The reason for the immorality of God in the bible is the immorality of the men who wrote it. In 1 samuel 15:3, we see an early act of terrorist--murdering infants in the name of God.

God is not an entity, he is an excuse. The God of the bible is a way to justify immoral acts--God told me to do it, so it's ok.

Evolution, specifically evolutionary psychology when dealing with morality, is doing away with a need for Abrahamic religion as surely as Darwin's original explanation of biological evolution slayed the creation myth. Man is a moral animal because we have evolved as a social animal, with built in feelings about things like empathy, a need for acceptance, and justice. We express those feelings in our social mores and laws, which we have honed with a couple millenia of experience. To see that man's morality is superior to the Bible's, consider slavery. The Bible doesn't condemn slavery, but most people on earth now do. It took the superior morality of man to make it happen.

Kevin, I would encourage you to read "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins, he explains why we have morals and ethics as humans and that it has not one thing to do with a higher power such as god. He has many other books as well, and there are other good authors referenced on this website.

The bible contains some of the most vile and cruel acts commited by humans in the name of god, and it is pure fiction written by men who wanted power and control.

Christians cherry pick the hell out of biblical writings choosing only that which will make god and jesus loving and caring. They do not want to acknowledge the contradictions as you have pointed out because that would burst their immortality bubble and mean they had been duped and brainwashed.

Immortality is a fantasy all about living forever in a blissful eupohoric world. It is nonsense, and the voice of reason is calling you Kevin, you should listen carefully.

Good luck!

I too am where you are at Kevin,

God tells us to love our enemies and do good to them. Yet, he himself does not. Even the bible says that if you love those that love you what good is that. The true mark of love is to be able to love your enemies, and yet, god does not do this. What a hypocrite he is! He wants to send everyone to hell, just because they dont see any evidence that he is anymore real then any other false god.

I occasionally slip up and say, under my breath, "Help me with this, God," but I don't feel hypocritical when I do, because I am not talking to the God of the bible. I am talking to the God that gave me a brain, and expects me to use it.

My God can truly do anything, anytime it wants. My God would never murder his own son to appease himself. My God doesn't need sacrifices of any kind.

It's OK for me to rail and scream at my God, because, for whatever reasons it made me and the universe, it knows exactly what I am made of and what I am thinking. I just have to assume that I am only letting off steam, and will eventually get busy and try to solve my own problems.

My God is a work in progress. Nobody tells me what my God wants, because I am the one who designed her.

I clicked on "Edit" under Bible God, a long time ago and rewrote or redesigned my God.

I am perfectly content to let the Bronze age folks, take orders from their God, and it's only natural, because they designed him.
Dan (You can have faith in a God of your own design)

Most Christians are very wicked people! Not all I would say about 90%. Very Cold and manipulative. They all manipulate the hell out of each other. Once you realize this you'll know how to play the game too. The pastors are the master manipulators! Its a big mind game and I would not wish it on my worst enemy! I actually thought about going back to church again after a five year absence until I was exposed to the truth again and then I came back to my senses. Its pure craziness! These people are crazy. Once your exposed to the reality of Christians and Christianity it is very hard to go back! I don't care what anyone says! I hope I never get suckered again into going back!

”I’ve written this post in the realisation that I could be mistaken, that it is possible that I’ve missed something. If so, please let me know where I’ve gone wrong.” Since you asked, I will provide my interpretation (a believer’s interpretation) and see if it might alter your opinion in any slight way...

”For arguments sake, let’s accept that this divine moral sense exists. Now, the problem is this: as a human being I must have been endowed with a slightly different moral sense than that of the God of the Bible. Why? Well, there are instances of God’s conduct that differ substantially from what I, and many others, consider to be ‘moral’.” I would propose that yes, we are all endowed with a guiding moral sense; but like any skill or ability we must hone and train it in order to excel in its use. In the case of morality we must look at the world around us, examine what benefits society and what harms it and learn to judge what is right from wrong using reasoning. But most importantly we must believe that we are probably using flawed judgments and must confer with others who also seek moral perfection to find our flaws. To do this Christians attend bible studies and talk with other believers with the hope of identifying and removing these flaws. And, because of faith, we look at the bible’s teachings as a measuring stick to identify right from wrong. I have many times found my ideas in conflict with biblical teachings but learned that I was wrong only after studying the passages and thinking about them, and in many cases testing out the new ideas. For example, it used to be incomprehensible that God would tell us to take an “eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth” (Exodus 21:23) until I realized God was simply limiting the freedoms we are given. He was not saying that taking revenge was a good thing but was limiting our freedom to do harm those who had harmed us. It was God’s way of limiting our retribution by not allowing us to take the whole herd of cattle from a person who stole a single cow from us. So, when I read God’s word it was my own interpretation rather than God’s idea of morality that was faulty. I have been a Christian for a very long time and my sense of morality is at least reasonably well centered, but I am still learning and improving my ways. As I said, it takes lots of practice to get it right. A problem which I perceive for non-believers is that they have no single perfect concept of moral perfection to follow and thus are seldom united on moral issues and even find many of God’s actions immoral as you commented.

”Many would consider it immoral to kill an innocent human being, especially if it is a child. The God of the Old Testament, however, ordered the Israelite nation to kill children (1 Samuel 15:3). As a Christian, would you kill a child if God ordered you to do it? If God orders it, is it moral? ” The reason our choices are moral or immoral is because they either follow or are contrary to God’s commands. In the Old Testament it was forbidden to eat the meat of cloven hooved animals, but later that law was removed and with it the immorality (Acts 10:9-18). If you realize that every command God makes serves a purpose for the greater good you would see that even His command to kill the children is a teaching tool. The passage from 1 Samuel 15:2 tells us that God was punishing the Amalekites for their actions against Israel; and as you noted, He chose to take the nation’s children. Why not? Isn’t God in charge of all life as well as the afterlife? Couldn’t He send them back to this Earth as children for different parents if He chose? And isn’t everything He does for our improvement? I tell you yes, He does everything for our improvement. Now regarding your question about whether Christians should obey if God ordered them to kill a child, I tell you yes: Christians should obey. But before obeying such a command they should follow scripture’s instructions and test to make sure such instructions are from the Lord as Gideon did in Judges 6:34-40. After all, Abraham, the OT’s earliest patriarch, was commended for obeying such a command and was not allowed to complete the task. So, I have no belief that God would ever ask us to do such a thing again, and even less that He would allow us carry it out without a very good reason.

