Ex-pentecostal preacher
sent in by Fred Brane
I became a Christian, about a year after the death of my first wife, while on active military duty in Kunsan Korea in 1977. The trek through Christianity went from baptist, pentecostal and non-denominational churches. Some of the churches were independents, not affiliated with any denominational organizations.
I read the bible trying to figure out what was what, finally found a minister who studied a lot and he taught me how to use methods of interpretation and what resources to use to dig out what was in the bible. He also told me I would not agree with any of the sources totally when I got into the deeper study, and he was right.
He made a statement from the pulpit on one occasion, he said "there are four to five thousand errors in the King James version Bible alone." When he made the statement I saw him cringe. He knew what was said was accurate, I found many as I studied myself. I don't think he included the additions, blatant lies and changes that took place over the centuries. These were just plain errors.
By the early eighties I was convinced that Christianity was under a self-imposed curse due to its history of murder etc. I continued in Christianity and later became a minister. My views of several subjects ran contrary to Christian theology. The hypocrisy in churches and in the pulpits was a real sore spot with me.
I found that most ministers did not study, nor did they know how to study. I also found that they did not have any kind of a prayer life. Later I found that they will cover up for and support other ministers in their ministerial associations that are blatant incompetents and sex offenders, this is in the protestant realm not catholic. The catholic record of cover-up is well documented.
The ministerial association I had some knowledge of would also black ball anyone who was a threat to them and their hypocrisy. This was not a painless discovery for me personally.
In 1988 I got a fifteen-minute spot once a week on a radio station that had a Christian format. I paid for the spot myself for the five year span.
After being on the radio for a while I was talking to a technician at the station one day and told him I had expected more open opposition from the local ministers. He told me that they would not do that but they would pray against me.
I was taken aback by his comment but it made sense, I was still very naive. If they openly engage an enemy they have to be able to answer for their own hypocrisy, improper ideas and wrong doctrine. This cannot be done when what they believe is false and is easily disputable. Those who do not study fear those who do. It is easier for ministers to hide behind denominational doctrine than to study for themselves.
I helped a young minister start a church in 1988. We were pretty like minded at the time. That like-mindedness changed as time went along.
My personal home situation was not good. The lady that I was married to became a Christian black magician. Our views were considerably different.
I use the term black magician in the context of using spiritual power to try to control, manipulate or do harm to another person etc. There are many in the church world that fall into this category be it from ignorance or vindictiveness.
No one reading this has to take my word for the concept mentioned in the above paragraph. There will, however, be those who know its truth.
I stayed with the church I helped start for about two years, there were signs that the situation was deteriorating but I mentally tried to over look the problems.
I started a series of messages for the radio broadcast on what happens to the mind of a hypocrite. After three of the series had aired I was called into the basement of the church and charged with preaching the programs with a bad spirit and that I should quit preaching till I got the situation or condition remedied.
Because there was a charge laid and a judgment given this constituted a tribunal.
It was about three days before I could pull the tapes of the programs to check to see if what I was charged with was in fact accurate. I worked a job and some days I was required to put in as much as fourteen hours. I didn't find the charge to be accurate, so I wrote a letter to those involved to make a defense for myself, in accordance with Deuteronomy 19:15-21. I asked for a meeting to be able to present my case. I felt that the charge had been on the witness of one, this is not proper in such a case.
The meeting was granted but I was not allowed to make the defense. I was given a set of papers stating their view as to me personally and I was given an ultimatum to either accept the pastor’s view on a point in Deut.28 or face ex-communication. I opted for ex-communication.
The pastor who instigated my ex-communication was the first person to exhibit pure hatred for me, and what was said on the radio programs. I spent six years in the Far East from 1964 to 1978, was in and out of Viet Nam, Thailand, Okinawa, Japan and Korea. I never experienced the intensity of pure hatred from anyone, even in Viet Nam, than I did from this man.
When a hypocrite is backed into a corner they will attack, you have brought their hypocrisy out to a point of having to defend it. If I would have been given the opportunity to present my case. The young pastor would have been shown to be the hypocrite, a false witness, and therefore would have had to quit preaching till he got his issues straightened out as he had made the judgment against me; according to Deut. 19:15-21.
I was emotionally devastated by the ex-communication. People in the church were told that if they saw me on the street etc they could speak but were not to share a meal with me.
