Sent This Letter To My Pastor

[mick]

Hi Dave,

 

I hope you are doing well.

 

I have already outlined for you some things about my reasons for not believing. Here is a very short list of scriptures. (There are many, many more) This list has nothing to do with contradictions, scientific absurditites, false historical accounts. (Those such issues are easier for a CHristian to deal with in my opinion, through other interpretation methods, or by simply not caring about them, and simple denial.) The most poignant issues, in my opinion, are the scritpures that show Yahweh/Jesus/etc to be morally corrupt and cruel. Remeber he is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

 

I personally believe now that the actions of God in the OT CAN NOT be equated to a being that is considered Omnibenevolent. (This is not limited to the Old Test, but for this email I will only concetrate on those.)

 

I admit that it is at least theoritically possible that a god could exist, he could be all powerful, and he could do anything, including kill and destroy anyone he wished to. However, it now offends my intelligence and heart to simulatenously state that the same being is "good". In fact he simply would not be good, at all.

 

Anyway here is a list of versus. Explain to me how this God is Omnibenevolent. (remember Omnibenevolence is a VERY high standard of goodness.) I'm curious to hear your answers. We are'nt even touching on tons of scriptures here, or the entire concept of Hell (which I think is repugnant). God himslef sends Moses to free the Israelites, then purposely behind Moses' back HARDENS Pharoahs heart so that HE WONT free them! Why?? If he is good? So, he can glorify himself by KILLING the first born Egyptian children and babies on the passover night? Yaweh ordered the slaughter of every women, child and infant in city after city after city during the conqyest of Canaan. Jesus is essentially the second person of the Trinity, one and the same being as Yaweh. In the NT Jesus says "Let the little children come onto me and do not hinder them" BUT in the OT he drowns an entire planet filled of them, AND he has the Israelites slaughter little children over and over. Anyway I'll stop with the overview. Here are some verses to look at. Why is this God NOT just the ancient war God of primative Barbarians?

 

These scritpures below are not "taken out of context" (at least not in the sense that they don't say what they say) They are not "twisted" by me in anyway. These verses simply "are what they are", and Christians who are aware of them must deal with them. 1 Peter says to be prepared to defend the faith, so please try to address them for me. I know of people at New Hope currently, who are in various levels of leadership, who simply think these types of verses are mistakes that shouldn't be in the Bible. That kind of aproach can't work for me, though I hoped it would.

Omnibenevolence?

 

"This is what the Lord says: Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass .... And Saul ... utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword." (1 Samuel 15:3,7-8)

 

(My comments on this one: This action against the Amalekites was supposed to be an act of righteous revenge or retribution for actions the Amalekites had taken against the Isrealites hundreds (I think like 400 or 500 years earlier. -I can't remember how long it was, I did that research a while ago.) That would be like my little children and babies being slaughtered by the sword for the actions of Irish people committed during the times of the Pilgrims. This action of revenge (or "Divine Judgement" as so many Christian apolgetics I have read say) is repulsive to me, and "un-Christ-like" (I mean that only by the way a typical Christian thinks of Christ. I actually find that many of the words of Christ in the NT are very mean, and also many of his actions as well) After all, he is the one who will be in charge when living, breathing Human beings that he created are being cast into the Lake for Fire for an eternity of torment. ("Lake of Fire", that is just mind bogglingly cruel imagry and awful. Many Christians I know just water down Hell to be something realy mild in their own minds so they can cope. Or they just don' t think about it at all. They sure don't evangelize people. Part of the reason it all seems so false now, is just how rediculous all the imagry is. To me, it is now obviously just the babblings of very primitive, ignorant people)

 

OK here some more. I will limit my commentary on the rest:

 

"Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourself every girl who has never slept with a man." (Numbers 31:17-18)

 

"The Lord commands: "... slay old men outright, young men and maidens, little children and women" (Ezechial 9:4-6) -I love how it is neccessary to add the word "outright" when it comes to killing the "old" men, like killing them is an even more obvious neccessity. He says to kill all kinds of poeple in the list, but then adds the word "outright" when talking about killing the old men.

 

"The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their women with child ripped open." (Hosea 13:16) -doesn't it say in 1st Corinthians "love keeps no record of wrongs"?. God sure keeps record of wrongs and acts harshly against those he considers to have wrong him.

 

"When the Lord delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the males .... As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves." (Deuteronomy 20:13-14)

 

"You will eat the fruit of the womb, the flesh of the sons and daughters the Lord your God has given you." (Deuteronomy 28:53)

 

"The Lord said to Joshua [...] 'you are to hamstring their horses.' " (Exceedingly cruel.) (Joshua 11:6) -I know they are only horses, but still. I'm sure they have pain receptors in their Biology!

 

"... Go and smite the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead with the edge of the sword and; also the women and little ones.... every male and every woman that has lain with a male you shall utterly destroy." (Judges 21:10-12) -I hate how it uses "little ones" in this verse. My grand father used to call us "little ones". At least most of the other verses uses "sucklings" or "infants".