”Many would consider it immoral to implement the death penalty for mundane, victimless actions. Again, the God of the Bible seems to act otherwise: think of the death of Uzzah (2 Samuel 6:3-8) who was struck down dead for simply trying to stop the Ark of the Covenant from toppling over. Also think of the thousands who perished simply because King David held a census (2 Samuel 24:1-15). And what of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11) who were killed for simply lying?” Which crime is worse: killing your neighbor or refusing to do what the god of all existence tells you to do (assuming of course that god exists)? If by killing your neighbor you simply send them to the next phase in their existence I contend that it is refusing the commands of the Almighty. Of course this would not be an acceptable response if God does not exist. But then again, if God does not exist then who is to say that the killing is morally wrong? In the case of the thousands who perished in 2 Samuel 24, it was not because of the census that they were killed; it was because of God’s anger at the Israelites (2 Samuel 24:1); it was for their disobedience, the response of which took place during the census. Ananias and Sapphira lied to the Lord and were punished as a warning to those who would follow, not because they were any more or less sinful than those around them. Likewise, Uzzah’s death was a teaching tool for those who would follow. It was God setting up the rules for how this game of life is played. The ultimate example of God teaching us by using the “death penalty for mundane, victimless actions” can be seen in the death of Jesus. Jesus did not die on the cross in order to inherit eternal life; he never lost the reward since he never sinned and could have died an old man and still claimed it. He also did not need to die on the cross to inherit us as his servants since he was perfect and would inherit all that the Father had as the one and only heir to the throne. No, the only reason Jesus died on the cross is because we would not otherwise listen to his word. We would have allowed his story to fade away as a happy fairy tale. Thus, the “death penalty for mundane, victimless actions” holds significant importance to those who seek to become moral.

”Many would consider it illogical to hold individuals accountable for the crimes of their parents or their ancestors. According to Exodus 20:5 and 2 Samuel 12:7-14, the God of the Bible seems to hold individuals guilty by association.” This is not as illogical or unfair as it may first appear. The choices we make affect the people around us, most logically our families; and it is only right and necessary that others would be affected so that people doing wrong would be encouraged to do what is right, and people doing right would be encouraged to continue. If, for example, a neighbor chooses to use cocaine and becomes addicted he may choose to steal from homes within the neighborhood to support his addiction. This action results in the community encouraging or forcing the addicted person to seek help and to correct the behavior. Similarly, a neighbor who maintains his home’s appearance increases the value of the neighboring homes thus benefiting others by his/her own actions. This is the “guilt by association” which God has set into place which is here to help us improve both as individuals and members of communities. So you see, the “guilt by association” which God speaks of is not as illogical or unfair as it first appears.

”Many would consider it just for a person to be judged by their actions, but according to conservative Christian doctrine, we are not saved by who we are in terms of character, or by the deeds that we perform. Instead, we are judged on the small act of belief. Mass murderers who surrender to Jesus on their deathbeds will be welcomed into heaven, but those who do not believe in the Christian message, but who have devoted their lives to charity and social causes, will go to hell.” Why would the judgment of a person’s actions be more fair than the judgment of a person’s motives? If you were a deity in charge of a minion who killed a deer for food, wouldn’t you have more affection for that minion if they killed the deer for food and did so as a sacrifice to please you? And if you kept giving food to the minion who killed for food alone wouldn’t you become tired of feeding that minion? And if that non-believing minion woke up on the day of its death and prayed honestly for forgiveness, wouldn’t you show mercy and forgive them? To me, this is evidence of God’s mercy and should be a reason we praise Him and a realization of how much better than us God is. A friend recently reminded me that even as Jesus was being whipped by the Roman soldiers before his crucifiction He was loving and forgiving them. I know that I am not that forgiving and merciful but I hope to be some day.

”When I read the Bible, these are some of the questions that I ponder: why does God order humans to follow a moral system that he himself does not adhere to? Why are some of his actions in conflict with the moral sense that many people – including most Christians – follow today? Why the double standard? ” I would most certainly be interested to know where God tells us to follow a moral system which He does not follow, since I don’t see it. When I read the bible I see God teaching us how to honor and respect others, to give rather than to receive, and to show patience when patience is not easy. And not only does God tell us to do these things He shows us; most clearly through Jesus, but also by having patience and mercy toward us as we fail while learning. God shows mercy by not punishing us for our many mistakes. It is people who are so very hard on each other, not God. Just look what happens to believers who prove they are sinners. Despite the fact that believers openly recognize they are sinners they are called hypocrites and all sorts of other names. How can you be a hypocrite if you openly acknowledge yourself as a sinner? Still, the name calling continues and the believers are held to a higher standard because of their beliefs. In this it is evident that God does “practice what He preaches.”
As for your question about “why are some of [God’s] actions in conflict with the moral sense that many people – including most Christians – follow today,” I contend that they are not. I have no doubt that God’s ways are perfect and when I find I don’t understand His morality I question why such a statement was made and seek understanding through scientific reasoning and logic, verifying my findings by comparing them against well documented proofs; and to date, the bible has always proven victorious over my interpretation. So I don’t see this double standard you speak of. I simply see misinterpretations and misunderstandings of what God has said. If I have failed to answer this question adequately, please rephrase it and I will attempt to do so. I’m a bit uncomfortable with my response, believing it to be less than adequate.

”Am I interpreting the Bible correctly here?” I find it quite puzzling that you would ask non-believers whether you are interpreting biblical things correctly. I find many inconsistencies on these threads and hope to correct a few of them, as our Lord allows. If I have aided you in your quest for answers then I welcome you to ask others. If not then I pray you find them where you can.

Peace to you and your house forever!

Angry God, Angry People
http://www.world-science.net/othernews/070228_god-violence.htm

An article proving with psychological tests that belief in an angry god makes people more prone to anger and violence themselves.
...just following god's example?

Neo: "But most importantly we must believe that we are probably using flawed judgments..."

Like, many of us believe you are making a flawed statement right now? Should we vote, on your flawed statements? If we vote unanimously, that your statement is ridiculous, does that make give our votes more "perfection"?

Why? And, whatever answer you provide, can you explain why Christians are different? If we are all biologically unable to use good moral judgment because of original sin, then, how does one get rid of it? By saying "I believe" in Christianity? You have got to be kidding.

Neo: "...and must confer with others who also seek moral perfection to find our flaws."

Again, if we are all flawed and thus, not capable of making moral judgments, then why would we ask another flawed person for their opinion?

