Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 06/11/2018 in all areas

  1. End, Not trying to be picky but do your statements above hold true? The "Professor" has answered your first statement as copied below: "We don't have knowledge of Christ the person, though. We have, at best, third-hand information written hundreds of years after the fact. Nor do we have a "relationship" with the holy spirit, given that there is no compelling reason to conclude it exists." Your "spirit/memory" statement very quickly drops the "memory" equation in your paragraphs above which in reality it is. Why do people who develop Alzheimer's or Dementia often forget people who may even be close to them? I know that from personal experience! Because memory is a brain function purely .. spirit has nothing to do with it! Once you are dead, all those memories WILL be gone too! As to not knowing a person and having as you say a "spirit/memory" relationship? Once again, it is purely something generated in ones own brain. ALL religions generate these same relationships. It is not just special to christianity! By the way End, why do OP's regularly leave you to stand and fight statements they start? I respect you for that! The OP has made himself quite scarce on this posting even though he has been logged on the site very recently! Maybe he is starting to see his relationship IS just a religion after all?
    3 points
  2. So this is just a fancy way of saying jesus was just some regular old dude that people still bother with today just because of tradition or habit. I mean, in the case of Santa, it's just the date that triggers these events so it's not like we're all-fired up with Santa year-round (though the ad agencies would love it if they could find a way to sort that out). mwc
    3 points
  3. A ‘relationship’ with jesus is like a ‘relationship’ with a blow up doll or your imaginary friend Jimmy. Whatever. I you dont hear the words with your ears then your brain made that shit up.
    3 points
  4. When Will Christians Become A Minority In The USA? Not soon enough.
    3 points
  5. "I'm not perfect, I'm just forgiven ... you assholes!" LoL
    3 points
  6. Sounds good on paper, but......... If someone has ties, school, sick mom, whatever and isn't surviving on the pay from the only job he can get, how is he going to pull off a move to another state or city? The only thing that makes sense is factoring in local cost of living. The only reason to even have a mandated minimum wage is that many, if not most, employers will pay desperate people as little as possible. There just needs to be some balance that affords some human decency to those who are working the best job they can get.
    2 points
  7. We don't have knowledge of Christ the person, though. We have, at best, third-hand information written hundreds of years after the fact. Nor do we have a "relationship" with the holy spirit, given that there is no compelling reason to conclude it exists. We have historical, first-hand evidence for the existence of St. Nicholas. We also have a credible timeline of the evolution of Santa Claus. In other words, we can see how the person of St. Nicholas became the myth of Santa Claus. We have no such connection between the supposed "historical" Jesus and the myth presented in the gospels. In this regard, it is more logical and rational to believe in Santa than in Jesus. Nonetheless, belief is not the same as a relationship. Even if I'm convinced that St. Nicholas rose from the dead to become Santa Claus, I still don't have a relationship with either of them.
    2 points
  8. There is a difference between "innocent" and "not guilty". Innocent means the defendant did not commit the crime; not guilty means the evidence doesn't support the defendant's guilt. The defendant could be guilty as hell; but if the prosecution does not provide sufficient evidence, then the default position is "not guilty." The evidence currently at my disposal does not support the claim that a god or god's exist. Therefore I have no choice but to accept the default position. god might exist; but the case has not been sufficiently proven.
    2 points
  9. Please don't make a presumption that a divorce is traumatic for children. Sometimes it's good for them. When my parents announced a separation I was elated. I could hardly wait for the palpable tension in the house to end as well the pressure on me from one parent who vented his frustrations on me. I was disappointed when they reconciled and he moved back home but by then I'd pretty much figured out how to stay out of his sight. But I would have much rather have lived in a single-parent house.
    2 points
  10. "I have a question, I'm curious about how atheists come to believe in no god." Many Christians think that atheism is a belief system and what I see in the question is a presumption that being an atheist is a belief, or somehow requires belief. That's different from not believing. The lack of evidence to support the existence of gods doesn't require belief. Rather, it's an analysis of fact.
    2 points
  11. When a testimoney is lengthy I usually don't read all of it, because they are often similar to what all of us have experienced. I read every word of your story because it was so interesting and well written. I am happy for you that you got out and that you found this site. I read all of your posts because you write interesting & thought provoking posts. You're an asset to our little community.
    2 points
  12. Being nice has nothing to do with being Christian. When you see somebody acting nice they are not doing Christianity. Pointing out this fact does not make me an asshole. It is just the basic facts.
