Stop Using Bad Christians As an Excuse to Avoid God

Stop Making ExcusesI think the title of this post really reveals what is to come. I am so weary of people that are “Christians” using bad Christians or bad Christian experiences as an excuse to explain why they themselves no longer pursue God. I have seen it happen over and over again throughout my Christian walk. A person becomes a Christian, starts reading the word, praying, even finding a local church where they can attend, grow and serve, and then they come across what we will call a “bad” Christian or experience that causes them to stumble.

It may be a person or group of people who wrongs them in some way. Instead of forgiving them, bitterness ensues. It may be a pastor or other lay minister’s morale failure that causes them to stumble. It may even be the general lukewarmness of the church today. No matter what the cause, it still does not justify one to abandon the pursuit of a God that never changes.

Any industry, social group or even geographical region of people have their good and their bad. We have all heard the stories of the auto mechanic that rips you off but are they all bad? What about contractors who put out shoddy workmanship? They are not all that way are they? Do you stop eating out because you had a bad experience at a restaurant? I could go on.

Even though we encounter “bad people” or “bad experiences” in many circles of life, it does not stop us from living. Neither should it stop us from pursuing the holy and loving God who at one time called us out of darkness — delivered us from the path of destruction we were on and from a hopeless future, and gave us life — His life. He did not change, did He? Maybe your perception of Him changed because of the folly of a few others but Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever (Hebrews 13:8)!

People will fail. Companies will rise and fall. Even this great nation of the United States that I am so blessed to live in will fail me and ultimately one day will fall. God however is constant. He never changes and he never fails. And even though it may not seem like it at times, God always has a remnant. In other words, God always has a people, although not perfect, are striving to be Christ-like and pursuing Him with all their hearts.

So, if you are excusing yourself from church attendance and even pursuing the things of God themselves, you really have no excuse. No one will stand before God on judgment day and justify their abandonment of God by pointing fingers at others. It is sad to think that so many that started off so well in their walk with God will fall short at the end of their lives, all because they allowed some one or some thing to offend them.

The real issue here is that our sinful nature is always looking for excuses that will justify our sinful actions. It started with Adam and Eve in the garden when after committing the first sin, Adam blamed it on the “woman whom You gave me,” and Eve blamed it on the serpent. So, Christians who have backslid away from God are really doing so because they want to. Using the argument like “all Christians are hypocrites,” “pastors only care about money,” or any number of other things is only a facade for what really is a heart issue.

The Bible instructs us to look at Jesus, who is the author and perfecter of our faith (Hebrews 12:2) who always has a people that are devoted to Him. People will change but God never changes. People will fail you but God will never fail you. So stop excusing your unwillingness or even laziness to live for God on people, circumstances and things and pursue Him who will always love you and wants to bless you with the most abundant live you could ever imagine.


Author: David Wallace

David Wallace is a search & social media marketer who lives in Anthem Arizona with his lovely wife. Interests & hobbies include all things Disney, roller coasters, musicianship and Christianity. Follow +David Wallace on Google + as well as Twitter.

Share This Post On

53 Comments

  1. there will always be abusers and bigots(O.o) in every institution, i know that, it’s a fact of life, and i want to stay away from them

    i just want to form my own path, believe what i want to believe.
    where is the freedom if you can’t question and form your own opinion???(see basically that’s faith, and that’s what your religion was founded upon) and, i dont like that kind of unquestionable faith especially if you are a seeker of wisdom(i wouldnt die peacefully if someone claims forceful truth without evidence to my questions, much better to tell me those honest words ‘i don’t know’)

    i just lost faith in one thing, thats all.
    i have faith in alot of things, i have faith that my chair will stand on all four legs with me sitting on it.

    We don’t ‘avoid’ god, how will we avoid an all-knowing, all-powerful super-being??? its just stupid on our part to do that..

    so just because you are christian and you believe in god and follow this so-called ”only path” does not give u the right to place yourself and your kind at the top of morality and look down upon us as if we were mindless zombies :))

    AND HAVE YOU SEEN WHAT PRAYER CAN ACTUALLY, REALLY, ACCURATELY DO??????

    im no hardcore atheist who is so dangerously certain and believes reason is the only way to go…im just agnostic atheist,”dont care if there is a god cuz there PROBABLY is not”

  2. It’s unfortunate that “atheists” and “Christians” are so generalized in this discussion. My beliefs are my own, definitely influenced by the people and situations surrounding me, but also developed through my own research. The study of science, as well as the Bible.