Neo: "To do this Christians attend bible studies and talk with other believers with the hope of identifying and removing these flaws."

So, a flawed person can make a flawed decision to be a flawed Christian, who can confer with other flawed people in a group, so they can make a "better" decision? So, the more flawed people that come together, the less likely they are to make a flawed moral decision?

Neo: "And, because of faith, we look at the bible’s teachings as a measuring stick to identify right from wrong."

So, does "faith" remove you as being "flawed"? You must "believe", without any evidence (called "faith), that you can actually "read" the bible, without flawed eyes, and get the right interpretation. But, you do this as a flawed person, Neo.

When do you finally get away from yourself, so that you can make perfect judgments... or is that possible... if not, then you don't have that ability, and are no better than a group of lets say, "non-believer jurors" in a courtroom, making a decision on the moral action of another person.

Explain, Neo, how a Christian, is "more capable" of making the "better" moral judgment in a society which has many non-believers who can equally confer with others in a secular society to "make the best decision".

If there isn't, a way for you to discern between the Christian and the non-Christian, Neo, then what is the point of Christianity.

I just bothered to read neocognitron's sycophantic spiel and have to make a few notes:

"As I said, it takes lots of practice to get it right."

It takes lot's of practice to convince yourself of the made up excuses.

"If you realize that every command God makes serves a purpose for the greater good you would see that even His command to kill the children is a teaching tool. The passage from 1 Samuel 15:2 tells us that God was punishing the Amalekites for their actions against Israel; and as you noted, He chose to take the nation’s children."

The infants and the sucklings never took action against Israel.
Ah, who cares, just kill 'em all, let god sort 'em out.

"Why not? Isn’t God in charge of all life as well as the afterlife? Couldn’t He send them back to this Earth as children for different parents if He chose?"

Wow!?
Sure he could, being omnipotent, (I argue that all the time), but you know reincarnation is not a biblical concept, in fact it's explicitly opposed by it.

Hebrews 9:27 “And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment.”


Neocognitron you've proved yourself a gutless sycophant, and a morally sick one at that.
I don't think there's anything more I care to point out to you.

People who think that morality flows from religion, for example, using the biblical stories from the Old and New Testaments, are simply kidding themselves. In fact, the Bible is littered with tons of immorality masquerading as morality; the Bible is a book about hypocrisy, about a capricious malevolent son of a bitch doing or saying things with total ignorance of the harm or consequencies of his alleged speeches/actions affecting humanity. Kevin, you have cited a handful, but there is a lot more of such trash in the Bible. I have given up Christianity chiefly as a result of reading the Bible; I cannot believe people can still continue worshipping such a God, [question of existence aside].

Morality is something that has evolved with human evolution, through thousands of years of ascertaining and experiencing what is socially acceptable, what contributes to the welfare and happiness of the individual and the society as a whole.

Anyone who believes in the Bible God has to view him as he has been portrayed; if the Bible author[s] wrote nonsense, then the people who believe the Bible as the gospel of God are just believing in nonsense; if the Bible is seen as a book of absolute truths, then the truth is that its chief character, aka God, had committed atrocities that can be viewed as more than sufficient to sentence him to the gallows.

SpaceMonk,
"Sure he could, being omnipotent, (I argue that all the time), but you know reincarnation is not a biblical concept, in fact it's explicitly opposed by it", I have to say that on the contrary, Christ himself clearly projected the concept of reincarnation when he said:
[Matthew 17.11/12]: "To be sure, Elijah comes and will restore all things. But I tell you, Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him, but have done to him everything they wished. In the same way the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands." [Matthew 17.13]: Then the disciples understood that he was talking to them about John the Baptist.

There are other passages wherein Christ talked of John the Baptist being a reincarnation of Elijah.

And this is all from the New Testament. So what do Christians have to say about reincarnation? That Christ was talking nonsense or something else?

Neo,
Do you really think the bible is the best inspired word,
that God, could inspire those bronze age tribal people with?

After inspiring those folk who thought the earth was flat, and the center of the universe, to write an instruction book for living, that is so incomprehensible, bizarre, incongruous, and virtually without relevance to us today, people like you, who are infected by the incurable Christian virus, spend a lifetime trying to defend it.

Why doesn't God come back now, in the age of information and inspire something a little more comprehensible to his "minions"?

I'll tell you why Neo.
Man created God in his own image! And furthermore you know it!

You have so much of your life invested in the Christian cult that you can never ever escape.

Do you really think an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent,
Omnibenevalent God would have any trouble doing anything perfect the first time?

It wasn't really written by them anyway, but composed and canonized by Constantine's men for the purpose of solidifying his power.

Dan to Neo:
("If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.")

Very interesting Telmi! Jesus clearly indicates reincarnation! I'm sure we'll hear the typical fundy response!

Neo: "I find many inconsistencies on these threads and hope to correct a few of them, as our Lord allows"

Thanks Neo, but no thanks to you and your lord. There are intelligent people on this thread that will prove you wrong every time, much better than I ever could. You are spinning the same apology for your book of giberish, and murderous acts that every other christian does on this site, and we have heard it all before.

The part where you apologize for god for taking the lives of innocent children is sickening, but I have heard that before too. It is frightening, and I wonder if you really understand what you are saying. Maybe if I put it this way it would make a difference to you. Would you kill an innocent child if god told you to?

People hate other people for being a different color, having a different sexual preference, worshiping the wrong god, not believing in god, you name it. They can't mind their own business and live and let live. They send their youth to war to kill other youth all because of a god they have never seen or heard. It is insane, yet it is going on right now.

CARL K said it best:

"Evolution, specifically evolutionary psychology when dealing with morality, is doing away with a need for Abrahamic religion as surely as Darwin's original explanation of biological evolution slayed the creation myth. Man is a moral animal because we have evolved as a social animal, with built in feelings about things like empathy, a need for acceptance, and justice. We express those feelings in our social mores and laws, which we have honed with a couple millenia of experience. To see that man's morality is superior to the Bible's, consider slavery. The Bible doesn't condemn slavery, but most people on earth now do. It took the superior morality of man to make it happen."

So did Mark Twain:

-- Mark Twain, "Bible Teaching and Religious Practice," Europe and Elsewhere (1923)

"There are no witches. The witch text remains; only the practice has changed. Hell fire is gone, but the text remains. Infant damnation is gone, but the text remains. More than two hundred death penalties are gone from the law books, but the texts that authorized them remain.”

