            what if you were worshipping either yourself or some indirect form of worship of another entity and didn’t know it? (you weren’t aware of it) Would there be a logical justification that could be substantiated that it was still some form of worship?

            One thing I would request that you think about is the difference between theism and Christianity. Theism is a conclusion based on alleged evidence (which we can go into all those evidences from the natural order)… whereas Christianity requires faith in Jesus Christ and His resurrection. Often the two get wrongfully co-mingled by the non-believing world… because they are not aware of the evidence for undecided/agnostical theism.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            That would assume that I see myself as a God of some kind, which I don’t.

            Definition of worship:

            the feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity.

            I don’t acknowledge a deity, so I am not worshiping anyone or anything.

            I disagree with your definition of Theism. Theism is the opposite of Atheism. Atheists do not believe in a God. Theists believe in a god. Christians are Theists, just more defined about which “God” they worship.

            Theism:

            belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in one god as creator of the universe, intervening in it and sustaining a personal relation to his creatures.

          • Breckmin

            is every theist a Christian? Do you see a distinction between theism (particularly undecided theism or agnostic (historical meaning not contemporary) theism) verses the God of Abraham or orthodox monotheism? Also can you worship anything that is not a deity?

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Theism is generic, Christian is more specific. All Christians are Theists, but not all Theists are Christian. The difference is Christians worship a specific god (or Gods if you include Jesus as separate).

            By the definition of worship, no. But it is used in place of extreme devotion elsewhere as a slang I guess. Either way, when you tell Atheists they worship something (usually themselves), you are pushing your thinking on us. We have no need to worship unlike you. We act and react to non religious matter similarly to you. As a matter of fact, I would challenge you to go to a mall and try to point out who is Atheist and who is not without asking them. I think you would find you’d have a hard time and/or get it wrong most of the time (Christians shop at Hot Topic too).

          • Breckmin

            Knowledge that there is a Creator is distinct from faith in Jesus Christ. That was my original point.
            Can a Catholic worship Mary by praying to her and saying “Hail Mary” continuously and not be aware that they are worshiping Mary? They may use a word like hyperdulia instead of Latria but in reality the behavior can be indistinguishable even if they claim they do not Latria Mary.
            IF there is a Creator/God, THEN you can make an “idol” out of anything and not be aware of it. You can worship beautiful young women’s bodies through viewing pornography and not be aware of your own objectification and idolatry of the female body. You can make an idol out of yourself also, and not be aware of it. Worship comes in many forms/behaviors. Question everything. Question why. A devil worshiper may worship Satan and NOT believe he is a “deity.” A Catholic who prays and continuously talks to Mary and hails her may not believe she is a “deity” but just believe she is divine. Question the definition of worship (requiring a deity).

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Well, I don’t define a worship that way. To me, your definition makes no sense and is only considered to drag Atheists down to your level. And argument shield so to say. Religion and worship require intent and a deity. So no…we dont “unknowingly” worship things or people.

          • Bingo

            You haven’t a clue what true greatness is.

          • Bluesman1950

            Missed this one before. “…filthy menstrual rags.” So, not only a deluded grovelling creationist, but a nasty mysogynist as well! Isn’t your god responsible for women’s menstrual periods, if he created women, or is that the work of Satan too?

          • Bingo

            Hardly. God has said that human-valued righteousness is nothing compared to His, and that to Him it is like smelly, putrid menstrual rags. That’s His metaphor for it. It has nothing to do with misogyny.

          • Bluesman1950

            Well good that he thinks so kindly of his creation. Pity that it makes him sound like a disgusting old creep!

          • Bingo

            It’s only disgusting old creeps that can say that, as well as divulge people’s names when clearly they do not want them out there.

            Retard.

          • Bluesman1950

            Christian!

          • Bingo

            I would never refer to such dear people in that way. Just people like yourself who truly do have a retarded, deadened spirit, who has been given the truth about the way to an abundant life in Jesus Christ but would rather grovel in sin, and not only that, but ridicule and mock those who have the truth, and who have done nothing to you to deserve the scorn you cast their way.

          • Bluesman1950

            You did! Continue to spew your bile and nonsense, I’m sure that will win some converts to Jesus.

          • Bingo

            You make a person who is mentally challenged appear normal.

          • Bluesman1950

            You just can’t resist using people with mental problems as an unfavourable comparison for your ammunition can you? God bless you in your Christian charity!

          • Bingo

            I draw very apt parallels, and they have nothing to do with my love for people with mental challenges. With God all can be made whole.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Ah, uses people with “mental challenges” (read mentally disabled), as a low barrier to show how someone is even lower, especially to show the extremely low intellect required to meet that barrier, yet continues to use “mentally challenged” as a politically correct phrase in order to appear not to insult.

            Yet still doesn’t see it as insulting…..

            Probably shows his “love for people with mental challenges” the same way God shows his love for people without the right religion or belief.

            Conveniently forgets that in his belief, God made “mentally challenged” people the way they are. How “loving”.

          • Bingo

            No, I am not insulting in the least…Intellect is not required to know God. He crosses all of men’s so-called barriers to reach the most difficult, unbelieving, rebellious heart and the most challenged human being, and the most comatose among us.

            God loves all—even those who are born with defects—and desires that they come to Him. he is our Healer and restorer, and enabler. He didn’t create them that way. Imperfections are he result of sin in the world—not personal sins, but sin in general. sin in the world has brought degradation and birth defects, and all illness and disease and death are the evidence of that.

          • Verisimilitude

            Your usual, outrageously presumptuous post: “…rather grovel in sin…”

            You arrogant ‘Christian’

            No wonder we “…ridicule and mock…” you because you claim to have the “truth”…

            …but you live a lie, and try arrogantly to force it on others…

            ….that’s why we ridicule and mock you.

          • Bingo

            No, I live in the light of the truth. You can mock all you like. people mocked and even killed Jesus. I can take it.

          • Verisimilitude

            I’m sure you can, Bingo.

            And, you’ll have to…for as long as you pour scorn–on those who are on a different path.

            As for you and the truth…you’ve fallen for one of the biggest falsehoods of all: The Church’s opinion of Yeshua’s divinity.

            Now, I’m really done with you…get thee behind me, Bingo.

          • Bingo

            I have no scorn for those who are walking the path to destruction. I have pity for them. For those who deliberately walk there, and hold derision for those who have God in their life, I can only see the end for them, and it is a horrible one. You can make another choice.

            You have been given the truth about Yeshua, but you choose to heed the lies. That is your choice and you will live—and die with it—and will be judged by God for it.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Sorry. Don’t need a spotlight in a zombie film.

          • Bingo

            You make as much sense as a waterproof towel.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            That is very funny. Your metaphors illuminate the misogyny of the people who made up your vile religion.

          • Bingo

            Not my metaphors—God’s—and they are very apt.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            “God, Jesus, Yahweh, Jehova, etc” are not great because they are imaginary, and the people who dreamed them up were very limited in their comprehension of nature or ethics.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Well, I was mentioning from his point of view. I agree 100% of course. For me, great means someone who has added something of value to all of humanity on a scale that goes outside the ordinary.

          • David Cromie

            So no atheist could ever hope to be a brilliant mathematician?

          • Bingo

            God creates people to be brilliant mathematicians, atheist or not. But His perfect plan for each one is to know Him and to allow His power to flow in and through them. He has a wonderful life planned for everyone, if they would only turn to Him.

          • David Cromie

            Why does this ‘god’, you so faithfully promote, currently deny christians the ‘wonderful life’, you speak of, in most Islamic countries today?

          • Bingo

            God doesn’t deny His children anything He promises them.

          • David Cromie

            So, your loving ‘god’ is powerless to end the suffering, and killing of ‘His children’, and ensure for them the ‘wonderful life’ you claim it has promised them?

          • Breckmin

            when His children suffer and suffer for what is right (standing up for the truth of the gospel, for instance), this actually finds favor with God (1 Peter 2:20). Suffering has multiple purposes in the temporary creation…. including knowledge of contrast. God will end suffering for His adopted children some day, but those who will suffer the consequences of remaining in their sin against a Holy Creator will not see the end of suffering.

          • David Cromie

            What nonsense you religious zealots preach. Prove your ‘god’ exists, outside of your head!

          • Breckmin

            The Creator is not my personal God. The Creator self-exists regardless of your perception or agreement that there is evidence. Of course there is evidence. You should be able to look at a snowflake (or any crystallization which is obviously a designed process to the individual without a bias against some form of theism) and know/conclude there is a Creator. In fact, you are culpable/responsible for knowing that there is a Creator just by looking at a snowflake… however concluding there is a Creator (theism) and becoming a Christian are two very distinct things.
            For those who have difficulty seeing the obvious design in a snowflake, we have much more detailed evidence for “a Creator” (undecided agnostical theism) in biological systems which allow us to make specific arguments and detailed evidence which goes far beyond the hasty generalization of “design” or I.D. It is the nature of these observations which are specific to arranged order and complexity rather than just design. The conclusion of theism is based on cumulative case argument. There is also a cumulative case argument that connects theism to the God of Abraham. It goes in several small steps which follow each other by logical reasoning and evidence. The cumulative case argument for the God of Abraham (from undecided/agnostical theism) is shared by Islam, Christianity and Judaism. The cumulative case argument from the God of Abraham to Jesus Christ/Christianity is much more detailed and deals with hundreds of specifics.

          • David Cromie

            The Argument from Design has been thoroughly debunked – even Aquinas, himself, was not totally convinced of its validity!
            Specious arguments ad antiquitam, and ad populum, will not serve your purposes either. After all, for no matter how long, or by however many, it was believed that the earth was flat, or that it was at the centre of the universe, this did not change the reality.

            The same is true of the supposed existence of any god or gods, and these are all the specifics that need to be bourn in mind. Do you not wonder why Christians are quite happy to ignore, or deny, the existence of all the other ‘gods’ that humans have created, believed in, and worshipped, since homo sapiens evolved? Moses, among other OT characters, certainly didn’t!

          • Breckmin

            Thomism has nothing to do with conventional teleological arguments and the exact nature of these arguments… and your hasty generalization of “Argument from Design” is not even identified. Which teleological argument are you referring to? An antiquated WatchMaker one???? Poisoning the well with flat earth fails to address any current positive data regarding algorithmic programming, genetic information, biological information, or the nano-factories of protein synthesis and the EXACT nature of these arguments. Hasty generalizations about “intelligent design” (or that they have somehow been debunked) fail miserably to address the “specific” nature of these obvious conclusions… and the distinctions made between implications of intelligent causation vs. theistic implications or even religious implications which are all three distinct from each other. Until you address the specific nature of the data that is proposed as evidence, you have no argument.
            I know of no cumulative case argument that stands from reason for any of these other “gods” that you suggest… and your question is a complex question with false assumptions.

          • David Cromie

            Please rehearse the “.. the specific nature of the data…” which encompasses the evidence for the existence of any ‘god’ or ‘gods’, without the lecture on “… the distinctions made between implications of intelligent causation vs. theistic implications or even religious implications…”, and algorithmic programming (what has this got to do with a proof of the supernatural?), etc..

          • Bingo

            God is not powerless to do anything. His word is truth and he will not violate it, nor will He violate man’s will. He kills no one, because he cannot sin. I find it ridiculous that one who sins and hates God as you do and many others like yourself, would be so brazen as to judge God as if he were a sinner like yourself. You presume to be above Him, but you only look like an idiot.

          • David Cromie

            “You presume to be above Him…”, and you presume to speak for it – and ascribe a particular sexuality at the same time! Just prove that your ‘god’ exists and then we will be able to discuss what it can, and cannot do.

          • Bingo

            That is EXACTLY what you do—you lord yourself above God. He has hardened your heart to confirm your choice. I pray there is still hope for you.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            God is not Omnipotent, for God can not create a being more powerful than himself. Since he is not Omnipotent, a being that is more powerful than him can exist.

            Since God is not Onimpotent, he can not be Omniscient, since a more powerful being could prevent him from seeing and hearing everything.

          • Bingo

            God is omnipotent, yet that doesn’t mean that He can do the stupid things you think of. You clearly do not understand Him or the ways in which He is described. He is also omniscient and omnipresent.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            The definion of omnipotent is……

            (of a deity) having unlimited power; able to do anything.

            So, by definition he cannot be omnipotent if he cannot do something. That includes making a being more poweful than himself.

          • Bingo

            God’s omnipotence is not what your poor human thinking dictates. God is all powerful, AND He will never go against His own word.

          • Bingo

            God is not powerless to do anything.