    2 points
  13. Riven, it is called "selective grace". Grace is given to the selected (Trump), while admonishment is given to the outgroup non-select (Obama). Self serving and convenient, isn't it? They have sold out to ends justify the means "Survivor" mentality. They have made a poor bargain. Short term glory, long run demise.
    2 points
  14. Sex is real. God isn't real. The only way for Christianity to compete with sex is to twist it around so that all sex flows from the Church. Men need to get married. Women need to satisfy their husband's needs. Married couples need to have kids and raise their children in church so the cycle continues. When young people grow up and follow their heart to have natural relationships with those who are willing they soon realize that Christianity is messed up.
    2 points
  15. The decline in the percentage of Christians in the USA has been well documented by several long-term, statistically valid studies. I got curious about when Christians might become a minority in the USA, so I plugged some of this data into a spreadsheet and made some forecasts using linear regression. The forecast, based on the 70 year trend, is some time in the early 2100's. But this downward trend has accelerated significantly recent years. The forecast, based on the most recent 20 years of data, is sometime in the 2040's, and "nones" may outnumber Christians sometime in the 2050's. I've created a 7 minute video that discusses these forecasts in detail, and gives some reasons why the downward trend in Christians has been accelerating in the past two decades. Here's the link to the video. I hope you enjoy it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvdq4Cz9MTQ
    1 point
  16. Richard Carrier has commented on the finally published "first century" fragment of the Gospel of Mark found in Egypt that "Christian historians" theologians and apologists have been hyping for at least six years. Guess what? It dates from the third century. Just another lie pushed by Jesus, Inc. Carrier: It’s officially the mythical mummy Gospel. The “first century” manuscript of Mark Christian apologists have been gloating about and beating everyone over the head with for years…is not a first century manuscript of Mark. It also didn’t come from a mummy. It came from, apparently, garbage. And on top of all that…there is a weird unsolved question about it still looming. Here’s the latest. Backstory & Update I’ve written on this legendary Mummy Gospel several times already (see The Mummy Gospel Isn’t Even a Mummy Gospel!? and From Lead Codices to Mummy Gospels). Publicly, this all began in 2012 when Dan Wallace, a credentialed but oft gullible Christian apologist, tried to “gotcha” Bart Ehrman in a debate claiming we’d found a first century copy of the Gospel of Mark. Legend grew. It supposedly came from mummy masks. And this supposedly had something to do with how we know its date. All of that was bullshit. But we already knew that (see the first link above). Now the manuscript in question has finally been published under peer review. Hallelujah! Only…oh no. It says it dates to the late second, early third century. And the dating is based on what it usually is: paleography (handwriting style). Also…it’s being published in the Oxyrhynchus papyrus collection. And has always been there (that collection was famously excavated in and around 1903, but as it recovered half a million papyri, the collection is still being translated and published to this day; it is nowhere near done). Which is news to us, contradicting some previous (and even some still current) insistence it was in someone’s private collection and on the market (more on that in a minute). But no. It is now confirmed to have been recovered in the original dig and never left the collection (figuratively speaking). That means it comes from the Oxyrhynchus excavation—famously an ancient garbage heap in the Egyptian desert. This manuscript is also just another tiny, torn fragment, containing only a few verses from Mark 1—which we knew; but now we know it only contains mere bits of Mk. 1:7-9 and 1:16-18. The official publication is in the 83rd volume of the The Oxyrhynchus Papyri (officially dated 2017; delayed printing is common for academic journals). It was translated and edited by Daniela Colomo and Dirk Obbink. The entry: [Oxyrhunchus papyrus] ‘5345. Mark I 7-9, 16-18’. They conclude it dates by paleography to the late 2nd early 3rd century. Just as we predicted would happen. Wallace has now apologized. Christians? You need to learn a lesson here. The Loch Ness monster doesn’t exist. That exciting new publication coming “any year now” that proves all your wildest dreams, is probably going to be bullshit. And when you start to realize that’s pretty much always the case, you’ll start to understand better why we’re not Christians. More Details You can see images and a brief on this new published papyrus, and how we know it’s really the mythical “mummy” Gospel, at the blog of Brice Jones (Ph.D., Early Christianity). Elijah Hixson (I assume the same who is a Ph.D. candidate in New Testament & Christian Origins at the University of Edinburgh) is keeping tabs on this new development with updates appended to his own latest article on it. So much uproar has gone up already, that the owners of the fragment (the Egypt Exploration Society or EES) have posted an official press release to dispel various rumors about it. And when that wasn’t enough, within hours they just went ahead and put the whole article online. It’s now designated P137 in Lists of NT Papyri. The EES press release makes a special point of noting, “No other unpublished fragments of New Testament texts in the EES collection have been identified as earlier than the third century AD.” That’s a hint. They mean: the date range including late second century might be wishful thinking. It’s probably a third century papyrus. If all NT texts found there date 3rd century or later, arguably a literate Christian presence in Oxyrhunchus itself only began in the 3rd century (and hence no Gospel could have been tossed into the garbage there in the 2nd century). (snip) And notice how many letters are uncertain (marked with dots beneath). They weren’t kidding when they said they had so little to go on in dating the hand! This also means the editors are relying a lot on other manuscripts of Mark even to reconstruct what is written on this one. Granted, there are limits on what letters can be there. But this just illustrates how tiny and trivial and vexed it all is. The harrumph was all about this. A few barely legible scribbles on a piece of trash. Copied well over a hundred years after the book was even authored. Wah, wah.
