“There Is Something Wrong”

This post title was part of a comment made in response to a lengthy conversation taking place on a Christian blog. When one reads the NUMEROUS comments (for and against Christiandom), no matter which side you’re on, you will most likely find yourself saying,  there is something wrong here.

Personally, I saw many things that were “wrong” in the conversations. But of course my perspective was from a non-Christian viewpoint. In any case, I’m sharing a few of the comments for consideration and discussion.

The topic of the post was why “we” killed Jesus … and the blog owner expanded on this as follows:

[T]he WORLD (societal construct) is flawed. We all live in this “world” of blame-shifting, fear, revenge, murder, greed, envy, and “us against them.” Therefore, it’s this MINDSET that killed Jesus. It’s the same mind behind the system we are all a part of, whether we like it or not.

This person believes the aforementioned “mindset” is “our” natural inclination to SIN, which by definition means: “Estrangement from God; An act that is regarded by theologians as a transgression of God’s will; The act of transgression against divine law; Any thought or action that endangers the ideal relationship between an individual and God.”

Or perhaps, as one person defined it …

I would call all horrendous actions “sin”. It doesn’t matter whether the act is committed by “religious people” or “non-religious people”. All horrible acts are “sin”.

NOTE: I agree that “horrible acts” are most definitely an offense against other humans. But are they SIN?

Many in Christianity believe humans are sinful by “association.” That is, because Adam and Eve (our spiritual parents) ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil after God told them not to, we are all guilty of the “sin of disobedience.”  However, the blog owner says this is not what the bible teaches and contends the doctrine was “invented” by Augustine in the 5th century … based on a “mistranslation of Romans 5:12.” Hmmm. A mistranslation …

NOTE: I’ve always found it interesting that much of today’s bible interpretations come from the early church fathers, who were simply men (!) who determined (i.e., interpreted) the meaning of various passages in the Septuagint (the oldest Greek version of the Old Testament translated from the Hebrew) based on their personal perspectives. I often wonder why religionists grant these individuals with such special powers of “determination.”

Rather, in his opinion, we are sinners simply because we sin. But why do we sin? Because we live in a “flawed societal construct and it’s this CONSTRUCT that led to Jesus’ death at the hands of the Romans and Jews.” Got that? O.K. Let’s continue …

He goes on to say this is very different from saying we’re born sinners because if everyone were born sinners then Jesus would’ve been born a sinner and that would create a theological absurdity, which a proper understanding would not do.

NOTE: Someone called this “word salad.” I tend to agree.

The question was then asked by the blog owner: By whose moral standard is right and wrong determined? Why are certain acts conferred immoral? What standard is being used? Public sentiment? If so, then (he contends):

[T]he South was morally right to own slaves since the “public pressure” in their culture was to own them. So, by what right do you have to judge slaveholders? And there are still parts of the world where selling children is normal. Who are you to judge those cultures? And on what grounds is your moral superiority?”

It seems he wants to know what moral standard we are appealing to if not the “morality” of the bible. Of course he believes there is no morality except via the invisible supernatural entity called “God.” Yet there are primitive tribes existing on this planet today who have never heard of the Christian god and seem to manage their “morality” just fine without any outside assistance.

NOTE:  Certain Pygmy tribes found in Africa have no identifiable cults or rites. They have no totems, no gods, no spirits. They bury their dead without special ceremonies or accompanying items and receive no further attention. In fact, some tribespeople, when asked about “God” respond, “Is he on a rock? On a white-ant hill? On a tree? I never saw a god!”

Me neither.

Final point: Doesn’t it feel like there’s something missing when our determination of what’s “wrong” is based on the ideology presented in a centuries old book full of myths and legends? What ever happened to the basic ability to understand and judge based on a simple perception of the situation or facts at hand?

85 thoughts on ““There Is Something Wrong”

  1. As you know from what I already wrote I agree with you. We know we have a better understanding of what is right and wrong in society than the people who wrote the bible 2000 years ago. We know this because we find some of the actions described in the “holy” book as horrendous, unacceptable, and criminal. If we know that now, then we couldn’t have gotten our morals, or idea of what is right and wrong, from people who did not know those actions were wrong. I feel we develop our ideas of morality based on the wellbeing for us as a society. Positive things that improve our well being as a society are right or moral, things that negatively impact the wellbeing of society are wrong or immoral. Be well. Hugs

    Liked by 8 people

    • Scottie, I love reading your comments … especially when you get going (as you have on that “other blog”). And although you’ll probably never make any inroads with JB or the blog owner (I’m not giving him any publicity), there could very well be those following along that will see the sanity of your remarks. *fingers crossed*

      Liked by 4 people

        • You were in the ministry correct? How do you reach out to people who seem threatened to ponder humanity and justice without a deity to either blame or lean on? I kept thinking that J.B. was deliberately toying with me when taking things out of context, saying one thing and then claiming another and so on during our replying to each other. Seemed to be pointless at some points. Hugs

          Liked by 2 people

        • That’s what he does. Is you really want to see the real side of faith its people trying to love you in. Not argue you in. SpaniardIII is a good example. He’s wrong but kind. Says what he believes and then leaves you with a learning experience, if nothing else, kindness. These guys like JB are not really interested in you as a person, they like to make you feel inadequate or pose questions that take volumes to answer but they won’t give an honest assessment of their doctrine. My blog is better with him gone.