          • David Cromie

            It is truly amazing what imaginary entities can be induced to achieve!

          • Bingo

            Those who know God have great imaginations, as they are functioning as they are created. Those who do not believe are functioning at minimal capacity.

          • David Cromie

            They must have, since they believe in the logically non-provable existence of imaginary entities, and expect others to just accept their delusions, without question.

          • Bingo

            Imagination is a gift from God, and we who know God know how to tap into it rightly. Those who have yet to discover God do not. You’re only expressing your opinion based on your limited knowledge and experience…and very poor use of imagination, in that you can only use it to try to drown out the voice of Truth in evil, mocking ways.

            Childish, to say the least. I doubt you are able to carry on a proper discussion without mockery. Fear is at the base of that.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            If it’s proof you need, Mr. Cromie, perhaps you should research the Shroud of Turin. Lots of sciency stuff in that subject. Scientists still can’t explain how the image was formed. (The C-14 tests were wrong, just to let you know.)
            p.s. My great-grandfather was from Bristol. And, he might have come from Cardiff. Although, my late mother always said that he referred to himself as a “proper Englishman.” Do the Welsh refer to themselves in that way?

          • David Cromie

            The Turin shroud is, indeed, an interesting artefact. Of course, the RC church was not happy with the C-14 dating, and one must remember that the tests were performed by more than one lab. As far as I remember, more tests were ordered subsequently by the Vatican, but I have not seen a report of these findings. However, there is no proof that the impression is of any particular person, whatever the age is determined as.

            In the Middle Ages, the array of relics was quite extensive, including, believe it or not, a feather from the Holy Ghost, along with enough pieces of the ‘true’ cross to build an Italian navy! I have never understood the need for the veneration of saintly detritus, some of whom were ‘de-sainted’ by a post war pope, including St Christopher, and that favourite Irish saint, Brigid.

            No Welshman would ever refer to himself as ‘a proper Englishman’! By the way, I am Irish, although I have lived in Cardiff since 1971.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            Scientists were not happy with C-14 tests, Mr. Cromie. You memory is faulty, I’m afraid, as the Catholic Church did not order more tests. The competent authorities have refused to provide more samples to be tested.

            The contention is two-fold. The samples used ware from only one area (one of the corners), and, later determined to have been taken from an area know to have been patched. Also, it has been found that cloths can be contaminated by other carbon-based material, skewing the C-14 results (e.g., Egyptian mummy tests that come back with dates in the Middle Ages).

            Recent tests have found that the image on the Shroud of Turin matches too many data points with the Sudarium of Oviedo, the blood-stained “napkin” mentioned in Saint John’s Gospel (20:6-7).

            Oh no, not the Calvin canard about the relics of the True Cross again! You atheists really need to update your talking-points, as that bogus claim was debunked long ago. (It wasn’t a navy, by the way. You atheists sure do like exaggerate, don’t you? Calvin, without doing any scientific research, falsely claimed that “if all the pieces that could be found were collected together, they would make a big ship-load.”)
            In 1870, a French architect, Charles Rohault de Fleury, published his own research, which found that only 3,942,000 cubic millimeters of wood could be found. Or, about 1/3 of the original Cross, based on 3-4 meter high cross.

            Thanks, for the info on Welsh/English differences!

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Sounds like a PR stunt for a company. “We at ABC corp have listened to our customers feedback, and understand that not everyone is happy with the current service that is provided. We hear you, and promise you that in a future update, you will see what we truly have to offer.” While they are whispering under their breath, “Just keep paying your bills”.

          • Bingo

            You have a very faulty and skewed ability to grasp things that are good and true about God. Rebellious and hardened hearts just cannot comprehend truth. They think that their perception is good by their glibness, but it is clearly broken and inadequate.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            You know who cannot understand truth? People who believe their own delusions, adjust their faulty facts to support said delusion, and deny any tangible evidence that goes against said belief.

            If you truely believe in a god, the you have to admit that we have no free will since it could create obstacles to gods plan, or that god doesn’t have a plan because he gave us free will.

            You also have to concede that every piece of evidence we use against you very well may be there because of your deity, making your Bible a work of man not god. Believing other wise goes against the gods plan/free will argument.

            So with that can come to the conclusion that if there is a god we likely have no idea how to serve him, no idea what he wants, and no idea on his nature or how it affects us.

            Essentially the same thing as having no god.

          • Bingo

            People who sit there and deny God are the most simpleminded and childish in their unfounded claims and deductions. You have no evidence.

          • Breckmin

            God will reward Christians eternally for their temporary persecution. The wonderful life you speak of is not promised to every Christian in the scriptures… in fact, persecution and martyrdom is expected when you stand up for the gospel in a hostile environment…but the reward for this is eternal (in addition to the already promised eternal life). There are indeed temporary blessings for Christians in countries like the United States that are a result of obedience… often times Christians make references to God’s Plan through statements of concision which do not include all of the logical exceptions which happen as a result of accidents, natural disasters, war, etc. Most Christian apologists would not make the statement without qualifiers.

          • David Cromie

            You make it sound as though some Christians are more worthy, in the sight of your ‘god’, than others. I still do not see how a perfect ‘all powerful, prescient, omnipresent, and loving god’ could have created an imperfect world for its creation to inhabit.

          • Breckmin

            God is dealing with the real problem of evil and exposing evil for what it really is… a danger to us because of our free will and because of the absolute Holiness of God. The temporary creation is dealing with this problem…and God became and Man to provide a Sacrifice which would be an Atonement for sin/disobedience. Being a Christian in America does not make you “more worthy” but sometimes it can contribute to you being “more blessed” which is by God’s grace. There is no equality in circumstances. No two people have equal circumstances in this universe…. so if fairness has a pseudo definition of “being treated equally” then it is something that does not really exist in this universe. No two people can be truly treated equally because all people have unequal experiences. Question everything… especially your concept of fairness and being treated equally within different life circumstances.

          • David Cromie

            How could evil exist without ‘god’s’ connivance – it is, after all, the author of all things, to believers? As for equality, are we not all equal, for example, before the law, at least in theory?

          • CALIGIRL760

            Hey David, its me again, at it again I see, is that all you do is talk and debate about “god” and his nonexistence, that is not a life David, you need to get out of the house, perhaps go to Church, you need something to fill your diluted heart, mind and soul…..how do you like to have me everywhere your turn on disqus…..now you know how it feels to be forcedpushed and harrased to continue debates you didnt ask for, you didnt respect me when I asked you to stop, well paybacks are a bitch….talk again later ok…..lol..byeeeeee

          • David Cromie

            I expect I have a much more fulfilled life than you, and a much broader range of interests than you ever will. Now just try answering the questions, instead of writing crap by way of evasion.

          • Breckmin

            To address your first point, God is NOT the Author of all things. There are some over simplistic systematic theologies (such as Fred Phelps or other extreme hyper calvinistic systems) which conclude this, but they are clearly against the teachings of scripture. God is involved, but God is not in collusion or in collaboration with the creation of moral evil in His universe (which is inevitable with self-generating cognitive beings possessing free will) other than the fact that God has “allowed” it to take place…because we are not God’s puppets nor His robots but we are rather created in His conscious Image. So God is not the Author of moral evil nor is God the Author of disobedience nor disagreement (with God from a created being). God created the ability for self-generation and volition but God does not create the moral evil…. that is created by the little creators in God’s universe via their own freewill. A Good God does not have to be symmetrical as to Ownership of the evil with the good. A Good God can co-own the good created by little creators (who were in those positions by His grace) and disown the “bad” (moral evil) in His universe because the former pleases Him and the latter displeases Him and the latter will be judged whereas the former may be rewarded. Sin/moral evil exists because God has allowed it to exist as a potential byproduct of free will agents…. but God did not create it… those who committed the evil actions created it. In order for love and genuine relationships to exist…and even genuine worship (which is self-generated) to exist, free will must exist… but it carries with it the potential for moral evil. You can’t agree with God if you can’t disagree with God. Disagreeing with God is an evil thing to do. You can’t say “yes” if you can’t say “no.” Saying no is morally evil (sin) and a horrible evil in God’s universe. The “no” is self-generated by the creature (cognitive being) with free will. God is not responsible for the actions of free will beings which go against Him, but He can logically co-own the good/obedience in a way that is different from that which goes against His desired Will. This non-symmetrical distinction is important to understand how it is justified… as well as many other non-symmetrical relationships such as God’s role in saving people. God is not the Author of sin, but God is indeed the Author of Good…and Good is defined by God’s very nature and will. (Here is where Aquinas is useful to appeal to)

          • Breckmin

            We are equally created in God’s conscious Image and we are perfectly judged according to the same standard of justice, but it is our circumstances which are not equal…. nor do we equally commit the same amounts of sin or good. Infants and babies might all commit the same amount of “no” sin and thus be allowed into heaven. The early Christians used to praise God that these little ones had pasted through this life without committing sin and would thus be welcomed by Jesus… in that sense all babies were considered morally equal, but that is another subject.

          • Breckmin

            I spent a few paragraphs answering this but I don’t see where it posted.

          • David Cromie

            Please Sir, the dog ate my homework!

          • Breckmin

            there were more than one of my posts that didn’t post to you for some reason… I spent quite a bit of time answering those objections or I wouldn’t have mentioned it.

            I have no homework because I skipped that period…now I’m withdrawing from the class altogether.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Not very a very “perfect plan” now is it? I didn’t know us Atheists could mess up his plan so much.

          • Bingo

            God’s plan for everyone is perfect…even you.

            Jeremiah 29:11
            For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Your god. Your hell. Why not visit, silly.

          • Bingo

            No one will visit. You will spend eternity there if you remain in unbelief.

          • David Cromie

            “I don’t talk to the voices in your head”, no, but Bingo talks to the voices in his/her own head, it seems.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Ok. I’ll give you one last reply.

            Re: “…you have not allowed God to speak to you through it (Bible).”

            Lets translate that for those that do not understand

            “The voice in my holy book says that no one has an excuse to deny the voice in my holy book exists, because the voice in my holy book’s existence is plainly observed by the voice in my holy book’s handiwork, so the voice in my holy book has done all the voice in my holy book need to prove the voice in my holy book’s self. If you want more proof and are serious about that, then all you need to do is ask the voice in my holy book, and the voice in my holy book is eager to show you.”

            Just because you label it with “God” and your source the “Bible”, doesn’t make it any different than any other description. If you replace the name with the definition (that you supplied), you can see how silly you sound.

            Just wanted to chime in, since you felt it important enough to reply to a post that you already replied to. Ta ta for now. See you in the next article.

          • Bingo

            You were created to know and worship the one true God who made you with great love and care. That you spit in His face with your every denial doesn’t negate His love for you, but it does keep you from His great plans for you.

            Jeremiah 29:11
            For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.

          • David Cromie

            You keep talking about ‘truth’. Why is your ‘truth’ so different from that of so many other deists? Please explain.

          • Bingo

            There is only one truth and it is found in God through the revelation of His word. Those who are united to Him by His Spirit don’t differ.

          • David Cromie

            I would expect to find as much ‘truth’ in the word of Hans Christian Anderson, for example, as in any of the fables of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, although it is difficult to discern which is more believable. Perhaps it would be best not to trust in any of them.

          • Bingo

            You would, would you? Then you are in much dire need of Jesus.

          • David Cromie

            Please supply some cogent reasons why that would be true.

          • Bingo

            As if you have cogent reasons for anything you believe. God, the maker of all things, is love. When one places his faith in Him for all he has done to bring us into intimate relationship with Him—that is, coming in the flesh and paying for our sins while He Himself has none—then we are given knowledge of Him, by Him, and one can never deny Him.

            If you have yet to experience Jesus, there is only hope and prayer that you will. However, seeing as you frequent these types of publications, I am pretty sure you have already heard the gospel, but receive it with disdain. That is the choice you have made—we all have been given the choice…some more than others. Hopefully you aren’t among those who squander all opportunities to know truth. I will pray that your spiritually blind eyes will be opened to the fact that there is far more in this life for you than what meets the physical eye.

            Those who are spiritually blind CANNOT comprehend the truth. that is their handicap.

          • David Cromie

            I have very good and cogent reasons for believing as I do – the likes of you!

          • Bingo

            That’s such a flimsy excuse.

          • David Cromie

            Not anywhere nearly as flimsy as your belief in a so-called ‘god’, which you cannot make a case for believing in.

          • Bingo

            There’s NOTHING flimsy about a relationship with God. Your lack of faith is flimsy and will send you to eternal destruction.

          • David Cromie

            As requested, give me some reason to believe that your particular version of a ‘god’ actually exists.