There was only one predominately white church where I was known in which I was still welcome, and it was fifty miles away. I opted to go to a predominately African American church were I was not known. I had taught and preached in African American churches in the past and was always welcome and treated with respect. This church was no exception to that; I was shown kindness and respect.
After about a year or year and a half I helped an African American start a church. I stayed there and worked in that endeavor for about a year before leaving the area.
Tried different churches in the new area, finally pretty much settled in at a small non-denominational church. I was again licensed to minister after some time passed. When the pastor went on vacation I preached two services, which were recorded. After his return I was sent a notice and let to know that I wouldn’t be preaching there anymore.
The morning service was on a wounded spirit and the evening service was on covenant. At the morning service the congregation just sat there when the message was over. Normally they would get up and leave immediately. The message evidently touched people. The evening service was in-depth as to the strength of the covenant relationship. Covenant was a subject that I had spent a significant amount of time studying.
It was the same problem again; when it becomes evident you have studied, you are a threat. Covenant is a subject that few in the Christian church world have little to no in-depth knowledge. I make this statement from observation and from conversations.
Shortly after this last episode with Christianity I knew that I could no longer stay in that kind of an atmosphere. I knew that much of what Christianity propagated was wrong. I stayed for a while not knowing where to go next. Starting my own church didn’t seem like a good option.
I had started taking some astrology classes, and things begin to make some sense. I knew why Christianity did not want people to get involved in any of the metaphysical studies. If people understood their own true natures this would eliminate the churches ability to control people through imposed guilt.
I had known for several years that the church outlook on human sexuality was totally incorrect. They try to put people into a box where their sexuality is concerned and have them fighting the natural sexual energy. The gross sexual crimes committed by church leadership, by others involved in churches and those influenced by their ideas forced on societies is testimony that their doctrines are incorrect.
Religions gross civil rights crimes against women, gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered individuals and any one who thinks differently from their twisted point of view are innumerable
My own detox where Christianity is concerned has taken many years and is still not totally complete, but the process is well underway. It started almost at the time of conversion with questions that did not make sense and continued to question areas I considered incorrect. I have had to reevaluate every thing I thought I knew about religion and spirituality.
The astrology classes were a major stepping stone for me personally. The hypocrisy I had been exposed to within Christianity and having been expunged from its less than hallowed walls were also major points. I continued to study, I studied other religions, forms of spirituality and metaphysical topics. I discovered that religion and spirituality are not synonymous. There is no common ground.
Religion is the greatest dividing force on the face of the earth. Religion has been the biggest murderer on this planet as is well written in the blood of the millions who have died at its hands.
We as people have been brain washed into thinking that because something has been around for a long time it is credible. That is not the case, especially where religion is concerned.
Christianity propagates and thrives on self-hatred. Those who suffer from debilitating emotions such as self-hated are easier controlled. Christianity cannot survive if people cannot be controlled. The brain washing techniques applied in Christianity are self motivating, people are programmed to debilitate themselves through self hatred and trying to restrict natural human energies designed to make us whole.
The self-hatred keeps people off center and they in turn project hatred outward. People who hate are not able to think clearly. Their thought processes are self-restricting. The creative and reasoning processes of the mind are always clouded in such an environment.
It was a long time before I figured out why there has been so much murder and mayhem involved with religions. The old testament of the Christian bible records when another people were conquered, their whole populations had to be murdered and anything that had to do with their spiritual aspects was to be destroyed.
If a religion has to destroy another people just to survive, it is because it has no legitimacy or authenticity. Whatever god it allegedly adheres too is false if it cannot stand the competition.
Through out history anytime that Christianity has gotten a foothold in an area the next move is to destroy any other form of religion or system of spirituality.
Over the years that I have studied I have found the Christian bible to be a twisted compilation of myths and stories of older religions modified to suit the purposes of a controlling few. I find nothing original on its pages or in the religion that claims to adhere to its dictates; both I find to be totally illegitimate. The Christian bible is probably the most grossly flawed document on the face of the earth. As history records in blood the Christian bible has been used as the authority to commit the most horrendous crimes, and is still being used to commit more crimes against humanity.
Those of us in the deprogramming process from Christianity are survivors of its emotional, physical and sexual death warrants. Our wounds and scars are emblems of courage. We are now battle tried soldiers.