I have lived in this world for 59 years, and it took me until I was almost 50 to realise and be happy and thankful that god just isn't there.

Christians are always talking about morality. Funny thing is there is very little of it in churches.

In talking about gods morality it is funny how they sweep things under the carpet just to try and make god look good. The fact of the matter is that morality is or it is not right. A person cannnot split hairs in saying that god has a different morality. The old testiment proves that god is a kind of dictator. After all the way he treated others is no better then Hitler, Saddam, or any other dictators have treated people who did not "toe the mark".

Wake up christians and quit trying to explain away the obvious with such childlike logic.

Further more, christians argue against abortion as "immoral" and against god. However, in the old testament god commanded that pregnant women would be cut open thus killing them and the baby. Is not this abortion? It seems to me that god is confused. Not to mention that the sins of the fathers wont be put on the children etc etc.

Again it is sickning how christians try to explain this stuff away.

"...reincarnation is not a biblical concept, in fact it's explicitly opposed by it",

telmi: "I have to say that on the contrary, Christ himself clearly projected the concept of reincarnation when he said:
[Matthew 17.11/12]:..."

What? The bible contradicting itself?
Why, it's unheard of! ;)

P.S. I like your username.

Actually Telmi, Elijah couldn't really reincarnate because he never died. He was taken up into heaven alive, with those chariots of fire.

Wow. Neo. I think you may have single-handedly pushed this "almost ex-christian" over the edge to "actual ex-christian". Your arguments make it easy to see how Christians, and religionists have used their holy texts to justify all sorts of immorality simply by showing that God did it so it can't be immoral.

Neo said:
To do this Christians attend bible studies and talk with other believers with the hope of identifying and removing these flaws. And, because of faith, we look at the bible’s teachings as a measuring stick to identify right from wrong.

And somehow come to the conclusion that two mutually consenting gay men must be stopped from loving each other (because that inexplicably undermines an entire nation), but it's okay vote en masse for a government who knocks out Iraqi sewage treatment plants with the foreknowledge that it will kill countless innocent people (mostly children). If that isn't enough, said government, supported by and large by Christians, also made sure that those same innocent people could not have access to medicine to cure them of the ailments that were killing them.

The thing is, if you read the Bible, the above makes perfect sense, since God hates both gay people AND the children of infidels, apparently...

Dano,

Yes, I really do think the bible is God’s inspired word. As for your statement about “inspiring those folk who thought the earth was flat,” I presume you are suggesting that the bible caused people to believe this. Since there is nothing in the bible saying it is either flat or spherical my contention is that the bible was not wrong but that man’s interpretation of it was. And yes, it was primarily religious institutions which were resistant to the idea of the world being round. Hopefully they will always remember this mistake and learn from it.

”Why doesn't God come back now, in the age of information and inspire something a little more comprehensible to his "minions"?” I tell you that God is here with us, you and me, even now. He is the reason we are free to have these conversations and to debate His existence. He is the reason our nation chose to be so moral and allows each person to choose his/her own faith (or faithlessness, as the case may be). How can we see him? How can we know His presence? We see him in the face of the lost child reunited with her mother or the sick when visitors arrive to comfort them. We feel God encouraging us when we try to do what is right even when it is not easy and we are given peace when we finish a job knowing we did the best we could. This answer will no doubt befuddle most readers since it is difficult to understand as truth; but the image of God which we all share is our ability for kindness, compassion, generosity, humility, thankfulness, and similar traits. And we feel God’s presence when He encourages us to continue doing what is right by giving us peace or happiness for an honest day’s labor; when we succeed in a difficult task or realize the fulfillment of prayer. So when you ask why God doesn’t come back now I tell you He is here; and He is calling to all who will listen.

As for why His presence isn’t “more comprehensible,” it is a threshing tool; a way of separating those who seriously acknowledge that they are sinners from those who refuse to do so. For if you do not acknowledge God’s existence you are in effect saying there is no true single authority over what is moral or immoral which implies there is also no single perfection; and hence one person’s morality is just as right as the next person’s. And, by claiming there is no single perfection you are arguing that Jesus was not perfect which, if you could imagine, would really anger that kid’s Father. Now, if you were the creator of all life and your creations scoffed at your works (and your son) wouldn’t you be just a bit ticked off at them? After all, you didn’t give them perfect knowledge nor understanding so wouldn’t you expect more gratitude for the gifts you did give? This system of separating believers from non-believers is not for God’s purpose; it is for ours. God can see into our souls and knows our motives so He has no reason to divide us as believers and non-believers other than to let us compare morality and immorality for ourselves. Thus, God can determine if someone is sincere about changing their lives even at the moment of their death, but we can not. So, the difficulty in comprehending God is for our improvement; a teaching tool, if only we will trust enough to learn from it.

”Do you really think an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, Omnibenevalent God would have any trouble doing anything perfect the first time?”. What is imperfect about the universe God has made? Is it because we have wars, famine, pestilence, hatreds, jealousy, crime, etc.? Or is it because we do not see God easily? Or, is it because some are princes and kings while others are paupers? This world has all the resources necessary to feed, clothe and shelter all of the people in it, and many more. But we are not good stewards of our gifts and are self-seeking rather than servants to our neighbors. God has given us the knowledge and abilities necessary to solve many of the world’s problems but we are the cause of our own infirmities. Most people do not plan to pass their wealth down to their children but rather horde it for their own retirement or day-to-day living. This is not a sin or wrong to do, but it is not the wisest course of action. Rather we should live to benefit both those who live around us and those who come after us. Recently North Korea was given many hundreds of millions of dollars with which to feed their starving nation but the money ended up going to wealthy North Korean politicians and to feed and clothe the nation’s military forces. So it is the greedy few who doom the many to continue in their suffering. And it is many like them who make it appear as if God’s creation is somehow imperfect; but this is not God’s will. Ultimately, it is because we have free will and continue to choose unwisely that we are doomed to suffer the punishment which began with Adam and Eve.

I hope this answers the questions you asked and I thank you for the compliment about my Christian “cult.” It is true that I will never escape from it since I remain a captive by choice. The door is open to all who are willing to enter and all are welcome to leave if they so desire; but once you truly accept who God is there is no reason to leave. I am the willing servant of a God who is merciful to those who show mercy and vengeful to those who are vengeful. Praise to His name!

May you prosper in your wisdom!

Neocognitron wrote:
"Dano,
Yes, I really do think the bible is God’s inspired word. As for your statement about “inspiring those folk who thought the earth was flat,” I presume you are suggesting that the bible caused people to believe this. Since there is nothing in the bible saying it is either flat or spherical my contention is that the bible was not wrong but that man’s interpretation of it was."