          • Bingo

            He can do that for you, just as He did for me, but you would have to be open to Him to do so. I highly doubt you are willing that He prove Himself to you. He will change your life—that is one major proof of His existence.

          • David Cromie

            How do you know that believing in fairies would not change my life?

          • Bingo

            It would make you weird, but it cannot change your life by freeing you from sins’ degradation…nor will it bring you true love, joy and peace…and fulfillment.

          • David Cromie

            How do you ‘know’ this assertion to be true?

          • Bingo

            I know the truth about how we are created and how Jesus Christ is the answer to all our seeking. It is in Him we find real love, real hope, real peace, real joy, real patience, real goodness, etc.

          • David Cromie

            You only think you ‘know’ whatever you care to read into what the bible says (or what you have been brought up/told to believe), as do the adherents of other Christian churches and sects, but which would vehemently disagree with you on what they perceive as the fundamental points of ‘true’ christianity (Islam suffers from exactly the same syndrome, but with fatal consequences, at the moment).
            In other words, there necessarily exists a belief free-for-all among deists, even those who claim to be worshipping the same ‘god’. This religious belief anarchy will continue until the day the incontrovertible evidence for the existence of a ‘god’ is produced.

          • Bingo

            Nope. I know. Every true Christian knows what the truth is about Jesus. There is no free-for-all. We believe the bible, God’s message to us.

            Your unbelief will end either with you coming to faith by a miraculous work of God, or your witnessing soon-coming tumultuous events.

          • David Cromie

            So it is a question of ‘believe or else…’. How beneficent of your ‘god’!

          • Bingo

            Yes, because one would have to be spiritually blind and dead to not believe.

          • David Cromie

            What does one have to be to believe in alleged entities when there is no irrefutable proof, whatsoever, for their existence? Why cannot someone say that “…one would have to be spiritually blind and dead to not believe” in, say, Osiris? If your claim would be true for one particular ‘god’, then it must be true for all alleged ‘gods’, irrespective of the claims made for their powers, etc.. Thus the ‘bible’ is no better or worse than any tome, stele, or other source material concerning these ‘gods’.

          • Bingo

            All one has to be is contrite of heart before the One, Most Holy God.

            Those who deny God are merely spiritually blind and dead. It takes the Spirit of God to awaken and quicken that deadness. hence, all those who believe in God and know Him and walk with Him are more alive than those who do not. We are living up to what we are created for. Atheists live only a portion of what they have the potential to live.

          • David Cromie

            Believing in Osiris does not make anyone an atheist, but insisting that there is only one presumed ‘true god’ makes one an idiot when the person so believing is unable to come up with any cogent reasons for their beliefs.

          • Bingo

            It makes one an idolator, which is a sin of paganism and will gain you hellfire.

          • David Cromie

            I still do not understand what is meant by ‘true christian’. Please explain.

          • Bluesman1950

            Because Bingo has a direct line to god, obviously!

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            I have never heard any god thingie say anything. I don’t think you have either. When you say “God says” I think that you are deliberately lying.
            There is no “evidence” for god thingies of which I am aware, no evidence of any god thingies having.hands, let alone evidence of of god thingies having left “handiwork”. Are you lying again, or delusional?
            If your god thingies are unable to even “open eyes” of those not vesting belief in them, why do you regard them as deserving to be regarded as deities?

          • Bingo

            Yes I have. God speaks through His written word (and in other ways). You don;t hear Him because your heart is hard toward Him. The only voices you hear are your own and the enemy of God, who whispers to make it seem like your own thoughts—but they aren’t.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Nobody “speaks” through written words. That is writing.

            Which Gods are you talking about? There are hundreds of thousands of them, millions including those revered in ancestor worship. How do you know3 which ones to pay attention to?

          • Bingo

            Nope. The bible is a powerful, supernatural, living document and the ONE AND ONLY God speaks to us, Spirit to spirit through our reading of it.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            However would you know?

          • Bingo

            I know because I live it and whatever God says is true and He proves it to those who want the proof. Those who don’t want it will never see it, due to their blindness.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            So auditory hallucinations as well as psychosis then. Quite rare. What accent do you imagine your god thingies speak with?

          • Bingo

            God doesn’t cause people to hallucinate.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            We can agree on that.

            What accent do you imagine your god thingies speak with?

          • David Cromie

            This god-thingy is an all-American thingy, and supports the T-party!

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            🙂

            It is quite a fascinating problem. I’d love to take the time off to investigate a few religiots of different beliefs with clearly visible allele markers, who visualise the faces of their god thingies (it is rare, but the claim is made, most frequently by christers and Hindus), as well as some auditory challenged religiots with hallucinations of hearing their god thingies “speaking” in ASL (it is rarer but it happens) in order to attempt to photograph the face and hands of these god thingies, using the same computer assisted methods used to unscramble the visual cortex to take pictures of images and dreams of images.

            Either we would end up with pictures of the faces and hands of some god thingies, and the ability to determine whether they are the same (good for those claiming a single god thingie) or different (good to determine whether cultural or phenotypical stereotypes dominate), and either way indicative of when exactly man was supposed to have been “made in his image” (hairier or less so) by those ancient Sumerians whose legends the Abrahamic believers have inherited) or we would have additional proof that god thingies are simply figments of disordered imagination.

            Worth a PhD and possibly a Templeton prize at the least. Maybe even a visit to Oslo. One can dream ;-P

          • Apostaste

            Thats called schizophrenia.

          • Bingo

            You live in a place called Denial. No, knowing God is not a disease of the mind. God heals people with schizophrenia and puts them in a right mind.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Then why do we have mental institutions if God is healing them?

            I think he better hire some staff. He is way behind on his quotas.

          • Bingo

            God heals those who have faith in Jesus Christ who bore all our sins and diseases on His body on the cross. People need faith to be made well.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            I remember sins….. But diseases? First off I don’t remember anything about baby diseased Jesus in the Bible, second the whole taking on disease thing seemed to have failed miserably, making it a failable event which makes god NOT omnipotent.

            Realistically, I think you are reaching at this point and are making stuff up. Hey! Maybe you are starting your own Christian denomination….

          • Bingo

            You are not familiar with God or His word, so…of course you have no opinion that really holds any water.

          • David Cromie

            Sky writing?

          • Bingo

            Well you certainly have proven yourself to be quite the child.

          • Bingo

            Your denial has further blinded you.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            Caught out with no responses, no answers, no excuses, for either yourself or your equally shifty-eyed god thingies. So you project. Classic, but boring.

            You will answer to Tezcatlipoca for your stupidity.

          • Bingo

            Nope. You have no answers and have only infantile excuses. They won’t hold water on your Judgment Day.

          • magormissabib

            Thats just stupid. I cant prove to you that a recipe book is true and that does not make it fiction. Its on you if your too lazy or indolent to get the ingredients together and test it. if you relly read the bible like you pretend to you would know that God promised that you would find him when you sought for him with all your heart, sincerely earnestly and with importunity. Stop with your lies and excuses. Its just pathetic/ You cant fool God and you cant talk your way out of hell.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Here is the path to Christianity, from a Christian point of view.

            1) Do you believe in God and Jesus? If, yes, then stop here, you have the right answer. If not, continue.

            2) Read Bible. If you think you understand, go back to #1. If not, continue.

            3) Go to Church. If you think you understand, go back to #1. If not, continue.

            4) Talk to Priest/Pastor/Fellow Christian. If you think you understand, go back to #1. If not, continue.

            5) Pray.

            6) Return to #1.

            You make the assumption that I have not read the Bible, been to Church, talked to multiple priests, and did my own exploration. Truth is, all the Christian apologists assume that if I didn’t come to the conclusion they did, then I have to do it all again because I obviously didn’t “understand” it.

            The truth is any one that reads the Bible SHOULD understand that it was a means to control the ignorant. With it, it puts a few people in charge of peoples hearts and morality. History has proven this. Example: Joan of Arc was a Hero, then a Heretic that was burned at the stake, and later made a saint. It is whatever they “church” needs at any given moment.

            Most Christians are so blind, that they can not realize that the reason there are so many different denominations is because you only worship the god you WANT to see. When the belief doesn’t fit with a given need, well, there is always a church somewhere that will preach what you want to hear. Just make sure to put money in the donation bucket.

            At least skeptics are open to listen to arguments for or against. That is the nature of being skeptical. Christianity is afraid of the truth that they want to bury their head in the sand to shield themselves from it. Of course, not matter how deep the head is buried the truth is still waiting when they pull their head out.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            I have tested it. I can easily read in the first couple chapters that the trees would all be dead by the time he got through his “week”.

            I also know that Noah’s boat could not have been large enough to hold enough animals to save the majority of them.

            I also know that if the world was reduced to just Noah’s family, we’d be extinct.

            And that is just off the top of my head.

            “if you relly read the bible like you pretend to you would know that God promised that you would find him when you sought for him with all your heart, sincerely earnestly and with importunity.”

            First, spelling goes a long way to making a strong point.

            I always hated this statement because it is like if you believe in the figment, the figment will find you. You will find that God exists once you believe that God exists, the Bible tells you that. The Bible also tells you that it is the word of God, so that proves that God exists because why would God have a written word if God didn’t exist.

            Reading the Bible only tells me that people that believe in what is written there, and support the morality that lies within is a threat to themselves and others. Once you submit yourself to be subservient to this message, it allows someone else to promote their agenda through you using your belief. It has happened before if you read up on Hitler’s use of religion throughout his reign (doesn’t matter if he believed or not).

          • magormissabib

            more lies. You sincerly and earnestly try and make excuses. thats what you do.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Ah faith… how you live to convince yourself of things you do not know.

            So what have I lied about?

            There was light… sometime later there was the Sun. Where was this light coming from? No sun, stars or other light generating phenomena.
            Its ok though. No matter how unreasonable, it was “God magic” and I’m a liar somehow… despite you knowing little to nothing about me.

            By the way… you are still making spelling errors.

          • magormissabib

            Like I said. all atheists ever do is make excuses and yak about what they dont know. So yes, I repeat. Those who seek God in sincerity and truth find him. the onus is on you. like it or not.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Btw. With your recipe book analogy, I will try to give you an example of how the Bible is a recipe book.

            Bible Chocolate Cake

            4 Cups Flour
            1 1/2 Cups Sugar
            1/2 tsp. Baking Soda
            1 Qt. Motor Oil (preferably 10W30)
            1/2 lb of lentils
            1 cup of yellow popcorn
            1 pinch of fairy dust

            Combine all ingredients in to a bowl. Mix thoroughly but do not use a mixer or spoon. This cake requires mixing with a rake. Once you have it thoroughly mixed (the motor oil will not float at the top anymore), then place it into a large sauce pan and cook on high for about 40 minutes. Do NOT put it in the oven or in a cake pan, as this will NOT be how to make this cake, but instead how another cake is made. Monitor the color of smoke to determine if it is complete, then force feed the children till they accept that it is indeed cake.

            Feeds 4-8 people.

          • magormissabib

            Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
            Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
            Joh 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
            Joh 3:21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
            NO EXCUSES

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Sounds like the motor oil part of my recipe.

          • magormissabib

            thats funny. you register as unrepentant atheist and then post comments on here to christians and IM the troll. what a loser.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            The topic of this article is regarding freedom of speech and religion. Read the article. I’m actually supporting the bigots right to speak his beliefs without legal repercussion. However his speech (and yours) is by no means protected from public opinion.

            Nothing wrong with my screen name. Makes it clear where I am coming from even when I am helping you protect your rights.

          • Guest

            Which is by definition insanity.

          • Bingo

            Says an insane one who has a deadened spirit.

          • magormissabib

            That isnt the definition of insanity is it?
            .Calling believers insane is just a
            tacky attmept to insult them to minimalize them and to cop out of
            dealing with the real issue.

          • Bingo

            Not so tacky. The jokers here are no into dealing with any real issues, as you can see.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Someone must have gotten to you. You see, one of the observations I have had of Christians, is when Christians feel cornered in their beliefs, they reaffirm them with others to make themselves feel better. Kinda like you just did.

          • Bingo

            I am not cornered. I am open and above board with the truth about God. I don’t care what people say about me. They don’t know me. They speak out of ignorance. I can see it and I address it.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            What do you imagine is “the real issue”? That the delusional threaten all of us with their aggressive ways?

          • Guest

            the real issue ? God hates [email protected]!

          • David Cromie

            It is sobering to remember that religiously induced insanity is not always benign – think of ISIL, as an extreme example. Now that is what I designate a ‘real issue’!

