Testimonials | Letters | News | Rants | Forums | Submit A Testimonial | Front Page
Archives | Podcasts | Videos | Recent Comments | Live Chat | Printer Friendly Version
In Defense of Dave: To the passing Christian
.: posted 7/17/2003 ::: by webmdave
::: 
I haven’t been around this web site long, but long enough to witness some of the ugliest behavior I have ever seen out of those who claim to represent the Prince of Peace. With only a handful of sites on the entire WWW dedicated to the subject of leaving the Christian faith, and perhaps thousands out there for the purpose of propagating the same, believers choose to seek this site out and attack Dave for what he is doing. And ATTACK is the operative word here. I dare say they’d burn him at the stake if they could.
So what is he doing? For one thing, contrary to what most Christians who come here perceive, he is NOT out to change anyone’s mind. He is out to free his own mind and to help others to do the same. He does not ask anyone to think what he thinks or adopt any particular take on truth other than what one finds for them self. This is difficult for a Christian to comprehend because of the theistic and dualistic perspective that guides every thought process. Everything, every idea that is not with them, that cannot be somehow subjugated or rendered neutral, is against them. Either there is a god, my god, or there is apostasy, unbelief, and everything is meaningless. One is either hot or cold, as the Lord put it, remember?
This limited epistemological framework does not allow for other possibilities, and consequently, little, if any, room for dialogue. Sure, Christians come here proclaiming their interest in what people who have left their faith have to say. They say they want to engage in conversation, sharpen their “debating skills” and listen. They often are out to prove the validity of their faith by presuming to be the one Christian who makes sure to tell them how much god loves them, while ever so kindly reminding the unbelievers that Hell awaits them.
Yet they end up complaining that they are misunderstood, that people are mean because they don’t have much patience for proselytizing, and that they are arrogant because they demand that any arguments be solid and well-reasoned and not filled with bible verses and an unimaginative repetition of things they have heard all their lives.
This place is like a library. Granted, it has a specific catalogue of material, but that is certainly not a fault. In fact, as a former theological student, I can see where this web site could be a valuable resource for materials to study regarding the Christian faith. There is nothing here to fear, unless knowledge is to be feared. But even better it is a forum in the best sense of the word. In the days of the ancient Greeks, or even Jesus and Paul’s time, cities usually had places, forums, where subjects were debated passionately. If you couldn’t hack it, if you didn’t come studied and prepared, with some skills and some imagination, then tough. Could it be that the claims of Christianity just don’t cut it in a reasoned debate anymore? Or that it doesn’t inspire imagination any longer?
Still, Christians find this place on the web to be a threat. Why is that? A faith that has lasted for 2000 years, survived the collapse of the Roman Empire, the 18th century Enlightenment (sort of) and suddenly one little old web site deserves such vitriol and hatred (yes, hatred, all you Christian readers) leveled on an almost daily basis toward Dave the webmaster for posting what he sees as a whole lot of stuff about Christianity that just doesn’t pass as loving, or even good. For what does this say about the strength of Christian convictions, of the confidence Christians have in the goodness of what they believe, or of Christianity itself? By its own standards Christianity is condemned, over and over, throughout history and by the witness of its followers who arrive and post here
In the 16th century the greatest minds in the world were all religious. In the west, they were all Christians. Let’s face it, they had to be or. . . (he draws an index finger across his throat). This web site is filled with information about why that is not the case any longer in the 21st century. The reason for bringing this up is that not once, not yet, not anywhere, not with any precision or honesty or thoughtfulness has a Christian come to this site with anything remotely resembling a well-presented theological argument for why Dave isn’t justified in speaking his mind, in working out whatever he needs to work out on his own web site that he pays for, in questioning god, the bible, the voracity of Christian claims, etc. OR offered any compelling reasons why he, or any apostate who has thought it through, should rethink their position. Furthermore, I have seen so little humility, so little graciousness, so few acts of kindness and mercy (if any at all), such a lack of love for the neighbor, and such an unwillingness of ANYONE to admit that Christianity is based upon faith and promise and NOTHING ELSE (not evidence, not proof, but faith--a word, a story, a truth claim based on religious authority) that if I were still a Christian I would be ashamed. Instead, it only confirms my own realization that Christianity is a fool’s errand and I can only feel a measure of pity and sadness for those who still cling to its delusions.
The violence in some of the responses to Dave’s site is troubling. Ye shall know them by their fruits indeed. It is disturbing to me that dissent is so feared these days that it almost seems that, not unlike the treatment of gays and illegal immigrants in the US, there are those who would hunt down anyone who thinks differently, and do whatever they can to eradicate them from sight (site?). And the Christians that come here would do so without even giving the accused a fair hearing. Most, it is clear, read very little of what is presented, and then unleash Hell. Hell, not Heaven mind you. So little love, so little time. They’re certainly not saying much for Christ’s sake.
When I was a kid, the Sunday school teachers told stories about persecuted Christians. We played games in youth group in which we hid out and had secret bible studies as if we were living in the former Soviet Union. All of this was designed to get us to think we Christians were a persecuted lot. I hear this silly notion repeated here and elsewhere by Christians. Every time government monies are blocked to fund a religious social program, or the Ten Commandments are removed from a public school, the Christians whine about persecution. They whine about it here when someone simply doesn’t agree with their poorly reasoned arguments. But who is trying to squeeze out whom? Like I said, this is one of only a handful of sites, if not the only site, that provides a forum for Ex-Christians.
Maybe it is not persecution at all. Maybe it’s just fear and panic, plain and simple. Maybe those clay feet of legend are the very foundations of the Christian faith itself. Maybe somewhere, deep down, those vituperative Christians who crash in here sense that the clay feet are cracking, and the whole thing is teetering precariously on the brink of oblivion. Maybe they know, like a man who leaves a seminary because learning is beginning to challenge his long-held beliefs, that if you think about it too much, it won’t hold water. Let’s face it, when faced with having to get out of the boat, do you try to walk on water or do you start swimming? What world are WE living in?
What is certain is that intolerance abounds these days. And even with all the information readily available on the web, so does ignorance. What is also clear is that, based upon the witness of the Christians who visit here, one could only conclude that they are, on the whole, insensitive, merciless, arrogant, smug, supercilious, fearful, neurotic, mono-maniacal, often unintelligible, seldom honest, lacking in empathy, and filled with their own self-righteousness. That’s what I see. I know many Christians—friends, family members—who do not fit these descriptions, and some others who do.
My point is that many Christians who arrive here do not obey the dictates of their own religion. They post on this site with beams in their eyes howling at Dave to remove the speck in his. They claim a loving god and can neither give a convincing argument for the claim based upon the contents of their faith nor the example of their own behavior. They call Dave hateful and promise him nothing but Hell.
So what is Dave doing? For me, he has provided a place to flush out of my mind a lifetime of religious training, indoctrination, anxiety, fear, and confusion that has plagued my existence with ideas that are irreconcilable with the person I am. What does that last statement mean? Well, it is personal, but it has to do with honoring the gifts I have and the way I have come to see the world around me, something that I could not do within the confines of Christianity. I have found that it is possible to have a sense of the good, the true and the beautiful without god. (If not, how could we ever determine god’s goodness in the first place? I digress). I realize now I am in good company in having felt restricted by the Christian faith. There is a case to be made for the idea that many, if not most creative events, inventions, and works of art in human history have, in some way, happened in opposition to Christianity. But I’m not interested in arguing that point. I still like Bach. Freethinking means I can still have that, and I can also appreciate .Buddhist poetry, or Muddy Waters. But in any of those cases, I am my own person, and I can take what I find appeals to me, what is useful, what agrees with my sense of humanity, and leave the rest behind. Christianity, if it is to be believed, and if Jesus is to be followed and the words of scripture to be put into practice, does not allow for that, in my view.