    1 point
  17. From Testimonies @LogicalFallacy request. LF It is not quite probable moving individual posts from one subforum to another. what has been done is a c'n'p to here where you may engage Knott away from Testimonies. Knott, this is a question best put in the Lions Den. This section is reserved for de converting people to seek help not face questions. But to get a start with your question read this thread: Also your profile should have that "believe in God badge". Whose in charge of Introductions? @buffettphan @SkipNChurch Pretty please can one of you shift the post above of Knotts and mine to the Lion's den in a new thread. Thanks. (Unlike God, when you call on the Mods something actually happens ) "Knowledge is preferable to ignorance. Better by far to embrace the hard truth, than a reassuring fable." - Carl Sagan "It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence." - W K Clifford "Some very intelligent and educated people fall for this crap because believing it is not an intellectual decision, but rather an emotional hook." - florduh .....apologies for crappy formatting. Engage at will!
    1 point
  18. It puts the money in the basket or it gets the sermon again ....
    1 point
  19. @MYRTBOS - It is wonderful to be out of such tension, holding competing thoughts for so long. As @sdelsolray said, our cognitive dissonance serves us well to inform us, however refusing to look at things doesn't. It took what it took, but I'm glad to be on my way out. @DestinyTurtle - thank you! It's been a rough road, and it's not without irony that I say I'm taking the road less traveled. It's easy to stay stuck, and harder to take steps into the unknown. But as you said, my life, my responsibility. I'm willing to step up! @Geezer - You have no idea how much that means to me. Thank you.
    1 point
  20. Well done. Very informative. Could you please create a video showing the ranks of other religions (Islam, Hindu, Judaism) and their associated changes? News that Christianism is decreasing is certainly good news but, if it is being replaced by Islam, we are all hosed!
    1 point
  21. Well then.....what else is this bullshit religion for?!? Lol I assume you were being cheeky, but you are kind of making my point for me! If we don't need to be saved, then......?
    1 point
  22. Yes. This is religion; not a relationship.
    1 point
  23. Except all this shit doesn't HAPPEN! I used to pray, cry even, nothing. Begged for a relationship, the guy didn't even have the decency to use a billboard on the highway. He doesn't email, text, talk on the phone or in person. I don't get dreams or visions....I can't even call upon Satan to sell my soul to him, he doesn't show up either! Summoning spirits appears to be bullshit, I can cast out a turd and have more concrete evidence that it exists than these illusive-ass demons...
    1 point
  24. People don't claim to have a personal relationship with Santa; nor do they insist that others should also have a personal relationship with Santa. They also don't try to pass laws against gay people based on Santa's teachings. You're trying to make orange juice out of apples.
    1 point
  25. For your Greek needs, well named has studied ancient Greek -- let me or him know and we'll see if he can help.
    1 point
  26. I agree. I read the book as I was deeply questioning Christianity and it helped push me on out the door. The supposed evidence was so weak that it merely proved it was all a scam. I'm so glad to be thinking clearly...
    1 point
  27. To be an atheist is simply to not have a belief in a God. There are many reasons why one might be an atheist. These reasons do indeed include science, study, Christians being so damn goofy, all of the above, etc.