          • magormissabib

            you expect me to respond to that stupid bullshit. lol

          • David Cromie

            So, real issues are not your bag, then?

          • Bluesman1950

            If you feel unable to formulate a coherent response, then obviously not!

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Nope. That would require intelligence and a valid rebuttal.

          • magormissabib

            That isnt the definition of insanity.Calling believers insane is just a tacky attmept to insult them to minimalize them and to cop out of dealing with the real issue.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            No it isn’t. It is perfectly in line with the DSM which recognises that religious delusions are simply psychoses, but because they are common, they are not usually treated.

          • magormissabib

            do you have a citation, pig?

          • Hogmanay

            Evolution is a religion plain and simple. You are what you are trying to cure.

          • Verisimilitude

            Evolution is only a religion in the sense that you proclaim it to be one.

            Similarly, the Christian god only exists in the sense that Christians proclaim it to be so.

            Other than the proclamations of the weirdly obsessed–such as yourself, say, and many other Christians–there is no Christianity…

            …and no Christian ‘god’…

            …no matter how many times you proclaim it otherwise.

            After all, if proclamations were enough, there would only be one god, and that god’s name would be Allah.

          • Bluesman1950

            Evolution is a religion in the same way that a Dolphin is a fish! Just because you are unable to distinguish between them does not make them the same. Your ignorance of the difference only establishes your ignorance.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Well, that was out of the blue. I cant find anything about evolution in the preceding comments.

            Was there any facts you’d like to impart? Or were you just stating that Christians feel sad for those that are beneath them… in poor grammar mind you.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            If reading the Bible requires actual belief to understand, then it is indeed insanity. The Bible is a book, and books are a medium to impart information in the form of text. If you can read, and understand what the words represent by their definition in the language it is written in, then the message should be clear.

            He is imparting a fictional filter that one must believe BEFORE reading the Bible otherwise understanding will not come. Which is a paradox, and believing such is not sane.

          • magormissabib

            begone Satan

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            Sweet. I became a figment of your delusion!

            Rwaaarrrr!

          • David Cromie

            How is it that the so-called ‘Holy Spirit’ reveals different, and contradictory, things to different believers? It is usually taken as a sign of mental disturbance when anyone hears voices (supernatural or otherwise) in their head, and even more so when they claim to act under their influence. Get a grip!

          • Bingo

            The only contradiction is in the minds and hearts of those who counter the truth. Holy spirit never contradicts Himself.

            the Lord Jesus Christ speaks. His own children know His voice and follow Him.

          • David Cromie

            Ah, those voices in your head again? See a shrink!

          • Bingo

            People who have found the truth in Jesus Christ and have been brought to complete wholeness in Him never need something so paltry as a secular “shrink”.

            You may, however.

          • David Cromie

            You just keep telling yourself that, and if I ever start hearing voices in my head, I will certainly visit a shrink, voluntarily!

          • Bingo

            Yes, because Satan loves to talk to people in their heads. It will drive you mad.

          • Bluesman1950

            As a police officer I’very dealt with many people who were hearing god’s voice. Unfortunately he usually seemed to be saying things like “Jump, you deserve to die” or “Kill her she is the spawn of the devil. ” Sadly, he rarely seemed to be saying anything nice or useful.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            So you are claiming that only those subject to psychotic delusions of a religious nature can “understand the scriptures”? Wouldn’t a knowledge of the language in which it is written more useful? For example, to read the Bhagavad Gita you had best be familiar with Sanskrit. Wholly imaginary spirits are not required.
            No wonder you are confused.

          • Bingo

            Only those who have become part of God’s FAMILY by faith in His Son, Jesus Christ, can truly understand scripture. Your confusion remains.

          • David Cromie

            So I need to believe before I can believe?

          • Bingo

            You need to be willing to experience and acknowledge God.

          • David Cromie

            It is not possible to believe in any entity, for which proof of its existence is lacking.

          • Bingo

            When He reveals Himself to you, you will believe, but if it is after your death, you will be convinced far too late for you to benefit from knowing Him.

          • David Cromie

            How come your ‘god’ has refrained from revealing itself to the world eons ago, even to those who have never even heard if it?

          • Bingo

            God has never stopped revealing Himself to mankind since Creation.

          • David Cromie

            If you really think about that claim, I am sure you will come to realise that it is complete nonsense.

          • Bingo

            No, bud…you will come to realize that everything you have spoken here is utter balderdash.

          • Bingo

            My source of belief is God Himself, who reveals Himself to everyone in various ways. You will find Him in the bible. He is the one who gives us the faith to believe. We have been given a choice to do so.

            You may have read the bible, but you have not allowed God to speak to you through it.

            Hebrews 4:12
            For the word of God is alive and powerful. It is sharper than the sharpest two-edged sword, cutting between soul and spirit, between joint and marrow. It exposes our innermost thoughts and desires.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            If you claim to have seen your god thingies, I think you are lying. What did they look like?

            Lots of funny things have been written by demented and delusional people. This seems little or no different from those made for the Sumerian gods. Do you vest belief in them too?

          • Bingo

            I’ve made no such claim to have visibly seen God. No one can see Him and live.

          • magormissabib

            Atheists all claim to have read the Bible . Liars. Every thing they say proves that they read ABOUT the Bible on some atheist web site, They spew the same old worn out points that have been answered a million times. slaves , rape . fibers, etc blah blah blah.

          • Bingo

            I agree with that.

          • David Cromie

            Unbelief comes into operation as soon as anyone asserts that an unproven entity is somehow to be taken as real because a book says so – it is as if the words therein have magical powers of mental persuasion, no intellect required.

            Do you not see that is the equivalent of saying that the Pied Piper of Hamlin must exist, because I read about it, in black and white, and that anyone who disbelieves me just does not understand what they were reading.

        • ter ber

          Well said my brother. Our atheist readers here have no idea what’s come down the pipeline.
          Fasten your seat belts children, lucifer and his demon army have been very busy.
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFn042VA-VA

          • OldArkie

            Many of them seem to have a hate for us and our opinions as they did for Jesus during His days on this earth. Yet, I do not hate them, I do not mock them, and when i can I try to point them to the Holy Scriptures, after all its the Holy Scriptures that’s our sword.

          • Joe

            I think we can find a basic common ground.

            You pity us because in your world view, we could be happy if we just believed ( and avoid fire, torture, and mayhem).

            We pity you because many of you have given up on thinking and questioning the world around you. I for one cant understand how someone can enjoy life without being able to seek answers to questions we have about the natural world.

            I don’t hate the Christian, I hate the Christian message.

          • bowie1

            What makes you think that we have “given up on thinking and questioning the world” around us? You have an inaccurate idea of how we live our daily lives.

          • Joe

            “Many” is not all inclusive. Only you yourself can show whether you are ignoring basic evidence in favor of Your holy book.

            There are many Christians that rationalize science with the Bible. In these cases often what is used from the Bible is cherry picked or interpreted in such a broad way that the Bible loses its meaning. I personally don’t have a problem with that but looking at the Bible I feel that many Christians wouldn’t see the same way. But then again that is exactly why there are so many denominations.

          • OldArkie

            A persons happiness now, during this life, will not overcome the unhappiness that will come to that person after death who is without Jesus. This life is only a very few years, its very short even if a person lives to be 90, 100, or 110 years, and where ever a person winds up after death, it will last forever.

            I’ve tried to show you the love that God & Jesus has showed towards you, John 3:15 & 16. Maybe one day you will come to an understanding of God’s Word realizing the wonderful gift He can give to you though Jesus, Ephesians 2:8,9, yet only if you will repent & confess, 1 John 1:9.

            Joe, I hope & pray that you will find true happiness in this life. You said you hate the Christian message, so I will stop posting the Christian message to you about our Awesome God & what He can do for you.

            God Bless you,
            OldArkie

          • Joe

            Ok. Lets make a few assumptions from a Catholic point of view.

            God is omniscient.

            God is omnipotent.

            With this perspective God both knows what I believe, why I believe, whether or not I live a good life, and has the power to intervene where he sees fit. If he wants me to believe, then he should know exactly what it is I need to see to convince me to believe and choose to follow (it isn’t enough to prove he exists, btw).

            With that said, God has had ample opportunity to take adequate action to ensure my belief and worship. He has not done so. So that brings up a few possibilities.

            “God has a plan that includes me the way I am now.”

            Ok. So this has a few issues. First, it means I likely do not have my own will, since I am acting according to a pre-existing plan. It also means that I am doing Gods work the way I am now, and therefore am either doing what he desires (I get to go to Heaven, and the Bibles requirements are false), or I am a disposable piece that will be sent to hell when he is done with me. As an added bonus, this also means that the Bible is incomplete or false when describing how to follow Gods will.

            “God chooses to convince me despite having the knowledge and power to do so.”

            This is a God that really doesn’t care about who follows and who doesn’t. This God is likely without emotion other than the self serving ones and arbitrarily assigns blame. There is no Justice under a God that acts like this as it is not fair to the people that either can not find the proper reasoning to believe or is limited by location to receive “his message”. There is no “love” in this God. There is a chance that we are seen as a “project” or a game. Something to be amused at as time passes.

            “God doesn’t want me to follow him.”

            Yep. I did something to piss God off and he just doesn’t like me and just doesn’t have the time to smite me down. So I’ve been left to jump off the deep end. Well, I’m kinda forced to be an Atheist at that point, or be divinely excommunicated whatever that would be called.

            So what happens if God is not both Omniscient or omnipotent? In these cases, God may no longer qualify to be a “God”. Sufficiently powerful intelligent life can appear to be god-like or magic if we can not understand it.

            “God is not Omniscient”

            God does not have the power to understand what we are thinking or see what we are doing. He does not know what is going on in his name and is an absentee God from this world. Prayers are likely ignored because he can not hear them. After he made his creation, he has left it to its own devices, and the rules found in the Bible are largely created by man and does not reflect Gods true nature.

            “God is not Omnipotent”

            God can hear us, but does not have the ability to interact with us. He may not be able to do many of the things listed in the Bible. Things attributed to his name may be fictional or incorrectly attributed to him. Prayers are worthless because he cannot do anything about it even if he wanted to. Bible has misquote miracle events associate with God. Jesus was never resurrected nor was he of divine birth.

            “God is not Omnipotent OR Omniscient”

            God might as well be Bob at the local convenient store. He has little to no affect on our lives, and literally has done nothing to garner worship or praise. The Bible is completely false in this pretense, and religion is a hoax. In this case, God likely does not exist.

            Needless to say, none of these is a positive outcome, otherwise I’d already be a believe. Only those that choose to overlook the flaws and inconsistency between the real world and the Bible can manage to keep faith in the modern reality.

          • Lee Stevens

            “If he wants me to believe, then he should know exactly what it is I need to see to convince me to believe and choose to follow (it isn’t enough to prove he exists, btw).” Perhaps He has given you what you need but because of the hardness of your heart, you won’t accept it; or perhaps He hasn’t done so because He knows that nothing will convince you.

          • Joe

            If he did that, and I didn’t accept that then he failed and is not omnipotent or omniscient. God being fallible is not a god.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            Joe,
            God the Son, Christ Jesus, healed the blind and crippled and raised the dead. So, did His Apostles. And people still refused to believe. People like Judas, the Pharisees, the Sanhedrin. People like you, Joe.
            Again, you may have read the Bible, but you sure don’t understand what Scripture means. As I’ve shown you, repeatedly. Since, you refuse to answer, we all must assume that you can’t debate these subjects, you can only paraphrase anti-theist hacks, like Dawkins & Harris.

          • Joe

            Great story….and David Copperfield made the Statue of Liberty disappear. Your Bible is nothing more than an uncorraborated testimony. And that is giving it more credit than t deserves. If the Bible needs special interpretation then it fails as a guide of any kind. Christians can’t even agree among themselves what passages mean. You accusing me of not “understanding” it is irrelevant. If I don’t it is the Bibles fault for not stating it in plain English (Greek?).

            Tell me. Which translation is the “True” translation.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            Uncorraborated? What is that? Don’t you have spell-check? Sheesh!

            Besides, Saint Paul told his readers that there were 500 witnesses to Christ’s Resurrection (1 Cor.15:6). Since, Paul was a Pharisee, he only counted men as witnesses. So, the number of witnesses was probably more like 700-1,000, when women and children are included.
            And, no, the Sacred Scriptures do not need a “special interpretation,” they need an informed and correct interpretation. Which you do not appear to possess, I’m afraid.
            You have to read Old Testament with the mind of a First Century, A.D., Jew. Not a 21st Century modern, who is ignorant of the history of the Bible. There is no perfect translation. Some are much better than others. I read 4 different translations, plus word studies, since I don’t read ancient Hebrew or Koine Greek. Which is why I listen to experts who do, like Fr. Mitch Pacwa and Dr. Scott Hahn. You should look them up.