 

..And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation. And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him. And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp. And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses. (Numbers 15:32-36 (King James Version))

 

-Dave, here is another thing that really, really bothers me. God, (Yaweh.The Father/Jesus, etc) has the Isreallites stone people to death, often. Stoning to death is a ghastly thing for so many reason. Historically, it was definately practiced by the ancient Israellites, just like described right here. The "people" would often take someone out and just stone them to death. I have recently thought about how awful the condition of the hearts of the "Stoners" would be. The hatred and anger necessry to throw rocks at someone with a mob until they die. It's not just bad for the person they stoned to death. It's bad for the stoners themselves. But think about, you, Juliana, Jim Spearin, a bunch more etc, etc having to take me out to edge of town and surround me, and to start throwing rocks at me until I am dead. It was a mob. And it was Yahweh's orders (And Yaweh is Yahweh/The Father/Jesus). I'm sure if you guys had to do it to me, you would weep, you would feel horrible that you were throwing rocks at me. You would probably feel like you are doing something terribly wrong. Any you know what, that is because you would be doing something terribly wrong.!!! The Bible here says that God (Yawhe/the Father/Jesus, etc) ordered the people to stone this poor man to death for collecting firewood. It was inheritantly, morrally wrong to do that to him. It was inhuman. As a CHristian who believes the Bible, you have to defend it, and say "no, it is not inheritantly immoral to stone someone to death like this, over something as small as this, because my God ordered it, even if it was way in the past. God is separate from time, and he cannot change, so it is irrelevant that it was in the past. If this same God asked you to stone someone to death today, would you do it? If this same God told you to slaughter a baby with a sword, or rip a preganant women open and dash her fetus agains the rocks, would you obey that? I had an 18 year old Christian in a PM debate that told me, if he believed God wanted him to cut a baby up with a knife right now, he would do it, have no problems doing it, and he would be happy doing becuase he would be obeying God. It is conversations like that that make me realize that fundamentalist Christianity is crazy.

 

..And he (Elisha) went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.

And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them." 2 Kings, 2:23-24.

 

(tare means ripped them apart to death. I have done some research on the Christian defenses of this action, which are the most terrible and embarassing I have read. One common theme I have heard is that the Hebrew interpretations is off and it should read "young men" or "youth" instead of "little children". I have found just as much research that says the correct interpretation is "little children", not males of a certain age like 18. Their defense fails there. BUT they take it further and say that this was more like a mob of angry 18 year old men, and that God's actions were an issue of "public safety". PUBLIC SAFETY!?! Are you kidding me? God sends 2 female bears to rip apart 42 human beings (little children when interpreted correctly) as an act of PUBLIC SAFETY!! I know, you never said this to me. But this is the kind of Christian answer I get to such verses. That was Christiananswers.net!! That one stupid answer made me realize that their entire apologetic site had no crediability if they could say something that stupid and actually mean it. I actually respect the Christians more, who simply say something, "yeah, God will kill with severe anger and fury if he wants to. Hey, he's God, he can do what he wants. Though that approach is utterly awful in my opinion, it is at least more logical. I had another Christian that you know very well try to tell me that God ordered all those Babies slaughtered by the sword as an act of "mercy". He said "the sword was a pretty painless way to go for a baby, if they had been allowed to grow up the Isreallites may have mistreated them. MISTREATED THEM!!?? Are you for real? Cutting them up with a sword is not mistreating them? Why could not God simply have ordered the Isrealittes, TO BE NICE TO THEM!!! Adopt them or something. Teach them about goodness. Something like that.)

 

"I will also send wild beasts among you, which shall rob you of your children." (Leviticus 26:22) -killing children because the parents disobey God's laws. Threats, threats, fear tactics and more threats if you don't do what the ancient religious preists and leaders said to do.

 

"A curse on him who is lax in doing the LORD's work!

A curse on him who keeps his sword from bloodshed!" (Jeremiah 48:10)

 

Dave, Is this really the "word of God" or the cruel thoughts of Bronze age warriors? I know many Christians, (I'm sure some at New Hope) who just don't believe these things about God. How can I do that? I tried. It didn't make sense to me. The Bible is our ONLY source for the things of Christianity. In your last email you talked about knowing in your heart God is real. I respect that. BUT if you chuck the Bible, and do that, you're not really Christian, are you? Is it OK for me to just believe in a generic God, to reject that he did any of these things in the Bible (which I do reject, obviously), still believe there is a nice god up there? It doesn't work. I now have along list of reasons why I don't think there is a God that is Omnipotent, Omnibeveloent, etc that don't even involve the Bible.

 

If I, Mike, were omnipotent, there would not be a SINGLE child abducted, raped, tortured, and killed. Not even one, ever! No child would die from not having food. There would never be some terribly sad parents, weeping day after day, because their little child is dying of cancer. There would be no people in agony, day after day. Nice people like "name removed" would not get afflicted the way he has been afflicted. (You know "Hell" was originally "thought up" by very ancient people, as a mechanism for them to deal with the fact that bad things kept happening to good people, and that good things seemed to happen for really bad people all the time. Ancient people made it up, so they could say, that King who chopped the head of my wife, is going to get it after he dies, even though nothing but good things are going to happen for him in this life. It is really sad, that Christianity perverted it into, "no, everyone deserves to be tormented for all all eternity, unless you beleive what we say. When you really take of the goggles of faith and analyse it from the open mind of "what if this were all false?" I think it utterly falls apart.