But I did not begin this essay to explain why I am no longer a Christian. My intention is to say that Dave is a person to be admired. He stands up for what he thinks against a plethora of personal, daily attacks, keeping his cool, and all the time providing for others who need a place to clear their head from their own daily assaults upon their individual psyches. Where Christianity is conformist, Dave’s site is turning over the proverbial tables in the temple and calling bullshit on the lot of it. Where it is repressive, Dave’s site sets captives free. In other words, from what I can see, even though he doesn’t buy all the truth claims of Christianity, he sure models the ethos it has made its reputation on. He uses what power he has and offers it to others so that they may find a measure of freedom for themselves.
I feel confident in using such an example because I can tell from this site that Dave has done the work. He has studied Christianity and taken it to heart. He gets it. And even though he finds 99% or even 100% of it abhorrent now, and I don’t blame him, he is also smart, sensitive, and compassionate enough, and has a sufficient sense of irony and humor enough to appreciate a compliment that is formed out the very material he has worked so hard to shake off.
“Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness sake, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven”
Funny, I think Dave is a better Christian than all of you wankers.
"likeafish" is a regular participant in the Open Forums area of the site.
Add this page to:
61 Comments:
wrote:
That was a well thought out speech to us "in-coming" christians and I do not feel threatened or attacked by this site. I do have a question though. How does you become an ex-christian?
posted: December 31, 2005 EST
wrote:
Excuse my typo, I am not well trained at typing
posted: December 31, 2005 EST
.:webmaster:. wrote:
How does one become an ex-Christian?
Click here.
posted: December 31, 2005 EST
wrote:
Hi,
I'm brand new here, my story still isn't posted (being only minutes old). I do not know the poster of "In Defense of Dave", nor do I know Dave. I see a familiar theme here, however. It is the same experience I have with progressive blogs - the freepers (Free Republic, right wing kool-aid drinkers) show-up uninvited and leave their "opinions". There is a crusade going on in this country. Right wing conservatism is in a panic state. Recent indictments prove that they are crumbling under the weight of their own empire. Even Ralph Reed is (allegedly) caught-up in the whole Jack Abramoff affair.
I was raised fundamentalist. I served in the US Army. I was taught to hate communist. Never in my life had a communist injured me in any way. The people who were trying to teach me to hate communists, however, had. In grade school, the teachers had us diving under our desks to practice surviving a nuclear attack?!? The whole right-wing consevatism thing is, indeed, child abuse and it gets perpetuated by our institutions. Anyone else find that scaring kids with hell-fire brimstone and communist-wrought nuclear annihilation as an assualt on the psyche of these young, impressionable children, I don't know... CRUEL?
The belief in a two superpower world was engrained in me. Then the Berlin Wall fell. It was a strange feeling. I was happy that the Soviet Union was doing the "dying cockroach", but there was an unease about it. Then it dawned on me. In the speed and unyeilding way that the Soviet empire was crumbling before my eyes, it could happen to the United States - in the same way.
It probably feels that way to the fundies. They are praying for Armageddon. They have a pResident who would be happy to deliver it for them. Pat Robertson continues to spew his venom, without fear or censure. It is almost as if Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Dick Cheney are all embodied in the image of Nero and they are playing the fiddle while Rome burns below them.
Excuse the metaphors, but I feel like Francis Scott Keye as he became aware that "the banner still waves". Our Constitution still stands. The Constitution is still in the tender-loving care of a few patriotic Americans who have clung to power. The Neo-Cons, with the help of the christian right, have tried to turn us into a facist state, but it didn't work. They are shaking in their (jack)boots.
Reason, the good-sense, intelligence and maturity of the American public has, once again, delivered us from evil. I believe that we are on the verge of another "American Renassaince", much like the "Summer of Love" and the sixties / early seventies. McCarthy failed, Nixon failed and now King George is failing. I feel like there will be a large backlash towards this "culture of corruption" and Americans will question the role of their religious leaders. They have no credibility. They have lied, along with their Neo-Con leaders.
Killing innocent Iraqis is not "Christ-like" (christian). Lie-ing about war is not "Christ-like". Using religion to con citizens about the evils of indian gaming in one state so that indian gaming can thrive in an adjacent state is not "christ-like". War profiteering (especially for the company that you just left being CEO of to be V.P.) is not "Christ-like" Leaving people without aid for a week after a devastating hurricane and flood just because they were black, poor and Democrat, is not "Christ-like". Using money from poor parishioners to put air-conditioning units on doghouses is not "christ-like". Bagging the young,impressionable church Secretary is not "Christ-like". Hiring a Prostitute so that you can masturbate (without your wife's knowledge) while you do your "church-lady" delivery about the intolerable sins of "fornicators" from a televised pulpit is not "christ-like". The people whose names were not listed above, but you should know who they are, CANNOT really believe in the existence of God or Jesus. If they really did, they would fear for their own eternal damnation for all of the things that they did (above). WWJD - Who Would Jesus Do?
posted: January 09, 2006 EST
wrote:
You wrote: The violence in some of the responses to Dave’s site is troubling.”
Just a few very lovely words from others on this website:
“Most of the fundies suck but there's hope...maybe.”
joel, 09.03.2004, 11:21am #
KC Jones wrote: “Hate fundies! Ridicule them! Smear them! It will give you unity! ...
Fundies! Hate fundies! And all will be well”
“Brainwashed people cannot see the truth that is right before their eyes and they will deny facts that do not agree with their beliefs.”
“Christians are, without a doubt, the most judgmental people on the face of the Earth!”
Bresson F8 wrote: “Sweet mother of Jebus! God bless you...I will say a prayer to Fetus Jesus for your soul.”
Forever and ever wrote: “Christians - Never before have so many done so little for so much.”
Hatred you say? Look in the mirror. All of you. If you want to help free people out of Christianity, make sure you attack the doctrine itself. Because when you attack people, you are no different from those fundies.
posted: January 18, 2006 EST
.:webmaster:. wrote:
This site has been online for 5 years now.
Is that the totality of the bad comments you can find? Do you really intend to lump together all of the 2200 daily visitors this site enjoys?
Are you serious?
posted: January 18, 2006 EST
Onanite wrote:
Another anonymous idiot wrote:
"Hatred you say? Look in the mirror. All of you. If you want to help free people out of Christianity, make sure you attack the doctrine itself. Because when you attack people, you are no different from those fundies."
I don't think most of us are here to free the idiots in the world of their silly myths. I really don't care what people believe, as long as they don't push it on me.
The low IQ Jesus people seem to come here to stir up trouble. They post and re-post the same old BS, and then they are the ones who get upset and start telling us we are all going to hell. Most of the time, they post anonymously, like you.
Yes we do get sick of it, they are asking for the abuse. (Maybe to claim persecution, who knows?)
So maybe they should just slither back into their holes and pray to their non-existent God.