            Finally, you didn’t answer my complete rebuttal of your objections, nor, did you address your anti-theist pals, who murdered over 100 million people, last century. Please, do so now, okay?

          • Joe

            So tell me what the correct interpretation is that needs and then explain to me who decided that interpretation was correct. for me I use this tool called the English language and I read it. To me it sounds like you are just making up an excuse for your personal holy book.

            As for a complete rebuttal, you have to understand I do not recognize the Bible as a legitimate piece of evidence, at least not without external sources to corroborate it with. So your 500 witnesses is really just one witness at best.

            Your objections seem to rely on not seeing the Bible through your eyes. It’s one of those arguments that just makes us go in circles because it’s a subjective opinion and not based on facts. Looking back at the way things were back then is only a basis on seeing where we made the mistakes and learning from them. the Bible doesn’t do that even the New Testament says that the Old Testament is to remain intact. So all the mistakes that were made then remain.

            As for trying to change the subject you should read the actual definition of atheism and explain where morality is preached at all. Whether you are a good person or a bad person has no relevance on atheism. Only the fact of whether or not that God exists. Only your magic book makes a claim that it knows everything.

          • Joe

            un·cor·rob·o·rat·ed
            (ŭn′kə-rŏb′ə-rā′tĭd)
            adj.
            Not corroborated: uncorroborated testimony.

            Sorry I spelled it wrong. I think you are smart enough to get the point.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            If you know how to use a dictionary, why did you spell it incorrectly, Joe?

            And, it was corroborated, by over 500 witnesses. Which, at the time that 1 Corinthians was written by Saint Paul (c.A.D. 57), many of these witnesses were still alive. As he indicates in the latter part of the verse that I cited: “[M]ost of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep.”

            It would would have been easy for Jews and Gentiles in Corinth to write a letter to someone they knew in Judea, in order to find out if the things that Saint Paul was claiming were true. How else to explain the rapid growth of Christianity throughout the Roman world? In addition to all of the miracles performed by the Apostles, e.g., healings, prophesies, and…raising the dead, that is.

          • Joe

            It can not be corroborated by over 500 witnesses. What you have said is that 1 person SAYS that 500 people witnessed it. In the end it is one persons testimony. Trying to state that 500 witnesses saw the event doesn’t strengthen the statement, it weakens it. Because only 1 testimony came out of 501 different people. This seems unlikely even considering the levels of illiteracy of the time since it was a “miracle”.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            Actually, Joe, it was probably more like 700 to 1,000 witnesses, since Saint Paul was Pharisee, and knew that his fellow Jews would not accept the testimony of women & children. And, you miss the point. Paul was writing to the Corinthians around A.D.57, and tells them that most of these witnesses are still alive. Which means that Jews in Corinth could write to family/friends in Jerusalem to find these witnesses.
            There is much written testimony about Christ. There’s not that much testimony making claims that the Apostles and disciples of Christ were lying about 500 witnesses to His Resurrection, is there?

          • Nick_from_Detroit
          • Joe

            I didn’t get to see it but from the pictures it looked amazing. Wish I could have saw it in person.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            No, Joe, I love science. Real science, that is.
            True science is the study of the natural world as we find it. Science can’t tell us anything about the super-natural. Except, when God does miracles, and science cannot explain it. (Which happens all the time, by the way.)

            Science & history are my two favorite subjects to study. Unfortunately, what passes for science nowadays is not true science, as in observable, measurable, repeatable science. What we call “science” today has been politicized and corrupted, badly, since WWII. The competition for govt. grant money leads to the Anthropogenic Global Warming Hoax & Climategate.
            So, science tells a lot about how the Northern Lights happen. But, the origins of the atomic laws that cause the ionization and illumination came from God, their Author. If I see green lights on Saint Patrick’s Day, I give the glory to God, because He deserves it. Because God is the first cause of everything. God is the great I AM, THAT AM.

          • Joe

            That is the “God of the Gaps* argument. The ” miracles” the science can explain are not automatically Gods domain. As a matter of fact every single time we learn new facts, something is disproved from divine origin.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            No, not really, Joe.
            Since God created space-time, He is outside of space-time. So, He is not measurable, observable (unless He reveals Himself), or repeatable. He created the laws of physics, so, He doesn’t have to obey them.
            But, I do believe that the physical, natural world is open for discovery; our only limitation being that of current technology.
            Do you really believe that a natural explanation will be found for ALL of the medical miracles that have been documented, or, for the thousands seeing the sun dance in the sky?
            Or, for a man who was scourged; crucified; died; stabbed in the heart; laid dead, and guarded, in a tomb for three days; then was seen by several hundred witnesses; some of whom put their fingers in His wounds?
            Not very likely.

          • Joe

            So you say no then agree with me?

            God can only exist in the places we don’t know about. Once the sky was where he was “the heavens”. But we went there and now he is somewhere else. You admit you can not prove his existence so I guess there is nothing else to speak on.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            All you are doing, Joe, is showing your ignorance of the Sacred Scriptures.
            If you’ve studied, as you claim, it should be rather easy for you to explain how the first chapter of Genesis, Noah’s Ark, and the Tabernacle/Temple all relate to each other, no?
            Or, provide explanations for the Hebrew terms berit, al beit, gebirah, hekesh, todah, and Kodesh Kodashim? Without googling them, of course.

          • Joe

            Strange. Not one video. And flopping on the ground is healing and tongues….

          • truthisnotevil

            Which message? Love, Joy, Peace on Earth, Good Will to Man (Humanity/Mankind)?

          • Joe

            Slavery, rape, child sacrifice, eternal suffering for non-believers, etc.

            Yeah. The parts of the Bible you do not like to read.

          • Jenny Lynn

            Joe@ Christianity is not a blind faith. It is an evidential faith. We don’t check our brains at the door, that is what the world does who are blind.

            Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
            hebrews11:1

          • Joe

            Faith is never evidence.

          • Jenny Lynn

            I don’t look at my car and think, wow look at my evolved vehicle. I know someone designed it and put it together. I look at creation and see the evidence of a perfect beautiful creator, who is beyond our pea sized brains. Can you make a rose? He can!

          • Joe

            I don’t know of any imaginary beings that can create a rose.

            I do know however of people that can make a car.

          • MelanieWaffle

            Jenny has you on this one. The science of our world is so remarkably complex and so intricate that I believe it points towards a creator. In fact I believe evolution is an amazing theory and as of now explains in a limited way how God created the world. I believe evolution shows just how intelligent the design God created is. It shows He created life to be self sufficient. Further, you can’t scientifically prove God doesn’t exist, thus you count say 100 percent there is no agod. Faith comes in when I choose to believe in the God I follow. Granted, I see my God as more loving than a lot of my Christian brothers and sisters.

          • Joe

            If you look at a cloud, different people can say it looks like different things. It is a product of imagination, creativity and our tendencies to see patterns that makes us think of all the “things” the cloud can look like. The cloud however was not created to look like anything. It is a occurrence that happened because of various weather patterns and the presence of water vapors. Within minutes the form changes to something else as the cloud moves in the wind.

            The same goes for looking for patterns elsewhere in nature. Based on natural selection, many of the “patterns” that we see are because they were efficient enough to outlast other variations that occurred in history making. For example, the fact we have legs and arms symmetrically on both sides of our body. If it was on the same side, it would not be efficient, we wouldn’t be able to walk well, and likely would have went extinct a long time ago.

            It does not mean someone created us that way, it means that inefficient life forms and patterns were weeded out. Dinosaurs bodies were too large to survive drastic climate changes and died out. There are too many examples of this to assume a master plan.

          • Jenny Lynn

            Your right there are no imaginary beings that can create a rose, only a true living God who is infinitely wise can create a rose. We see God’s beauty in the pages of His God breathed word, through His creation, through life etc. compared to God your brain is a pea size, man really knows nothing in comparison to theGod who created the universe. So yes, you have a pea sized brain.

          • Joe

            The only thing you can begin to claim God as by your Bible is sentient. He doesnt qualify as living as he has no biological functions.

            Please tell me what part of the Bible goes over the size of Gods brain.

            God didn’t breath words. He had minions write it down. At least that is what the Bible says.

            The only one here who’s brain is in question is you. You are making stuff up on the fly because you don’t even have enough knowledge of your own Bible to put up a decent argument.

            You have essentially broken down the the mouth foaming “end o the world” types that people shake their heads at in pity.

          • Jenny Lynn

            He’s only imaginary to you. I know Him. I spend time with Him everyday. I wouldn’t say your wife is imaginary even though I’ve never seen her. For all I know you could of made her or him up. But you know her and spend time with her. My life has been eternally changes so I can testify as others who know me can too.

          • Joe

            You are correct. Would you trust your life/afterlife on making a decision on whether or not my wife exists? Good. I’m not willing to bet on your belief either.

          • ReasonableVoice101

            You do not spend time with him every day. You might talk to him. And find peace in doing so. And more power to you if that is the case. But it is misleading to say you spend time with him every day. By that logic, I spent time with several fictional characters last night when I read before going to sleep.

          • ReasonableVoice101

            There is evidence that someone built your car. You can go and meet many people who build cars. I know someone building a car in his garage.

            That is evidence of a creator. Something existing is not evidence of a creator.

          • Jenny Lynn

            It takes more faith to believe your evolved gas than created by a creator.. Have you ever seen a sunset, did that just evolve? If it was any closer we would fry to death. If it was any further away we would freeze to death. God is perfectly orderly and that did not happen by accident. It is scientific fact.

          • Joe

            Nothing scientific about that. The thing about science is that I begs to be disproved. It encourages it. By trying to prove it wrong we learn more about our world. The last thing religion wants is attempts to challenge its premises.

          • Poster

            Dear Joe,

            I am not only willing but excited to have a conversation with you, although I doubt if I am a worthy instrument to convey the Truth to you. I have not read all your comments here, but I have read several. If you choose to engage in a conversation with me, can you at least agree to the principles of logic? If not, I would definitely fail to see why you would claim to like science. As a first point, I would argue that everything you do as a human being is based on faith. How do you know that your senses are actually perceiving reality? Do you not have faith in your senses? I say this because I noticed that you commented to someone else that faith is never evidence. Viva Cristo Rey!

          • Joe

            That is an extremely philosophical approach. I could stand in front of you and claim that you are merely figments of my imagination, and that everything you do, including disagreeing with my statements was all part of my own fantasy. There would be little you could do to disprove it.

            So with that said, I have to assume that I exist, and there is indeed a reality, following the “I think therefore, I am” thought. That what I can observe is indeed real if I can measure and interact with it. This is pretty much the beginnings of Scientific Method here.

            Things that I would take on faith are things that are testable, observable and measurable. I only take those things on faith because I do not have the time in this life to study every particular field of knowledge to ascertain for myself that each fact is indeed true. Don’t believe me? Try to become a Doctor, Lawyer, and an Architect with full educational background. At some point, you are going to have to rely on expert advice. This is not done blindly, as there are others that have to corroborate said evidence.

            However, with what I was referring to as “faith” is the religious belief where logic and need for proof is suspended in order to maintain that the belief is true. With science, the information is there to verify if I so choose, however all I have is an authors word when it comes to the Bible. I cannot fact check them. So in the end, I can not believe in the conclusion that a god or gods exists. It doesn’t mean they don’t, but it does mean it is highly unlikely.

          • Poster

            Is science, which you were praising based on philosophy?

          • Joe

            Not sure on that one. I think of philosophy as a series of what ifs and logical conclusions. Its essentially an mental exercise. Philosophy helps us generate the questions, not necessarily the answers.

          • Poster

            I am no philosophy of science expert, but is it not true that scientists assume that human beings can create controlled conditions to some level of accuracy e.g. 95% plus or minus X (which may or may not actually be true)? Is it not true that there is also an underlying assumption that if a phenomena is repeatedly observed under certain conditions that a scientist may be able to posit some probability of its likelihood that it will always occur, given the same procedure is performed, under those conditions?

          • Joe

            I think you have it close. I am not an expert either, however the concept is when a conclusion is made in science, the general assumption is to continuously challenge that assumption even after it is been proven to be “fact”. A good example is Einstein’s theory of relativity. For may years it has been designated as fact, but recently it has been seen as flawed when dealing with singularities and small particles, in which we have to turn to quantum physics.