Ex-pentecostal preacher, Ex-Christian
Fred
Williams
Arizona
USA
Joined: 32
Left: about 50
Was: baptist, pentecostal and non-denominational
Now: solitary pagan
Converted because: was a widower of about a year and was looking for something
De-converted because: knowledge, reason and experience
email: fredbrane at direcway dot com
I became a Christian, about a year after the death of my first wife, while on active military duty in Kunsan Korea in 1977. The trek through Christianity went from baptist, pentecostal and non-denominational churches. Some of the churches were independents, not affiliated with any denominational organizations.
I read the bible trying to figure out what was what, finally found a minister who studied a lot and he taught me how to use methods of interpretation and what resources to use to dig out what was in the bible. He also told me I would not agree with any of the sources totally when I got into the deeper study, and he was right.
He made a statement from the pulpit on one occasion, he said "there are four to five thousand errors in the King James version Bible alone." When he made the statement I saw him cringe. He knew what was said was accurate, I found many as I studied myself. I don't think he included the additions, blatant lies and changes that took place over the centuries. These were just plain errors.
By the early eighties I was convinced that Christianity was under a self-imposed curse due to its history of murder etc. I continued in Christianity and later became a minister. My views of several subjects ran contrary to Christian theology. The hypocrisy in churches and in the pulpits was a real sore spot with me.
I found that most ministers did not study, nor did they know how to study. I also found that they did not have any kind of a prayer life. Later I found that they will cover up for and support other ministers in their ministerial associations that are blatant incompetents and sex offenders, this is in the protestant realm not catholic. The catholic record of cover-up is well documented.
The ministerial association I had some knowledge of would also black ball anyone who was a threat to them and their hypocrisy. This was not a painless discovery for me personally.
In 1988 I got a fifteen-minute spot once a week on a radio station that had a Christian format. I paid for the spot myself for the five year span.
After being on the radio for a while I was talking to a technician at the station one day and told him I had expected more open opposition from the local ministers. He told me that they would not do that but they would pray against me.
I was taken aback by his comment but it made sense, I was still very naive. If they openly engage an enemy they have to be able to answer for their own hypocrisy, improper ideas and wrong doctrine. This cannot be done when what they believe is false and is easily disputable. Those who do not study fear those who do. It is easier for ministers to hide behind denominational doctrine than to study for themselves.
I helped a young minister start a church in 1988. We were pretty like minded at the time. That like-mindedness changed as time went along.
My personal home situation was not good. The lady that I was married to became a Christian black magician. Our views were considerably different.
I use the term black magician in the context of using spiritual power to try to control, manipulate or do harm to another person etc. There are many in the church world that fall into this category be it from ignorance or vindictiveness.
No one reading this has to take my word for the concept mentioned in the above paragraph. There will, however, be those who know its truth.
I stayed with the church I helped start for about two years, there were signs that the situation was deteriorating but I mentally tried to over look the problems.
I started a series of messages for the radio broadcast on what happens to the mind of a hypocrite. After three of the series had aired I was called into the basement of the church and charged with preaching the programs with a bad spirit and that I should quit preaching till I got the situation or condition remedied.
Because there was a charge laid and a judgment given this constituted a tribunal.
It was about three days before I could pull the tapes of the programs to check to see if what I was charged with was in fact accurate. I worked a job and some days I was required to put in as much as fourteen hours. I didn't find the charge to be accurate, so I wrote a letter to those involved to make a defense for myself, in accordance with Deuteronomy 19:15-21. I asked for a meeting to be able to present my case. I felt that the charge had been on the witness of one, this is not proper in such a case.
The meeting was granted but I was not allowed to make the defense. I was given a set of papers stating their view as to me personally and I was given an ultimatum to either accept the pastor’s view on a point in Deut.28 or face ex-communication. I opted for ex-communication.
The pastor who instigated my ex-communication was the first person to exhibit pure hatred for me, and what was said on the radio programs. I spent six years in the Far East from 1964 to 1978, was in and out of Viet Nam, Thailand, Okinawa, Japan and Korea. I never experienced the intensity of pure hatred from anyone, even in Viet Nam, than I did from this man.
When a hypocrite is backed into a corner they will attack, you have brought their hypocrisy out to a point of having to defend it. If I would have been given the opportunity to present my case. The young pastor would have been shown to be the hypocrite, a false witness, and therefore would have had to quit preaching till he got his issues straightened out as he had made the judgment against me; according to Deut. 19:15-21.