    As I read your comments I see an outstanding display of intelligence from both sides. As science looks further into Darwin’s theories, including that of evolution, there are various discoveries supporting it. However, there is an incredible amount of “holes” so to speak, things that contradict or present problems with these theories (cambrian age for example and several others, but that’s another discussion).

    On the other end, the validity of the Bible is questionable. There is no doubt the text has changed over the years, and in fact was edited and re-written by priests and kings (King James Version). And yet the fact that Jesus existed is undeniable. So who was he? I have to agree with CS Lewis on this point; He was either a phenomenal liar, completely insane, or truly the Lord.

    My point in all this is that this anger is ridiculous and ineffective. Try listening to what the other is saying, research it, find evidence supporting what they say, and try to see where they’re coming from. THEN present the alternative.

    I’m especially confused at the anger displayed by the Christians on the site. Isn’t the point of Christianity the power of love and grace? – most of the complaints presented by the atheists are that Christians are ignorant and judgmental, and you’re proving them right.

    Atheists, you also display some ignorance – I would agree with the earlier statement that there is much to be discovered…but why is God so quickly ruled out as an explanation? Perhaps the gaps are filled by equations, perhaps science is responsible for creation, or perhaps we are a result of intelligent design. To completely rule out God as an explanation for creation is an incredible demonstration of lacking objectivity…and is completely against the rules of science.

    One last point I would present is that the idea that atheism is the lack of faith is slightly ridiculous. You have faith in nothing? …impossible.

    I think we need to stop focusing on criticizing others’ beliefs and start analyzing our own. Complete understanding will never be reached, so listen to the people around you…you don’t have to agree with them, but there’s always something to learn.

  3. Nick, You said
    “Yet at the very minimum 95% of those born into Christian families are still Christian to my knowledge under one denomination or another.”

    How about citing your source? Oh! I imagine you’re just pulling it out of thin air like everything else. Make it up as you go Nick that’s okay we’ll try to keep up. But, just for future reference it is commonly considered to be dishonest to make up facts without citing a source. But, it’s especially hypocritical coming from someone whose entire argument against Christianity is based upon our lack of facts.

    Again you said:

    “Look it up, there are instances where it says god is omnipotent, and instances where it says he is not.”

    You’re citing it. You have the burden of telling us where it can be found. Let’s work togther. Give us chapter & verse & we’ll respond.

    Omnipotent
    –adjective
    1. almighty or infinite in power, as God.
    2. having very great or unlimited authority or power.

    Go right ahead and explain how words like infinite and unlimited are really gray areas, they could mean not infinite and not unlimited just as easily. If you stop ignoring the inconsistencies you really might notice how superficial it all really is, but if you really really want to believe it, go ahead, just don’t ask ignorant questions to the world and expect anything less than disappointing answers.”

    Nick, as best I can tell from reading the posts in this forum, it is you who has been consistently inconsistent. You have nearly violated every criterion of a good argument; including questionable authority, insufficient sample, fake precision, causal over simplification, question begging, ambiguity, omitting key evidence & so many more.

    Don’t feel sorry for us for believing in a book written 2000 years ago it is you I feel sorry for. I guess you don’t believe any historical book written at a time in which you were not around to witness – you are really missing out on alot.

  4. Nick you say “I guarantee that you (David), were born a christian, just like the other 3 billion people who are not christian were born into their religion. I’m sure, just as I’m sure you are, think oh well I got lucky to be born into the correct religion.”

    Another one of your erroneous, unsubstantiated assumptions Nick? You certainly have a knack for it. Did you learn this while being indoctrinated in the public school system?

    I did not become a Christian until receiving a degree in the science’s from a major university. It was there that I realized . . . I have been indoctrinated since grade school.

