How I became religion-free

sent in by undeceived12

I was 16 when I went to this church which was supposed to be a church that helped and provided spiritual support to people who didn’t have it.

It all went well (at first). I received Jesus and like a little kid I started to follow a life that not only was a very hard life to live, but an almost impossible one. I read my bible, prayed, and had a relationship with God, or so I thought. I imagined that my walk in the path to Jesus was going well until I started to see some things that were going on in the church. I saw many things that led me to believe that the pastors were stealing from the people, but as a good Christian, I kept my mouth shut. More and more I was convinced that the pastors were only looking for money. As the weeks went by the preacher would ask for money every single week, on top of the ten percent supposedly established by God.


Well, he (the pastor) made up tons of excuse: the church needs funds to pay pay that… People, including me, would give blindly. As time went by we started seeing that that youth pastor, which by the way is a lazy ass good-for-nothing idiot, started to get better stuff – brand new car…well, two new cars, one for him and one for his wife, which was the pastors daughter. He had the most expensive cell phone and cell phone plan; he was constantly buying very expensive things from the mall, and was always showing it off to the rest. Not long did I have to wait until he announced that the Lord had blessed him and that he gotten a new house.

People started to wonder where the money was really going, and I got fed up with all of the asking for money. It got to a point where they asked for money in big amounts, ($300 - $400) from each person and claimed that god had sent them to be blessed and that they were the chosen ones. They said that a servant of god was not to live like a normal person, but a rich one.

Oh yeah, and the rest of the people who had nothing to eat, let them die hum?

Well I got really fed up and started to ask questions. No one would answer anything and everyone would always say not to worry about anyone but myself. Well I spoke to other people about that issue and they all felt the same as me. One of the leaders asked the pastor for a report of the finances, and all hell broke lose. The pastor called him a sinner and so many other things.

That’s when I knew I had to speak out.

I spoke to other people, and without anyone saying anything, we left the church. About half of the people left, and not because I spoke out about having things set straight, but because they were tired of being always asked for money.

Now the pastor of the church blames me and my family and other members for the loss of half his congregation. He reacted in a way that Jesus was not reflected at all.

Now I’ve learned that religion is just a money-making scam, and that they take advantage of people who are looking for something to hold on to. Now I see everything with logic and not with "spiritual eyes". The emotion that religion gives you only lasts for so long, for some it’s a short period of time, for others it’s longer, but it will soon pass.

Meanwhile, preachers are still taking money from desperate people, and are getting rich off of other peoples hard work.

joined: 16
left: 19
was: Christian
now: Agnostic/Atheist
converted because: In search of a better life
deconverted because: It's a big lie told by preachers to get money.
email: undeceived12 at hotmail dot com


Anonymous said...

Welcome Undeceived!Amazing,you know
more at 19 than most people ever do
Churchianity is indeed big buisness,and is taking advantage of
the weakess most vulnerable of all people.
I encourage you to speak out to your generation about the con game of christianity.

Anonymous said...

Congratulations, Undeceived! As freedy said, you are far ahead of so many who, at a much older age, are still blind and choose to be so!

It matters not what the preacher says...blaming you and others for his problems...he is pathetic and has to put the blame on someone else...which is par for the course. What he says and his opinion mean diddly squat!

Keep your eyes open and you will go far!

Anonymous said...

If all churches were required to post a perfectly transparent accounting of every penny contributed by their congregations, they would all go out of business.

As L Ron Hubbard, who founded "The Church of Scientology", said "The best way to get rich is to start your own religion"

Albert said...

Dano wrote "If all churches were required to post a perfectly transparent accounting of every penny contributed by their congregations, they would all go out of business."

Sorry to burst your balloon but there are actually churches where the financial statements (in detail) are available to anyone in the congregation.
Too many posters here see everything in simplistic, all or none terms. I think it's a hangover from the fundamentalist way of thinking. In reality life is many shades of grey.

Anonymous said...

Hey, Albert:

No balloon bursted here!

I've seen the booklets that come out and show how the money is least the funds the pastor, et. al., is willing to admit was received and can be justified. Whether or not the funds accounted for was the total amount of funds received is highly unlikely, since the cars and clothes and vacations and jewelery and alcohol and prostitutes and other items are never accounted for.

Not only that, but the names of the folks who made the donations are also in the booklets so everyone can be shamed into giving more than they want or can afford so no one will think they are stingy.