I was emotionally devastated by the ex-communication. People in the church were told that if they saw me on the street etc they could speak but were not to share a meal with me.
There was only one predominately white church where I was known in which I was still welcome, and it was fifty miles away. I opted to go to a predominately African American church were I was not known. I had taught and preached in African American churches in the past and was always welcome and treated with respect. This church was no exception to that; I was shown kindness and respect.
After about a year or year and a half I helped an African American start a church. I stayed there and worked in that endeavor for about a year before leaving the area.
Tried different churches in the new area, finally pretty much settled in at a small non-denominational church. I was again licensed to minister after some time passed. When the pastor went on vacation I preached two services, which were recorded. After his return I was sent a notice and let to know that I wouldn’t be preaching there anymore.
The morning service was on a wounded spirit and the evening service was on covenant. At the morning service the congregation just sat there when the message was over. Normally they would get up and leave immediately. The message evidently touched people. The evening service was in-depth as to the strength of the covenant relationship. Covenant was a subject that I had spent a significant amount of time studying.
It was the same problem again; when it becomes evident you have studied, you are a threat. Covenant is a subject that few in the Christian church world have little to no in-depth knowledge. I make this statement from observation and from conversations.
Shortly after this last episode with Christianity I knew that I could no longer stay in that kind of an atmosphere. I knew that much of what Christianity propagated was wrong. I stayed for a while not knowing where to go next. Starting my own church didn’t seem like a good option.
I had started taking some astrology classes, and things begin to make some sense. I knew why Christianity did not want people to get involved in any of the metaphysical studies. If people understood their own true natures this would eliminate the churches ability to control people through imposed guilt.
I had known for several years that the church outlook on human sexuality was totally incorrect. They try to put people into a box where their sexuality is concerned and have them fighting the natural sexual energy. The gross sexual crimes committed by church leadership, by others involved in churches and those influenced by their ideas forced on societies is testimony that their doctrines are incorrect.
Religions gross civil rights crimes against women, gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered individuals and any one who thinks differently from their twisted point of view are innumerable
My own detox where Christianity is concerned has taken many years and is still not totally complete, but the process is well underway. It started almost at the time of conversion with questions that did not make sense and continued to question areas I considered incorrect. I have had to reevaluate every thing I thought I knew about religion and spirituality.
The astrology classes were a major stepping stone for me personally. The hypocrisy I had been exposed to within Christianity and having been expunged from its less than hallowed walls were also major points. I continued to study, I studied other religions, forms of spirituality and metaphysical topics. I discovered that religion and spirituality are not synonymous. There is no common ground.
Religion is the greatest dividing force on the face of the earth. Religion has been the biggest murderer on this planet as is well written in the blood of the millions who have died at its hands.
We as people have been brain washed into thinking that because something has been around for a long time it is credible. That is not the case, especially where religion is concerned.
Christianity propagates and thrives on self-hatred. Those who suffer from debilitating emotions such as self-hated are easier controlled. Christianity cannot survive if people cannot be controlled. The brain washing techniques applied in Christianity are self motivating, people are programmed to debilitate themselves through self hatred and trying to restrict natural human energies designed to make us whole.
The self-hatred keeps people off center and they in turn project hatred outward. People who hate are not able to think clearly. Their thought processes are self-restricting. The creative and reasoning processes of the mind are always clouded in such an environment.
It was a long time before I figured out why there has been so much murder and mayhem involved with religions. The old testament of the Christian bible records when another people were conquered, their whole populations had to be murdered and anything that had to do with their spiritual aspects was to be destroyed.
If a religion has to destroy another people just to survive, it is because it has no legitimacy or authenticity. Whatever god it allegedly adheres too is false if it cannot stand the competition.
Through out history anytime that Christianity has gotten a foothold in an area the next move is to destroy any other form of religion or system of spirituality.
Over the years that I have studied I have found the Christian bible to be a twisted compilation of myths and stories of older religions modified to suit the purposes of a controlling few. I find nothing original on its pages or in the religion that claims to adhere to its dictates; both I find to be totally illegitimate. The Christian bible is probably the most grossly flawed document on the face of the earth. As history records in blood the Christian bible has been used as the authority to commit the most horrendous crimes, and is still being used to commit more crimes against humanity.
Those of us in the deprogramming process from Christianity are survivors of its emotional, physical and sexual death warrants. Our wounds and scars are emblems of courage. We are now battle tried soldiers.