          Liked by 5 people

        • You had to kick him out also? Jim said his blog was better off also. You know it looks bad for a christian to be so disagreeable that they keep getting kicked off every blog they comment on. IMO. I don’t think he does his cause any good. Hugs

          Liked by 3 people

        • IMO. I don’t think he does his cause any good.” You are exactly right there Scottie. Biblically speaking, specifically from the Synoptic Gospels, JB is damaging the doctrines of grace and reconciliation that Yeshua was reforming inside Judaism. Excellent point! ❤

          Liked by 2 people

        • Well said. Like hitting your head against the wall and expecting the wall to suddenly wake up. But what is the alternative as reasonable responsible people? If we don’t engage no one learns anything, if we do engage we get attacked and they muddy the waters. Frustrating. My thing I am working on now ( and it is important to me personally ) is to know when I am tired and frustrated so I do not get snippy or lash out. I have done that before and regretted it. I feel once you resort to name calling you basically lose any discussion. I have to learn to let it go sometimes. But I do try. Hugs

          Liked by 4 people

    • Scottie you have done very well sparing with JB on the blog Nan mentioned. You had him trapped against the ropes, however he attempted to cheat by trying to strangle you and kneeing you in the groin. Glad you pummelled him.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Every human being is created in the image of the Divine Creator and as such has some basic instinct. After the fall of man human beings came to know good and bad, and that is what each person can feel inside himself or herself. Each time man has to make his or her own choice of going one way or the other way, doing good or bad.

      One does not have to be a believer in God to know what is good or what is bad. There is the natural instinct which each of us has inborn. though we get influenced by many things and by many people and because of those influences our character can be formed or deformed. Growing up we can become a good or a bad person or from an innocent child becoming a guilty adult.

      The Bible gives very good guidelines which people are free to follow or to forget. States also tried to put rules and regulations before their citizens, some presenting good but others also presenting bad regulations.

      It is a shame how we can find people in the Christian religious world who go against others, call them names and dare even to tell untruths about them to others. Their unchristian attitude undermines the Christian faith and makes more and more people going away from religion. A shame.

      People should know that the Bible is the Best Guide for each human being, giving the necessary answers and showing the right way or showing to which moral rules we should keep and how to behave.


      • People should know that the Bible is the Best Guide for each human being…

        This is merely an unsubstantiated personal claim, not a viable unanimously agreed upon answer by Christians, FYI. The “Bible” — if he’s referring to the 4th-century CE canonical Hellenic Bible — represents a very different teaching than what Yeshua’s/Jesus’ ancestors and fellow 1st-century Sectarian-Palestinian Jews were teaching and seeking in their reforms… all under the enormous oppression of one of the GREATEST Empire’s in history: Rome. And followed by a deeply rooted and successful sociopolitical culture of Hellenism from c. 323 BCE to the Roman versions beyond 330 CE. Neither aligned with Palestinian Judaic-Messianic fervor at the time. That’s why Rome destroyed the Temple and Torah-loving Jews in Syro-Palestine by 73 CE at Masada. Sadly, way too may Hellenist Christologians (Christians today) know very little to nothing about the real history of their religious ideology. :/

        Liked by 2 people

  2. Mans morals are frequently testing gods morals, and those tests have forces change for the better in protecting people against the Abrahamic onslaught of self righteous judgement and conviction of certain members of our society. If it weren’t for godless, Humanist ideals and pressures you’d be a puritan woman to be seen and not heard, not voting, not driving, not owning, not working, and on and on. We can collectively outdo god at every turn when it comes to morality, until we infuse Christianity or Islam into the culture and then it’s war! On everyone but the white male.

    Liked by 5 people

  3. The only way to interpret moral considerations is to first have the moral sense to do so. Obviously, this sense of morality must precede any religious moral system before any interpretation of it can come about. So, according to the blogger, this prior moral sense is the ‘mindset’ that cannot be trusted… because it is sinful. Therefore, any interpretation of any moral consideration from any religious source must pass through this ‘mindset’ first in order to be extracted and so itself must by this blogger’s definition be sinful.

    This argument does not help his case but dooms it.

    Liked by 6 people

  4. >>> “[T]he South was morally right to own slaves since the ‘public pressure’ in their culture was to own them.”

