Exactly.

If Jesus was God he made it impossible for us to place any faith in him.

The only option he left open to us is to place our faith in Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John (or the authors who claimed to be those men). All of whom give differing accounts of the supposed ministry of Jesus.

It's impossible for us to accept or reject Jesus. All we can possibly do is accept or reject the conflicting hearsay rumors of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and these I reject as being unrealistic and quite frankly unconvincing.

Once upon a time...

Source: Wikipedia

Then there's Ted Haggard...



I myself have a defrocked pastor in my family tree who couldn't seem to resist the temptation of infidelity.

And a Google search of 'pastors sex parishioners' will turn up more hits that you can thump a Bible at, so spare us the holier-than-thou attitude about unbelievers and morality.

-Kerry O.

Truly.

The arrogance of Christianity is truly unbearable. And their constant proselytizing actually spits in the face of very words of Jesus according to their doctrine. Christianity is the most hypocritical religion in the entire world. Specifically Protestantism that spat in on the Body of Christ and rejected the Catholic Church claiming that "No man speaks for God".

What do these hypocrites do almost every single day? They proselyzing and post verses from the Bible claiming to speak for God.

What hypocrites!

It's truly shameful beyond comprehension.

To say all Atheists are not immoral is like saying not all Christians are good, or for that matter Christlike. In the last 2,000 years more wars have been fought and more people killed in the name of Christ. All religions claim to be the word of god and all others are false, so by that token all are true and false concurrently. When someone converts, all of a sudden what they once sincerely believed is now untrue. They may well be a creator of some kind somewhere up the spiritual food chain, but it’s highly doubtful it would be a capricious deity who demands loyalty from its creations. What tickles me is believers feel they have to do the work of god. Here was someone who supposedly created the heavens and the earth in 6 daze. Did god retire, or simply get lazy and decided its creations could carry the load. When are you going to start the construction of your new planet?

You may have discovered by now I am one of the noble 16% of nonbelievers. Then there was the bit about a reward in heaven. That was how they suckered the poor, illiterate masses to go off and fight and die in the Crusades. The powers that be will use any means possible to get cannon fodder for their wars of conquest, almost invariably over some natural resource. Islam has the 77 virgin thing, but that was essentially to get poor schleps to fight the invading infidel who believed god was on his side and his reward was forthcoming. I have no idea where they got 77, but perhaps the idea of a harem was popular in those daze.

Religions get started to try and explain who and why we are, but after a while, those in charge get a bit power drunk and that gives them the idea they can tell everybody what to think, feel and believe. All religions start out as a cult and Christianity is no exception. Romans were either Urbus or Pagus (sp?), city dwellers and those who farmed and ranched, known as the Pagans. The city dwellers were the first to accept a monotheistic religion since all that worship cut into the time they could be making money, but the Pagans believed in the gods and were appalled at the thought of a single deity and they insisted on no less than three, which was where the holy ghost originated. Another thing the Romans did when they conquered a culture was allow them to go through the motions of their beliefs, but they made up other reasons for why they did what they did and expected them to forget over several generations and say it was always that way. Someone remembered and passed it along by word of mouth for future generations.

Did Jesus eat the ears off his chocolate bunny rabbits at easter? There is no supporting documentation to prove anything in anybody’s religious texts, so there is no way to prove they were written by who they claim to be. When science supports religion, science is good, but when it doesn’t support religion, the same science is evil. When you insult those for not believing what you believe, that makes you just as big a fool as you call them.

Oh See, C.C. Rider
Oh See what you have done
Oh I forget the rest of the words.

As an atheist, I find this thread funny, mainly because when you boil down the OP to just the basics, what you get is basically: "If you claim there is no god, you are wrong, because my holy book says there is."
One of the other funny things about religion is, Science and History are wrong, when dealing with that religion, but when they can be used to disprove parts of other religions, then Science and History can be right.(the movie Religulous has plenty of examples of this.)

Like many people on here, I don't believe in any type of god for various reason. Mainly the lack of any scientific or historical evidence of any kind. Also, like one other person on her, I feel that the NT(if not the whole bible) is a complete work of fiction.