    Having said this however, I agree with your comment regarding the – “christian fanatacism camp indoctrinating children before they even have the most basic reasoning skills.”

    That’s weird.

    But, I have to say with all do respect Nick; you don’t appear to hold reason in very high regard. At least your abuse of it in your posts seems to indicate this.

    If you’re going to accuse others of being unreasonable, don’t you believe that you carry some responsibility or obligation to set a good example?

    Consider your completely absurd attempt to equate what has been attributed to The God of the universe to Santa Clause.

    I have never read in a Christmas card . . . Remember kids that on Christmas Eve Santa died for you sins. Or that Santa is the Alpha & the Omega, the creator of heaven & earth. Or that God has a body, wears a red suit, eats milk & cookies, flies around once a year in a sled pulled by eight tiny reign deer & is married. Nor have I ever seen Santa revealed in scripture.

    I guess if we are attributing properties & attributes with out any concern for reality. How about this one

    I will assume for the same reason as you – that would be – NONE or No reason what so ever – that you are Agent Smith & you are trying to stop Dave & other Christians in their crusade to free humanity by bringing down a tyrannical system of thought created in order to imprison the mind of man within an illusory world of artificial reality known as the Matrix.

    Prove that this is not the case. Prove what no thinker sharing your worldview, has done before . . . prove we are not brains in a vat. And that life is not an illusion.

    It shouldn’t be hard for you Nick; after all, unlike the rest of us, you need no use reason or logic to make your case. Simply say it & it is so.

  5. Nick, Christian, Joshua

    In my responses to earlier posts, I believe your God of the gaps has been rebutted as well. Take the time to read the arguments & respond to them. In my responses, I believe I have provided counter argument & a rebuttal to the strongest arguments posted. I believe, I’ve demonstrated where these posts have used ambiguous terms, false premises & logical fallacies. I do not believe you or they have done likewise.

    You fail to provide any effective rebuttal to the strongest point presented in my arguments. I believe you incorrectly minimize & divert in order to ignore the counter evidence offered in those points. You are merely denying & ignoring the counter evidence. This is fallacious & worse it stifles any hope of understanding.

    I reiterate my earlier points – You reject the Christian world view because it involves certain nonempirical, metaphysical hypothesis, while assuming for yourself a boatload, all of which go as far beyond empiricism as does Christianity.

    And this speaks to “proving oneself not guilty of murder.”
    Yes! Christian, I like your analogy – “Prove you’re not a murderer, then. Seriously. If you’re not, it should be easy. Right?”

    This is an interesting point because, you are actually making our case for us.

    During the cold war, a soviet citizen was picked up by the KGB & accused of spying for the United States. All of his property & papers were confiscated & he was thrown into prison to await trial. Now Christian . . . did this man know with all certainty & beyond a shadow of doubt that he was not a spy? Yes! Absolutely! Could he prove it scientifically? Absolutely not! Why? Well, it comes down to who decides what is considered admissible proof . . . what constitutes evidence, belief, knowledge . . . truth.

    In the case of our man suspected of spying, it was the Kremlin that determined what constituted evidence. Our suspect had a deep, unquestionably true belief that he did not commit espionage but he could not prove it. Though he had good evidence to establish his innocence, it did not rise to the standard of the court. Friends, loved ones, eye witnesses; expert witnesses & physical evidence, all revealed the states case to be a web of propaganda & deceit; and testifying to the authenticity of the mans basic belief & assertions of innocence. Never the less, it was derided & deemed inadmissable, unjustified superstitious pseudoscience.

    The man was subsequently executed for a crime he did not commit, but died knowing, though he did not prove it, he possessed justified true belief . . . Knowledge. The others only error, falsehood & superstition driven by prejudice.

    Many years later however, the truth was revealed, that he had been framed to cover up covert actions of the government.

    Justice demands that the accused – so called naïve & superstitious Christians – not be disqualified from the court of debate by rules manufactured by their opponents – so called rational Atheists. But rather justice demands that the truth should be determined by the hypothesis which assumptions best account for the totality of reality.

    Talk about a fox on the jury ay a gooses trial.