The poorest folks who give more than they can afford are equally criticized: "Who do they think they are? They can't afford what they gave. Who are they trying to impress."

Such good xian attitudes.

I've seen it myself with my own baby blues. Whether accounted for or not, money makes xianity a lucrative scam.

As for shading.....religions are completely in the same color as the blindfold worn by the believers.

Anonymous said...

I'm talking where every penny is counted in a locked room with cameras, recording and posted like they do in count rooms in the hotels in Vegas.

If they are just publishing a statement without rigid controls, it is worthless.

Anonymous said...

Albert!You of all people talking shades of grey?
I GUESS THAT MEANS "JESUS CHRIST" IS JUST ONE SHADE OF MANY MESSIANIC GODMEN!..........(budda,krishna and mohammed are equally part of the shades of gray) Thanks for your imput.

Anonymous said...

Con't,....Albert,even if the church is totally honest about where the money is going ,it is still a scam.The "scam" envolves the false teachings of fundies, and how they con their followers to give more than they can afford!
We may be simple, but we're not
at least we are naive and gullible

Anonymous said...

oops ,sorry that's we're not naive
and gullible!

freeman said...

When your preacher has a nicer house and a better car than you, you may then write SUCKER on your forehead.

freeman said...


Glad you figured it out at a young age. You have the best years of your life ahead of you without the guilt trips.


Anonymous said...

If someone cons you out alot of money, do you care what car they drive? No you just feel embarassed,
& like you've been raped!
I think we're missing the point if we focus on how big a preachers house is.The "tithe & offering"
doctrine is nothing but a fear
tactic to relieve people of their hard earned money!

Anonymous said...

Years ago, I was on Rev. Robert Tilton's mailing list. One day, someone called from that organization and said that Rev. Tilton said the Holy Spirit had told him that I would give him $25. I replied, "The Holy Spirit didn't tell me!" SILENCE on the other end. I started laughing. Gee, for some reason, they never called me back!


Anonymous said...

Evelyn,...I was watching Tilton during the unholy-days & I tivo'd it for my sons to see.(I try to
educate them on how crazy churchianity is).
Suddenly, I recieved letters from him. He sent a life size poster of himself praying,& many other ridiculous trinkets.
So I guess that means that fudies know what were watching!!

Anonymous said...

Let me ask you a simple question!

If a person is decieved,how does he know that he's not decieved?

cdmon said...

aniny wrote: "Let me ask you a simple question!

If a person is decieved,how does he know that he's not decieved?"

Ah, another simple question!

If you are xian, you are deceived. As with most deceived xians, Y'all are in denial.

Proof? You still believe jeezus is coming back to get you? He told his disciples he'd return within their lifetimes. That was 2000 years ago and you are still waiting...

I'd say you're just as deceived as they were!! Of course true to form, you will adamently deny it. So I guess you'll never you're deceived.


ZeNaBi said...

Thanks for thew positive comments, and
yes i will keep speaking out about the issue,there is still people from the church who talk bad about me and people who think like me,but hey what can i do? ignorance...well that all for now,check out my blog.

Anonymous said...


Regarding your complaint about prophecies not being fullfilled.

I can see how easy it is to read things like this in (MATT 24:29)....and come to the conclusion that this prophecy must be wrong because those things spoken of by Christ didnt happen...IMEDIATELY? as it states in this verse!

But let me tell you something about this prophecy. ..Jesus isnt talking about the church age,or the last judgement.or even of his second coming?

He was talking about the immediate distress to the jews and of the conditions in that great city- during Siege,and the attack,and encampment,and the final DESTRUCTION of the city of Jerusalem.

And worse still! He was talking of the destruction of the "Holies of Holies" within the center of the temple.

He was talking of the destruction of the very dwelling place of God on earth.The romans were to replace the jewish God,with those signs,and symbols that the romans were well known forwas believed to have dwelt

He was talking of the conditions that will accompny the siege of jerusalem.He was talking of the Destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans!

I assume you are refering to Christs prophecy about his GENERATION statement?

I'm afraid you have been listening to too many charismatic/pentecostal people?

Sadly their modern ideas of biblical prophecy is getting to be a worry for most christians!

Let me tell you something! Those particular prophecies in the NT that talk of Jesus Christ's IMEDIATE return,arnt in any way talking about his "literal" Second coming!...or!of the end of the world.