It is called "The Great Commission"...

A Commandment given to His Disciples, to pass on from generation to generation, and to empower others to do the same:

Matthew 28:18-20 (NKJV)

18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.


It is at the least much less harmful than the junk being taught in our schools about everything springing into being on an imaginary stepladder.

Among the other challenges I've had to deal with, I have a condition that makes my taking NSAIDS, the most common of analgesics, dangerous. Just because they could set off a chain reaction that can kill me, I don't crusade against them.

On the other hand, the type sophistry embedded in the proseltyzing in the OP is not very far away from someone blowing cigar smoke in someone's direction in a No Smoking area.

Said another way, it would be like me chiding someone for not knowing what Euler's Identity is. I figure if they wanted to know, they'd spend the time to explore it. If not, no biggie, it's not immoral to see with different eyes that may not grok the beauty of it.

-Kerry O.

1. ei(PI)+1=0
There are you happy?

2. Also the OP points out that if you do not believe in his g-d you must be an immoral monster of some sort. boy he really does have a great technique for his great commission, doesn't he?

So tell me, Circuit, does Swaggart get a free pass because Jesus also hung out with prostitutes?




Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District. And the judge was even Republican. Happened in my neck of the woods.


-Kerry O.

1. Science does not state that "everything just sprang into being"

2. The very nature of Science has something that religion doesn't: Checks and Balances. Once a scientist discovers something, other scientist do the same experiment, basically trying to disprove the original scientist. It's called Peer Review.

3. Science does a better job of explaining things than "God did it." which, itself is just a non-answer, because it doesn't answer the question, though it brings up more questions, like mainly, If there is a god, what created god?

Yep! :)

Did you know that Euler disliked atheists?

-Kerry O.

WOW!!!

Where do I find that??

Science doesn't say from whench the universe sprang. All science teaches is how it unfolded after it sprang.

So perhaps this is a misunderstanding of science on your part?

Moreover, what would you have the schools teach our children? That some jealous egotistical God created man from the dust of the earth and breathed life into him and then created a woman from his rib.

Where's the evidence for that? Because it's written in some ancient mythology? Why don't we teach our children that Zeus is God?

We'd have to lie to our children to tell them that some jealous egotisitcal God created man from the dust of the earth, because in truth, we have no clue if there's any truth in that myth.

Similarly, why should we teach our children that they are sinners and have fallen short of the glory of their creator? That's a terrible thing to teach innocent children! And to teach them that God had to send his son to be butchered on a pole to pay for their sins is even worse?

What does that TEACH children? It TEACHES them that nailing people on poles is rightesous payment for wrong doings. And that two wrongs clearly make a right because this is "God's Way!"

Nope CircuitRider, I don't think I want my kids taught any of that garbage. I see nothing holy about it whatsoever. On the contrary I personally feel that it's sicker than sick.

The whole idea of threatening that God will send sinners into a place of eternal damnation of pain and agony where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth, actually teaches our children that even God believes in physical punishment as the 'correct' way to solve problems.

Nope, I don't want that garbage being taught to my children. And I see absolutely no reason to believe that the creator of this universe should be anything like that. I've met and read the writings of mere mortal men and women who have far wiser solutions to problems than the authors of the Bible could come up with.

I see absolutely no reason to believe that God is the demon the Bible makes him out to be. And the Biblical God would indeed be a demon. He's a confessed jealous egotistical male chauvinist pig who hates heathens. He also has absolutely no parenting or mentoring skills whatsoever as far as I can see.

You may as well be talking about Zeus, or any of the other mythical Gods. Yet we'd never dream of teaching our children that Zeus is God. Why should we teach them that Yahweh is God? We have absolutely no good reason to believe in those myths.

The religion is entirely 'Faith Based'. You have to have faith that God is as nasty as the Bible claims. And I won't place my faith in such an absurd and horrible notion. I see no reason to even want to believe that my creator is such an arrogant egotistical jerk who lusts to be the King of Kings and Lord of Lords and will cast anyone who doesn't worship him into an eternal hell fire of damnation.