Dan>>> Neo! Some of your answers in the past have shown a lot more coherence and logic than this one. Are you o/k Neo?

I can't be responsible for the condition of your posterior Neo, after the regulars here see this one!

Worried about you Guy! (dano)

**Since there is nothing in the bible saying it is either flat or spherical my contention is that the bible was not wrong but that man’s interpretation of it was."**

Neo -- the entire first chapter of Genesis was written with the belief that the earth was flat. There are quotes about the four pillars of earth, of God stretching out the heavens, and of their being corners of the Earth. Hell was perceived to be directly below the surface, and Heaven directly above -- hence Jesus ascending upward, while so many others said that they would descend to 'Sheol.' The entire reason why there are only four Gospels is because it was said, "Just as there are four corners of the EArth and four pillars of the Earth, so there are four gospels."

** Now, if you were the creator of all life and your creations scoffed at your works (and your son) wouldn’t you be just a bit ticked off at them? ** No. Because I'd be all-knowing, and I'd understand that so many people are repelled by the behavior of those who act in Jesus's name by rushing to condemn sin, and not lifting a finger to help the poor. Or those who kill in Jesus's name. I'd understand that many study science and can't make it compatible with the Bible. I'd understand that many would see God's actions in the Old Testament as barbaric.

If my three year old child hates me because I won't let him play on the highway, I don't get mad at him. I understand that my child lacks the understanding as to why it's dangerous to play on the highway.

Neo! Still lurking about, I see.

I just have a couple of points to make about your reality-challenged replies...

So all of that killing and suffering in the OT was just god's way of teaching us some important lessons, huh? Well, tell me, don't you think it should have occurred to god that SOME people might not have understood these stories as lessons of peace and love, but instead may have thought that god was saying that it's ok to kill people and make them suffer?

You know, like the people who started all of the holy wars and the witch hunts? Don't you think that someone as smart as god would have figured out a better way to get his point across without causing all that pain and death?

Of course your god "owns" us so our pain and suffering are of little consequence to him.

Now, notice Neo, I am not equating you with those holy warring, witch hunting folks. Because that would be guilt by association - just because one christian is a sick, twisted, sociopathic monster doesn't mean that you all are.

But you think that kind of guilt is a good thing, so I guess you wouldn't mind being lumped in with all of those lying, cheating, adulterous, child abusing, slave owning christians whose names keep showing up in the headlines.

If you don't think that's fair, then that makes you a hypocrite. (I'm not engaging in name calling here - and if you don't believe me just look it up in the dictionary.)

Neo, I like having your input on this website. You consistently provide us with these wonderful examples of just how far a christian will twist and warp and rationalize their perspective just to get it to align with their beliefs.

Yes it is true that the Bible God behaves seemingly immoral according to our standards. However, this does not mean that there is not at least some practical value to its morality. For example, abstaining from sex does prevent STDs whether anyone wants to follow this advice or not. Loving your neighbor creates a more peaceful world. The Bronze Age did not just write down what they wanted to believe necessarily. They tried to pen down how a perfectly ordered society should be run.
For further consideration, we have the following concepts. We condemn the wars that greatly benefited the Israelites ordered by God in the OT, but we still go to war. Why? We war because we have our own best interests in mind, just like the OT authors did. There are other things in the OT that we find morally reprehensible, but we participate in them like they did. The only difference is that they attributed their behavior to something inspired by God whereas we attribute our behavior to our personality. Indeed, most of our modern ideas about people's rights come from the NT. It was probably not God that authored these concepts, but some very smart people who had society's best interest in mind did. Thus, God may seem to be immoral, but he is no more immoral than present day normal people who participate in many of the same antisocial activities as the OT or NT God.

Hi Jamie, I pray that God's grace will touch you soon. If you are sincerely seeking the Truth, I hope that you don't keep this site as your sole source of "wisdom". The obduracy towards God's word at this site can be harmful to anyone. Especially someone that may not be protected from the fruits of His church. I know this may not make sense to you today but I contend that you, at the very least, remain open. There is a Truth and the evidence is overwhelming but you must be permissive to hearing it. Even if today it sounds ridiculous to suggest this, at the end of each day trying sharing with Him the highs and lows of your day. With time, maybe even mention what your conscience tells you might have been a wrong choice. Before you know it, you'll be praying and He'll be teaching!

May God bless you,
Marc
http://www.tlig.org/
http://www.garabandalny.com/

"The obduracy towards God's word at this site can be harmful to anyone. Especially someone that may not be protected from the fruits of His church."

Except for the infants and sucklings...?

How about you christian types stop talking about morality and address the fact that your god approves of killing babies.

You obviously wouldn't follow his example. Why not?

Actually, some of you have said you would, so...

Shit, I don't know.

Hey Jamie!
I know that you have been hanging around this "obdurate" site long enough to have read a few things about cults.

Unblinded's plea to you to not leave the cult has virtually every classic component of how cults work.

#1 We are praying for you.
#2 An insinuation that unblinded's cult has the real truth.
#3 Don't expose yourself to any other source of the truth than the cult.
#4 The cult loves you and you must not be trying hard enough to believe.
#5 We have a very mysterious way of knowing the truth.
#6 If you emerse yourself in the cult and pray more, you will son find yourself back in the loving arms of the cult
#7 It wouldn't hurt to confess that you were wrong to break the rules of the cult, but the cult has faith that you will return as a fully restored, full fledged cult member.

Jamie! I painfully downloaded (with dial up) that U-Tube thing about how cults work, that Webmaster presented here about a month ago. That is how I spotted the almost perfect mechanics of a cult in Unblinded's post.

In this "cult" you are always free to leave. No one will harm you or pressure you. You can join the "cult" in the privacy of your own home, no money required. The only thing that is asked is that you look at all the facts. Once you get to know Him as revealed in the New Testament, either you'll love Him and are willing to work at living life by His rules or you prefer to make your own rules.

So, choose your "cult", the atheists that think everything around them evolved from nothingness where you can then worship "evolution". Or, choose the "cult" that believes that everything around them has intelligent design written all over it.

No words, written by me or anyone else could ever deter a person from his choice. We all have free will, we just need to decide on His will or ours. I choose to write about Him because I love Him and what He did for all of us. Personally, I tried living by my own rules for many years, it didn't work for me. Another thing about this "cult", you never need to let anyone of us know that you joined it, God knows and that's all that matters.