Jesus was in fact talking about

1.The end of the JEWISH STATE.

2.Abut the end of the CITY.

3.And of the end of the TEMPLE.i.e..its ceremonies. And of the departure from it of the SHEKINAH of God) or,of God's presence having departed from the midst of the temple!

The free preaching of the gospel to the world,and the sight of many jews believing in that gospel.was the sure sign to everyone alive at that time,that the final destruction of those three things in Jerusalem...Will soon be fullfilled!

Those signs that Jesus talks of, were to be seen and felt by every jew or gentile that was around at the time of jerusalems destruction.

I have only touched this subject sorry its so brief an explanation.

Anonymous said...


A little more on that prophecy of Christs which you mentioned.

You will know that the term "Forty Years" crops up on occassions in the Bible.

And whenever this term crops up in the NT you can bet your bottom dollar that its in regards to something similar mentioned before in the OT!

This term 40 years,always seems to accompany the word-GENERATION!

Didnt he go into the desert to be tempted of the devil 40 years.

We find it in (Psalms 95:10).."FORTY years was I grieved with this GENERATION" See how the author points to a generation being 40 yrs.

Meaning that the jews were a rebelous and hard hearted people.and because their hearts wernt right with God they were sent into the wilderness by God for a period of 40 yrs.(Psalms 78:8)

So when we read of the term generation in the bible,and it being mentioned by God.Then please bare in mind that thats the time span that he really means.

The jews to this day know that period has "the Generation of the wilderness"

It seems that Jesus hadnt known anything then! about the theology of some of the modern day charismatics in the world today?

Of course i'm talking in regards to his statements in (MATT 24:34)..and particulary his words like...."This generation shall not pass,till ALL these things be FULLFILLED"

So if Jesus really meant a literal period of years..upto the fall of jerusalem? then his Prophecy was spot on!

I must go! sorry.things to do that wont wait.continued...

Anonymous said...



Another thing about Christs prophecy,was his discription of fearfull sights in the heavens.And great signs from heaven.

Looking in (Luke 21:11) we find mention of some of these signs mentioned by Jesus.He said they would be fearfull.and very frightening to all who witnessed them!

Turning briefly from this....

Regarding JOSEPHUS the great Jewish historian.And the Roman historian TACITUS..Both of these two mens tesimonies of the fall of jerusalem matched perfectly with eachothers version of what was seen and heard over the doomed city of jerusalem that day.

In the records of both these very respected men,they both describe the same events and taled about the sights seen in the sky over the city during that time.

Josephus writes,"The signs and prodigies,which preceded the taking of the city," and he goes on to describe what he himself saw and heard! "A star hung over the city like a sword,and a comet continued for a whole year"...."The people being assembeled to celebrate the feast of unleavened bread,at the ninth hour of the night there shone so great a light about the alter and the temple,that it seemed to be bright day,and this continued for half an hour"..and "At the same feast,a cow,led by the priest to sacrifice, brought forth a lamb in the middle of the temple"...continuing his description of what he saw "The eastern gate of the temple,which was of solid brass,and very heavy,and was scarecly shut in an evening by twenty men,and was fastened by strong bars and bolts,was seen,at the sixth hour of the night,opened of its own accord,and could hardly be shut again,"..."That before the setting of the sun there was seen over all the country chariots and armies fighting in the clouds,and besieging the cities"..."That at the feast of pentecost,as the priests were going into the inner temple by night as usual to attend service,they heard first a motion and a noise,and then a voice as a multitude saying,Let us depart hence"

Again!.."That one jesus,an ordinary country fellow,four years before the war began,when the city was in peace and plenty,came to the feast of the tabernacles,and ran crying up and down the streets day and night,A voice from the east, a voice from the west,a voice from the four winds,a voice against jerusalem and the temple,a voice against the bridegrooms and the brides,a voice against all the people"..during these times the local law tried to stop him doing these things! he was hated by all because of his constant shouting in the streets these warnings.but he still kept on shouting "Woe,Woe to jerusalem!"..he did this for seven years five months, especially at festivals,and he grew hoarse nor got tired; But went about the walls,and cried with a loud voice,Woe,woe the city,and to the people,and to the temple; and as he added at last,Woe,woe also to myself,it happened that a stone from some sling or engine immediately struck him dead"

To the jews there isnt a more credible historian than josephus who reported them.and appeals to the testimonies of those who saw and heard them.