 

Slavery is another really good and interesting example. Slavery is probably one of the most abhorant things that human beings have ever done to each other. God never comdems it. Not even once. The Bible goes into rediculous, painstaking detail, about how a priest should rip the limbs of a lamb in a certain procedural way, sprinkle the blood in a very specific direction, etc. But he doesn't even bother once to say slavery is wrong. In fact, the Bible justifies it often. There is a verse that talks about how long you are allowed to beat your slave for. I forget that one, but it talks about how the Isreallites were basically allowed to beat a slave right up to the point of death, just so long as he does not die. IF he dies, you would get "punished" but only if he dies. The point here is, God not only never forbids slavery, but gives out laws and rules about it, without comdeming it. He was supposed to God. It should have been banished in one of the 10 commandments for goodness sake.

 

I could go on forever Dave. If you want to respond I would love to hear from you. Most specifically I would like to hear your defenses for the scriptures themselves that I have shared in this email. Tell me how you deal with them. Again, this was actually a very small list. Some Christians end up saying something as weak as "well that was the Old Test" or "we have a new covenant now", etc. That approach doesn't work at all. For one, we have not even talked about the worst part of Christian dogma at all yet, the doctrine of Hell. The doctrine Hell is literally, infinitelty worse that all those scritpures I have shared combined. Put it this way. If I remember correctly, Jehova Witnesses believe that, on Judgement Day, all of us (CHristians included) that are not JWs, will be DESTROYED forever. I.e. there is no Hell. My belief is that they (JWs) beleive in an infinitely more merciful God, than the evangelical Christians do. There is NO way, in my opinion, that God, if he exists and is merciful in any way, is going to be LESS merciful than I would be.

 

Look forward to your reply,

 

Mike

[Purple]

That was well written, if a bit long. It takes a lot of courage to write to your pastor like that. I hope the outcome is good, although I doubt he will write back. He might, but I doubt it. Keep us updated though, I'd love to know what happens, and I commend your courage.

[Eponymic]

I would be interested in hearing what he says too!

 

I looks like you did a good job from getting too emotional. It's always important to stay away from that.

[♦ nivek ♦]

mick:

 

Far too long. Remember that most folks have an attention span that requires your point, and summary, conclusion be made within a mere 200 words.

 

In your letter, you are tossing out facts and figures, items and ideals which he'll know by "heart" and can recite them back to you with cross references.

 

Using the bible to prove the bible incorrect to a christian is as tough as their use of it to convert an unbeliever.

 

Condense, summarize, and make your points short, pointed and sharp.

 

One page maximum, maybe with a second of footnotes and documentation if you feel it necessary to ensure accuracy in your quotes of the bibull and other allied materials.

 

"Short 'n sweet"

 

kevinL

[Amethyst]

I liked your letter, but I'm going to have to agree with Nivek. Most people are not going to read that whole thing, unless your former pastor is an exception. I finished it but I read novels regularly. Most people will probably skim through it briefly, then respond with some tripe like "you took the verses out of context, god is loving, etc." That is, if your pastor responds at all.

 

I personally would just say "Please remove me from your membership, I consider myself a non-believer now and do not wish to ever come back." Actually I wouldn't have even written at all, I'd have just left without saying a word, but that's just me.

[Purple]

I liked your letter, but I'm going to have to agree with Nivek. Most people are not going to read that whole thing, unless your former pastor is an exception. I finished it but I read novels regularly. Most people will probably skim through it briefly, then respond with some tripe like "you took the verses out of context, god is loving, etc." That is, if your pastor responds at all.

 

I personally would just say "Please remove me from your membership, I consider myself a non-believer now and do not wish to ever come back." Actually I wouldn't have even written at all, I'd have just left without saying a word, but that's just me.

 

 

When I left I felt the need to say something. I actaully met with our Senior Pastor in person. A lot of people told me "DON'T!", but I really felt I needed to. So, I can understand why someone else feels they need to. That said, after I had the meeting with said Pastor he did his best to fuck up my life. It didn't work and now, with it ten years in the past I'm glad I did, it kind of burned bridges for me. Anyway, warm thoughts and do be careful.

 

Is it a requirment to graduate seminary that you be a dick?

[bluewizard]

I liked the well-thought out letter, if the preacher does write back it'll be one of those excuses Christians make up like saying the Messianic prophecies are part metaphor and part reality(it must be a wholly real prophecy) and other things you'll hear as excuses.

[chefranden]

I don't think it is too long.

 

Worry about that sort of thing is ok if you want to write a popular blog, but the purpose of this letter is to get some shit off your chest, and not really to illicit a response.

 

If this pastor can't finish it and respond, he doesn't give a shit anyway.