    Huh? What sort of history did this blogger learn? The “pressure” to own slaves did not come from public opinion, but from the greedy little minds of plantation owners who sought to commercially exploit a race of people they considered as subhuman. And, what better way to justify and perpetuate this slavery than to indoctrinate and poison the hearts and minds of uneducated working class whites who were already under the oppressive thumb of Christianity?

    Yes, there are “gods,” but not the supernatural kind. The real gods are just human beings who, by circumstances or fortune, seek to manipulate and control the rest of us for their benefit and pleasure. Whenever morality – such as the profoundly sick example in the above quote – clashes with basic humanism, then look to the motives and capacities of ordinary men. For it is they who write all literature, including the Bible.

    Liked by 7 people

  5. What the Pastor often forgets during his exposé of biblical and theological ramblings is that HIS personal exegesis (and his sect’s/denomination’s too) is no more valid than other Christian denomination’s ramblings about sin. As I’ve often touted about Christendom, widespread ambiguity within the “faith” and churches from top to bottom is all indicative of its origins, contradictions, confusion, and unreliability! Case and point:

    However, the blog owner says this is not what the bible teaches and contends the doctrine was “invented” by Augustine in the 5th century … based on a “mistranslation of Romans 5:12.”

    Let me go dig-out my Christian seminary-theological hat and speak like a “True righteous believer” — bear with me Nan. 😛

    The Pastor is wrong. Augustine did NOT invent the doctrine of Sin because its condition, its state was already written and understood way before the Greco-Roman concept of Jesus came into the picture! This Psalm was uttered/written c. 1035 BCE by King David:

    “Oh, God, I was born in sin, and in sin did my mother conceive me” (Ps. 51:5)

    From the Greco-Roman and Pauline Christian viewpoint, Adam’s sin has to do with the fallen nature of humanity. The idea is that we are not sinners because we sin, but that we sin because we ARE sinners. And death is the consequence of sin and EVERYONE dies. There was no “death” in paradise for Adam and Eve until their original sin. Thus, since we all are descendants of Adam and Eve (maybe Lilith too), and we all die, then naturally we are all radically corrupt right from birth and our very first breath!

    The Pastor’s leap into “flawed societal construct and it’s this CONSTRUCT that led to Jesus’ death at the hands of the Romans and Jews” I do not have enough time (nor the interest) to sort out that messy convoluted can of worms. Yikes! Moving on!

    He goes on to say this is very different from saying we’re born sinners because if everyone were born sinners then Jesus would’ve been born a sinner and that would create a theological absurdity, which a proper understanding would not do.


    If Jesus was not born a sinner, identical to all of humanity, then WHY did he go to John the Baptist? The answer to that question is about as ambigious and causes all sorts of controversy inside the churches and seminaries — and the Pastor also — as it does to non-Believers. Supposedly, here is what Yeshua/Jesus himself said about it:

    “Let it be so now, [baptism, annoiting] is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.”

    Now to take off my dusty, grungy Christian seminary-theological hat and put it away.

    If one is to fully and contextually understand the symbolism and meaning of Jewish baptismal bathings, then you are a step ahead of mainstream conventional Christianity in understanding Jewish Messianism. From the Jewish viewpoint of annointing the Messiah, “baptism” is required for the Kingly-Levitic Messiah. It’s one step of many steps toward Messiahship. And as far as world-wide sin in need of a Savior, THIS is purely a Greco-Roman twist/addition to recruit and attract numbers, i.e. Gentiles. Why? Because traditional Judaism of Antiquity was too exclusive, too elite for Paul the Apostle and Rome. They needed the floundering new religion to grow the sociopolitical Empire while setting themselves APART from ‘snobbish’ Judaism. By NOT doing this, then the church has as the Pastor admits “a theological absurdity.

    However, this 3rd thru 5th century CE Church Father’s theological tweaks (distortion) of true Jewish Messianism ignores all the Old Testament passages for God’s ‘elect or chosen ones’ and atonement for a select group of humans/Hebrews. Study Exodus 33:19; Isaiah 65:1; Deuteronomy 7:7-8; all paradoxically confirmed by Paul in Romans 9:15-24. The Pastor will NOT like these 4 passages in their proper contexts.

    Bottom-line? The tiny historical lens and its moral ideology and “flawed societal construct” that the Pastor criticizes then attempts to solve is not only confusing, contradicting, and convoluted over too many centuries inside a violent 1st thru 5th century war-torn area of the world… it is doomed from the outset because he and most Christian apologists fail to first establish how or where THEIR truth originates! Hahahaha! I’d say that’s pretty critical to do before spouting off non-sense like this. But that’s my educated opinion isn’t it? 😛

    Liked by 7 people

      • Buy, why remove his name? I think it’s good for people to be able to openly consider and debate both sides of an equation. This is one way to come to deeper truth and insight together.

        Are you feeling that people could be harmed in some way?


        • Quite frankly, Rebecca, it’s my blog and my prerogative to reference or not reference someone. As I mentioned in another comment to you, you arrived at the party late and are not familiar with what has transpired up to this point.