Remember! tacticus in his writings describes the exact same events taking place.(he would know because he knew the roman soldiers who saw these fearfull sights atr the siege.)

A Dr Jortins remark is very pertinant. "If christ had not expressly foretold this, many,who gave little heed to the portents, and who knew that historians have been too credulous in that point, would have suspected that josephus exagerated,and that tacticus was misinformed;but as the testimonies of josephus and tacticus confirm the predictions of Christ, so the predictions of Christ confirm the wonders recorded by these two historians"

These were true sightings and events that was seen in and over jerusalem during the period upto and after the fall of jerusalem!(Both of these great historians are still given the highest respect by the jews and the romans. They are the first people that the jews/romans go to for their answers.

I realise you wont be at all bothered about who saw what? But these details i've just writen are only a few of the signs that were seen in the skies over the city of jerusalem at that time.

I will try to get back to explain about "The sun being darkened"(of course this word isnt talking in a literall sense,but in a "figuraitive" sense.

The meaning of this word SUN points to the presence of the Shekinah of God.Or the Divine presence in the Temple! (Who is known in scripture "has a sun and a shield" This SUN talks of the presence of God on the mercy seat.

And the word MOON in this scripture,were it says "It shall not give its light" is to be treated in a "Figuarative" sense. It dosnt refer to the roman empire,or to the city of jerusalem.It talks directly about the "ceremonial law"

The moon-the church is said to be have under her feet,(REV 12:1)"A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet"

So the cerimonial law was now under the churchs feet,so to speak!or buried,no longer needed in the worship of God.That age has gone,the Gospel age is now here.

Anonymous said...

I hate to tell you pault, but if God wanted to convey a message to us earthlings, don't you think he would have a more precise and clear way of doing it other than vague sightings of things in the sky? Don't you think he would use 21st century technology to talk to us today, instead a vast collections of scribbling by people a couple of thousand years ago.

Well, in fact he has. He has directed me to inform you and the other 3 billion Homo Sapiens who are about ready to destroy this planet and them selves, that this childish game of "My God is better than your God," is offensive to him, and he wants it to stop. He want's me to inform you that he didn't give you a brain, so that you can argue about what ancient Israelite, said what to whom.

Your creator want's you to quit pretending that you know how the universes were created, and why. He want's you to use all of the mental faculties that you were given to try to see things realistically, get rid of all of the silly demons, Satan's, and pagan sacrifice stuff, and have a rational discussion about how you are going to save this planet for your children, and grandchildren!

Dan (I don't remember writing this. I must have been in a trance)

cdmon said...


You know I find it interesting how you use apologetics to give scripture a meaning that it never had just to attempt to prove it inerrant.

So I'm going to try to keep this short and simple. If it states something as clear as this statement is, that this scripture does not mean what it apparently says.

But for the record I was referring to following scripture which had nothing to do with "generation."

Matt 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

How much clearer does that need to be?

How this can mean anything other than what it says, just means you are trying to read something into it that it never meant.

Pault said, "But let me tell you something about this prophecy. ..Jesus isnt talking about the church age,or the last judgement.or even of his second coming?"

Please explain how you know without a doubt exactly what he meant. Were you there? I didn't think so... You have assumed that because his second coming didn't occur when he said it would, that means this scripture doesn't mean what it so clearly states.

Let's apply Ockham's razor to this. The simplest explanation is that this so-called prophecy is a lie. Anything else is adding your own assumptions, which is quite obvious from your post.

You see pault, even your biblical namesake was obviously convinced the jeez would return during his lifetime. He made numerous references to this within his epistles.

Typical xian apologist to defend the big lie with adding your reasoning to fill in the gaps. Sorry I just don't buy it.

You see pault I have heard about 40 different apologetics for this same unfulfilled prophecy and all of them have done the exact same thing you have. Reading things into it that it obviously does not say. You know and quite interestingly no two of you had the same story as to what this passage really means.

Please try again, and this time please don't assume. When you assume you make an ass of u & me.


Anonymous said...


regarding your question about (matt 16:28)

Clearly you are in no mood for biblical explanations?

But while i'm here.I might as well try to correct you about your understandable distorted view of this verse!

In this verse,amongst others.Jesus was talking to his disciples about his immediate "Coming again" to his disciples by...HIS SPIRIT!