    On to your argument:

    You propose – “You assume he is saying matter/energy created runs and maintains the universe, just as you suppose a god does. But you’re missing the point, and I can’t speak for every person who believes there are no gods.”

    You do not then demonstrate or offer any evidence to prove how I have missed the point or I falsely assumed anything in his post. You simply offer a different incoherent & self refuting explanation of faith – placeholder, which corroborates my original point – Atheists are not that which are without faith. Atheists are that which have faith.

    We already know we put our faith in the God of the Bible. Your argument was an attempt to prove that you lack faith in what we believe, but it was simply a repetition of the God of the gap argument you made earlier . . . that “No one [had] dared counter point.

    You then, in order to show the superiority of your faith, slyly shift the burden of proof off your failed counter argument onto us by pointing out alleged inconsistencies & contradictions within the Bible.

    Here is the point of my earlier arguments. You can point out inconsistencies & contradictions within the Bible all you like. What I’ve asked you to do in my argument was demonstrate, to prove, given your naturalistic explanation for all things, how it is you possess justified true beliefs about these inconsistencies & contradictions about the God of the Bible.
    Nick, you said regarding your God of the gaps argument – “No one has dared counter point.” It’s not like the argument has left us trembling & ready to abandon our faith. It’s pretty standard stuff.

    Below are several replies. You may recognize the first –

    1. “Faith in itself, is a placeholder, it’s used to fill in the gaps in our knowledge as humans.”
    2. “An atheist/agnostic completely acknowledges that for every person on the planet, no one understands the world around them to the degree they wish/think they do.”

    Elsewhere you say,

    3. “Now, as someone with a lack of faith, i’m not saying i have faith in some alternate answer to the many questions we dont know for sure yet, but i’m admitting i dont know, not accepting the easy way out and saying, god did it, especially since everything that has been attributed to a god, was done so out of a lack of knowledge to help fill in gaps until that gap is filled with real knowledge.”

    A.
    I. If all who do not “understand the world around them to the degree they wish/think they do [are that which] fill in those gaps in knowledge as humans.”
    And “atheist/agnostic completely acknowledge that they are that which do not understand the world around them to the degree they wish/think they do.”
    Then, “atheists/agnostics are that which fill in those gaps in knowledge as humans.”

    II. If that which “fills in those gaps in our knowledge as humans [is that which is] “Faith in itself, a placeholder.”
    And “atheism/agnosticism” are that which fill in those gaps in our knowledge as humans.”
    Then, “atheism/agnosticism” is that which is “Faith is in itself, a placeholder.”

    III. All that which was done out of a lack of knowledge to help fill in gaps until that gap is filled with real knowledge is that which that has been attributed to a god.”
    And according to you – “[atheism/agnosticism] are that which fill in those gaps in our knowledge as humans.”
    Then, following your logic, – “[atheism/agnosticism] is that which that has been attributed to a god.”

    That god, of course, is the holy duality of science & rationality. Though you disagree, there are only so many alternatives.

    IV. Conclusion: Nick, When you argue that all members of the class of things which fill in those gaps in our knowledge as humans are that which are not filled with real knowledge, while placing yourself & “atheism/agnosticism in that same class of things which fill in those gaps in our knowledge as humans,” by necessity atheism/agnosticism is that which is not filled with real knowledge; your argument is nothing no more than a self refuting vicious circle.

    B.
    In your God of the gap, you attempt to argue

    All that which is known by men with true & justified belief is that which exists
    God is not that which is known by men with true & justified belief
    Therefore, God is not that which exists.

    If this is true, then so are the following:

    I. All that which is known by men with true & justified belief is that which exists
    Space/Time is not that which is known by men with true & justified belief
    Therefore, Space/Time is not that which exists.

    For the son who has never known a father who has been away at war:

    II. All that which is known by the son with true & justified belief is that which exists
    The father is not that which is known by the son with true & justified belief
    Therefore, the father is not that which exists.

    If a son believes his father to be alive because he has the assurance of his mother, unique experiences & other unusual occurrences, which could only be explained as being the work of his father such as numerous gifts & correspondences signed “I will return to you. Love your Father.”