          Generally, I give credit where credit is due.

          Liked by 2 people

        • You are right, Nan. It is your blog and your prerogative. Upon deeper thought, feeling that I’ve overstepped my boundaries in saying this. My apologies.

          Liked by 3 people

    • Well put, Professor Taboo! Let’s backtrack to the start of your long comment as follows:

      As I’ve often touted about Christendom, widespread ambiguity within the “faith” and churches from top to bottom is all indicative of its origins, contradictions, confusion, and unreliability!

      Let’s contrast that degree of divergence and theological chaos with the 98% convergence amongst scientists in climate science, or with the high consensuses in other fields such as quantum mechanics or evolutionary science (let alone the availability of large amount of collaborating empirical data), any reasonable and discerning person will indeed always wonder why those religious folks who denounce evolution, climate change and environmental sciences have not bothered to realise that there are far more grounds to doubt and object to their own extant beliefs, scriptures and practices than the counterparts of the scientific community.

      Unfortunately, the absence of religiosity does not necessarily offer better protection against many human follies and foibles. One would be highly amiss to assume that non-religious persons are immune to amassing and clinging to falsehoods, irrationality and biases, which, surprisingly, can be systematically revealed through examining why, how and what people quote in their daily lives, as discussed in my analytical post published at https://soundeagle.wordpress.com/2017/10/18/the-quotation-fallacy/

      Liked by 3 people

    • This here -> “… it is doomed from the outset because he and most Christian apologists fail to first establish how or where THEIR truth originates!” ~ Professor Taboo

      I don’t know. I just had to put emphasis on this. And so many followers just sit and read and sit in pews and think/believe that the apologists know it all.

      Liked by 2 people

      • If it is convention, it must be true. If it is orthodoxy, it must be true. If everyone around me buys Ford Navigators, it must be the best vehicle ever to drive; no need to consider any other vehicles or manufacturers. 😉

        Thank you Zoe.

        Liked by 3 people

    • Jesus was a man and like any other man after he was born had to learn everything. He too had to learn what is good and what is bad. He had also to make the same choices as we have to do. He too was tempted more than once, but always choose to follow the Law of his heavenly Father. He managed to put his own selfish will aside and did what God wanted him to do. It was because he never sinned (though he could sin) that he was made higher than angels and taken up into heaven to sit next to God to be a high-priest for God and a mediator between God and man.


      • Hi Christadelphians. I’m quite familiar with everything you’ve written there. Was there a specific point(s) to MY comment — support, questions, challenges? Or are you just wanting to echo 4th thru 6th century CE Hellenistic Pauline theology… as opposed to Yeshua’s Second Temple Sectarian Judaism/Messianism we now thoroughly understand with Independent sources such as the Dead Sea Scrolls and numerous Syro-Palestine Judaic sources? Feel free to elaborate your precise objective you are shooting for. Thanks.

        Liked by 2 people

        • The apostle Paul did not bring in the Hellenistic teachings. He too was against those human philosophical theories. None of the apostles ever followed a teaching of a Trinity or the later ‘Church Fathers’ doctrines.


        • That isn’t a very good or even halfway sufficient elaboration; disappointing. Maybe you were at work and couldn’t spend the necessary time to substantiate your personal claims(?). Nevertheless, all three of your short sentences are apparently personal presuppositions. You offered no precise corroborations in any of those sentences, just personal opinion. Allow me to dissect those three presumptions.

          The apostle Paul did not bring in the Hellenistic teachings.

          Not true, or at minimum mostly untrue. Are you aware of exactly who Rabban Gamaliel I and the TWO notable 1st-century CE Jerusalem schools of Bet Hillel (of Hellenistic Stoicism, particularly its Book of Wisdom and other Apocrypha including Philo of Alexandria’s transparency within most of Saul’s writings) and opposed by Bet Shammai or the House of Shammai which by all exhaustive sources of Jewish evidence was a very Torah-strict Palestinian-based interpretation of the Mishnah? Both Hillel and Shammai were part of the first Tannaim, or Rabbinic sages of c. 10 – 220 CE. There is very compelling evidence that Saul of Tarsus’ background (Jewish lineage especially!) and education is quite distorted and considered by many Jewish scholars blatantly wrong. Many Jewish historians of Second Temple Sectarian Judaism/Messianism have shown that Saul of Tarsus (Paul) was most likely a Herodian Jew (NOT of the tribe of Benjamin) and his extant writings, including the canonical epistles, align more with Hellenistic, Babylonian Heikhalot mysticism than the more mainstream prominent Merkavah mysticism of Sectarian-Palestinian Judaism and their meaning/role of a Messiah or dual-Messiahs. This is a very reasonable conclusion given that Hellenistic Stoic culture (Hillel) was much more INCLUSIVE of non-Jewish (or Gentile) traditions versus the Torah-loving stricter Jewish sects just outside of Jerusalem (e.g. Qumran on the Dead Sea) where Yeshua/Jesus, John the Baptist, the Essenes and Nasi (or Nasoreans) lived ascetic lives and traditions.