Ex-pentecostal preacher, Ex-Christian
Fred
Williams
Arizona
USA
Joined: 32
Left: about 50
Was: baptist, pentecostal and non-denominational
Now: solitary pagan
Converted because: was a widower of about a year and was looking for something
De-converted because: knowledge, reason and experience
email: fredbrane at direcway dot com
Comments
God Bless
1) Can you please use a name other than "Anonymous".
2) Do you understand that we are intimately familiar with the tenets of your religion, and that we have chosen to examine them critically rather than accept them unthinkingly?
3) Do you understand that we have concluded your religion is as false as all the others? (If so, why do you continue to make assertions as though we shared your belief in the Bible? That's complete nonsense.)
4) Do you agree that it is foolish to simply believe whatever you are told, or what you were brought up to believe? Do you understand that each of us must decide for ourselves what is true and what is not?
5) Do you acknowledge that there are intelligent, honest, hard-working people who have reached different theological conclusions that you?
6) Can you offer anything approaching credible evidence to support any of your beliefs?
Good day.
Thank you for promptly responding to some of my questions.
You said "First the comments that were left earlier were in response to the one that claimed to be an ex pentecostal preacher. So that would imply that he once shared my beliefs. Now that we have adddressed that."
I don't follow you. If someone once shared your beliefs, does that mean that you should converse with them as if they still share those beliefs? Your remark is all the more perplexing to me given that it has been made manifestly clear that we no longer share your beliefs. So why speak as though we do? You still have not addressed that question.
You "To say that you are intimately familiar with any religion would imply that at some point you were involved in some religion."
No, not necessarily. I hope you will agree that it is possible to have intimate knowledge of serial killers without being a serial killer, or intimate knowledge of insects without being an insect. Moreover, I would argue that one can in fact gain are more useful and scholarly perspective on a belief system without being an proponent of those beliefs.
You "And now you would like to try and make someone believe that you have some how evolved into some more intelligent life form because you no longer claim to be a christian."
That's a very unsavory remark, and completely uncalled for. I do not agree with your theological position, and I have reached my current view through extensive study. Can you accept that fact at face value, or must you attempt to paint me as arrogant and irrational?
You "I am inclined to be believe that you have slipped a little further back on the intelect scale."
And you base that opinion on what? Do you even know what my position is? Do you know anything at all about me? I'll ask again: do you admit that intelligent, honest, hard-working people can hold theological views that are different from your own?
You "I do not believe that any person has to share my beliefs to make it to heaven."
That's a strange caricature of the question I asked. I don't believe in your heaven, and neither do most of the regulars here. That's why I did not phrase my question in terms of "heaven". Please re-read my question (which I re-stated just above) and attempt to answer that directly. Thanks.
You "But to label ones self as an exchristian would imply that you choose to be negative rather than positive..."
Do you also label ex-Mormons, ex-Hindus, and ex-Muslims as being "negative"? I suspect not. Let me repeat: we disagree with your theological position, and we do so through reason, study, and debate. There is nothing negative about attempting to discern what is actually so, as opposed to what one wishes to be so. DO you disagree with that?
You "I choose to believe that I will have eternal life as well as eternal salvation.If I am wrong I will never know HUH?"
Absolutely so. However, that does not imply that you have used your time in the best way possible, or that you have made any positive contribution to humanity.
You "But if I am right I will know and so will you.I have read the bible from cover to cover 6 times,So in response to the comment about believing what you are told does not apply to me,I was a skeptic and that is why the time was spent reading the bible."
My comment was not directed specifically at you. My question was a general one: is it wise for one to accept everything one is told or brought up to believe? You did not answer that. As for being a skeptic, I must ask if you chose to address your skepticism by reading the Bible exclusively? Have you availed yourself of any works that purport to debunk Christianity and the Bible? If not, why not, and how can you suggest that you were ever a true skeptic?
You "I do agree that all religions have their problems. And I am not saying that mine is any better...."
But of course you ARE suggesting that yours is better! Are you not saying that yours and only yours is the ONE TRUE RELIGION? If not, then I've totally misread you, and I apologize. Please do clarify, as I'm having difficulty following your points.
You "I love the way I feel when I go to church,I have seen God do a lot of things in my life. I am a sold out beiever."
Well put.
You "The only thing that I see as false is the absolute rediculous belief that there is no God."