Onanite
posted: January 18, 2006 EST
wrote:
"Is that the totality of the bad comments you can find? Do you really intend to lump together all of the 2200 daily visitors this site enjoys?"
I didn't have time to post all of them. That would be a waste of YOUR space don't you think?
"Another anonymous idiot wrote."
An idiot? Wow another example of venomous talk. Give yourself a hand for being a good example of a fundie. I don't have to cut and paste this one.
"Most of the time, they post anonymously, like you."
They? so you are assuming that i am "they"? how do you know that for sure? the reason i am posting anonymously is because honestly, its easier - i don't have a blogger username and don't want to take the time to sign up for one.
"Yes we do get sick of it, they are asking for the abuse."
So the end justifies the means. Your mentality is - because THEY are doing it to ME, then I will do it to THEM. Your mentality is no different from fundie suicide bombers then. or those fundie Christians who shoot abortion doctors. YOU THINK THE SAME. Take great care Onanite, your hatred is grotesque and might result in repugnant actions later on.
posted: January 19, 2006 EST
wrote:
Anonymous Idiot,
So fucking what if some here profess hatred of fundies and their nasty, bigoted beliefs? We do not profess to be "holier than thou" like they do. Most of us are, however, smarter and much nicer people in general. Hate is a emotion that sometimes can't be helped, like love. Some here choose to write about those feelings.
I, personnally, would like to burn down every stinkin' church in the world. So what? I don't do it because that would be just plain wrong and is illegal. Just a nice thought. However, xian fundies often resort to violence and vandalism against those that disagree. Talk about not practicing what they preach!
You can think what you like about the folks here, but if you don't approve-go the hell away. That is the difference, isn't it? You and your fellow xians can just ignore this site. But we cannot ignore the religious right and all the other xian fanatics as they insist on being in everyone's face and trying to impose their evil on the entire nation. I wish ignoring them was as easy as not looking at a website.
On the plus side, more and more free thinkers are speaking out and working to pull the world into the 21st century. Rock on, my friends!
Regards, carol
PS. It is really easy to post a name to your comments. You must've been home schooled.
posted: January 19, 2006 EST
wrote:
Hi Carol, my lovely child.
OK LETS ATTACK THE DOCTRINE. !!!!!
Lourdes,
You know that little brown book called the Bible? IT'S A PIECE OF FUCKING SHIT !!!!!!
It has lies in it written by PEOPLE about how god created the Earth and has knowledge about every person and every thought being thought by every person that has ever breathed a living breath, you know, and this god has loving compassion, and sees to it that everything that is just and pure and good is completely watched out for and protected and cared for and some people have diseases some people win the lottery, some people are born defective, physically and mentally and some people are called to preach and some people talk to this god where as some people have never talked to this equal oportunity god, who watches over certain ones and allows some to be maimed and have their heads cut off, god allows some christians to be burned alive in wrecks and plane crashes. Yes Lourdes you should get down on you knees right now and thank this wonderful god for allowing you to witness these horrible tragic events.
The bible spelled backards = TRASH. Guess what Lourdes the bible was sent over to America on a boat with BLACK SLAVES. The American Indians never heard of God, Jesus, Heaven or Hell and why not?
Because it was written down in a BOOK from clay tablets, by men.
Does this mean that the Indians did not deserve to know about the Jesus salvation savings plan? Since they were considered savages?
NOOOOOOOOO It means that the bible is the invention of a MAN, from the OPIUM FIELDS out of the Middle East.....Arab Country, via England.
There was no a single church on American soil before 1492, did god build these churches? Noooo whitemen did.
The bible is whitemans god and fantasy book, his answers for all things unknown, whiteman's answers that the Opiumhead Arabs wrote down on clay tablets.
This is knowledge that needs to be got out to the public !!!! NOW !!!! TODAY !!!!
THE BIBLE AND KORAN NEEDS TO BE DESTROYED AND ALL RELIGIONS ABOLISHED
posted: January 19, 2006 EST
.:webmaster:. wrote:
"the reason i am posting anonymously is because honestly, its easier - i don't have a blogger username and don't want to take the time to sign up for one."
Then click the "OTHER" Button!
posted: January 19, 2006 EST
.:webmaster:. wrote:
And Mr. Anonymous who can't figure out how to click the OTHER button, because it's too hard: You are right - there are harsh things said on this site sometimes. However, it is only words. If you don't like what you read, just click away. No one - not one single person - is forcing you to read this stuff.
I wonder, do you get as upset over porn sites? Do you troll Muslim sites? Do you rebuke Christian sites that trash atheists? Do you even care about any other type of harsh language if it's not directed against Christians.
Whether you answer any of this or not, please start using the "OTHER" button, or your posts will not last long.
Thanks.
posted: January 19, 2006 EST
wrote:
I'll begin this by saying that I'm a Christian. I find it unfortunate that people who call themselves Christians come onto this site and verbally harangue those who are not believers. For instance:
"What is certain is that intolerance abounds these days. And even with all the information readily available on the web, so does ignorance. What is also clear is that, based upon the witness of the Christians who visit here, one could only conclude that they are, on the whole, insensitive, merciless, arrogant, smug, supercilious, fearful, neurotic, mono-maniacal, often unintelligible, seldom honest, lacking in empathy, and filled with their own self-righteousness."
The Bible teaches us that *all* are sinners, including those of us who attack you guys, and that we shouldn't criticise people for their faults when we've got plenty of our own. Open discussions about religion where both sides respect each other's views are the proper place for Christians to engage non-believers, not one sided attacks that do little but make the church look bad.
There's so much that I could say, but no real place to start. I'll finish by saying that most people who come here and criticise you guys because of your lack of faith have problems, self-esteem probably being the most obvious. The most important commandment according to Jesus is to love God & love your neighbors. Verbally attacking a non-Christian because of their anti-Christian attitudes is *not* showing love. I feel really bad about this. I truly believe that Christianity is really not as bad as people have made it out to be. I actually left the faith when I was a teenager and came back to it as an adult, so I think that I have a bit of perspective on the issue.
If anybody wants to contact me about this, feel free to email me at papafriesen@gmail.com. That's it!
posted: January 20, 2006 EST
wrote:
Txiasaeia,
I hope that you come back. You actually left your name and did not sign in as anony-mouse!!!I am impressed and awe-struct. You may be the first real christian I have ever met! Please do not view my post as sarcastic (it's starting to sound that way to me...)
I am curious, are you Catholic? Papafriesen, as in Father Friesen? How do you view the current political situation? What about a woman's right to make decisions about her own body (abortion and birth control)? You sound like you might be a private person who likes to worship on your own, or you might be a Priest. Either way, you come here as a humble servant of Christ and I am truly impressed.
posted: January 21, 2006 EST
Joshua wrote:
As a Christian, I don't find the site offensive at all. If anything, it reminds me of how far short I fall in living up to my faith.
I appreciate the honesty, sincerity and fearlessness in questioning faith that I find here. It may be a bit over-the-top at times (such as the "tracts"), but it's no more over-the-top than some of the Christian media.
I'm still a Christian, but I thank you for having an open forum to question faith. Without searching, nobody has faith - they just have hollow tradition.
posted: January 24, 2006 EST
wrote:
I like that the poster put in that he knew christians that aren't mean and egotistical. Personally, I think most of the things that people complain about (they push their beliefs on me, they're so stubborn) and all that jazz, thats a personality thing and shouldn't be blamed on a book.