          Feel free to read my 5-part series “Saul the Apostate” for a more elaborate detailed explanation (introduction) to what I’m sharing here. Also, I’d like to quote this portion of that series here, if I may Nan. 😉

          It deserves noting too that Merkavah mysticism along with Hillelite ideology aligns almost perfectly with Hellenism and Neoplatonism. This gives good reason for later 3rd – 4th-century Hellenistic Patristic authorities supervising the composition of the New Testament canon to retrograde (change) or retrofit Saul’s education to Hillel, Gamaliel, and Pharisaic references in Acts, 2 Timothy and Philippians — more recognizable by Hellenistic Gentiles (perhaps rural, average Jews too) — rather than to his less auspicious, more volatile background, seizures, and short-temper of Shammai-Heikhalat teaching, behaviors and praxis inferred in Galatians and Philippians. With the latter, people in Cilicia, Syro-Palestine, Judah, and Galilee would’ve literally spat upon Saul as a perceived demonic, shameful spectacle; something Saul alludes to often in his letters.

          Furthermore, Saul’s infatuation with mysteries and the Spirit of God through tongues, supernatural powers, sacraments, and fatalism can be directly traced to the Gnostic lore of Alexandria and the Corpus Hermeticum, specifically the Poimandres. Once again, clear Hellenistic (Herodian) influences and background.

          He too was against those human philosophical theories.

          This is overly vague. What is “those human philosophical theories.” exactly? LOL 😄 That could mean a hundred different “human philosophies” around the then Mediterranean cultures, a span of some 500,000 square-miles and cultural eras! Minimum! 😳

          None of the apostles ever followed a teaching of a Trinity or the later ‘Church Fathers’ doctrines.

          This is definitely your most ambiguous sentence. Given the much more exhaustive, INDEPENDENT historical evidence and records of the time-period — i.e. Second Temple Sectarian Judaism/Messianism — and the obvious clash of Hellenistic culture (the Roman Empire)… versus Syro-Palestine Judaism/Messianism. One viewpoint/tradition wants to edit, morph, and change (completely?) a popular sociopolitical Hebrew ‘Welfare System’ (Hellenic Rome, the latter), and the other wants to protect its sacred history of Torah-obedience, often seen as exclusive, elite, set-apart from ‘dogs and pigs’ (Matthew 7:6) by outsiders or Hellenic Gentiles. The oppressed Jewish people (God’s chosen) would be rescued, given salvation, by two (maybe three) Messiahs in a literal Kingdom of God on Earth (Palestinian Judaism/Messianism, the former; the sect(s) Yeshua/Jesus belonged to). This explains why Saul of Tarsus (Paul) was spat on and hated by Syro-Palestinian Jews he tried to “convert” early in his proselytizing. Here we glean the conflicting teachings of Yeshua/Jesus and Saul the Apostate.

          And by the way, Saul never once met Jesus in person. Therefore, he knew very little to nothing about Jesus’ true nature or his canonical and non-canonical teachings of Jewish reformation against Hellenism and other cultural contaminants.

          As I’m sure you are not familiar with the comprehensive history and context of events leading up to the world and time Yeshua/Jesus was born into Christadelphians, I recommend you do an extensive study of some of the points I’ve shared here before replying. That should take several weeks maybe months given your personal schedule and commitments. This way you and I MIGHT be able to continue this dialogue productively in the future to benefit Nan’s readers/followers here rather than with lots of ambiguity and vague personal opinions.

          Thanks and best regards to you.

          Liked by 1 person

        • You’re welcome. Please take your time to absorb, discern the explicit as well as the implicit historical information, evidence, facts, and suggestions of the 5-part post series. Realistically it should take some time to equitably examine, explore, and understand. Try your best to suspend (temporarily?) any common Christian bias you may already possess, say from family or birthplace or current congregational circles. 🙂

          Also, I very much encourage you to explore much further on your own the much WIDER context of Second Temple Sectarian Judaism/Messianism from the numerous INDEPENDENT sources available today… versus the highly dependent (biased) Hellenic Patristic canonical sources of the 4th thru 6th centuries and beyond that 98% – 99% of Christians utilize with a sort of naive tunnel-vision.

          To clarify, "independent" means ALL reliable, verifiable sources that are NOT Roman-Hellenic Patristic manuscripts and are not canonical New Testament reliant, e.g. all of the Dead Sea Scrolls to name one.