          • Poster

            Sorry, I only saw a small part of your comment, I will try to respond to the rest, but need a minute to read it.

          • Poster

            Dear Joe,
            Here is my response to your full comment. I think you can imagine that I agree with you that we should assume reality exists. However, it is also true that we operate based on faith. I like science when rightly applied, so there I think we are the same. What I would disagree with, however, is that religion asks anyone to suspend logic. I do think some people who are in error believe this (both Christian and non-Christian). I would also disagree with the notion that human beings are capable of “proving” anything. There is a very popular notion in some circles that there is no evidence that the religion is true. I fundamentally disagree with this idea. There is a great deal of evidence that supports the one true faith, but if anything could be proven, we would not need faith. It seems as though you view faith very negatively, but I would argue that you operate your whole life based on faith, even if it does not include faith in God.

          • Joe

            The evidence that religion often provides often is eyewitness testimony that is not reproducible, the Bible (here say), and intelligent design. None of this is actual evidence and the last is subjective interpretation.

            I don’t look for evidence that god exists or doesn’t exist, any more than I look for evidence that minotaurs from Greek mythology exists. There is nothing to suggest it does so why would I attempt to justify a belief in it.

            There is also the choice to follow if he did exist. I’m not sure I would accept his values. I believe we should be held to carry our own burden and work to correct our past mistakes. I think the Christian religion promotes an escapist moral structure (give your sins to Jesus), and holds worship as the primary criteria for acceptance even over a persons character. That is a little to arbitrary for me.

          • Poster

            The witness testimony of Jesus in the gospels is not hearsay. St. Matthew was one of his apostles, and therefore it is a first-hand account. Comparing this to Greek mythology is ridiculous. Jesus is a historical figure and so is St. Matthew.

            As for the last part, no it is not true that Catholics support an escapist structure. For example, if one steals the teaching is to repay the money and go to confession. If one is guilty of a sin that is repairable, the reparation must be made. I am not a protestant. Some of them believe in faith alone (without works), and you are right to condemn them, I do too. Most of what you hate about Christianity probably comes from either protestants of the false Novus Ordo sect that has occupied our buildings since 1958.

          • Joe

            Well if he wrote the book himself you are correct, the 500 witnesses of the Resurrection are irrelevant without their testimony. Many of the books were not written by the original named originators.

            If a rapist “comes to Jesus” before he is executed the he is “saved”. Yet someone who has never encountered christianity is doomed for eternity.

          • Poster

            I encourage you to do research. Look at both sides and objectively determine what is true. That is what I did.

            As for sinners, the Catholic Church does not teach what you are saying. It is true that if a rapist before his death were to make a perfect act of contrition or confessed, he would be saved. But he would first have to suffer in purgatory to atone for his sins. Unless a person atones completely for their sins in this life, they will have to pay for their sins before they may enter heaven. Secondly, it is also not true that someone who never encountered Christianity would necessarily be doomed. If they were in invincible ignorance, and led a moral life they will not be damned, whereas any Catholic, including myself, might be. We believe in justice, and forgiveness.

          • Poster

            The other thing I would say about this comment is that there are probably many other things you believe that are based on the same kind of evidence as presented in the Bible. A great deal of history is based on witness testimony. Court cases often depend on witness testimony. The Bible as it refers to Jesus Christ is also based on witness testimony.

          • Joe

            …. and if I do believe those things on such flimsy evidence, then they are trivial things. Things that if the chips went south I would easily change my mind. I don’t risk important things on unfounded belief.

          • Poster

            I have a question for you. Do you really want to know the Truth? Do you believe Truth exists? What I am really asking, sincerely, do you with all your heart, mind, and soul want to know the Truth about whether or not Jesus Christ is God and if so what you must do to save your soul?

          • ReasonableVoice101

            People who have been convicted on witness testimony are frequently found to be not guilty when actual verifiable evidence is found. A great deal of history based on witness testimony is backed up by actual evidence. Also, the Bible tells stories which were never meant to be considered factual. Such as walking on water, the loaves and fishes miracle, and yes, even the story of Christ’s birth.

          • David Cromie

            Perhaps we humans need to have faith that the the bridge we are crossing will not collapse, for example (trusting that the bridge builder knew how to do his job), but this has nothing to do with religious ‘faith’ in an unknowable, unseeable, evidence-free supernatural entity somewhere ‘up there’, or wherever.

            The Scholastics hoped they had struck gold when they discovered Aristotle, and thought that they could bend logic to the self serving purposes of religious indoctrination, hence the discredited Five Ways, for example. You appear to be suffering from the same delusion.

            So, it is back to philosophy school for you, and if you ever catch up with Cristo Rey, get a message back to us, we would love to hear from you both!

          • Jenny Lynn

            God is the author of science. He wrote about it in His book before science was a religion that is worshiped. God is the author of all universal laws. Any intelligent design, has an intelligent designer.

          • Joe

            Then the world is not intelligently designed then. The word itself presupposes the conclusion.

            Man created God. I guess that makes us an intelligent designer.

          • ReasonableVoice101

            Nearly all of the science in the Bible is wrong. How does this fact affect your belief that God is the author of science?

          • David Cromie

            The discredited argument from design again rears its fallacious head. If design were the criterion for a creator ‘god’, then there would be a watchmaker god, a toad god, a plant god, even a sun god, and so on. Why stick at one supernatural entity, when there room, and ample justification, for so many? Our forefathers certainly thought so, even the bible speaks of ‘holy mountains’.

          • Joe

            The sunset merely the refraction of light off our atmosphere. There no “creation” of the sunset.

            If were were any closer, we’d be on Mercury and would have been an afterthought (extinct).

          • Jenny Lynn

            Who created the sun, that created the reflection of the sunset?

          • Joe

            No one created the Sun.

            As for the Universe (your next question if I explained the formation of stars to you) is “I don’t know”.

            However you ask the wrong questions. Its not ” Who created…” but how it came to be. Who suggests a person when there are more possibilities than that.

            Your argument is nothing more than the “God of the Gaps” believers rely on when they don’t like the science.

          • Jenny Lynn

            9“Woe to those who quarrel with their Maker,
            those who are nothing but potsherds
            among the potsherds on the ground.
            Does the clay say to the potter,
            ‘What are you making?’
            Does your work say,
            ‘The potter has no hands’?
            10Woe to the one who says to a father,
            ‘What have you begotten?’
            or to a mother,
            ‘What have you brought to birth?’
            11“This is what the Lord says—
            the Holy One of Israel, and its Maker:
            Concerning things to come,
            do you question me about my children,
            or give me orders about the work of my hands?
            12It is I who made the earth
            and created mankind on it.
            My own hands stretched out the heavens;
            I marshaled their starry hosts.
            Isaiah 45:9-12

          • Joe

            Woe to those that quarrel with imaginary people, for thou art only arguing with thy self.

            ~ Me

            I would hold my quote over your quote, since I actually exist and you can talk to me to determine whether or not my opinion is worth anything. Yours is unverifiable for accuracy or legitimacy.

            Pot shards do not have intelligence to comprehend their making, so it is a difficult analogy to compare to humans. I can comprehend my mother and father because they are not an absentee creator. If they were, they would be deemed “deadbeats” and be held accountable.

            I don’t recognize your holy book as fact, so quoting from it does not further your argument.

          • ReasonableVoice101

            “I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.”

            1 Timothy 2:12

          • David Cromie

            The Big Bang, as far as anyone can tell.

          • ReasonableVoice101

            As Douglas Adams said, “This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, ‘This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn’t it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!'”

          • ReasonableVoice101

            Sunsets occur on every planet, incidentally. Particles in the air (some natural, some caused by pollution) cause refraction of the light into different colors. Sunsets on Mars are blue. They did evolve, sort of, in that that they change in response to different conditions, both with and without human intervention.

            But they don’t evolve in the way humans and other animals have (Plants, too). We evolved based on natural selection and availability/desirability for procreation over millions of years.

          • David Cromie

            ‘Faith’, in the religious sense, is the symptom of a superstitious person, and evidence of the presence of an unthinking imbecile.

          • Jenny Lynn

            Thanks for sharing! It is evident to those who read the Bible who their god is.

          • Joe

            I agree. Those that actually read the Bible can determine that it was written by men. By believing the Bible you are trusting their accounts of events that happened a very long time ago, despite the unreliability of personal and second hand accounts. Your God is the fictional character and story written by these people.

          • Meepestos

            Which explains why this god has all the period traits and characteristics of those people.

          • ReasonableVoice101

            More atheists have read the Bible than Christians have, and are more knowledgeable about what it says. Dismissing the Bible doesn’t come from a place of ignorance. It comes from a place of knowledge.

            What does it say about a belief system that the more educated people become about it, the more they abandon it? Under any other circumstances, if someone told you to just go along without asking any questions, how would you respond?

          • Bingo

            That’s a lie. People who reject God yet claim to have read the bible are just as much in the dark as they ever were…and still have no excuse before God when they are hauled up to stand before Him. Because of their unbelief, they have even more to answer for, becasue they have been given the truth and still reject it.

            Dismissing the scriptures comes from a place of abject stupidity.

          • Unrepentant Atheist

            So…. your Bible is useless? Because by your account, reading it isn’t going to tell you anything. If God exists, the more likely scenario is that humans, in their folly, edited and raped what was supposed to be a holy book, so that they authors are burning in hell, while everyone else gets a pass on a technicality.

          • Bingo

            The bible is the unadulterated word of God…His message of love to all humanity.

          • Bluesman1950

            Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey. (1 Samuel 15:3)

            Happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us. He who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks. (Psalms 137:8-9)

            “If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you … Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die.” — Dt.13:6-10

            Yes, his ‘unadulterated words’ are just chock full of love!

          • Bingo

            You prove that you enjoy cherry-picking scriptures that paint a false portrait of God for your own hateful purposes. Only God-haters and haters of His people will point to these passages as if to repudiate God. Foolishness.

            God is completely just in all His judgments.

          • Bluesman1950

            Cherry-picking? You mean pointing out the ‘unadulterated words’ of a loving god who directs the slaughter of infants? How unfair of me! Those infants, nursing children and oxen obviously deserved everything they got!

          • Bingo

            Innocents go to be with God. It is a mercy to them, rather than grow up pagan and be condemned forever. God’s judgments are righteous—always—even if you cannot wrap your head around His acts.

          • Bluesman1950

            ISIS would find nothing to disagree with in that argument. Of course a loving god wants to see infants dashed against rocks rather than growing up not believing in your religion! A true devout believer obviously.

          • David Cromie

            Pot, kettle, and black spring to mind!

          • Bingo

            You are stymied, aren’t you?

          • David Cromie

            Only in your fevered imagination! Why would any sane person point to anything in a book of fables to prove any point about the beliefs or actions of a supposed ‘god’ referred to therein?

          • Bingo

            The only thing that’s fevered here is your hatred toward all things Godly.

          • David Cromie

            “…all things Godly” = all superstitious entities you care to believe in. It is impossible to hate something for which any proof of its existence is lacking. Do you hate Thor, for example?

          • Bingo

            What do you think of mythical beings such as Thor?

          • David Cromie

            No one has yet provided me with any reason, much less evidence, to encourage me to believe in any ‘gods’, not even Thor.

          • Bingo

            Well, your life isn’t over yet. Therefore, where their is life, there is always hope.

          • David Cromie

            Dum spiro spero to you too!

          • Bingo

            I have the Living Hope, Jesus Christ.

          • David Cromie

            I think you have an on-going delusion, which you desperately cling to, having invested so much in it.

          • Bingo

            The living Jesus is no delusion, but you are free to carry on in yours. He has invested so much in us—His life for our freedom.

          • Bluesman1950

            Tosh!

          • David Cromie

            Complete and utter tosh!

        • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

          Making up stuff about god thingies doesn ‘t make them real.

          • OldArkie

            Its real, and you will find out one day, them have much regret. Yet you can repent having a bright future. Your choice.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            If you are right, and “it’s real” whatever you i8magine it to be, then the following simple questions should be easy for you to answer. You are invited to answer my questions if you think that I am incorrect. Please note that in the following, where evidence is sought, that this means that the evidence is in a form which may be intersubjectively verified.