Nope, that's a nightmare. Even if I were "lucky enough" to be 'saved' so I could lick his boots he still wouldn't be worthy of my worship.

How could I worship such a demon? That would be like worshiping Hitler simply because you are afraid of the consequences should you happen to disagree with his horrible plan.

A God who threatens people with eternal damnation for not worshiping him is no God at all. It's clearly a myth of man. And not even a good one at that.

In fact, there are far better myths of Gods if you truly want to worship a divine being.

That's the basic tenet of Protestantism. The protested against the Catholic Chruch because the protestants didn't agree that a single individual should speak for God. (i.e. the Pope)

And so they proclaimed that only the Holy Spirit can speak to people through their heart.

In fact, Kerry O. once posted a link about this,...

Oh,.. good! I found it in my Favorites Menu!

http://www.godonthe.net/evidence/catholic.htm

That was cool that I saved that. Thanks Kerry!


The Catholics believe that "The pope is Jesus' representative on Earth."

But the protestants protested and said that that pope speaks for no one!

The Protestants hold that "The Holy Spirit is Jesus' representative.

Yet, all the Protestants ever do is act like Paper Popes posting verses from the Bible and giving THEIR interepretations of what Jesus said!

It's totally hypocritical.

If the Protestants want to truly stick to their belief then they must SHUT UP and let the HOLY SPIRIT speak for Jesus.

But they refuse to do that. All they ever do is proselytize and quote from the Bible and claim that there interpretation of those verses is CORRECT.

But all they are doing when they do that is becoming PAPER POPES!

That's hypocrisy in the highest form.

And you still aren't sold on atheism?

My final post on this subject...

This is from The Latin Vulgate... The Catholic Bible:


1 Corinthians Chapter 1

{1:21} Nam quia in Dei sapientia non cognovit mundus per sapientiam Deum: placuit Deo per stultitiam prædicationis salvos facere credentes.

{1:21} For the world did not know God through wisdom, and so, in the wisdom of God, it pleased God to accomplish the salvation of believers, through the foolishness of our preaching.



{1:22} Quoniam et Iudæi signa petunt, et Græci sapientiam quærunt:

{1:22} For the Jews ask for signs, and the Greeks seek wisdom.




{1:23} nos autem prædicamus Christum crucifixum: Iudæis quidem scandalum, Gentibus autem stultitiam,

{1:23} But we are preaching Christ crucified. Certainly, to the Jews, this is a scandal, and to the Gentiles, this is foolishness.




{1:24} ipsis autem vocatis Iudæis, atque Græcis Christum Dei virtutem, et Dei sapientia:

{1:24} But to those who have been called, Jews as well as Greeks, the Christ is the virtue of God and the wisdom of God.




{1:25} quia quod stultum est Dei, sapientius est hominibus: et quod infirmum est Dei, fortius est hominibus.

{1:25} For what is foolishness to God is considered wise by men, and that which is weakness to God is considered strong by men.




{1:26} Videte enim vocationem vestram fratres, quia non multi sapientes secundum carnem, non multi potentes, non multi nobiles:

{1:26} So take care of your vocation, brothers. For not many are wise according to the flesh, not many are powerful, not many are noble.



{1:27} sed quæ stulta sunt mundi elegit Deus, ut confundat sapientes: et infirma mundi elegit Deus, ut confundat fortia:

{1:27} But God has chosen the foolish of the world, so that he may confound the wise. And God has chosen the weak of the world, so that he may confound the strong.




{1:28} et ignobilia mundi, et contemptibilia elegit Deus, et ea, quæ non sunt, ut ea quæ sunt destrueret:

{1:28} And God has chosen the ignoble and contemptible of the world, those who are nothing, so that he may reduce to nothing those who are something.




{1:29} ut non glorietur omnis caro in conspectu eius.

{1:29} So then, nothing that is of the flesh should glory in his sight.




{1:30} Ex ipso autem vos estis in Christo Iesu, qui factus est nobis sapientia a Deo, et iustitia, et sanctificatio, et redemptio:

{1:30} But you are of him in Christ Jesus, who was made by God to be our wisdom and justice and sanctification and redemption.