    1 point
  28. ... the problem with your scenario here End, comparing a "real" physical relationship ... a factual one which can involve ALL the human senses with a "belief" relationship is really in no way similar! One is undoubtedly FACT! What christians are NOT prepared (or want) to believe is that OTHER religions have and FEEL these same feelings from their "belief" relationships. Usually of course in christianity it is the "born agains" who keep pushing this "relationship" versus "religion" scenario. It does get a little tiring continually hearing it ... and once again ... being used as a statement of their christian superiority. Let's be plain simple on this ... keep the church (which some christians are stating is religion)out of this (relationship) comparison! The churches (bricks and mortar) just by themselves (just like firearms) are of no harm to society! With religion it is the individuals who "create" these relationships involving all their various faiths and practices that are! By the way I also feel your statement here "Whether or not you have to accept Christ in the end is not my call" comes across a little uppity in my opinion! Why? It is tainted with the christian dig that it is me that will have to account to christ on this! Of course that has no concern to me ... it will not happen ... but it is just the fact that line has been used in your reply!
    1 point
  29. Yeah I know how he feels. Takes a lot to really get in and question your beliefs and have them challenged.
    1 point
  30. I chime in. Very well done. The fundagelicals have to ramp up their attempts to exercise control and political dominance, because otherwise, they are losing control. Will their attempts only push more people to get out of the cult?
    1 point
  31. I've just had more practice is all. It's not like everyone who drives-by doesn't ask this same question. mwc
    1 point
  32. Long story short: I'm atheist because I decided to examine why I was a xian. mwc
    1 point
  33. 1 point
  34. Well said. It is easy for us (humans in general) to assume that those with strong differing views are arrogant, but it's not necessarily true. It is especially difficult to assess whether or not one is arrogant on a message board. We're not getting the person's tone or body language. All we're getting are the words they post, so it is easy to misconstrue the intent.
    1 point
  35. Lots of interesting discussion here! I'm surprised we don't have more threads like this. Interestingly @Riven, the question you asked was answered for me by various Bible studies and through theologians I read. The answer was essentially that everyone goes to hell by default, and anyone who avoids this fate does so purely by the grace of Jesus. Which only comes by hearing the Gospel. So long story short: if you don't hear about Jesus you are definitely going to hell, which is what you deserve anyway. For me it was a more nuanced, but nonetheless very important issue that Christianity could never answer to my satisfaction. It was: how could Jesus possibly be the Messiah when he so obviously does not fulfill many of the messianic requirements indicated in the Old Testament? Every issue I raised had detailed and lengthy answers from theologians ancient and modern, Internet commentators, etc., but none of them were particularly convincing to me. Here are some issues I have off the top of my head. I promise I haven't Googled any of this: Jesus is descended from King Jeconiah, whom the prophet Jeremiah explicitly said was cut off from the line of David for his disobedience towards God, such that none of his descendants would sit on the throne. The business with Isaiah 7:14 and the virgin birth. The Hebrew word almah is used to refer to a "young woman," when the separate word betulah, which actually means "virgin" was available in the lexicon if Isaiah really wanted to call the woman in question a virgin. The translation into the Greek parthenos (virgin) is very obviously an error on the part of the translators of the Septuagint. Separately on the topic of Isaiah 7:14, ignoring the translation issues and focusing on the Biblical exegesis, I have other objections. Anyone who simply reads an additional chapter or so will find that the sign Isaiah is offering the king is the birth of Maher-shalal-hashbaz. Christians' only answer to this is that prophecies have a short term, partial fulfillment and a longer term fulfillment in Jesus. Even the fullness of God couldn't contain the mental gymnastics necessary to achieve such a ludicrous conclusion. The book of Numbers says that God is not a man, despite that as Christians will insist, Jesus claimed to be God. Lest their be any doubt, Numbers follows up this statement by stating that nor is God a son of man. It's ironic that Jesus chose the descriptor "Son of Man." While drawing from the imagery of the book of Daniel, he also takes in the baggage from Numbers. The New Testament often quotes the Old Testament, but some of the quotes are incorrect and most of them are taken from the Greek Septuagint rather than being translated from the Hebrew. This makes it clear that the first Christians were heavily Hellenized Jews, assuming they were Jews at all. Adding to your religion's scriptures when you can't read the existing scriptures in their original language will very obviously cause theological misunderstanding of existing canon. More generally, I have a problem with the fact that the New Testament was written in Koine (i.e. vulgar) Greek. Not only that, but the Gospel of Mark was written in objectively bad Greek. If the Jewish Christians really intended for their new faith to be a continuation of the original, it should be written in Hebrew, or at the very least Aramaic (a few parts of Daniel were written in Aramaic). By writing in Greek, they made it difficult to make meaningful theological comparisons between the messianic prophecies and their fulfillment. They added a layer of obfuscation, which seems necessary in order to believe that Jesus is the Messiah without running up against these Hebraic contradictions. Christians claim the New Testament was written in Greek because it was the common language of the day and made it easy for the faith to spread. OK sure, but it also shields you from legitimate criticism of Jesus' Messiahship. Jesus didn't restore the Davidic throne, and the New Testament itself addresses this point by stating that Jesus' kingdom is a spiritual one. A few years ago when the owner of Family Radio sent people around the country proclaiming that the rapture was nigh, he excused the fact that it didn't happen on the appointed day by stating that the rapture was spiritual in nature. We recognize such impotent explanations from everyone else, but excuse them when they come from Jesus or his apostles. If ever I were tempted to return to Christianity, the failure of the excuses for Jesus' Messiahship would keep me away. Again, these are things I remember off-hand without any research. Were I to open the Bible, the failed prophecies I or any other knowledgeable reader could find would be legion.