    Yet many years later, however, he learns that all these were in fact the work of a man whose life the father had saved during the war.

    What I understand you to be arguing Nick is that the son’s belief about his father being alive is not justified & therefore does not constitute knowledge of the actual existence of the father.

    However, if there were a relevant truth unknown to the son, such as his father is alive in a Siberian prison then the son would have justified belief.

    Additionally, if the son fails to have knowledge of his father’s existence because the belief is not caused directly by the father, then that is true also for those who have knowledge of the earth beneath them but lack any understanding of the causal process involved in their relationship with the earth i.e., gravity, mass, energy, velocity etc. They believe they have good evidence to trust the earth exists, but according to your God of the gaps, their beliefs are unjustified & do not rise to knowledge because they don’t possess suitable belief. That belief, of course, being grounded entirely upon induction, observation, verification & testing which is your criterion for knowledge.

    The problem with this is that you offer No, explanation, None, Zero, Zilch, Nata, for why we all must accept your criterion for what constitutes knowledge.

    If I were to ask you to explain how you know your implicit propositions . . . ‘Belief (knowledge) is true & rational to hold if & only if it derives from well established scientific belief (knowledge). And that since religious beliefs (knowledge) do not derive from well established scientific beliefs – Religious beliefs (knowledge) are therefore not knowledge.’

    What well established scientific beliefs could you offer to support this knowledge?

    And, if I were to press you further by asking – How do you know – knowledge is true & rational to hold if & only if it derives from well established scientific belief, you would have to say, if you had integrity, – Because the scientific community says so. To which I might ask – why do you trust the scientific community? To which you might say, if you had integrity, because the precepts of the scientific community are all true. To which I might ask again, But how do you know? To which you must say, if you had integrity, because they are ‘derived from well established scientific beliefs.’

    Such circularity!

    This not only commits the fallacy of vicious infinite regress (Circularity), as I‘ve just pointed out. But, also the fallacy of contradictory premise similar to: “There are absolutely no absolutes.” “It is a universal truth that there are no universal truths.” “The only thing to fear is fear itself”

    Its real incoherence comes, however, from the fact that it violates the law of contradiction. A cannot be both A & non-A. The proposition A – All Belief (knowledge) is true & rational to hold if & only if it derives from well established scientific belief (knowledge), cannot be non A – Not All Belief (knowledge) is true & rational to hold if & only if it derives from well established scientific belief (knowledge).

    1. So, if Only belief (knowledge) derived from well established scientific belief (knowledge) is [that which is] true & rational to hold.
    2. And the proposition – Only belief (knowledge) derived from well established scientific belief (knowledge) [is itself that which] is not derived from well established scientific belief (knowledge)
    3. Then, the proposition – Only belief (knowledge) derived from well established scientific belief (knowledge) is that which is not true & rational to hold.

    In other words, Not all belief (knowledge) derived from well established scientific belief (knowledge) [is that which] is true & rational to hold. Some are not true & rational to hold. And some belief (knowledge) not derived from well established scientific belief [is that which] is true & rational to hold.

    Therefore, if the logical conclusion – Not all belief (knowledge) derived from well established scientific belief (knowledge) [is that which] is true & rational to hold . . . some scientific belief (knowledge) being that which is not true & rational to hold & some belief (knowledge) not derived from well established scientific belief being that which true & rational to hold.
    as demonstrated, then, it fails to rise to its own criterion as a -well established scientific belief. And is therefore self refuting.
    The first rule of a coherent system of thought is that all its parts be ordered and related according to the principles fundamental to the systems in question. Fundamental to your system of belief are at least two parts that do not relate well to one another. In fact they can not logically coexist with one another. The first is the denial or rejection of anything transcendent and universal. The second is the use of the transcendent and universal to argue the first.

    The fact that ancient people lacked the scientific knowledge to properly explain natural phenomenon & instead attributed it to God does not prove the non existence of God any more than the fact the works of the man saved by the father during the war prove the father does not exist.