          Liked by 1 person

        • That is kind of you sklyjd. Thank you. ❤

          I simply ride on the shoulders of numerous well-known, acclaimed, equitable and honorable scholars on this ENORMOUS historically complex subject. Took me at least 12-years and extensive reading, examination, and correspondence in many cases with these scholars to arrive at my intermediate understanding and knowledge of Christianity's earliest origins. THEN it took me longer with Second Temple Judaism/Messianism — something one CANNOT obtain if you strictly stay within dependent (vs. non-Christian, non-Judeo-Christian) “approved” Patristic sources and only the canonical Bible concerning this time-period and location!

          If one does not consider ALL related, relevant sources — even when they cause fear & discomfort to you! — then they are NOT being fair or demonstrating a higher integrity, much less showing a type of “faith” that equality and truth can be revealed (in time) with high-levels of reliable consensus and plausible-to-compelling accuracy… subject to be modified at a later time. 😉 😛 Besides, if it is a lifestyle and proclamation that is NOT of your own creation, then you DAMN WELL better know and understand intimately every single working part, nut and bolt of the ideology/belief-system before preaching its brilliance or salvation! Why? HAH! Because it could be a lemon, a complete fraud, a total embarrassment to your credibility! Duh, right? 😉

          Liked by 1 person

        • I admire your tenacity, PT. Of course, few are so dedicated (or interested) in learning the history of their faith. It’s much, much easier to just take what the pastor/teacher/priest says and go merrily on your way. Even those who DO make the effort (speaking personally) don’t dig as deeply as you have.

          And yet … they will argue incessantly about what they believe to be true because, well, “it’s in the bible.”

          Liked by 2 people

        • Thanks Nan, and I don’t need to tell you that you are for the most part bigger part, right. It does get exhausting and frustrating sometimes. :/ As I’ve heard way too many attorneys echo a well-known adage in law and inside courts with jurors and spectators… (I paraphrase)…

          It isn’t what you know to be true and backed by mounds of corroborating evidence, it is what you can convince (sell?) or persuade the jurors to believe DESPITE the evidence and truth.

          This has never before been made more true this day and age than with the trial of O.J. Simpson, climate-change and deniers, and the epitome of this sales & marketing scam/fake-news… our current POTUS. 😦

          Nonetheless, I/we must never relax when it comes to blatant ignorance and verifiable knowledge. ✊

          Liked by 1 person

  6. Alright, you people, listen up! You all have a disease! I am the only one with the cure. I accept all major credit cards, debit cards, and cash. Upon confirmation of proper payment, I will provide the cure … but you have to believe in me and help spread the word, got it.

    Scam be simple, scam be quick, scam got you jumpin’ over the candlestick. Don’t get your ass burned. Pay me now!

    Liked by 5 people

  7. As a banned person I am now able to read the posts without any emotions other than amusement.
    Oh, and admiration and a hat tip for Snr Scottie who has done a sterling job of showing up the convoluted arse-backwards arguments of Mr. Other Centered Love and for making Captain Dipshit look even more stupid than he normally does. And that was a feat that took some doing. Well done, Snr Scottie.

    Captain Dipshit must be seething that he cannot get a rise out of anyone anymore. He might even have to put Viagra in his tea.

    Liked by 2 people

    • But, Ark, can’t you see that it doesn’t bring any long term good or positive change. If people can’t respect each other, and communicate in a positive way on just these blogs disagreeing about one issue, it doesn’t bode well for peace and reconciliation in general across our culture at all. What a mess?


      • @Rebecca I think you fail to realize each of us that have encountered the person spoke of have tried hard to be respectful and have a polite conversation. This person doesn’t want that. He doesn’t want an exchange of ideas. He doesn’t get anything out of that.

        In fact he looked in at this post and made one about it on his blog. There he insulted me, misrepresented the entire conversation, and called all of us cowardly. He took a screen capture of my first comment here to Nan, and I used it to show one of the commenters who agreed we were all cowardly, that in fact I had answered the question.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Scottie, I can understand and empathize. But, it seems to me that because someone insults and disrespects us personally it is not good and ok to simply retaliate in kind. It’s really the very sort of thing that Jesus speaks against. I’m not talking about setting healthy boundaries or not being a doormat. But, I think there is a way to be assertive about what we believe and think, and respectful at the same time. The other person’s disrespect should not simply condition our response in kind. Trust me, I don’t always do this perfectly myself, by any means. But I think it’s something to shoot for in civil discourse. Where do Ark’s comments get him, but to offend people, and then get banned from their blogs? And, unfortunately, the same could be said for JB as well. My two cents for what it’s worth.

          We are so polarized right now in our country across all these divides, political, social, spiritual. How will we heal these divisions between us, find common ground, and work together for everyone’s benefit?