Just send 100$ to PO box... hehe. Bad joke, please be careful, your choice is serious and there are many, many real cults and a fantastic number of them are masqueraded as "Christians". Your conscience will tell you if something isn't right. The new testament is your preferred revelation, the Web sites below are sources of new modern day revelations He's allowed for these difficult times.

God bless,
Marc
http://www.tlig.org/
http://www.garabandalny.com/

Isn't ironic that when some person kills there children, kills someone else, or does some unspeakable crime and says "God spoke to me and told me to do it" that Christians will denouce the person as insane. God would never tell anyone to do such wicked acts. But yet, here in thier very own holy book you see god doing EXACTLY that, ordering his chosen to cruel acts of barbarism.

Oh Jamie! You absolutely must keep an open mind and an open heart! (How does one not bleed to death after their heart has been opened? I've never understood this.)

Go, Jamie! Go to Unblinded's websites and see for yourself how he SO does not belong to a cult!

You will learn of the great and powerful Vassula; the modern prophetess who actually receives messages from god!

(Usually these are messages although she will get the occasional memo - there has been no complete manuscript from god, but he is working on an outline.)

You will also learn of the miracle at Garabandal, Spain. How four young girls witnesses an apparition of both an angel and the virgin Mary. And you will immediately see how this had to a miracle and not just some kids telling lies to get attention, or stoned on drugs, or misinterpreting some unusual phenomena as a religious experience because they had been so brainwashed by their church that they could not conceive of it being any other thing, or any of the other reasonable explanations that could come to mind if one just thought about it for a few minutes.

Yes, it isn't a cult. It is an option that you may freely choose to believe in.

(Of course, if you don't freely choose to believe in it, you will be turning away from the one-and-only true path to god/truth/
enlightenment/salvation/
happiness/whatever, and you will have to suffer for that decision for all of eternity.)

Peace
AND understanding.

Dano, Thanks for the backup. I've been clicking on the links that Christians have been leaving on this site and others like it, hoping that the arguments there would be enough to assuage my doubt, but so far they have not. I have been 'unblinded' for better or for worse.

I am annoyed by the assumption that if I am sincerely seeking Truth, then I will wind up back in a church pew and believing that the bible is the final authority on truth. I was told all my life that this "Truth" stands up to scrutiny.

Not long ago I started noticing that atheists seemed to have all the best arguments. As I started to put the "Truth" to the test, I found out quickly that it didn't stand up at all once I started using sources outside the church to do my scrutinizing. So Unblinded's kind admonission for me to be 'more honest' in my search is not only a little late, since I have already started being more honest, but also wrong in where that honesty will lead me, since it's led me so far away from Christianity instead of toward it.

Tigg, as a former Seventh-day Adventist (I think this is the first time I publically claimed to be 'former' in this regard) I know all about prophets. We had our own Ellen G. White, who church evangelists always praised for being right 100% of the time.

A quick google search will also show how this prophetess turned out to have plagiarized a good chunk of her writings from other books...not just lines here and there, but practically whole books!

One good thing I did get from Adventism, though, is a belief that there is no eternal hell. Adventists believe the choice is between heaven and "eternal death" where those who don't make it to the good place will simply cease to exist. (We may go down in a ball of flames, but once we're dead, we're dead).

I am still at a stage where I feel the loss of my beliefs, and it hurts a bit. I don't know if I'll ever be ready to wear the "atheist" label, but I'm certainly wearing the 'agnostic' label right now, because I just don't know...and I don't really see any way of ever knowing.

Back to the topic of this post, though, how can I, in good conscience, follow the example of the God presented in the bible? It seems tailor-made to permit crazy megalomaniac's to commit all sorts of horros against humanity.

Neocognition, I find your playing the theologian to be just too cute. I could just squeeze you to death.

I just happen to be a world-renowned expert in theology. Now let me enlighten you:

I do not give a flying fuck into hell if a god exists or not, nor do I see why I should. I am an intelligent woman, I am managing my own life, I have friends who love me and I have a guy who keeps me happy. I think for myself and do not go to my knees for answers. I do not fear god, nor revere god, nor do I have any use for god. I think god is for children, drunks and losers.

If your god exists (fat chance) she could not possibly object to me. She would respect me. And by the way, your religion is just getting in the way. Why don't you get rid of it? I have read your postings and I do not see god. I see religion.

Hey Jamie!

One of the most freeing and life affirming moments in my life came when I realized that it's ok to not know.

Think about it - if an all powerful being wanted you to know something then how could you not know it?

And, if this same all powerful being truly loved and cared about you, then you'd have to assume that "not knowing" couldn't possibly have any negative consequences.

Why should there be rewards or penalties for having a unique point of view? Particularly when you begin from the premise that everyone's perspective is perpetually flawed and incomplete.

In other words, ignorance IS bliss. (At least as far as deities are concerned.) So, why not enjoy it?

I'm glad to see that you have looked into the "tlig cult" and can see it for the nonsense that it is.

I'm not an atheist or an agnostic. (I'm just really good at passing for atheist.) I am what ever I feel like being at any given moment: Pagan, Wiccan, Pastafarian, Bullwinkelist, Jedi, Klingon (non practicing, of course)...

Don't get too hung up on labels. Just be you.

To Neo:

I'm perplexed. You are still repeating your beliefs ad nauseum. As I pointed out in another thread, we all understand that you believe in god, and believe that the Bible is his inspired word. We really truly do understand that you believe such things. Is there some reason you need to keep repeating it? Your position is trivial to grasp. Neo believes in god. Neo believes that the Bible is this god's "inspired word". Neo believes that god/religion makes us moral. Neo believes that the US was built on Christian principles. Neo believes that god is all around us. Neo believes that all of our warm-and-fuzzy feelings come from god. Neo believes he is a follower of the one true god/religion/savior. Neo believes the universe is perfect and his god is loving and just. We get it.

I could probably make a rather lengthy list of "what Neo believes". What good is that list, Neo? Please explain. Supposing I can make a detailed list of your personal beliefs, of what possible use is that to me or anybody else? As all of your statements rest upon your personal feelings, or dogmatic assertions, in my opinion they have zero value. Zero. You simply gild your elaborate edifice, which rests upon nothing but wishful thinking, at least as far as I can tell. There are thousands of such edifices, all floating in the air. Yours is no different. You are quite welcome to cleave to whichever floating castle you wish--pour your heart into it, profess it to the world, let it shape your every thought. However, please don't expect anybody here to give your rhetoric a second glance if you don't have substantive evidence to support your fantastic claims. All of us here have quite deliberately chosen to follow where evidence leads, not where wishful thinking leads, particularly when that wishful thinking is offered up by a third party who seems to take no interest in examining anything critically.