    These ancient believers, like modern believers, believe God exists because he has revealed himself through the orderly nature of the universe, the knowability of the universe, the existence of the truth, the existence of numbers, categories & sets. And if they, in their naiveté, attributed directly to God, phenomenon which is better explained by nature, then their belief in God would still count as knowledge. How many true beliefs must one have to constitute knowledge?

    In regards to “My infinite wisdom being like that of people of 2000 years ago,” I can only say pick up a history book. Maybe you’ll learn something about the “wisdom” of people 2000 years ago. People like Pythagoras, Democritus, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Euclid, Thales, Archimedes, Hero, Philolaus, Aristarchus, Eratosthenes& Hipparchus I guess I could go on, but come on, I thought it was us Christians who ‘lacked knowledge.’ Hey, if you don’t care for books at least visit Wikipedia.

    Finally, Suffering/Evil should not be an issue for one who holds that man is nothing more than one of many manifestations of the universe & of no hierarchical importance from the point of view of the universe. The actions of men, though perhaps more complex, are not in any way different then that of the lower species. The human ethical situation is grounded in natural phenomena, motion of atoms, basic needs & drives. There is no difference in kind between man & any of the lower species, he exists on a continuum somewhere between bacteria & and what ever the gradual changes of natural selection has in store for us.

    Does suffering/evil exist in nature? Do you shake your fist at God outside a particle accelerator . . . Oh cruel God? When crab grass, slugs, mildew leaf disease or the longhorn beetle destroys a stand of trees? Surely, the process of evolution itself cannot cause suffering & cruelty. If you are not bothered by realities such as scores of animals slowly dying of disease & overpopulation, or the African lion devouring the newborn Thompson’s Gazelle, then why would the reality of cancer & AIDS patients slowly dying in a hospital bed, & the brutalization of a defenseless child be any different.

    Yes, all feel pain. But, as Spencer said ” The ill fitted must suffer the evils of unfittness, & the well-fitted profit by their fitness.” Man is either, in nature, subject to & determined by its dictates, or he is outside & above. If he is inside, as you believe, then it is not appropriate to use normative terms.

    Nature is what nature does.

    According to atheism, your view, we are all just blind instruments of nature; mere characters in a drama over which we have no control. The plot is survival. And it’s every species . . . every organism for itself.

    The theme is the purposeless, rhythmic principle of the material universe . . . the ebb and flow of evolution & dissolution; nonexistence to existence; death to life & life to death.

    I see no room for freedom in such a determinative universe . . . where every change & every event must have a material cause & a material explanation.

    And where there is no freedom there can be no moral evil, that which causes pain, suffering &/or impedes the good, because moral actions require free moral agents.

    All moral evil therefore, from your view, is no different form natural evils like disease, famine, tsunamis, & earthquakes which cause “suffering” through natural random occurrences. And, as instruments of nature, a marauding army of murderers, rapists & thieves & the suffering they cause, is really in no way different from any other natural random occurrences . . . say a tornado or an outbreak of infectious disease.

    So if you are consistent, you should not be concerned with suffering/evil. Evil & suffering are terms reserved for ethics & morality. When the atoms in iron heat up & begin to bang into one another, they don’t beg pardon.

    As Christians however, we believe that man as the image bearer of God, is significant & not a mere accident. He is both in & above nature; flesh & spirit.

    So, I have never really understood the argument from suffering/evil, for they are normative concepts, referring implicitly to non scientific questions such as . . . what ought to be or should be done? – And ought not God end suffering, if he is able? Oh! But perhaps he is unable?

    I will be direct. It is my opinion that He is unable. Yes, God is unable to do all things – He cannot contradict His own nature & attributes. And if God is perfect reason, then even He cannot make a square circle or create a world where suffering & libertarian freedom coexist. As a parent, I have morally sufficient reasons for permitting the kinds of suffering my daughter experiences, discipline, intellectual & emotional development just to name a few. Consider frustration tolerance. If this is true for me why should it be any different for God? You have not demonstrated how Omnipotence/omnibenevolence & morality are mutually exclusive. You have merely assumed it

    So, Christians, take very serious the issue of suffering. See my earlier post regarding Christian charity & social involvement.

  6. You talk about fact, yet you claim 500 people watched him rise from the dead, which is from the bible, which is as I pointed out early, capable of falsehoods.