          Liked by 1 person

        • Arks comments work to a large degree because he responds in kind but with the knowledge and information to back up what he is talking about. It is a sad fact that some people respond to hierarchies of what they see as authority. I don’t know if it is conditioning or a sense of inferiority. But the fact is some people will brush off me or Nan, but pay attention to Ark or John because they see them as alphas. They will disagree, argue, taunt, even troll and insult, but they do read and get a sense of what is said because of the position they assign the person they are talking with. Basicly I am saying ti takes all kinds to reach all kinds. I watched the pastor we are referencing just ignore Nan’s comments while debating the same idea with someone who was less polite and more in your face about it.
          I can not be anyone else, and wouldn’t want to be. But I can see and admire the different styles of engagement this community has. I also greatly admire the knowledge here. These people have taken time and effort to both know and understand the topic. They are well rounded in other areas also. So when they try to show where theists get things wrong, the theist tend to feel threatened and push back in not so nice ways. IMO.

          Liked by 3 people

        • Hi Scottie,

          I have not read all the comments but in seeing yours here I gave it a read. In the years that I engaged in debate, the debate raged on all around me though I was myself engaging in it. There are those of us who seem easy to ignore. Maybe it is because our approach is different. I don’t know. What I have learned though is not to invest my time &/or energy to the debate/discussion if I’m going to be ignored or at least ignored ad nauseum. One or two comments for those who are lurking and then I move on.

          In my past experience, pastor’s often ignore the comments of women. We are not to teach &/or lead men.

          Liked by 3 people

        • Rebecca, once any respect for what’s true or even knowable is demonstrated to be irrelevant, then there cannot be a ‘respectful’ discussion at all. There simply is no common ground on which to exchange anything of true or knowable merit. Once a person has jettisoned this common ground of respecting what is true, what is knowable, and thinks substituting content devoid of these elements is somehow equivalently virtuous, to demonstrate time after time by continuously lying, misrepresenting, distorting, cherry picking, misquoting, and relying on deception to try to assemble a false equivalency in order to counter what’s true and knowable, while fully aware that these tactics are built only on deceit and deception, has forfeited the right to be treated equivalently, forfeited any reasonable expectation to have his or her contrary ideas and conflicting beliefs and opinions in opposition to what is true and knowable be treated with respect and be considered legitimate ‘dialogue’. It’s not dialogue at all; it’s conning. It’s not reasonable to expect this conning to be treated with respect but calling for it to be treated with respect is itself an irrational demand because the foundations of what constitute rational dialogue – valuing and respecting what’s true and knowable – is absent. Any desire for an honest exchange has already left the building, ordered out by the good pastor and his bevy of irrational supporters.

          Liked by 1 person

        • It’s really the very sort of thing that Jesus speaks against.

          Remember, Rebecca, this is a non-believer’s blog.

          I do agree with you, however, regarding the polarization of this country. But this has been going on for centuries … and I doubt it’s going to stop anytime soon. Besides, the current “leader” is doing everything to keep it alive and well.

          Liked by 3 people

        • “But, I think there is a way to be assertive about what we believe and think, and respectful at the same time. The other person’s disrespect should not simply condition our response in kind.” ~ Rebecca

          Jesus – whip – temple


        • Rebecca, I agree with a lot of what you say, however one thing that has struck me over the last couple of years reading and commenting on these blogs is that some of the commenters on here such as Tildeb, the Prof, Nan, John, Ark and many others I have missed are not just people who read the Bible, most of these guys and gals have lived and been involved in religious studies for many years and are far more schooled than your pastors and church preachers, they also have an extremely high ability to explain the common facts that were learnt from when they were believers, however now, without the pressure of having to use a bias slant for the sole reason of justifying their Christian faith.

          When a Christian such as the ones we encounter believe that they have the measure of knowledge and experience to inject Christian bias and unsubstantial claims into a debate they are insulting the intelligence of these scholars. This would not be a blood bath of insults if these arguers or liars for Christ would stick to the issues raised and the known facts.

          This is something they often find impossible to do and neuroscience would say it may not be their fault as indoctrination is a very powerful state of the mind, and I guess it is something we should be mindful of before we retaliate.


      • Ah, but there never was and never will be an intention of converting people such as Branyan and Mel. Or you for that matter!
        The onus there is on you, Rebecca.
        Any deconvert will tell you, the brain- numbing nonsensical drivel you pander to is only something you can sort out yourself.
        You first have to stop for a few moments and ask one or two pertinent questions.

        Such as … why is the bible so stupid and violent?

        Why I am believing in such stories as the Exodus and Adam and Eve when science has already provided evidence that this stuff is nonsense!
        Why do some Christians believe that dinosaurs were once all herbivorous and were tamed and lived the livelong day with humans and it was sin with a capital Ssss that made T-Rex grow long, sharp pointy teeth and starting eating other dinosaurs.

        And the examples are almost endless.
        Therefore, engaging in such dialogue (ha ha!) not only brings to light a great many things about religion and Christianity etc that we may all have previously been unaware of, and thus, are able to share, but it also allows those poor believers who are a bit too shy to comment who may be reading along.
        And maybe something; a word, a phrase, a piece of humour they read will cause them to have pause for thought …

        And of course to show up disingenuous arses like Branyan and his sidekick and the convoluted theological gymnastics of Mel and his group may also help those currently in a quandary to realise how blatantly dishonest some of these apologetic arguments really are.