Didnt he talk of this particular event in (JOHN 14:18) "I will not leave you comfortless;I will come to you"

Please notice how he said the words "I" will "COME" to you...Meaning he will come again to them after his death and Reserrection.We know that he was to return to heaven,yet he wouldnt really leave them alone.because we read in john that In this verse in john that He will come again to them immediately after his assencion i.e.The day of pentecost.or the "Coming of the Spirit of Christ"

That was the time that this prophecy of his in(matt 16:28)was fullfilled-literally!

Please bare in mind,that the first time Jesus came to this earth,he came in Humility..has a baby,as a servant!But the next time he was to come he was to come to his church in..POWER! not has a mild man,not as a servant to no man.but has a king.

In the next verse of the next chapter(matt 17:1) Jesus even gives his disciples a brief glimpse of this glory,that he was about to recive-has a king! And the disciples saw this when he was transfiguered to,peter,james,john.

Jesus is reminding his disciples about the things he told them,concerning the coming of His Spirit to the believers heart.

Then notice what he says in (JOHN 14:19) which is the following verse

"Yet a little while,and the world seeth me no more;but ye see me;because i live,ye shall live live also"

notice how Jesus says it will only be "A little while" before they see him again? he even calls his absense from them will only be "A little while"? only a little while?

Now how do the charismatics etc explain this one?

Jesus came again "by his Spirit"-too Plant the new church on earth!

He came again-to destroy Jerusalem,in punishment to the jews for handing him over to die.

The world knows very well that John lived long enough to see all these prophecies fullfilled.

This prophecy of Christs is very similar to those prophecies to the OT believers who didnt live long enough to see those many prophecies to the Israelites,that they would eventually see Gods promised land.Some did live long enough to see it.

Just like some christians lived long enough to see the coming of the Holy Spirit to esthablish CHRIST's church on earth.(Or! the begining of the KINGDOM of CHRIST!)


PETER talks about the fullfillment of this very prophecy of Jesus'in (Matt 16:28) when he writes in (2 PETER 1:16)

If you are still with me? Let me just write it for you...Quote! "For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of the Lord Jesus Christ,but were eyewitnesses of his majesty" inquote. notice how he says they were "eyewitnesses" of his POWER.

webmdave said...

Right, well Pault, you may not realize that II Peter only got included in the Bible after quite a bit of controversy over its authenticity.

That authenticity, by the way, is still debated by Christians.

Regardless, here's the rule of thumb when it comes to interpreting "Scripture," as per "true" believers: Verses are to be taken as literal except when the verse is not meant to be taken as literal and that's when it's allegorical, or mystical, or well, just not literal. How can we tell the difference between when a verse is meant to be understood literally versus when it is not meant to be understood literally?

Dummy, the Holy Spirit will tell you!

Man, what a stupid question.

How can we know it is the Holy Spirit and not a self-justifying game we are playing with our own imaginations?

Again, dummy, the Holy Spirit will tell you! Anyone with the Holy Spirit knows that he/she knows that he/she knows that he/she knows!

Case closed.

cdmon said...


It is amazing how you fill in the blanks once again with scriptures which really have nothing to do with the one I quoted and your own reasoning. Under what criteria do you state that what this scripture says means something totally different?

Your attempts to "correct" me what this "really" means is nothing more than your own conjecture. It is merely your opinion based on twisting it's meaning to fit your own personal wishes.

Let's look at the facts, according to your buy bull the apostle paul expected his return within his lifetime also. Didn't happen.
2000 years later still hasn't happened. It will never happen because it is a lie along with the other 49,999 discrepancies and contradictions and absurdities the buy bull is full of.

You see, far be it from you to admit to the huge mistake that is so obvious.

He said, "see "HIM" coming in his kingdom." This absolutely nothing to do with the day of pentecost, or with "power" as you have so eagerly added. And you know what it says about adding to the scriptures, don't you?

You know pault, you need to try to sell your rhetoric to someone who will fall for it.

It really doesn't matter to me what you believe, you have that right. I, however, will not be converted by your silly efforts to interpolate the scriptures in an attempt to make them to mean what you wish them to mean and not what they so obviously state.

Pault, you're not the first to try use apologetics. But I'm not convinced. And certainly many others here are not convinced.

You want to convince me? Arrange a personal appearance with the jeez. I'd love to meet him face to face. Then we could ask him what that scripture really means. So do this and you might even save all of us in one fell swoop. Otherwise your words are nonsense, and nothing more than wishful thinking.