Do you also think it ridiculous to not believe in Zeus or Mithra or Krishna or Osiris? Do you believe in them? I'll assume you do not. You most likely do not believe in them because you have seen absolutely nothing that would suggest that they are anything more then make-believe deities. If so, then you hold essentially the same view with respect to those entities as we do toward Yahweh/Jesus/Jehovah. If you think our position is "ridiculous", then please explain why your position is not equally ridiculous.
You "But the bible covers that subject too, It says a fool has said in his heart that there is no God."
And your point is what? Because the Bible says it, it must be so? Here's another maxim that I'll share with you: The thinking person says with her mind that belief without reason is foolishness. There. Now we have two little sayings to choose from; one from the Bible, and one I just made up on the spot. Of the two, I prefer mine. How do you propose we go about seeing which captures more of the truth?
You "Last of all if anonymous is the name i choose then that is the name i will use."
Okay, then do you mind if we make up a name for you? It's frustrating trying to disentangle all the anonymous posters here--it makes it difficult to maintain a dialog because we don't know who said what. Can we call you "Shirley"?
Shirley: "I dont have a lot of time trying to prove that God does exist to someone that doesnt want to believe. There are plenty of people that do."
True, very true. But there are none who do it well, in my opinion. Why do you suppose that all those people who argue for your god employ so many fallacious arguments, engaging in so much special pleading and erecting so many straw men? It's almost as though they cannot construct a cogent argument. What's your take on it? Which apologist(s) do you feel make the most compelling arguments? (Please don't say Lee Strobel!)
Shirley: "At one time there was a growing number of people that thought that you were less intelligent if you believed in God. The growing number of believers out weighs the non beleivers."
Would you mind sharing the source of your statistics? That's actually a very tricky thing to measure, particularly when believers wish to include all the "apathists" among their numbers. By the way, by your estimation, what percentage of the population must accept a doctrine as true before we can safely conclude that it is actually true? Would that be 51%? Or maybe 90%? Any guess?
Tootles.
First, I don't believe that the existence of the Biblical god is possible. It's a self-contradicting entity, supposedly all-loving and vengeful at the same time. Gimme a break.
Even if your god did exist (and I rather doubt it), I wouldn't worship it because I consider it to be a petty, genocidal monster unworthy of respect.
I do believe that it's possible for some sort of god-like being to exist, but I haven't been able to verify the existence of any so far.
And no, I do not like organized religion. In my opinion, faith and spirituality are unique to each individual, and are not suitable matters for group participation of any sort.
Isnt that a little strange that a person would stop beleiving in christianity to be a paaganist.I would think that some sort of therapy is in order.
Yes, after years and years and years of mind-numbing, life-denying and just plain idiotic "believe or burn" horse manure, I think most people would benefit from a session with a therapist.
Preferably one who specializes in post-traumatic stress syndrome and/or abuse recovery.
But switching to a less-judgemental religious practice such as Wicca or Ásatrú is a good way to recover without dumping spirituality altogether. (I consider myself an agnostic Buddhist Ásatrúar and like you, Mr. Brane, am a solitary practitioner.)
I know that this is an old saying,I can not see the wind but i feel the effects of the wind therefore I beleive.
Lousy reason to believe, in my opinion. The air is not "nothing". It's made out of molecules: Oxygen, nitrogen, and many other gases. It's matter, pure and simple. That's why you feel it. That's why it *cough* destroys churches in Florida.
Shirley: "Are you people saying that you dont believe in God, or are you simply saying that you beleive in him but you have a problem with religion, or are you saying that you beleive in him but just dont want to be a christian."
First, "we people" hold a variety of opinions. One thing that we agree upon, however, is that there is no logical reason to believe in the god of Christianity, and indeed many to reject her as an absurd invention of Bronze-age humans.
Shirley: "Isnt that a little strange that a person would stop beleiving in christianity to be a paaganist. I would think that some sort of therapy is in order."
Isn't it a little arrogant and condescending for you to suggest that? What if I told you that I thought you needed therapy to overcome your irrational belief in invisible conscious beings? Would that sit well with you?
Shirley: "Give God another chance..."
We don't believe in your god. What if I implored you to give Krishna a chance? Wouldn't you think that I had failed to grasp even the most fundamental aspect of your position? I hope so, because that may give you some inkling as to how patently absurd your statement sounds to us.