    1 point
  36. Hi ludicrouSpeed. First, welcome to Ex-C. Yes, you have found yourself in a bit of a predicament. I like the idea of marriage counseling, and for me, counseling helped me sort out that there wasn't any future in my marriage. Should your marriage end, it certainly isn't the end of the world. I'm glad that my first marriage ended. It ending meant the end of a whole lot of stress! I will second what mymistake said about not having any children with things being as uncertain as they are for you. Children take up tons of time and energy and if a couple isn't careful, they can drift apart even if they have a good marriage. Adding children to an already shaky marriage is just not a good idea. Best wishes as you navigate through this difficult time for you.
    1 point
  37. I think it's a perfect analogy also. We (most of us) believed in Santa when we were children. In time we put away our childish ways and figured out (one way or another) that Santa wasn't real. To continue believing in Santa would have been embarrassing to say the least. But ohhhhhhhh---to have those feelings (and gifts!) that the belief in Santa gave us. Wait--we can have it! Just believe in Jesus/God aka Santa-For-Adults. No evidence, no logic necessary -- it's all about the feelings. (edited for clarity)
    1 point
  38. I don't think I could have picked a better analogy if I tried. You're strawmanning me a little, I never said Jesus did not exist, I talked about unicorns. I was using the analogy to demonstrate speculating on hypothetical somethings that have not been proven. If Jesus did exist, like Santa, than he was nothing more than a person that has become a legend since his death. Using your analogy, Santa is based on a person who did good deeds and was well liked/remembered. Somehow that became a fat, bearded, red-clad, ho-ho-ho decreeing, immortal being that lives in the North Pole and has elf slave labor to be able to cater to all the good little children, while keeping tabs on the naughty children. And somehow he carries ALL those gifts to everyone in a single night on a single sleigh carried by flying reindeer. So yeah. Maybe Jesus was just a little carpenter with a couple magic tricks who wasn't the biggest asshole around and tried to help others not be assholes. The "resurrected, son of god, perfect being" part might be the legendary lies we're referring to.
    1 point
  39. Yeah, this is quite typical. When we get a Christian visitor, if they are part of a denomination then they think we are ex-Christians because we went to the wrong church that taught us the wrong theology. If they believe they "don't have a religion, have a relationship" then they think we are ex-Christians because man-made religion did us wrong. If they stopped attending church altogether then they think we are ex-Christians because church did us wrong. The Christian visitors always look to their own personal experience to explain away our existence. It could never be the reason ex-Christians give - that Christianity is empty and false - because Christianity could never be false. Nah, it's bad denominations, bad churches and bad man-made religion. Funny how an all-powerful God who can do anything and is birthed inside people in such a way that Jesus changes lives can't stop these petty little problems from driving people away from Christianity. Something something free will because reasons?
    1 point
  40. I’m slowly reading through the testimony section. I hope everyone knows how important this section is to people like me. I need to know I’m not alone in my experiences and thoughts.
    1 point
  41. As I mentioned in another post where one of you was trying to deal with forced church attendance, cut out the pages of the Bible, saving the cover, and replace the insides with a detective novel that also includes lots of steamy sex. Then you can sit in church and read your "Bible" and everyone will be impressed with your piety. Another option is to cut out the center of all the pages so you have a hideaway spot for valuable jewelry. A thief wouldn't go through your bookcase opening Bibles to find your diamonds.