If you wish to do us all a favor, you could spare us the sermons. We already know what you believe.

Have a good day.

Hi Jamie,
Your comments on Ellen G. White's plagarism are your clue. I hope and pray that this observation of yours begins to talk to your conscience. When something comes from the Truth you will know it. If you compare both reports from Wikipedia, you don't need divine intervention to see the difference.

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

"There are currently over 107 Notebooks compiled in 12 Volumes of the "True Life in God" series, which have been translated by volunteers into 42 different languages. Since 1989 Vassula has spoken more than 800 times in over 63 countries and more than 90 times in the United States. She receives no royalties, commissions or remuneration of any kind for her travels or for these publications"

"On the basis of Cardinal Ratzinger’s short letter it is now without the shadow of doubt that a Catholic with a clear conscience can consider Vassula as sent from God. Of course, everyone is free not to do so, but it is no longer possible to posit dogmatic grounds to reject her. To judge spiritual things one needs to listen to one’s heart. Freedom and respect for each other’s opinions are imperative when dealing with apparitions and prophesies"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellen_G._White

God bless,
Marc
http://www.tlig.org/
http://www.garabandalny.com/

Jim, we know what neo believes. I would like to know why.

UnBlinded wrote:

...either you'll love Him and are willing to work at living life by His rules or you prefer to make your own rules.

That is a false dichotomy: "a situation in which two alternative statements are held to be the only options, when in reality there exist one or more other options which have not been considered."

I don't have to make my own rules, I can follow the rules of the society that I live in. I can even adopt rules from a philosopher such as John Stuart Mill or Jean-Paul Sartre. I don't need to believe in a religion in order to behave in an ethical manner.

Dagmar said "Jim, we know what neo believes. I would like to know why."

Yes, exactly. Good luck extracting it from Neo, however. He resorts to repeating his dogmatic assertions when they are challenged. He also touts the usual Christian distortions, such as the "abundance" of evidence for the existence of Jesus (if memory serves) and even his resurrection, and he tends to view everything through the lens of Christian dogma, assuming the existence of sin and an absolute moral code (which he has never articulated, despite many requests). It all comes down to beliefs, beliefs, and more beliefs.

Unblinded said "The only thing that is asked is that you look at all the facts...."

Have you looked at "all the facts", Unblinded? Have you carefully examined the evidence that undermines the claims of Christianity, or have you confined your studies to only those "facts" that support it? Given the types of arguments you've put forth, I'd be willing to bet a large sum of money that you've not read a single book that examines Christianity critically. If I'm wrong about that, please list several titles and/or authors of such books that you've read.

Unblinded: "Once you get to know Him as revealed in the New Testament..."

And how did you reach the conclusion that the NT is a reliable source of information? Have you read the Koran? How about the Book of Mormon? If not, why not? If you have, how did you conclude that they are NOT what they purport to be: i.e. the revealed word of god?

Unblinded: "...atheists that think everything around them evolved from nothingness where you can then worship 'evolution'".

That comment reveals a profound ignorance of science in general (let alone cosmology or evolutionary biology specifically). I'll say it again: To the dogmatist, all is dogma. Just because you accept things based on dogma and/or personal intuition, it does not mean that the rest of the world does. Have you ever read a single book on science?

Unblinded: "Personally, I tried living by my own rules for many years, it didn't work for me."

I don't know what "rules" you made up for yourself, but I can't imagine they had much to do with reality, judging by the things you've posted here. Most of us allow reason, honesty, kindness, and respect for one's fellow human to be guiding principles. Have you ever tried those? They work astonishingly well, especially when coupled with a modicum of critical thinking.

Unblinded: "Your conscience will tell you if something isn't right."

I think intuition is a marvelous thing, but I suspect that you and I are worlds apart when it comes to what the value of intuition really is. To you it seems to be a shortcut to "knowledge". If your intuition tells you that something is not right, then it's not right. End of story. To me, intuition is little more than a subconscious "hunch", which may or may not be correct, as it is based purely on heuristic reasoning and incomplete information. Its value lies in pointing toward alternatives that are worth exploring further. If you confuse it with an infallible arbiter, then you run the risk of elevating prejudices and half-baked ideas to the level of "truth". (But, of course, that's precisely what religions thrive on, isn't it?)

This is an excellent, scholarly, treatise on how virtually every religion has had a virgin mother of a God, down through history, and why. The virgin Mary was just a copy of the many mothers of gods who preceded her.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/pcc/pcc11.htm

I still don't understand how the hell someone can believe the bible is the "inspired word of god" without any supporting evidence. What is the evidence?? Yeesh! Every frikin' religion out there has its 'inspired' word/doctrine/whatever. What makes the christian's so special over everyone else's? -Wes.

...but then - do I really want to know?... Ugh. -Wes.

Hi Jim,

Yes, I have looked at the facts and from both perspectives, Christians and atheists. I continue to do this as it is a young passion of mine. I've read some Sam Harris, Dan Barker and online works from others with similar views. From the Christian perspective, too many books to list. When it comes to determining the divine authenticity of an apparition or prophecy, I look for the Pope's comments for guidance and also for God's stamp of approval (I'll comment on this later).

To understand how the NT is reliable, I recommend starting with an easy read in Lee Strobel's "A Case for Christ". Yes, I have read parts of the Koran (and others like Urantia) but not the Book of Mormon. I am still young in my search for understanding and I'm a busy man (young family) so I don't get to read as much as I'd like. I have not read enough of them to provide a proper critique. My education is in the field of sciences, lab reports not book reports. :) I can say that in all my readings of non-Biblical "revelations" there is a falseness to these works. It is also apparent in those works written by atheists that try to refute Christian apologetics. It's made apparent with the intellectual arrogance that they often carry and the way they often pre-suppose how the reader will respond ("The reader will agree...").

On the other hand, I've found that there is a definitive truthfulness and general honesty in the way St. Augustine, C.S. Lewis, St. Anne Catherine Emmerich, G.K. Chesterton, St. Thomas Aquinas, etc... present their ideas.