{1:31} ut quemadmodum scriptum est: Qui gloriatur, in Domino glorietur.

{1:31} And so, in the same way, it was written: “Whoever glories, should glory in the Lord.”








1 Corinthians Chapter 2

{2:9} Sed sicut scriptum est: Quod oculus non vidit, nec auris audivit, nec in cor hominis ascendit, quæ præparavit Deus iis, qui diligunt illum:

{2:9} But this is just as it has been written: “The eye has not seen, and the ear has not heard, nor has it entered into the heart of man, what things God has prepared for those who love him.”




{2:10} nobis autem revelavit Deus per Spiritum suum: Spiritus enim omnia scrutatur, etiam profunda Dei.

{2:10} But God has revealed these things to us through his Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God.




{2:11} Quis enim hominum scit quæ sunt hominis, nisi spiritus hominis, qui in ipso est? ita et quæ Dei sunt, nemo cognovit, nisi Spiritus Dei.

{2:11} And who can know the things that are of a man, except the spirit which is within that man? So also, no one knows the things which are of God, except the Spirit of God.




{2:12} Nos autem non spiritum huius mundi accepimus, sed Spiritum, qui ex Deo est, ut sciamus quæ a Deo donata sunt nobis:

{2:12} But we have not received the spirit of this world, but the Spirit who is of God, so that we may understand the things that have been given to us by God.




{2:13} quæ et loquimur non in doctis humanæ sapientiæ verbis, sed in doctrina Spiritus, spiritualibus spiritualia comparantes.

{2:13} And we are also speaking of these things, not in the learned words of human wisdom, but in the doctrine of the Spirit, bringing spiritual things together with spiritual things.




{2:14} Animalis autem homo non percipit ea, quæ sunt Spiritus Dei: stultitia enim est illi, et non potest intelligere: quia spiritualiter examinatur.

{2:14} But the animal nature of man does not perceive these things that are of the Spirit of God. For it is foolishness to him, and he is not able to understand it, because it must be examined spiritually.




{2:15} Spiritualis autem iudicat omnia: et ipse a nemine iudicatur.

{2:15} But the spiritual nature of man judges all things, and he himself may be judged by no man.




{2:16} Quis enim cognovit sensum Domini, qui instruat eum? Nos autem sensum Christi habemus.

{2:16} For who has known the mind of the Lord, so that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.



*Note:
We Protestants have but one Priest... that is YESHUA, MESSIAH... HE is our Priest... NOT The Pope...


Anyway, anyone who doesn't like what Christians have to say, is not bound by any rules here on this board to have to click on our posts.

Well Corinthians was written by Paul not Jesus. So I guess Paul is your Pope then.



If you're only interested in Christian feedback you should have posted this in the Christian forums.

Let's face it, your original OP is a form of Proselytizing to FRESH MEAT by suggesting that anyone who doesn't worship your doctrine as the "Word of God" cannot possible be a moral person.

Why are you so bent on offending Non-Christains?

If you wish to only converse with Christians you should post those topics in the Chrisitian forum. It's exceedingly rude to tell non-believers of the Bible that their non-belief can only be driving by a desire to be immoral people.

That's not only rude, but it's also quite false. You should expect to hear opinions that differ from that presumption in the General Religions Forum.

Let's face it. You aren't open to anything less that 100% commitment to the ideal that the Bible is the word of God and that Jesus is the divine Son of the God of Abraham. And you're basically attempting to proselytize that ideal by claiming that anyone who rejects your faith-based notion on this matter must be an immoral person.

That's just downright rude. What did you expect? A bunch of Christians to come by and post, "AMEN BROTHER!".

I think you got a few of those anyway.

Was that the Book of Loopholes...AGAIN???

When you take left-handed swipes at unbelievers' morality and intelligence like you did when you lent your name to the content in the OP, you can expect to get a little chin music in return. Just for your future reference, there are a lot of people who have felt bullied by militant Christianity throughout our lives and since we aren't living in the Dark Ages, we no longer have to acquiesce.

-Kerry O.