    1 point
  42. I'm in the midst of processing my deconversion. I wrote this today. I'm probably a little shrill, but whatever. I really hope any current believers that lurk here see this. I wrote a bunch of stuff over the years, much it from a place of incredible emotional pain and torment, as I felt my heart slowly get ripped away from my faith. It's hard to read now. However, this list came to me, after pouring through those writings today. 42 Reasons Why I'm Not a Christian Anymore The idea that if you are divorced because you were in an abusive marriage, you’ve got “no grounds” for a “scriptural divorce.” Seeing Christians more motivated by who they hate, than by who they should love. (Um, that would also be people groups that your savior, Jesus, said to love.) Attacking each other if you dare to offer any other rational idea to a problem than the accepted “party line.” All forms of “We’re a Christian Nation!” The idea that you will go to hell if you don’t worship or believe “X” way. I’m talking denominational differences here. Theological in-fighting. I’m right, you’re wrong, about “X” theological presumption. And writing endless books to prove the point. Pre-trib, post-trib, who cares?! Christians would rather argue about the evils of social justice in the church, rather than lift a finger to help the hurting. Oh, and if you do want to help the hurting or needy, you’re a liberal! You must believe the exact literal interpretation of creation as written in Genesis. Young earth teaching. Random TV Morality: “Desperate Housewives” is OK, but Harry Potter or Twilight isn’t. Arguments about symbolic rituals: baptism or communion comes to mind. My Christianity is better than yours! And we are all better than those that don’t believe “our way”. Jesus would be a Democrat. Jesus would be a Republican. Actually, any sentence that begins with, “Jesus would be a....” If Christians are being criticized, it’s the devil attacking. It's never because they are being cruel, mean or unfair. The evil upturned eye when you get when say you are interested in learning yoga or meditation. (“Don’t you know they are “gateway exercises”!?) Ignoring completely that meditation is in the Bible. The Boy Scouts are bad! They let in homosexuals! Beware of psychology! Science is run by liberals! (And therefore, has a hidden agenda!) 12 Step programs are evil! If you are gay, you can’t be a Christian! Elevating some sins over others. Social justice is “invading” the church and should be stopped, at all costs! Shooting your wounded. Shaming messages. If you are hurting, it’s clearly YOUR fault. You don’t trust God enough. All forms of “Should we be friends with this unbelieving family who ______?” (Fill in the blank….drinks, smokes, lives together, is less modest….etc) We have the right to diagnose and point out non-believer’s sins, and we do this in the name of “loving them” (Ours aren’t up for discussion, though.) We have the right to tell non-believers how they should and should not live, whether they want to live our way or not. We have the additional right to legislate what their morality should be. We have the right to email out slanderous, racist, vicious emails about President Obama, including portraying him as a MONKEY because we don’t agree with his political views. Never mind that the Bible says slanderers will not inherit the kingdom of God. Just details! (See 1 Corinthians 6:9-11) And on that note, only in the church can someone who is obese feel morally superior to a homosexual person. Ever heard of gluttony? God sure has. (See Proverbs 23:2) All forms of spiritual abuse. All forms of legalism. Rules are elevated to be more important than love and compassion. Grace? What’s that? Oh yes, something you say Jesus gave his life for freely, that you won’t extend to others. Got it. Invalidating people’s pain. Be sure to bring up how someone else is suffering far worse than they are…..somewhere in the world. Tea Party. Feeling it’s OK to slander anyone with impunity if they don’t share your religious beliefs, political ideals, or any other number of issues (fill in the blank) For shaming anyone who has every struggled as a believer, when they sought out answers to sincere questions and doubt. For completely invalidating someones faith experience, if they have left the church.
    1 point
  43. The New Testament was written by celibate monks who were secretly gay but hated themselves for being gay. This is really obvious in the Pauline epistles, and especially Revelation, where the author has the ultimate closet gay celibate fantasy of having 144,000 male virgins who inherit the Kingdom of God all to himself. Perhaps "the second coming" was just a secret in-joke?
    1 point
  44. Yes. Remember a Biblical marriage was between one man and all the women he could buy. Samson's parents tried to get him to marry one of his relatives. Abraham married his half sister and then allowed somebody else to marry her too. (Christians try to make up excuses but really there is no excusing that) Two sisters married the same man, Jacob. Esther becomes queen of Persia because even though she was a virgin she was the absolute best at sex (the best out of thousands of women). Ruth needed a husband so late one night she snuck into her cousin's (or was it her uncle's?) bed and said "cover me". People could own sex slaves. Even priests could own sex slaves. Most women didn't choose their husbands but were sold by their fathers. There was all kinds of sex in the Bible and much of it was immoral.
    1 point
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.