Lets blame violence in todays youth on video games right? Nah.
You don't have to believe in god to be stupid and pigheaded, nor be atheist to be accepting and kind. I'm not really religious but I go to a bible study anyway because the people there are all different denominations and there's open debate with acceptance of challenges. And you can press me on this and say 'do they logically defend their bible' or something like that, but for the most part, they've done a LOT of research. I don't agree, but there's no animosity between us.
I forgot where I started with this so, hey! I like the site, even though I don't agree with everything ^_^
-SacredEve
posted: January 29, 2006 EST
wrote:
" However, it is only words. If you don't like what you read, just click away. No one - not one single person - is forcing you to read this stuff.
I wonder, do you get as upset over porn sites? Do you troll Muslim sites? Do you rebuke Christian sites that trash atheists? Do you even care about any other type of harsh language if it's not directed against Christians."
Sorry, I really don't mean to sound trite, but aren't you being a hypocrite too? If you don't like what someone posts its also your choice to ignore it. 'course, you are a big part of the site and all, but don't blame other people for defending their beliefs when you do just the same.
All people, when feeling attacked, defend themselves. In this case, defense on either side seems stupid and pointless.
I guess people on both sides here prolly feel attacked because anything that challenges ANYONES beliefs often feels like that, at least, at first. I can bet a lot of fundies are jerks here. People, PEOPLE are stupid.
Err anywho, please don't imply that anyone defending christianity doesn't just as ardently fight for atheism or islam on the christianity sites. I mean, I do...
and you can disbelieve me if you like, but whenever someone seems disrespectful it makes me sad. No one portion of society has the claims on unkindness either.
Oooh and I don't mean the articles are mean or anything, no more than an article on nuclear physics insults chemistry.
*sigh* and I suppose I went off track there at some point again. Sorry.
*hugs* But I do hope none of this offended you, though I suppose thats not likely.
posted: January 29, 2006 EST
wrote:
As a christian I just wanted to thank Txiasaeia for saying what she said. It's sad to see christians come here and get all mad, when they shouldn't.
posted: February 01, 2006 EST
Jason wrote:
Sam Harris has written a wonderful book entitled "The End of Faith." I highly recommend it.
posted: February 21, 2006 EST
Jennifer A wrote:
Jesus was constantly stating to his disciples "You do not understand." Looking at some of the vitriol spouted by so called Christians, He's probably still saying it. There _should_ be intolerance among Christians- for viciousness, cruelty, ignorance and plain hatefulness. The Jesus whom I have a personal relationship was none of these things. Faith, Hope and Love, people. - Jennifer
posted: March 02, 2006 EST
David wrote:
To Jennifer A,
I'll say AMEN to that.
Dave Poole
posted: March 14, 2006 EST
Pastor Doug Hoag wrote:
I'm enjoying the responses by the Christians on this particular thread, but there is one thing we are forgetting to do, and that is, to apologize. This is what I will attempt to do now for the many ex-Christians who visit this site.
I am truly sorry.
I am sorry for the snobbishness and rigidity that is found in so many of our religious systems, and for being complicit in these very systems.
I am sorry for the violence and hatred that the church has inflicted on the world throughout its history, all done in the name of god. We have wielded the sword in vain.
I am sorry for the attitudes of exclusivity and for shutting the kingdom of god in people's faces solely because they don't conform.
I am truly sorry that the church has not sought solidarity with the human race, but instead has sought to dominate, control, and squelch minds that are truly brilliant.
I am sorry that we Christians have been, and are, way too focused on the specks in the eyes of others while ignoring the logs in our own.
I am sorry for the way we Christians have taken the greatest story in the world and have reduced it to sound bites and pious platitudes, commonly know as Systematic Theology-- actually, theology that systematically seeks to destroy the hearts and lives of those who don't comply.
I am sorry that the church has looked down its collective nose and considered itself the sole interpreter of the will of the god it worships and reveres.
I am sorry that the church has supported, encouraged, and even assisted, oppressive war machines, including that of the current administration.
I am sorry that we Christians have claimed the corner on the morality market.
Christians, we have seen the enemy. And it is us! We are being crucified, as it were, and rightly so! I have no quick solutions, but I do believe that a couple of things are in order for us.
First, we need to repent. We must decide if we are going to continue to walk on the same road we've been walking on for most of our history, or if we are going to turn around and seek another.
Second, we must stop dividing the human race into "us" and "them" (as I admit I have done in this post). Styx was right-- deep inside we're all the same! Any attempt to pretend otherwise leads to deception and a diminished humanity.
Third, we must look at the Scriptures more closely and realize that they are products of their time. It does not make us liberals to do so. We can explore deeper into the biblical narrative and begin to notice the wider canvases that the Scriptures are giving us.
Dave, you are doing a great service, no matter how much opposition you are facing!
P.S.-- Lest anyone think I'm into self-flaggelation and masochism, I'm not! I'm a Christian minister who strongly feels that Christians must explore avenues of engaging the world with fresh perspectives and lessening narrow-mindedness.
With Charity,
Doug Hoag
posted: April 11, 2006 EST
Pastor Doug Hoag wrote:
Oh, and, by the way: I'm not an ass-kisser either. Well, sometimes I am, but not today!
posted: April 11, 2006 EST
Bentley wrote:
Pastor Doug Haog said:
I'm sorry yada, yada, yada, blah, blah, blah, blah, etc.
I'm sorry yada, yada, yada, blah, blah, blah, blah, etc.
I'm sorry yada, yada, yada, blah, blah, blah, blah, etc.
I'm sorry yada, yada, yada, blah, blah, blah, blah, etc.
I'm sorry yada, yada, yada, blah, blah, blah, blah, etc.
I'm sorry yada, yada, yada, blah, blah, blah, blah, etc.
I'm sorry yada, yada, yada, blah, blah, blah, blah, etc.
I'm sorry I took everyones money to my bank account.
I'm just sorry!
Ok I'm glad I got that off my chest, I'll see you all in church on Sunday. Don't forget to bring your wallet!
posted: April 11, 2006 EST
Pastor Doug Hoag wrote:
Ben,
Yeah, but I didn't take all the money! ;)
The church in America has been a big money machine. Many congregants give because of threats, real and perceived. And then great big humongous gargantuan churches and cathedrals can be built. Another shrine to greed and arrogance!
And, yeah, I'll admit that I've been party to it. I have no excuse, except to say that, like most others, I have a family to support and bills to pay. How could any of us earn a living if it weren't for other people? Of course, it's very possible that I don't have a real job.
Now I feel much better!
Affectionately,
Doug
P.S.-- Am I correct in assuming your unacceptance of my apology? No motive here-- it's just a question.
P.P.S.-- I would love to have someone interrupt my sermon in the middle of Easter services this Sunday and yell, "Fuck you, Pastor Hoag, you're full of shit!" God, that would be so refreshing!
P.P.P.S.-- Congregants could stop giving offerings completely, and I would say, "Good! Give it to your favorite charity!"
posted: April 11, 2006 EST
David wrote:
To Pastor Doug,
What church do you preach at?