Anonymous said...


Forgive me for going on a bit more,about the true explanation of the recent scripture's we discused.

And I really do understand your lack of interest in biblical things(other than to mock them) And i realise you are cold to any of its contents.

But i must say one more thing regarding those prophecies we spoke about.

I tried to explain(though i relise not very clearly) the fact that everything that i wrote on this subject,was only to repeat what all the giants of the christian faith believed in! Many of them even died at the stake still believing in this same doctrine!

If you should look at the history of the Christian faith.And the translation of the NT into the English language,you would find that my claim is only what all those other christians have believed in during their own lifetime.

Below is a brief sample of those greats who believed in the same explanation of those scriptures which i told you about....

All the Reformers who went to the fire alive .i.e..the Martyrs.

All the Translators of the original greek scriptures(the textus receptus)into the English language...such as...Tindale.Whycliffe.Coverdale.Cranmer.etc,etc.

Others who believed in this explanation of the immediate return of christ.which i've just explained to you.

Was such greats of biblical comment such as,Martin Luther.Calvin.Bunyan.Wesleys.Spurgeon.the Pilgrim fathers.The Waldensians in europe.Erasmus.Cromwell.Latimer.John Knox.Protestant Kings and Queens of europe.

I could go on.But i dont need to.

All the church fathers since the church was given birth by Christ 2000 yrs ago,believed in this doctrine!

My explanation are not some sort of personal revelation given me in a dream sometime.

Anonymous said...

Pault, why does the word "Protestant" mean? Okay, I'll tell you, it means to "PROTEST", against something. Okay, what was being Protested during the Protestant Reformation? Okay, I'll tell you, the "BIBLE". You can't possibly believe that you are going to historically present the bible as some unchanging divine writing, that would just prove your ignorance.

"The Protestant Reformation was a movement which emerged in the 16th century as a series of attempts to reform the Roman Catholic Church in Western Europe. The main front of the reformation was started by Martin Luther and his 95 Theses. The reformation ended in division and the establishment of new institutions, most importantly Lutheranism, the Reformed churches, and Anabaptists, a radical branch whose name means "those who baptize again". It also led to the Counter-Reformation within the Roman Catholic Church, which theological draft and background were drawn up with the Council of Trent (1548–1563), when Rome struck back against the fundamental ideas defended by the Reformers, like Luther. The rift between Catholics and Protestants would lead to the breakup of large European empires into the modern nation-state system."

Again, most of the nations of Europe were defined by religious groupings, which is why the Roman Empire earlier attempted to pull them together under "one" common belief system, by creating his own religious Council, and forcing the entire Empire to bow to its creed.

Oh, and Jesus didn't build a church, if anything, the character of Jesus fought against the rules of religion. He didn't keep the Sabbath day holy, he was seen as one who needed to break up the Orthodox Jewish religion. The early churches of the Roman Empire were plane jane churches, with no 'solidified' teachings, just letters and epistles being passed around. Much like churches today, from one church to another, have their own little differences, there are currently over 38,000 versions of the christian denomination around the world. The Roman Emperor Constantine I, wanted to unite "all" churches of the era under one rule of law, and he set up the early Roman Church council. The council was made up of early priests, who gathered together the many differing views of Jesus, and local beliefs, and formed a council, i.e., the First Council of Nicaea ~325CE, etc., to vote on such matters. The results of these votes, i.e., that Jesus was Divine (which was "NOT" a unanimous vote), etc., were written down, and a religion was formed around the core of votes. The NT was canonized well after these votes had taken place, and only epistles and letters which supported the vote were placed in the NT.

Oh, and my explanation that Jesus didn't give birth to "anything", is part of the historical record, of which, it appears you are sorely lacking in knowledge. If you haven't been dreaming, then, where do you get your information? Perhaps, from a dreamer, who wants to make their dream a reality.

It took over 350+ years after Jesus' supposed death, before the Roman Emperor forced the "many" varying religious groups, to follow the doctrine of the NT and the Nicene Creed. Jesus failed to present himself as a god to enough people, to bring them together, there was not one archeological piece of evidence, i.e., statue of Jesus, etc., excavated from that era, or any following era for over a thousand years.

Pault: "All the church fathers since the church was given birth by Christ 2000 yrs ago,believed in this doctrine!"