            1) What attributes make your god thingies deserving of being regarded as gods and why?
            2) What evidence do you have that possession of these attributes is necessary and sufficient to regard a thingie as a god thingie?
            3) What evidence do you have that such attributes may exist in this Universe?
            4) What evidence do you have that your god thingies possess such attributes?
            5) What evidence do you have that other thingies do not possess these attributes?
            6) What evidence do you have that your god thingies exist?
            7) What evidence, however hypothetical, might lead you to change your mind over any of the above?
            8) Can you provide a single falsifiable prediction made by the alleged existence of your god thingies that would be falsified if they did not exist?
            9) Consider that anything that has a significant affect upon the Universe may be detected through its affect upon things in the Universe. If there is evidence that your god thingies have affected the Universe, where can that evidence be evaluated? If there is no evidence your god thingies have affected the Universe, then why should they be regarded as deities?
            10) Why should anyone take your ideas about god thingies seriously if you don’t know enough about them to be able to answer the simple questions above about them?
            [v 0.40]

          • OldArkie

            Romans 1:20,21
            For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
            Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

            Also see: Mr 10:6; 13:19; 16:15; Ro 1:25; 2Co 5:17; Ga 6:15; Col 1:15,23; Heb 4:13; 9:11; 1Pe 2:13; 2Pe 3:4; Re 3:14.

            He is real, He made this world, the heavens that surround it along with mankind, and if you ever repented, confessed your sins to Him, accepting His Son as Savior, you will know He is real.

            Yet its your choice, we just tell people about our Savior, because we love them as Jesus did, He gave His life for us while we all are still sinners.

            Ro 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

            Just think, God gave His Son to die for our sins, so that we can have life eternal, instead of “Everlasting Punishment,” Matthew 25:46.

            Yet He forces Himself on no one, he lets each of us make our very own decision.

            Re 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

            He is at your hearts door knocking, but He will not come in unless He is invited.

          • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

            You didn’t answer a single question above responsively, let alone substantively.

            Quoting from books made up by unknown authors centuries after the events does not constitute “evidence.”

            I take it that you don’t really know anything about your alleged god thingies, and that your lack of kn knowledge confirms that nobody need take them seriously.

      • Oboehner

        Another troll on a Christian site, how droll.

        • Joe

          Troll = Comment you don’t like apparently. Another redefining of known definitions.

          I guess you don’t have an answer to any claims. Expected since Christians expect everyone to agree and sing kumbaya.

          • MelanieWaffle

            While I don’t agree with Joe, he does make a lot of good points and none of you seem to be able to effectively argue against his points. I’m a Christian and a scientist and I’ve learned you can’t change people’s minds by quoting the Bible. They don’t believe it anyway. You change people minds by your actions and by showing logic. Sadly none of you seem to be offering this. I think we can learn alot from Joe because until you can argue effectively against his answers, you have no right to say anything as yall are just making us look dumb.

          • Oboehner

            Trollin’, trollin’, trollin’…

          • Joe

            Yes you are.

          • Oboehner

            Trollin’, trollin’, trollin’…

          • jen fon

            No, troll = atheist hanging out on a Christian site to shame people for their beliefs. Or are you expecting to make some kind of ‘positive difference’ here through your hostility and condescension?

          • Joe

            Well, it is the Internet. This article came up in a search. I commented. This article could have been printed on a newsletter and handed out and the Atheists could have been excluded this way.

            My first comment here was supporting your bigoted hate mongers right to speak freely. Live with it.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            The only bigoted hate mongers, here, have been the anti-Christian bigots, like yourself, Joe. I’m glad that you defend free-speech, but, that’s no excuse for prejudice and rudeness.
            Also, I’ve provided explanations to your objections, from earlier, and you haven’t addressed them. Why?

          • Joe

            Prejudice? You act like I opened a wedding cake bakery and told people they couldn’t buy if they were Christian.

            Rudeness is about manners, not prejudice. There are posts where I gave an honest opinion without the satire. Then there were the replies to the posts that showed nothing but ignorance.

            I have no necessity or criteria to show respect. You may think that religion is a special class that allows you to be protected from being insulted, but that is not the case. We are too diverse a culture to be so thin skinned.

            Take my Jesus Zombie reference. That was said to show that you see what you want to see. Typically Jesus depicted as floating up to the sky, glowing with holy aura, halo etc. It doesn’t say this however in the Bible, it says very little actually.

            So who is to say that he resurrected like that? He could be any number of descriptions of the dead come back to life. Ghost, revenant, specter, vampire, ghoul, poltergeist, etc. Nothing in the Bible states specifics about his resurrection. Only the followers imagine it the way they do, and by doing so chances drawing the incorrect conclusion.

          • Nick_from_Detroit

            No, Joe, you don’t have to show respect. But, your arguments will simply be ignored when you are disrespectful. Which is really your objective, is it not?
            You can’t argue this subject with any intelligence. You only regurgitate what you find on sites by New Atheist hacks, like Dawkins and Harris.
            Because, I notice that you didn’t respond to my rebuttal to your false claims on the Scripture passages about slavery & the sacrifice of Isaac. Nor, did you reply to my comment about the crimes of your fellow anti-theists.
            Feel free to do so, now, Joe.

          • Joe

            The crimes of my “fellow” Atheists are their crimes since Atheism is about God existing and not about morality. Only religion tells people how to think and act. So you would have to ask them personally. I have to admit though it is amusing that you attack specific figures in history that were motivated by power and not necessarily religious belief and yet claim that somehow you are morally superior when the clergy rapes and molests its own children. I am sure that you would claim that as an evil act, however with all the morality that the Bible is supposed to preach, those priests were instead protected from the law. Since Christianity does have a moral code that is supposed to be”good” the religion itself should be held responsible for its actions.

      • Jeff Tilley

        I’ve read the bible, and in it are the Words that speak life for an eternity. It is a lamp unto my feet. Mock it at your own risk.

        • Joe

          Lamps don’t work very good at your feet unless you are trying to look at your toes.

      • Rebecca Bonfield

        Clearly you haven’t read the bible.

        • Joe

          I actually have.

      • JTLiuzza

        Joe you are onto something my atheist friend. The Bible without an authoritative interpreter is worse than useless because it can be used by any charlatan that comes along who wants to read into it anything he wishes. Tens of thousands of denominations indeed. The phrase “sift them like sand” springs to mind.

        God exists and He is not so easily duped. He has revealed what of His Truth He wants us to know. And He did establish an authority to keep it safe. I hope you find it.

        • Joe

          The problem is with so many interpretations which one are you choosing to be right and what makes you more right than anyone else?

          If you are taking a literal view of the Bible that it’s not just a don’t believe whether it’s true or not. There are actually major morality issues that conflicts with what I believe is right and wrong.

        • David Cromie

          Some ascribe truth in interpretation to the Papacy! This allows papists to claim that the Roman church is the one true church. Ignorant, semiliterate, superstitious, fools will believe anything, as long as the anointed mouthpiece is dressed in fancy drag, and claims to be speaking infallibly, ex cathedra! But then, so do all the other self-serving religious faith ‘gurus’.

      • cheesemaster

        I’m blown away by all the evidence you provide to bolster your idiotic claim.

        • Joe

          I am blown away by your ability to NOT see the evidence, (and the lack of your own). May I suggest reading up a bit on Evolution, Abiogenesis, the Theory of Relativity, and Quantum Physics. Good thing is you can read these without having to worship or get rid of your god.

      • SMC_BC

        Likely you made the same mistakes reading Scripture as most
        people. The bible isn’t a single book it’s a library of separate books put
        together in one binding. If you read one book after another as complied you didn’t read it in chronological order – that makes the story hard to follow. But, most important, literal must be distinguished from literalistic. If you read Scripture using a literalistic approach like Fundamentalists (e.g. ‘raining cats and dogs’ in a literalistic understanding means felines and canines are falling from the sky)? Or, did you read Scripture in a literal way which allows for metaphor, allegory, etc.? Also, if you have some understand of ancient history it helps. Honestly, it’s usually the literal versus literalistic approach that screws people up.

        • Joe

          That is one interpretation. Some take the words literally when Jesus says that he doesn’t come to change the law.

          When I say the Bible’s message is “evil”, I am referring to it in its entirety. I too can go through and market the book as a loving peaceful book, but only by omitting the parts I don’t like.

          The other issue is that interpreting the Bible at all outside of what it says specifically can be said to editing the message. Realistically, at this rate, one specific denomination might be the only one getting it right, meaning the majority of the world might be going to hell in the proverbial hand basket. All you have to do is pick the correct one from the 41000 variations, and you should be good.

        • David Cromie

          How convenient!

      • Jenny Lynn

        joe@ you have a veil over your eyes and fail to see the beauty! Furthermore the Bible interprets itself, yes people will take verses out of context or use bad translations, but the Bible is the Word of God whether you like it or not.

        For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when He comes in His glory, and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels
        Luke 9:26

        • Joe

          Are you kidding? I see beautiful things every day. My new born nephew, a beautiful sunset, the turning of the seasons. Life in itself is beautiful. I do not see beauty in the Bible. It isn’t even all that well written (or well translated).

          Have you ever watched a 2 or 3 year old finger paint? Order is not needed to have beauty. Just an appreciation of the world around us.

          • Jenny Lynn

            That beautiful world was created by a perfect orderly creator. The only reason your 2-3 year old paints is because the creator programmed it in our DNA. We are complex just like our world.

          • Joe

            I do not think there is a DNA sequence that causes people to paint. There may be a sequence that allows them to be good at it. The reason a two or three year old paints just because its parents gave him a paint set and some paper. The child learns from interacting with its environment. These are facts we know. God is not included in them.

          • Jenny Lynn

            The DNA is the most complex thing in our bodies. It was not evolved. The reason a child can paint is because the Creator who created us made us creative. He is the one who programs us with abilities. We are made in His image. He is the One who gives us gifts and talents, that is why you see such variety in skills. It is all from God and He is worthy to be praised, not ignored.

            He is before all things and by Him all thins hold together. Colosians 1:17

          • Joe

            So complex means created. I didn’t see that in any dictionary. The creator must have also made us to be violent, selfish, bigoted, aloof, spiteful, ignorance, greedy, arrogant, etc. I laugh when I hear your claims of how good he made us yet nobody ever attribute anything negative to your God. One of my favorites is when a sports figure gets up on camera and thanks God for whatever he thinks he got from him. Like the other players playing his sport must not have been faithful enough to win.

            Let’s take your comment about being made in His image. it is very possible with that alone to assume that God may be just as flawed as we are. As an atheist, I keep my mind open to all possibilities but follow the evidence to where it leads. As much as the religious want to say their god created everything, even if there is a “creator”, who is to say that they were a god. As as they say, technology that is sufficiently advanced is for all intents and purposepurposes is magic for those not able to comprehend it.

            The biggest flaw of the faithful is assuming the answers we do not know must be God. There is no more prideful a statement then assuming you have all the answers. Sometimes the best answer is I don’t know.

          • MelanieWaffle

            As a Christian evolutionist….. why not both. I think God creating the process of evolution makes things even more awesome because he programmed life to be self proficient and better itself

          • Joe

            My understanding doesn’t exclude a creator. However there is no real evidence of a god, than someone claiming an ink blot looks like a butterfly. Without evidence pointing to a conclusion, I can not by any right assume that there is indeed a creator.

            Science strives to answer the questions about our origins and the path we took to get where we are today, about the universe and its secrets. Perhaps one day we will know enough to make a more assertive answer than I don’t know. Till then, I choose not to make anything up to answer the questions.

          • Jenny Lynn

            No that’s your free evil will that does that. He did not make us robots. That’s what evolution teaches. God is the moral law giver who has given us a conscience ( with knowledge) evolved slime balls can’t have a moral conscience to know anything, they are merely evolved robots.

          • Joe

            Well I don’t believe your god exists, so from my eyes its as if you are telling me its the voices in your head that tells you what is good and evil. The Bible is only someone else’s voices.

            Before you tell me how God gives you morality, prove he exists.

            Until then, you wouldnt be looking to buy a bridge now would you? I’ve got one real cheap….

          • Jenny Lynn

            The fool says in his heart there is no God Psalms 14:1

          • Joe

            Of course. Because he is thinking with his heart instead of his mind. Rationality comes from the brain. Feeling comes from the heart
            The heart will make you see what you want to see.

          • David Cromie

            If humans have free will, then, according to you christians, it was a gift from your ‘god’ (after all, we are supposed to be made in its own image). If free will turns out to be ‘evil’, then that is solely down to your ‘god’, which must also be evil, is it not? In any case, why would it be against your ‘god’s’ master plan to exercise this ‘god-given’ free will, for good or ill? On the other hand, how does predestination fit into this picture?