Dave Poole
posted: April 11, 2006 EST
Pastor Doug Hoag wrote:
Dave,
I'm pastor at Trinity Lutheran Church in New Lenox, Illinois.
posted: April 11, 2006 EST
.:webmaster:. wrote:
Hi Doug,
Might I ask what your position on Gay marriage?
posted: April 11, 2006 EST
Pastor Doug Hoag wrote:
I think all marriages should be happy ones! ;)
Kidding aside, I've recently questioned the traditional stance on homosexuality, mainly because it doesn't fit the scope of the biblical narrative.
What appear to be condemnations of homosexuality are, historically and narrativally (sp?) speaking, condemnations of temple prostitution, of which there were both male and female. Fertility cults in the Ancient Near East were numerous. Temple prostitution was solely for the purpose of manipulating the gods and goddesses to copulate, and thus it would rain for the crops. But, you knew all of that already.
The Biblical condemnations against homosexuality have nothing to do with the orientation, but with worship.
With that, I personally have no problem with gay marriage. I recently had a gay couple in my congregation. They weren't married, but they did have a committment ceremony. They were very active in the congregation serving on the usher team. One died of cancer and it was very sad. I was slated to conduct the funeral, but at the last minute his family decided they wanted a Catholic priest. I felt dejected because I knew the guy and got to know him very well, and here's this priest who never met him before acting like he knew him. I felt sick.
Anyway, I think I overkilled your question. Did I answer it?
posted: April 11, 2006 EST
Bentley wrote:
Listen Mr. Hoag, I think we can communicate here, because you seem to be open minded and not afraid of words.
Ok I liked your answer to me, it seemed to be the most honest answer that I have ever received from a person claiming to be Christian since I've been on here over 2 years.
Now let me address something that concerns me about the Bible writers and Christians fear of homosexuals, now read carefully and slowly, OK?
Now the Bible writers were not what I would call educated geniuses. They thought that diseases were caused by demons and witches and spells, or unclean spirits, so anyone being homosexual would set off alarms in one's head back then as the King of Darkness, Satan!!! as well as most Christians today think, not only to homosexuals, but to Atheists also.
Now Doug please get this, please! please! Read below and think Doug, please! please!
If your almighty God will allow people to be born Siamese twins, with heads joined together, people born without arms, limbs, blind, albino, deaf, with cancer, etc. etc.
There is no reason that a person could be born with the wrong sexual preferences mentally wrong sex chromosomes with a body of a man, but mentally atracted to the same sex, Not Demon possessed!!!
The same could be said for a female born with the wrong sexual preferences mentally wrong sex chromosomes, with a body of a female, but mentally atracted to the same sex or bisexual, Not Demon Possessed! and not against a god or any god!!!
Now most all preachers here in the Bible cess pool, will say that homosexuality is chosen behavior just to be against God, it's not natural, but homosexuality is done to defile God, It's all against God.
Guess what Doug? They, them, you perhaps! Could Just Be Fucking WRONG!!!
I'm not including Atheistism in the menatlly challenged or perverted category, mainly Atheists do not hate a God or any Gods and Atheists do not do things to oppose a God or any God or to be against a God or any god.
Now Doug there is so much to learn here on this website and we can continue to communicate, as long as you do not come back on here wishing to pray for us and condemning us.
Most of the regulars here have been Christians for many years and spouted the Christian cliche's, we've heard them all and we're fucking sick of them.
Doug I think you have the capacity to communicate with us here, I hope you do not prove me to be wrong. Respectfull Yours, Ben
posted: April 12, 2006 EST
Bentley wrote:
typo's- attracted
respectfully yours Ben, it's getting late :-P
posted: April 12, 2006 EST
.:webmaster:. wrote:
Thanks for your open and honest answer Doug.
posted: April 12, 2006 EST
Pastor Doug Hoag wrote:
First, I received an e-mail from Marty (I forgot his last name) who wants to come to my church this Sunday and yell at me. I went to hit the reply button and accidentally deleted the e-mail. I guess I had my head in my ass. I apologize Marty, but if you read this, the church is Trinity Lutheran Church, 508 N. Cedar Rd., New Lenox, IL. Services this Sunday are at 7 and 10:30 am. We have hot breakfast after the 7 am service. If you can make it we'd love to have you! Oh, and if you want to yell at me during my sermon, can I request you not using any expletives? Of course I was being a bit facetious and engaging in a little hyperbole in my post. In fact, I would prefer you talk to me privately, and leave my minions out of it! ;)
Whew! Now onto matters at hand.
Ben, I understand your concerns. I don't seek to convert anyone. I wouldn't know what to do if I ever did. And I promise I won't pray for your eternal soul (whatever that means). I consider myself a student of life, and I search for diamonds in the rough. I truly believe that every person on this planet has hidden treasure, and I try to find them. In my way of thinking there's no such thing as human debris. I know some people who have been royally screwed and may consider themselves a waste of space. But underneath the damage there are gems.
This is not to say that I'm good at it or that I always succeed. Sometimes I get frustrated, but that doesn't change the core of who I am.
I do not think gay people are gay to thumb their noses at God. I do not believe it is a chosen lifestyle. Those who believe that it is never seem to hold heterosexuals to the same standard.
I hope that someday humanity will find ways to get rid of the checkerboard mentality which seeks to compartmentalize and pigeon-hole people, and realize that we are all in life together. I'm not a fan of boxes-- the man box, the woman box, the gay box, the six-foot nose hairs box, etc. Boxes bury treasures even deeper.
When a gem is discovered and that person learns to identify with it, I call that resurrection! It's beautiful to watch. Miraculous is a better word for it!
I believe all of this because this is what I see Jesus doing in his ministry.
Gotta run. I'll finish later!
Doug
posted: April 12, 2006 EST
emptycan wrote:
Hei, Doug,
It's quite interesting if it's ok for you and your minitry to open your name and church name like you did.
Do you teach or preach what you wrote down here to your congregation? If so, does your congregation have no problem with the teaching and still gives the donation (offering) to your church?
Or do you live a schizophrenic double life? You say something here and preach totally different thinngs there?
I am waiting for your answer...^^
posted: April 12, 2006 EST
Pastor Doug Hoag wrote:
Emptycan,
In short answer to your question-- yes, that's what I do teach at my church. However, the issue of homosexuality doesn't come up very often. No one asks me about it. When the issue does arise, I ask people to read the texts in question more carefully.
I just had lunch with a colleague, and we started talking about Romans 1. I asked him to give me his take on it, and I'd give him mine. He said exactly what I was going to say. The issue in Romans 1 is worship and idolatry, not homosexual orientation. I felt less like a maverick after that conversation. There are other Christians like me.
I'll readily admit that sometimes I'm inconsistent in my teaching. I'll say something in one place and turn around and say the complete opposite in another place. It's not a habit-- I'm usually a straight shooter. Occasionally it is brought to my attention, and I end up eating crow.
Honestly I don't know if people accept what I say or don't. It appears that they do, although sometimes appearances can be deceiving. I generally don't encourage uniformity. Just because I say something doesn't mean that it is necessarily true or must be believed upon penalty of death. I encourage people to voice disagreements if they ever have a tough time swallowing something I said or did. I do my very best not to get defensive, but engaging and intelligent dialogue leads to patience and understanding.
Gotta run, again!