        And, yes, if I am being brutally honest, winding up dickheads like Branyan and his neurotic kid and others of this ilk always puts a smile on my face.
        Yes, I know I shall be going to Hell for this … can’t help myself … but .. what the hell, eh?

        As a Christian, you of all people must know that we atheists live such pointless, empty, immoral godless lives, raping and pillaging and eating babies and indulging in satanic rites, playing our records backward, and accepting evolution and other heinous, pitiless empty subjects that we have to get our kicks wherever we can.

        God Bless … (any god you like)

        Liked by 2 people

  8. So I have a question and request if anyone feels up to it. I have been here http://johnbranyan.com/the-best-thing-ive-read-this-week/ trying to clear my name and show how John is outright lying. I used copy and paste of the very responses I gave him at the time. IF you have a strong stomach and feel up to it, can you tell me if I achieved my goal or if there was a better way. Or maybe I shouldn’t have tried and just ignored them. Rebecca this is the stuff I was saying. John is on his blog telling everyone I was a coward who refused to answer him, insulting my intelligence and getting support for a strawman he is creating. Sometimes you have to fight back hard when this crap is what they are doing. Hugs

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Just tell him it’s what atheists do. Remember, we are immoral. Send him lots of hugs just to wind him up until he bans you.
    In fact we should all sign off our comments to Captain Dipshit Hugs and Tongues.

    He will then post another thread on Facebook and have all his fundamentalist Ye Haws frothing at the mouth condemning us to Hell. Which seems pointless to moi as I thought we were already going there. Can you be condemned to two Hells? Or Hell twice?

    Laugh at him … it will be novelty he rarely experiences.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Request from me, the blog owner …

    Please limit any attacks to ideas/beliefs/practices, but NOT to individuals. OK? OK. I know it’s difficult … considering … but please. I’m asking nicely.


    Liked by 2 people

    • @ The Blog Owner.

      Oooh I like that. It has a firm, authoritative ring to it.

      Oh, dammit, I forgot again. ‘S’cuse me a moment , Nan.

      Down Prof … DOWN! Sheesh, Behave yourself in the company of a lady.

      It’s okay, Nan, no one knows who Captain Dipshit is. Honest.
      That’s a code name. It was a generalized comment regarding any mentally unstable individual who would besmirch one of us … All chant …”One of us , one of us … one of us..”

      Gods bless us one and all. 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

      • Awright, Mr. Sarcasm! I’m just trying to keep things civil. You know I agree with pretty much everything you have to say about certain individuals. But anyone who follows yours or my blog knows exactly who is pushing these agendas without mentioning “names.”

        Liked by 2 people

        • I am yours to command. Sssh! Don’t mention anything to do with punishing me for blog transgressions otherwise Prof will come over all strange and have to go and lie down.

          Sarcasm? Nah .. just a bit off fun.
          I save my sarcasm for The Special One.

          Liked by 1 person

    • Nan I know you are a nice person who likes to be fair. I do agree we should all try. I try. However sometimes you have to call out those who insult and demand you with no regard to truth or your personhood. Not just for us, but for those younger who maybe reading and need to know that sometimes people will stand up to the bullies. As a young gay kid I can not tell you the times I stood alone against an onslaught of abuse from people who knew they could get away with it as no one would try to stop them. So yesterday when I called the person we are talking about a jerk, and showed in my replies where he was acting like a jerk I don’t feel I was crossing a line. It needed to be out there what his actions were. Well that is my opinion, subject to change if a better idea / evidence comes along. Hugs

      Liked by 3 people

        • I think you and I are ruining a perfectly good depraved blog article. We should quit while we are ahead.
          Let’s find some Christians to annoy.
          Pick a blog … any blog. Now look at it. Okay put it back in the pack … shuffle and …
          Damn| I can’t think of one I am not banned from!

          I need coffee.

          Liked by 2 people

      • Yes … I know how difficult it can be when people insult your “personhood.” And it’s our natural tendency to want to strike back. But in my several years of experience, no battles are won by personal attacks. YOU may feel better, but no ground has been gained.

        I will admit that things may be different when it comes to in-person one-on-one issues, but as far as the written word on blogs? Far better, IMO, to simply stop responding because after awhile, it pretty much turns into a “wash, rinse, repeat.” Perhaps say your “last words,” then move on. Those that support your position will silently applaud you … those who disagree will never be swayed anyway.

        Liked by 4 people

  11. Is it just me or have the replies to the “Are we becoming more secular?” thread on the pastor’s blog been disabled. (Apologies for going off-topic, though “there is something wrong” kind of fits the situation.)

    Liked by 1 person

Don't Be Shy -- Tell Us What You Think!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.