You are obviously young, and not very well educated on your own religion, take some pride in yourself and learn about your own belief, I am well aware of why I don't agree with your religion.

"Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus, anglicized as Tertullian, (ca. 155–230) was a church leader and prolific author during the early years of Christianity. He was born, lived, and died in Carthage, in what is today Tunisia.

Tertullian denounced Christian doctrines he considered heretical, but later in life adopted views that came to be regarded as heretical themselves. He was the first great writer of Latin Christianity, thus sometimes known as the "father of the Latin Church". He introduced the term Trinity, as the Latin trinitas, to the Christian vocabulary[1] and also probably of the formula "three Persons, one Substance" as the Latin "tres Personae, una Substantia" (itself from the Koine Greek "treis Hypostases, Homoousios") and also the terms vetus testamentum ("old testament") and novum testamentum ("new testament")."

One of the earliest writers of christian literature, who helped found the Roman Church, and created or termed the word "trinity", defected. He started his "own" little branch of religion, called Montanism, a form of early Pentacostalism.

Pault, you were given the information by someone, perhaps you should find out "why" that person/group presented this information to you, becuase it is based on ignorance at best, and blatant self-righteous lies at worst. I have found, through research, that I no longer respect those who are ignorant, as I search for truth, and that I don't really respect ingorant self-righteous people who want to "lead the masses", without taking the responsibility to validate their beliefs with logical reasoning.

cdmon said...

pault said, "And I really do understand your lack of interest in biblical things(other than to mock them) And i realise you are cold to any of its contents."

Pault you jump to too many conclusions. First off you have no idea what my interests are. You think you have every thing figured out. Well, sorry to disappoint you, but once again you are wrong.

pault said, "I tried to explain(though i relise not very clearly) the fact that everything that i wrote on this subject,was only to repeat what all the giants of the christian faith believed in! Many of them even died at the stake still believing in this same doctrine!"

Again, I have to ask, were you there? What we have is a buy bull that has been translated so many times. We have stories which were so heavily borrowed from earlier pagan stories, which I might add are so close to the "gospel" stories of jeezus, that it is clear the buy bull was plagerized from these.

And as for the doctrine, you really have no idea what doctrine was actually being taught by the apostles, other that the reworked versions of the letters written by frightened, half crazed men high on ineffable chrism. And hand selected at the numerous councils. Some by way of intimidition or poisoning or violence. Yeah, these councils were some ghastly affairs, and far more political based than spiritual.

You have named numerous characters who had strickingly different beliefs than the next.

When we look at xianity we see there are literally thousands of denominations, no two can agree totally on what the buy bull says.

If an almighty, omniscient being ever wrote a book, "All you want to know about god, but were afraid to ask" or in your case the holey babble, it would be written in a style that would be far beyond that of human capability, in a style that would be studied and never being able to be replcated.
A person could read it from cover to cover in one night, and there would be no question what it means, and no one would ever have to argue about its interpretation, or disagree. Even a young child should be able to understand it clearly. There would never be discussions about inconsistancies, discrepancies or contradictions. The buy bull is not such a book. It is far less intellegently written than other writers of that same period. It doesn't even hold up to itself. And you will not convince any of us otherwise.

Pault, if you wish to keep on believing in this plagerized book of old pagan mythology, knock yourself out. But please do me a favor and dispense with trying to prove something you cannot prove.

And for the love of pete, stop trying to analyze what I feel about the buybull. You really have no idea.

Your assumptions are getting tired. Ever heard the old adage "it is better to be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt?"


Anonymous said...

wow; talk about vanity and ignorance on both sides. One very nearly gets it right while the other self-reighteous person goes on babbling about not believing in God, then gives his own reasons for believing in God and the messages God gave him to share with believers. What Nonsense!

All of you need to look up and research Full Preterism. Christ came and did all He said he was going to do, when he said he was going to do it. For one to be so narsissistic as to believe God doesn't exist simply because you want to live your life according to your rules, and the supposed believer to be again; so narsissistic as to believe that Christ was never speaking of a reutrn, wow, what can I say? Look up Full Preterism, both of you, please. If you ever hope to see any of your past or future relatives in peace again, learn to love if nothing else.

webmdave said...

Sheesh Jerry, talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

"You idiots! I'm Spartacus!" (Loose paraphrase of JBs post.)

Archived Testimonial Pageviews the past 30 days