Truly Yours,
Doug
posted: April 12, 2006 EST
Pastor Doug Hoag wrote:
Continuing on in answer to Ben... I do not think that homosexuals and atheists are demon possessed or satanic. I have my own thoughts on demons and Satan, but I could get long-winded. So, instead of the War and Peace version here's the Reader's Digest Condensed version:
I believe that Satan existed at one time but does not exist anymore. He was destroyed in the lake of fire describe in Revelation, which served as a metaphor of the destruction of Jerusalem and Temple in 70 CE. The warnings about hell and damnation spoken by Jesus were mostly aimed at the religious elite. It's also interesting that Jesus called them "snakes" and "brood of vipers" (words normally associated with Satan), meaning that it was they who were the satanists!!
The metaphors of weeping and gnashing of teeth, the never-dying worms, etc. etc. became solid realities when Rome completely leveled Jerusalem and environs. Jerusalem became then an odorous extension of its own garbage dump. In short, hell!
Perhaps Jesus saw legalistic religion itself as the enemy, as being the purveyors of hell? I think so!
Perhaps in leaving the church and becoming an ex-Christian, you have unwittingly and unintentionally become a follower of Jesus?
I'd better quit before this post actually becomes War and Peace!
Cordially,
Doug
posted: April 13, 2006 EST
Bentley wrote:
Hi Doug, I was just wondering what you think about my hypotheses that I originally poste and questioned you about, please read below.
If your almighty God will allow people to be born Siamese twins, with heads joined together, people born without arms, limbs, blind, albino, deaf, with cancer, etc. etc.
Then it could be that a person could be born with the wrong sexual preferences mentally wrong sex chromosomes with a body of a man, but mentally atracted to the same sex.
The same could be said for a female born with the wrong sexual preferences mentally wrong sex chromosomes, with a body of a female, but mentally atracted to the same sex or bisexual.
Just wondering do you think this is the a reason for homosexuality?
posted: April 14, 2006 EST
Pastor Doug Hoag wrote:
I believe you're asking me if I think there's a biological component that could lead to a homosexual orientation.
I don't know, but it would appear that way. I wonder if there's a biological component that leads to heterosexuality or bisexuality. Why am I heterosexual? It certainly wasn't a decision I made one morning upon waking. It's something completely out of my control, almost as if the "choice" was made for me by numerous factors.
I think sexual orientation has many causation factors, therefore making it a very complicated issue. We should seek to understand the homosexual person, not so that we can discover clues as to why he/she has that disposition, but so that we cease treating such persons as anomalies. Myself, I don't understand the homosexual orientation, and I probably never will. But that's my burden, and I don't blame the homosexual person.
As the human race continues to evolve, it may turn out that we who are considered "normal" (whatever that might mean) are actually the anomalies.
As far as people with various birth defects-- why do we call them defects? It implies that they are defective and that the only thing to do is turn them into objects of pity or derision. My personal belief is that every person we see is God in disguise, in order that we may know ourselves and discover that there are no mistakes. The dwelling of God is with and in people, not in the sky or a distant galaxy, thrusting anathemas down on a helpless human populace. My theological views are very incarational.
I hope I answered your question, Ben, and would welcome your comments.
posted: April 14, 2006 EST
Pastor Doug Hoag wrote:
Ben,
I agree with you that the Biblical authors were not exactly geniuses. They were products of their time. This is why I keep insisting that Christians understand that the Bible was not written to us citizens of 21 century America.
"You shall not covet your neighbors ox..." Well, my neighbor doesn't have an ox. In fact, I don't know anyone who has an ox. But even if I did, I don't want one. What am I going to do with an ox in suburban Chicago, ride it on the freeway?
I treat the Gospels the same way. Fundamentalist Christians interpret the Gospels as if they were written to America in general, and to them in particular. And so they prooftext and harmonize them to death, ending up with a burgoise moral system that everyone is expected to comform to.
This is a horrible approach to Scripture. But I want to suggest a different approach that is intellectually stimulating and faith affirming. I'll keep it short.
I suggest that the Bible be approached as a long and arduous narrative about a beleagured people trying to understand their situtation in terms of what God was doing and how God was involved. Remembering that the Ancient Near East was very tribal, had seen powerful and brutal empires come and go, it is very easy to see the tribal biases on the pages of the Bible. But since a nation's power was believed to be directly proportional to the power of its god(s), of course the god(s) will share their prejudices. This is why we see Yahweh portrayed as a monster and a tyrant. "Well, of course he is! Look at what we have to live through!"
I'll have to finish another time. It's getting late!
posted: April 15, 2006 EST
emptycan wrote:
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
posted: April 15, 2006 EST
emptycan wrote:
Hei, Doug,
So your view of bible is it is an obsolete and not necessarilly pertinent book to today's people. If so, where is the authority of your xtian belief? In another word, how can you claim yourself as xtian, if you discredit the bible. Why don't you turn to agnosticist or atheist?
And I am curious of your view of other religions. Do you believe that buddhists or muslims can be also saved although they do not believe nor confess that jesus is their god?
posted: April 15, 2006 EST
Pastor Doug Hoag wrote:
Emptycan (and all interested),
Actually, I don't think the Bible is obsolete or impertinent to people today at all. The way it is fundamentalistically (is there such a word?)interpreted makes it obsolete and impertinent. When we take ancient texts and project them thousands of years into the future from when they were written and expect people to conform to the letter, the effort will quickly degenerate into slapstick. This is what I see happening in Religious Right-Wing Fundamentalism. See my previous post about coveting your neighbor's ox. Absolutely goofy!
I read the Bible as an ancient text. Why? Because that's what it is! So, how can it serve as a basis for faith today? I will make an attempt, albeit brief, to point in some direction that I hope makes some sense.
As I mentioned previously, the Bible is a lengthy narrative about a nation trying to understand its identity and relationship to its god and other nations in the Ancient Near East. As is true for all nations, they were birthed, went through some growing pains and troubling times, experienced an ascendency to power, occupied new territory, formed tribes, established a form of centralized government, had a civil war, headed off invaders, built palaces and monuments and high places (temples), was occupied and taken into exile by a foreign power, returned home to start over again. All with the mentality that their god will help them to rule the world, if not now, then someday.
Israel had such a history. I'm don't waste a lot of time going into questions whether or not the events actually happened. Those questions to me are simply becoming increasingly irrelevant. But for the sake of this post, I personally believe that most of the events actually happened. However, the more important questions to me are these-- why did this particular author decide to write this? What were the events that precipitated this writer's interpretation of what his god was doing? In doing this I begin to identify some undercurrents and contours of ancient Hebrew thought. In short, what we see in the Old Testament is that the Israelites became just like their neighbors. But they felt in their bones that their god had chosen them to be somehow different. This was their ongoing struggle.
For the sake of brevity I'll fast forward to the first century, common era.
The Jewish people were at their wits end. Their god had not done for them what he promised. Yes, they lived in the land of Israel. Yes, they had the Torah and oral traditions. Yes, they had their temple and synagogues. But the problem was simply that they were under foreign domination (Rome). Yes, the Romans were brutal. Yes, the Jews were being unfairly taxed. But that wasn't the worst thing about Rome. What was the worst thing? The Romans didn't worship the true god in this god's favorite city (Jerusalem) and its temple. Couple this with the fact that, in the Jewish worldview, the Romans were of the "wrong" hereditary stock and you begin to see a cauldron of brewing hostilities.
But the Jewish people were a hopeful people. Someday, their god would send a messiah (anointed one, king) who will free them from foreign domination, enslave the occupying powers, help them to live in Edenic like conditions, and rule the world. Their god would once again be the god of the whole earth and crowned king!