With regards to your response on my comments on "evolution", being that you say it "reveals a profound ignorance of science", I can tell you that I did believe in evolution for most of my life. Today, having looked at the facts, I am very much opposed to our children being taught these theories in a way that presents them as fact. As I said in another thread (http://exchristian.net/2/2007/02/insulting-to-atheists.html), with what I've learned, to me, it takes more blind faith to believe in evolution than to believe in God. I recommend reading Michael J. Behe's "Darwin's Black Box" for a non-theological analysis on the facts for Darwin's theory.

On the "rules" topic, I have written about choosing righteousness in all that we do in the "Insulting to Atheists" thread but this topic always comes across as someone being self-righteous. The facts are, of course none of us are ever truly righteous but ironically, I've come to recognize that those that admit to this truthfully, are the people you can trust the most.

On intuition, please recognize that I spoke of nothing of the sort. Intuition is by definition, more of quick insight or an immediate recognition while your conscience gives you that inner sense of what is right or wrong. There is nothing necessarily quick with your conscience and it can be fooled, normally by ourselves. I believe that God talks to us through our consciences but we cannot hear him if we're immersed in impurity and self-interest (ie. sin). If we endeavor to live righteously in action and thought by listening to our conscience, I believe that divine guidance will follow. This is a life long journey and the fruits of His church can provide us with the sustenance we need to grow and learn with Him. By fruits, I generally mean His written word, the sacrament of Holy Communion, of Confession, etc...

To return to my comment on God's stamp of approval for the TLIG messages and the apparitions of Garabandal, He does so by the content of the messages coupled with details that cannot be understood with naturalism. For TLIG, her hand writing compared to the divine hand writings are distinctly different. Vassula Ryden was not educated in theology nor was she a practicing Christian. In fact, she was taught the Our Father prayer through these revelations. My point here is that with the little knowledge she had, she's written nearly a bible's worth of text and, studied by the Holy See, they find nothing contrary to their theology. Isn't it striking that she could write so much, from her "delusional" state and have it comply with the church? Have you noticed from an earlier post that she receives no royalties, commissions or remuneration of any kind for her travels or for these publications.

Part of God's stamp of approval for the Garabandal apparitions is evident in the duration and the corroboration......4 years and 4 children trapped in another delusional state? A shared delusional state? Witness after witness discussing what they saw during their ecstasy, reveal that the children were often moving too fast for anyone to follow. At times, no one could keep up to them, not even the older kids. Multiple accounts of men trying to lift the children during their ecstasy and not one of them ever succeeded. Never a problem to lift them after the ecstasy. The visionaries, while in ecstacy, could effortlessly return the blessed objects (generally rosaries) to the rightful owners, even though they had a pile of them in their hands, were surrounded by crowds and were looking up at the sky. The list goes on and on of inexplicable witness accounts, not the least to mention are the miracles of conversion of many that witnessed the children. In fact, if a person were to trust the TLIG messages first, Jesus directly confirms the authenticity of Garabandal in a September 1987 message (http://www.tlig.org/en/messages/145/).

This is just a little sample of the empirical evidence that God has made available to us all. Some might ask "Why doesn't He just write something in the sky, with the stars, or something?". The answer, to me, is that to certain extent, this would negate our freedom. This undeniable evidence that is being asked for would simply corner everyone into what, loving Him? With His infinite wisdom He does the best that He can to reveal Himself without coercing us to choose His will. He wants an honest, repentant soul that truly acknowledges it's distance from Him. And for this act of love to happen, He simply will not take away from our freedom, despite the fact that this is our weakness.

May God bless you,
Marc
http://www.tlig.org/
http://www.garabandalny.com/

Blogger sucks. Never works. -Wes.

Everytime I post, I have to create a new disposable account. This is silly. Anyone else having problems with this?? -Wes.

Oh - I murdered Lee Strobel last night. His head hangs above my bed. Thought you should all know... Thanks. -Wes.

Wes, please email me or call and leave a voice message at 1-206-600-7954. I'll get back to you and see if we can't resolve whatever is going on when you try to post.

UnBlinded wrote:
"This is just a little sample of the empirical evidence that God has made available to us all. Some might ask "Why doesn't He just write something in the sky, with the stars, or something?". The answer, to me, is that to certain extent, this would negate our freedom. This undeniable evidence that is being asked for would simply corner everyone into what, loving Him? With His infinite wisdom He does the best that He can to reveal Himself without coercing us to choose His will. He wants an honest, repentant soul that truly acknowledges it's distance from Him. And for this act of love to happen, He simply will not take away from our freedom, despite the fact that this is our weakness."

DAN SAYS: But what he gets is people like you who have sold out to the God of credulity.
You look to the Pope for guidance!!

The office of the pope has a history, so full of dishonesty, terror, and deceit that there are libraries full of books documenting it.

Who do you think those clowns are impressing with their funny clothes, and rituals?

I didn't think anyone still took them seriously, (If Jesus were real he would be appalled), and low and behold God has guided your hand here to this website, for Ex Christians, who share their views about the UN-believability of the Christian Myth.

But wait a minute! I just saw an apparition on my computer screen!

An old man with a beard, and a balloon, with text, which said: "Reach out to Unblinded, for I am not content that even one of my creations should have to go through life spouting the kind of nonsense about me, that he is so full of."

Dan (You say God does the best he can!!!!! He is "God", for Christ's sake!!)

So, UnBlinded, Bible-god is real?

So we should all bow humbly and kiss the arse of the god who orders people to kill babies, because if we don't we go to hell for eternity?

That is blackmail, bullying, gun-to-the-head mind-rape, call it what you will.

The only moral thing to do is resist him.

Giving in to his demands is cowardice, and a betrayal of mankind - and only serves to feed his overblown ego.

Unblinded,let me begin by saying that I am a student at a catholic college (Rensselaer, IN) and I am familiar with the authors you mentioned. I have majored in philosophy and minored in religion (google up to my name) and I find your innocent devotion to theology to be cute.

About acquinas: if you will return to the summa; question 1; article 1......the doctor is saying that, because reason is faulty, we need revelation in order to get things right, expecially salvation. This is a blunder that I would not excuse in a child. The doctor has tried to bullshit, and failed.The entire summa proceeds from that fallacy.

First, who says that our faulty reason is not all there is? My reason is faulty; okay, I should just go eat shit?

Second, why do we need salvation to begin with? I deny any such need. Where do you get such notions, the pope?

On that subject, I have participated in endless debates on the resurrection, all of them unnecesary, because there is no need for the resurrection, or the atonement, to begin with. The notion of forgiveness and salvation i