          • Jenny Lynn

            9“Woe to those who quarrel with their Maker,
            those who are nothing but potsherds
            among the potsherds on the ground.
            Does the clay say to the potter,
            ‘What are you making?’
            Does your work say,
            ‘The potter has no hands’?
            10Woe to the one who says to a father,
            ‘What have you begotten?’
            or to a mother,
            ‘What have you brought to birth?’
            11“This is what the Lord says—
            the Holy One of Israel, and its Maker:
            Concerning things to come,
            do you question me about my children,
            or give me orders about the work of my hands?
            12It is I who made the earth
            and created mankind on it.
            My own hands stretched out the heavens;
            I marshaled their starry hosts.
            Isaiah 45:9-12

          • Joe

            You cut and pasted this for another comment, and it is about as valid here as it was there.

            Your Bible is no more fact than Harry Potter.

            I should have not expected creativity or reasoning from someone that needs to be told what to think via an ancient book.

          • Jenny Lynn

            No you made yourself violent and evil by the rebellious seed planted from the devil. He has you ignorant to his vices. He also has you just where he wants you. Not believing in God makes you his disciple. The devil hates God just like you so you are his disciple.

          • Joe

            How can there be a Devil if God doesn’t exist? Also, I haven’t hear the devils side of the story. Might be a lot different than Gods point of view, no? Ever think that maybe God is the evil one?

            I don’t believe either exists. But if I did believe I want all of the truth. Not just what people want to believe.

          • Joe

            You defend the Abrahamic God, so you must also be Muslim and Jewish too.

            Just wanted to return your failed logic back at you.

            I don’t believe in God, therefore I don’t believe in his fictional adversary either. Even if God did exist, I wouldn’t take his word regarding his “enemy” as it is completely biased and subject to God’s proven ability to be dishonest and malicious.

        • Joe

          Oh. I also never heard of a self interpreting book before.

          • Jenny Lynn

            Maybe you should try reading the Bible in context then!

          • Joe

            The context I see it in is in the hands of the authors that are seeking to control the believers. It is the biggest financial scam known to man that has ripped off its followers for over 3500 years.

          • David Cromie

            In the context of there being no valid reason for believing in a supposed, extraterrestrial, supreme thingy, supposed to have created everything?

          • David Cromie

            It is amazing what a book of fables can do for itself!

    • Joe

      Speaking the Bible offends the Truth.

    • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

      When you set out to offend people, by flaunting religious delusions in public, through attempting to infest others, particularly children, with these ideas in the hope of damaging their rationality, or by killing them, as so many christers have done to people rejecting their insanity, you should anticipate a strong negative response in a world which is no longer prepared to grant any religion the right to demand special privileges. Particularly as “For surely it is folly to preach to children who will be riding rockets to the moon a morality and cosmology based on concepts of the Good Society and of man’s place in nature that were coined before the harnessing of the horse! And the world is now far too small, and men’s stake in sanity too great, for any more of those old games of Chosen Folk (whether of Jehovah, Allah, Wotan, Manu, or the Devil) by which tribesmen sustained themselves against their enemies in the days when the serpent could still talk.”[ Joseph Campbell (1904-1987, Professor at Sarah Lawrence College, Yonkers, New York, USA); 1959; “The Masks of God: Primitive Mythology”; p. 12]

      • OldArkie

        There is only one God and it’s the Father of Jesus Christ our Savior.

        As for you, your continuing this conversation. And after all this is a Christian web site, Christian news site, so you can expect to hear about God and His Son on this web site.

        God saved me when I was quite young, just under 24 months of age. My mother, sister, and a brother died in a house fire, my father threw me and my older brother into an orphan home 30 days later. Life is not fair, yet those saved will have their ‘tears wiped away’ while the ‘former things will pass away.’ My older brother was saved because mother sent him to the store on his bicycle to get something for supper, on his return trip he saw out house blowing up.

        According to everything my mother, sister, brother died because father put gasoline into the can setting by the wood cook stove back in 1948 instead of kerosene. Mother was fixing to cook our evening meal, the gasoline blew up that was setting not far from the cook stove.

        • http://emilie.hermit.net/ Hermit

          There is only one God and it’s the Father of Jesus Christ our Savior.

          How do you know that any of the above represents anything other than delusional expressions? Who is this so-called “Jesus Christ”, neither of which is a Jewish name, suggesting that if any prototype existed he was not sufficiently significant to the early chusrch to bother to remember his name.

          What this web site purports to be is irrelevant, it uses the Disqus engine to draw cpm traffic to its sites and encourages cross-posting to increase its revenues. Not all those coming are christers (about 30% to 40% of the US population does not vest belief in such superstitions, higher in much of the rest of the world).

          If something happened when you were “under 24 months of age” you cannot credibly claim to know about it except through hearsay. It seems to me as if your father may have been responsible for the fire, and your survival had nothing to do with god thingies, but if it did, it was responsible for not eescuing your “mother, sister, and a brother.” Rather nasty of your god thingies, was it not?

          • OldArkie

            I’ve seen many of the things you’ve posted to others. It seems all you doing is talking against God, and running down every one who loves and speaks about Him. It even seems you’ve got hate in your heart for us who loves God and speaks His truths.

            Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

            Everyone including you will face the judgment. Between now and your death i asked you to read and study the Bible, meditating on His Word.

            Now, I’m through, as I said I looked at your other post and its clear your not listening to God’s truth but trying to put everyone down that stands up for Jesus. And when conversations goes this way there is no use for me to keeping it up, for all you will do is keep on mocking me.

            May God bless,
            OldArkie

          • Breckmin

            When you say/type “god thingies” you do yourself a disservice of building a straw man out of the 3 Abrahamic religions rather than attempting to understand the logic of the God-concept. (of an infinite Creator Who is not a “god thingy.”) Such a predisposed bias will make it very difficult for Christians to share their experiences with you… and how they know that the Creator is real. I encourage you to “question everything” – but when you question, try to understand the system for which you are questioning. The systematic theology of Christianity often begins with a better understanding of theology proper….for which we are NOT talking about finite constructs of fairies, invisible dragons, unicorns or flying spaghetti monsters… (none of these are candidate creators for theism) but rather an Infinite Creator Who is beyond the limitations of time and space (but NOT outside of time….that is a pseudo concept relative to time) and much bigger and much more logical/reasonable/rational than you are granting. Question everything, indeed.

      • Unrepentant Atheist

        I wonder one day, when we begin our expansion into space, and our children live on Mars or other colonizable planets, if they will look to they sky and be able to ditch the false beliefs. Or will they change and edit them as they have in the past to fit their current situation and declare with one voice that “this world was made for us”. Ah, I hope folly does not repeat itself.

    • David Cromie

      Atheists asking pertinent questions about the beliefs of Christians seems to cause a lot more than mere offence. I wonder why.

      • OldArkie

        Most usually the question Atheists ask do not need to be answered. They ask questions that tries to tear down our Savior. The atheists cannot discern God’s Word. 1st they need to get saved, them they will have the Holy Spirit that will help them discern God’s Word.

  • TheBBP

    I remember this video. Good on this man for standing firm in his faith.

    • Bruce Morrow

      Yes indeed! We need more Christians like this. Funny they have a Muslim judging his case….was this done on purpose???

    • Joe

      So you are cheering on a man spewing hate because of his vision of what everyone else should be like?

      Thank you again for reinforcing my views that religion promotes nothing but hatred and bigotry.

      • Gary

        Why is homosexuality moral? And why is islam true?

        • Joe

          Its neither moral or immoral. Why would I care what they do in the bedroom? Only religion makes those kinds of decisions and believes in the peeping tom god.

          Also Muslims are in the same boat. All Religion has serious faults. The only difference is how they market themselves.

          • Gary

            Then you don’t believe there is such a thing as morality?

          • David Cromie

            It would be interesting to hear you define ‘morality’ without reference to the bible. Why do you christians not preach the stoning to death of adulterers, and condemn to hell all who wear mixed fibres, for instance?

      • MelanieWaffle

        Please know, not all Christians are this……. well there is no good words. Granted I’m an outlier as a transgender Christian biologist so I mange to make multiple groups of people uncomfortable. The thing is you ask some great questions. Some I don’t even have answers for and I’m going to have to look into some of this.

        • Joe

          Yikes. I don’t envy your position.

          Its ok not to have answers. I just believe it is important to look for those answers, even if we don’t find one right away. We have the ability to reason the world around us, to not use it is a waste of one of our most precious gifts.

          • MelanieWaffle

            I completely agree. At the end of the day I struggle with my beliefs sometimes. There are some portions of it where I just have to believe like Jesus rising again. But honestly it saddens me how there is a lot of blind faith and then people can’t answer some of the questions you pose. You brought up the point of God sacrificing H8s son. This is actually something I’ve been looking 8nto recently. Unfortunately a lot of Christians, especially fundamentalists are afraid to question their beliefs. Good for you standing out there making Christians uncomfortable! We need more people like this so we can grow better in our faith. As a trans person we need more people like you because of the hatred we receive everyday from the people who are supposed to be my Christian brothers and sisters. Sorry for spelling and grammar, I’m on my phone so it looks like I don’t know how to spell

          • lynn

            Genesis 22 verse 8 Abraham told Isaac that God would provide Himself a sacrifice, and God did when providing His darling Son Jesus Christ as the ultimate sacrifice for all who would believe on Him.

          • MelanieWaffle

            I’m totes cool with Jesus dying for me. I think it was amazing. I just don’t know how to ethically argue it yet for those who don’t believe the Bible or who are looking for a logical argument. Like I said you can’t persuade someone to believe in God by quoting the Bible at them because they don’t believe in the Bible. You have to show your actions and give out logic. Also sometimes it’s ok to admit you simply don’t have an answer and some things you take on faith alone such as virgin birth and rising of Christ.

          • lynn

            You are correct. It hardly ever helps to be offensive when trying to deliver the gospel to someone who has read the bible and has no spiritual understanding of what they have read. That is also true with folks who have never had any experience with Christianity. Our duty is to present the gospel in a loving way, and let God do the work. If the Holy Spirit doesn’t empower the spoken word in the sinners heart,nothing good will come from our efforts to convince folks that they need a Savior. As you implied,we ought to act like the Christians that we profess to be. I appreciate what you said, and again, you are exactly right.
            God bless your day.

  • Joe

    As offensive as his speech is, we do have a right to speak our minds. If he wants to go “Westboro”, well, we see what the majority of the country thinks of them. However, this should not be a criminal act.

    Now, I say that with the understanding that he can speak his beliefs. If he is inciting violence, then that is a whole different story.

    Btw. I say that as an anti-theist that believes what Overd preaches is immoral bigotry that should go away. But we can not legislate that. We have to make him and his belief socially unacceptable. We have to counter ignorance with knowledge and fairy tales with reality.

    • Paul Hiett

      Too bad he doesn’t live here in the US…he’d be free to preach his hatred anywhere he wants.

      • Bruce Morrow

        By “hatred” you mean people who don’t accept the sin of homosexuality? Tell I’m wrong Paul Hiett.

        • Paul Hiett

          Judging others and hiding behind your Bible…yeah, that’s considered hatred.

          • chrisleduc1

            Sounds like you’re judging him and his beliefs? Are you being judgmental? Are you being a biggot? Are you being intolerant?

          • Gary

            Both you and your sodomite daughter are damned.

      • Joe

        Yep. I like our rules, just not some of the people that use them.

    • jen fon

      I’m so smarrrrrt. F**k you dad! Science and logic!

      • Joe

        If I were to extend out the word smart, I would use the vowel. Its easier on the throat. You should take some oral communication classes or voice lessons. It would do wonders for you.

      • MelanieWaffle

        You are making Christians look terrible! Jesus never would have said something like that or demand someone. He corrected people when wrong, but you are being rude. Is Joe being nice all the time? No. However, by being rude back to him you ate showing there is no difference in Chrostians. Sorry for spelling, my phone is sad lol

  • MEP1101

    THIS ENDS MY VISITS TO ENGLAND ! But this may be the case in Canada and Australia too. We are living in the day of the End time’s Anti-Christ and things are just going to get worst for Christians before Jesus straightens everything out.

    • Paul Hiett

      While I agree he has a right to free speech (too bad he doesn’t live here in the US), I hardly think it’s indicative of being in the “end times”.

    • thoughtsfromflorida

      No doubt the citizens of England are just crushed that you won’t be visiting.

    • David Cromie

      You christians have been living in the ‘end times’ for 2,000 years, according to the expectations of the NT ‘believers’.

  • Gary

    No freedom of speech for Christians in England. I understand the muslims are increasingly powerful over there.

    • Joe

      Doesn’t England have a Christian state religion?

      • Gary

        They might still have a “state church”, but it is not now Christian, if it ever was.