That's the very big story in a very small nutshell.
Into this seething pot comes Jesus. We can spend a lot of precious time trying to figure out if Jesus actually did this, or really did that, or if Jesus actually existed. Those are interesting questions, but I think there is one question bigger than all of these:
If Jesus existed, and if he did and said anything close to what is recorded in the canonical gospels, then what was Jesus trying to accomplish, and how was Jesus interpreting (or reinterpreting) the big story of the history of the Jewish nation?
Answer (in short)-- Jesus tells much the same story, but differently.
I'll get into this in my next post. Sorry, but I love cliffhangers!! And I have to get up early tomorrow.
So, relax and drink some alcoholic beverages!!
Doug
P.S.-- If I only had a choice between fundamentalism, liberalism, and atheism/agnosticism, I would choose atheism or agnosticism in a heartbeat! Dietrich Bonhoeffer said that we should live our lives as if God didn't exist. I think there's a vital truth contained in that gem of a quote!
posted: April 15, 2006 EST
Pastor Doug Hoag wrote:
Before I go any further with my posts, I want to make clear that I am not here as a teacher or mentor or evangelist or savior or guru or anything remotely resembling any of these. I came to learn perspectives about life. There are many things about religion that I find to be wonderful. But there are even more things about religion that I find to be rigid and suffocating to the human spirit.
And now, on with the show!
The Jews of the first century common era had various signifiers that identified them, individually and collectively, as the chosen people. This is not an exhaustive list, but Temple, Torah, land, family, monotheism were the important ones. These were the symbols that set them "apart" from anyone else. And someday God was going to glorify Israel by glorifying the symbols. This would have the effect of forcing the gentiles to submit to Israel's and God's reign over all creation during the "age to come" or "the Messianic Age".
Jesus came along and challenged the validity of the symbols. He did this in roughly two ways: 1)Deconstruction of the symbols, and 2)Reconstruction of the symbols by applying them to himself. For brevity, I'll talk about the Jerusalem Temple.
The Temple was God's House. The Holy of Holies was considered to be the center of the universe. It was essentially "God-in-a-box." Any interaction with God was to take place at the temple with priestly mediation-- animal sacrifice, incense, prayers, water rituals, wine rituals, oil rituals. It would be "world HQ" when messiah came.
Jesus trashes the place and quotes Jeremiah 7, which was a prophecy about the temple's destruction by the Babylonians. Jesus was not saying that the place needed reforming. He was saying that the whole place was going to be destroyed. Jesus acted out his message by putting the temple out of business for a couple of hours during Passover, and by extension there would come a time when it would be put out of business permanently. It happened in 70 CE.
The apocalyptic sections of the gospels are about this destruction, not about the end of the space-time continuum. In fact, the book of Revelation is merely commentary on the "doom and gloom" parts of the gospels.
And so when Jesus said, "Repent or perish", he was not warning us today that we need to stop sinning or we'll fry in hell forever. He was telling the Jews of the first century, "Run away from Jerusalem before it is sacked! Don't join the revolt, and don't stick around to protect the temple! It will be your doom!" Everything that they believed would happen to everyone else would happen to them unless they walked away. Paybacks are a bitch!
The people of God were no longer identified by adherence to the Jerusalem system. They were now identified by following Jesus, who was, incarnationally speaking, temple, torah, land, family, and God in one package made of flesh and blood. Jesus and his followers would be Israel.
I'll close with this. Do you realize what you all have done? You have done what Jesus would have done! I'm convinced that Jesus would do the same things today that he did back then, and he would be crucified (or at least kicked out on his ear). Jesus called the temple system what it was, a total manipulation of God and exploitation of people. It was a dark closet instead of the light of the world.
Yesterday was Easter. In my sermon, I gave the Bonhoeffer quote and offered this advice to the packed pews: "Leave God alone!" God is not in the business of exalting our way of life or keeping us in line. God raises the dead, and God does it all by hisself. Resurrection isn't something that will happen to dead bodies in some undefined future, or the last day of history, or the end of the world. It happens now to dead hearts as we live in this present age.
How much of the above do you have to believe? None of it. I could be completely off the wall. But I see a lot of hearts coming alive and being unburdened on this website! A very Christ-like thing to do. Well done!
With Gratitude,
Doug
P.S.-- You won't be hearing much from me anymore. But I'll be checking in occasionally to see what you're up to and maybe post a question or two.
posted: April 18, 2006 EST
Bentley wrote:
Hi Doug, Thank you for hanging around some, I think you are a honest and sincere person, I also think that you may be struggling with what you're trying to preach, when your innerself is rejecting what you truly know inside that most of what the bible teaches could not possibly be true. One must remember that all Middle Eastern religions sprung out of the Opium Capital of the World, and other exotic drugs also.
Doug, please read this,
Writen by Barry on his testimony April 17, 2006 very brilliant!
I couldn't help but think that these people were really gullible and unquestioning. From this seed other doubts emerged. I started to question the whole thing about Jesus. This is where my questioning led:
"God creates flawed humans. He creates an evil being to tempt these humans to do bad things. He decides he won't let these humans into heaven to be with him because they do bad things called sins. Of course, since God created everything he was the one responsible for creating sin and evil in the first place, which is probably the reason God decides to relent 4000 years later. He will send himself to Earth as his son to save everyone. So, he impregnates a young virgin and she gives birth to him. Now oddly enough God is both in heaven and on Earth at the same time. God prays to himself and calls himself father. Then God has himself tortured and brutally murdered. Now in doing this he somehow atones for the sins that he himself created. Believing that God (in the form of his son) did this for us gets us into heaven. However, if we don’t believe that God did this for us, his atonement does not apply and we are sent south to spend eternity with his nemesis."
I couldn't help but think that if I were God I would do things in a much less complicated way. Like, I would create perfect humans, so I wouldn't have to go through all that suffering. Or I would just forgive sins without requiring any blood sacrifice. Or maybe I wouldn’t bother creating humans in the first place and just create more angels to worship me.
Just plain ole common sense thinking, I love it.
So Doug, thank you for being so patient with us here, I think you may be a wannabe Atheist, but you've got so much face invested, and plus it would be hard to jump off of the golden gravy train, if I'm wrong, please do accept my apology, I mean no harm in saying this, it just appears to me that most preachers are more interested in their finanicial well being, before the god and jesus saves thing, after all, they always pass the collection plate before the preacher begins his speil, and I've never heard a preacher say, Ok everybody, please be sure to leave your wallets and money at home. Every preacher I meet on the street, they ask, what you doing these days, are you making any money? Just something to think about Doug.
I wish you all the best for your life and I hope you will come back some day and say to us, You guys shut the F**K Up, Ok this the absolute truth, I can prove the Bible is all true or Buddha, or Islam, or something, but until that time, I will stick to my unbeliefs. TC Ben
posted: April 18, 2006 EST
Pastor Doug Hoag wrote:
Ben,
That's cool. I respect your position, which I hope I made clear.
I took no offense at your comments, and in a sense you're right. I do get a salary from the church, and I never tell the congregation to leave their wallets at home. We do have bills to pay, and such. And, yes, I am heavily invested in the church, emotionally speaking. But I am not seeking to leave because I'm trying to be an agent of change within the church. I want people to think about why they believe what they believe, and not just accept it just because some guy in a robe standing in a pulpit tells them what to believe.