Shirley: "Only God will never fail you."
We don't believe in your god.
Shirley: "To the rest of you i have the feeling that this blog is a place where you all go to whine and complain about the actions of christians that you have encountered in your past."
That's a petulant remark. I've never once complained about how I was personally mistreated by Christians. I find that to be completely irrelevant to the question of god's existence.
Shirley: "I think that you are miserable and misery loves company."
Now you are grasping at straws. You have absolutely no way to make such an assessment. It merely highlights the absurdity of your position.
Shirley: "I have way worse experiences with non christians than with christians."
My experience is the opposite. What does that show? Nothing.
Shirley: "None the less God is still God... "
We don't believe in your god.
Shirley: "I believe that God could give anyone that reads this the peace that they desire if they only beleive."
It appears you are advocating blind mindless belief. If not, please correct me, but I've not seen the slightest appeal to reason nor to evidence from you--just blind and mindless belief, over and over again. No thank you, I intend to keep my mind intact.
Shirley: "May God bless and lead each and everyone of you into all truth."
We don't believe in your god. And even if we did accept the existence of the capriciously absurd being you worship, we certainly wouldn't think that you had any control over her. Is any of this starting to sink in?
P.S. Your spelling is atrocious. I counted 14 spelling and punctuation errors.
Where did you hear about your God or Jesus, or did God and Jesus just reveal themselves to you?
How old were you, the first time you heard about God or Jesus?
This person is much more than an example of a moron. This person is a true Chritian [sic].
Either that, or her posts are intended by someone as a joke.
I sure hope that wherever her petroleum plant is, it isn't near a populated area.
;')
I'm actually quite pleased that you find me amusing; that gives me license (in a sense) to reciprocate. To me, visitors such as you are the utmost entertainment. I like challenges, and I like to figure things out. There is nothing quite so mysterious and incongruous to me as the mind of a believer. Not only is it a puzzle that fascinates me endlessly, it's downright amusing.
I can't help but make an analogy. I once heard a physicist describe the greatest challenge of harnessing fusion energy; it's called the "containment problem". Physicists can initiate a controlled fusion reaction, but they can't keep it going as there is no container that can withstand the intense heat; the ball of plasma melts through everything. The greatest hope seems to be suspending the glowing blob in a magnetic field. However, according to one physicist, "It's like wrapping Jell-O with rubber bands." That is the perfect analogy for what it is like to attempt a logical conversation with a died-in-the-wool believer: it's just like wrapping Jell-O with rubber bands. Let me explain...
I have attempted to explain repeatedly that as we do not believe in your god, making statements that presuppose she exists (e.g. "God loves you") is futile and counterproductive. It's like me telling you how to behave to appease the aliens from Zoogon. But, just like Jell-O, your reasoning somehow oozes past my rhetoric, and you think I am telling you not to use the word "god". You can use the word "god" all you want--I use it all the time. We all do. You can also talk about aliens from other star systems. But the moment you assume we all agree that such things exist, the discussion is completely side-tracked. Just to be clear, I'll add a couple more rubber bands: Saying "I think that we have been invaded by aliens because I have observed the following..." is okay by me. However, saying "You had better avoid eating tuna fish because it upsets the aliens," or "The aliens love you and are here to help you" is just plain nutty. Now, I know full well that you will do violence to what I just said, it's just a matter of how. And that's the entertaining part.
Of course, your replies are filled with such ghastly misinterpretation, as is nearly every post by visiting Christians. There are not enough rubber bands in the world to contain your gelatinous reasoning. Your insistence that we "prove" your invisible friend does not exist is, of course, the most absurd of all. I'll save that for latter. Gotta go now...
Wow, I'm very impressed by your wit and your razor sharp tongue. U r just 2 smart 4 me. You dealt the 2 of us such a blow I'm still reeling.
You have a really great workout at the sports club.
Bye now.
First of all, I'm female.
And I don't know if my views are shared by many people at Ex-C. That isn't really important, though. The logical fallacy of argumentum ad populum indicates that you can't prove something true just by having lots of people say so.
I wouldn't even call my willingness to discover gods a "belief" in gods. I merely have not ruled them out as a possibility, because it's easy for me to imagine beings more advanced than humans.
On the other hand, the god of the Bible is so erratic, emotional, clumsy and unintelligent in its behaviour that I think its existence is virtually impossible.