I will continue to encourage critical reading of the Bible, while at the same time identifying and following the threads of the biblical tapestry.
I may be a closet atheist-- who knows? I've endured times of bullshit and doubt.
So, thanks for chatting, Ben and emptycan! You guys are great! Maybe we'll meet again soon!
Truly Yours,
Doug
posted: April 18, 2006 EST
emptycan wrote:
Hi, Doug,
I must apologize that I did not (actually could not) check your answer to my question. I tried to find where i commented more than several times, but I didn't find.
I appreciate your answer and admire your sermon. I just guess that most of your congregation must have advanced education to digest your teachings. ^^
Anyway, I have tarted to have a dangerous feeling of liking you...ha ha (^.^)
And I love Ben's ruthless remarks-- "you've got so much face invested, and plus it would be hard to jump off of the golden gravy train"
and
"I hope you will come back some day and say to us, You guys shut the F**K Up, Ok this the absolute truth"
My love to you, guys.
And...I am not sad because Doug will come back soon to say that "You guys shut the F**K Up, Ok this the absolute truth." ha ha (-.^)
Blessed life to Doug and Ben...
from totally empty head
posted: April 18, 2006 EST
wrote:
i found this site searching the web for things to say to christians who approch me with their nonsense.
I have always wondered how people could believe in these fairy tales.
I mean so many people for so long how can everybody be so i dont want to use the word but stupid.
I had figured they were just scared of dying. Or brainwashed since youth or scared their pack will turn on them or fear of being alone
But i think i found a better terminology on one of the other pages on this website.
Its the survival instint like we cant stop breathing i guess their brains just react to it being the only way to live forever.
But any organized religion just exits out of total selfishness.
I just cant believe a person can believe and waste time and effort on crazy fairy tales from 2000 years ago.
And im statring to get mad about it
the tv evangelists and churchs sucking money from old people.
Politicions who are making decisions for us saying they believe and follow the fairy tales.
How can so many people be so stupid and scared.
posted: May 20, 2006 EST
Bentley wrote:
Great questions Victor, you're just using you brain in it's natural state, not brainwashed.
Religions use emotional childhood fear, a threat imposed by how you behave, but if misbehave, you must answer to the father, Paul recognized this and used it to manupilate and embellish the NT and incorperated fear as a punishment for not believing his lies. This way he found that could control masses of people and their possessions.
Thanks Victor and post some more, and check out my blog, just click below and leave your comments, just whatever ya think is fine.
http://nomorefakegods.blogspot.com/
posted: May 20, 2006 EST
wrote:
The Old Testament books were written down as the Word of God and recognized as such from the moment of their writing. Beginning with the words etched into stone by the finger of God himself, God's people recognized the Lord's writing as it came to them through their leaders and prophets. The books of Moses were recognized as scripture by Israel's earliest judges and kings, who referred to them in their writings as Scripture. From the time of Samuel, the words and writings of the prophets were kept in libraries, along with the histories. The Hebrew Bible, which Christians refer to as the Old Testament, was widely accepted and agreed upon by Jews well before Jesus' time. Thus the various councils that supposedly determined what would be Scripture actually only confirmed what was already widely accepted as the Word of God.
The Old Testament was begun by Moses circa 1446 BC and was completed by 400 BC. (About 400 years before Christ, according to other Jewish writings, the voice of God "ceased to speak to them directly" and the prophets "had fallen asleep," thus the 400 years of scriptural silence prior to the birth of the Messiah.) The Old Testament is written almost entirely in Hebrew, with small portions of Daniel and Ezra in Aramaic.
The Old Testament covers the history of the nation of Israel and the nations who dealt with Israel. It begins with creation and follows the Jewish people through the flood, the Exodus, the period of the judges, the reign of the kings, and finally into exile under the Babylonian Empire. They include all the laws God's people are to observe and the nation's history, as well as prophesy.
Old Testament Documentation
Both Old and New Testament documents were copied with excruciating attention to detail. When an entire scroll had been copied by hand, one letter at a time, if one mistake was made, the scroll was destroyed. In addition, the Jewish copyists of the Hebrew Scriptures adhered to detailed requirements in copying. We looked at this list in studying New Testament documentation, but it bears a second look. (Taken from Don't Check Your Brains at the Door, Josh McDowell and Bob Hostetler, and The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict, Josh McDowell):
1) Each copy had to be made on a brand new writing surface and had to be prepared in a specific way;
2) Each copy had to be written in a certain number of columns of thirty-letters width, with a certain number of lines to each column;
3) Each copy had to be written in a certain color and quality of ink;
4) Not even the tiniest letter could be written from memory, as one would glance at the word "to" and write the letters "t" and "o" before glancing back at the original, but every letter was copied singly from the original;
5) No letter could connect with or overlap another letter. The distance between each letter was measured by a single hair or thread;
6) Every letter of every page and book was counted and compared against the original. The number of times each letter of the alphabet occurred in a book was counted and compared against the original. The middle letter of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament) and the middle letter of the entire Hebrew Bible were computed and indicated in the text. If one of these calculations was incorrect, the copy was discarded.
7) The Masoretes, who were responsible for copying Biblical text from AD 500 to 950, calculated everything that could be calculated. They numbered the verses, words, and letters of every book. They calculated the middle word and middle letter of each.
"These trivialities, as we may rightly consider them, had yet the effect of securing minute attention to the precise transmission of the text.; and they are but an excessive manifestation of a respect for the sacred Scriptures which in itself deserves nothing but praise. The Masoretes were indeed anxious that not one jot nor tittle, not one smallest letter nor one tiny part of a letter, of the Law should pass away or be lost."
Frederic Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts
"Jews preserved it as no other manuscript has ever been preserved ... They kept tabs on every letter, syllable, word, and paragraph. They had special classes of men within their culture whose sole duty was to preserve and transmit these documents with practically perfect fidelity-scribes, lawyers, masoretes. Who ever counted the letters and syllables and words of Plato or Aristotle? Cicero or Seneca?"
Bernard Ramm, Protestant Christian Evidences
The Old Testament has been shown to be reliable in at least three major ways:
1) textual transmission (the accuracy of the copying process down through history),
2) the confirmation of the Old Testament by hard evidence uncovered through archaeology, and
3) documentary evidence also uncovered through archaeology.
Information on documentary evidence and textual transmission follow:
Masoretic Text
The earliest Old Testament manuscript before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls dated about AD 916, called the Masoretic Text, after the Masoretes, who from about AD 500 to 950 were responsible for preserving and editing Biblical text, as well as other Jewish writings. It was been the primary Hebrew text used for translations and transcriptions until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
The Masoretes are not the only Jewish group to have had charge of the scriptures and other Jewish writings, as the following list shows. Each represented a group of scholars whose entire lives were dedicated to preserving accurately the Hebrew Bible and sacred Jewish writings.
! Masoretes (AD 500-950)
! Talmudists (circa AD 100 to 500)
! Tannaim ("teachers" or "repeaters") (100 BC to AD 200)
! Zugoth ("pairs" of textual scholars)(first and second centuries BC)
! Sopherim (from the Hebrew for "scribes") were the Jewish scholars and custodians of the text between the fifth and third centuries BC.
The comparatively late date of the Masoretic Text and the lack of other preserved manuscripts is not startling, consideri