    But understand you want to believe the bible, which I never even started posting on this forum to argue what you do and don’t do in life. If you wish to accept something written so long ago as accurate, so be it. Understand though if you wish to have an argument about reality, you’re going to need more than something that you simply wish to be true, compared to things that are true.

    You speak of something that happened 2000 years ago like you yourself were there. I’m sorry I know you want to believe what you read in the bible, but I don’t. I’ve seen more than enough to convince me the bible is just a book and a poorly constructed one at that.

    Don’t throw your double standard for what passes as fact as a rebuttal for what I said.

    And I’m sorry you went through a childhood of what you describe as bad.

    “Trash mouth” isn’t anything other than a societal system of preferences as to how you speak. If you choose to accept the consequences of how people view you by the language you use, then so be it, but don’t act like it is some sort of sin to use certain words.

    And a person existing does not provide any proof for anything other than the fact the they lived. With that, anybody who lived, who at one time or another was called a god or son of god in a book, is credible.

    If you want I can start a list of alternate religions (cults) that fit these same standards as your christianity.

    In the same way people in the middle east who are living negative lives, turn it around and become fervent muslims or jews. Are you going to say you don’t live in North America or Europe and that being the major factor in you becoming christian? Whether you were from the start was not my point, my point was if you were in India you would be touting hinduism just as strongly.

    And maybe it’s the circles you run in, but the majority of at least suburbia I know, you have people born into christian families, some on off again church goers, some fervent goers, and some who never go. Yet at the very minimum 95% of those born into christian families are still christian to my knowledge under one denomination or another.

    This is simply because (IN MY OPINION), peer pressure and no truer form of it. And I need a little more than peer pressure to base my whole life on a bible written 2000 years ago. A bible that has countless contradictions that allow it to be interpreted by the user. Look it up, there are instances where it says god is omnipotent, and instances where it says he is not.

    Omnipotent
    –adjective
    1. almighty or infinite in power, as God.
    2. having very great or unlimited authority or power.

    Go right ahead and explain how words like infinite and unlimited are really gray areas, they could mean not infinite and not unlimited just as easily. If you stop ignoring the inconsistencies you really might notice how superficial it all really is, but if you really really want to believe it, go ahead, just don’t ask ignorant questions to the world and expect anything less than disappointing answers.

  7. @Nick – First of all, just for the record, the portion of the title of this post that reads “bad Christians” was used for the lack of a better phrase. In reality, all Christians are bad; all mankind is bad.

    Romans 3:10-12 reads –

    10.As it is written: “There is no one righteous, not even one; 11. there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. 12.All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.”

    So I am not claiming or indicating that there are “good” Christians and “bad” ones. I was simply using the word “bad” to describe negative experiences Christians may have had with either a person, pastor, lay leader or even a church itself.

    You said, “Unfortunately there is no one to tell you Jesus is long gone and dead 2000 years ago.”

    That is not the case at all and if you will see my first comment in this post, you will clearly see that there were plenty of witnesses to the fact that Jesus Christ did rise from the dead and was very much alive after He had been killed in a most brutal way.

    As a reminder, I said the following:

    “Furthermore, your statement that “there is no physical evidence to support the claim of any god, or gods” is not entirely true, at least with respect to Christianity. Jesus Christ was a real historical figure, in the same way that Napoleon, Abraham Lincoln, Christopher Columbus or any other person that is no longer with us was real. He really was crucified and really did rise from the dead. In fact, something like 500 or so people witnessed Jesus being crucified and then being alive after he had died.

    If you were to put Jesus on trial as to whether He rose from the dead or not and listen to testimony for everyone who witnessed this historical fact, that would amount to more testimony than any court case in history that I am aware of. “

    Finally your assumption that I was a Christian since birth is wrong. In fact, I was quite a heathen up to the age of 21 years of age. Prior to becoming a Christian, I was involved with the use and sale of illegal drugs, was an alcoholic, a thief, a liar, disobedient to parents, had a trash mouth and many other things I won’t go into detail here. Main point is that I was far from being a “follower of Christ.”

    I have always believed there was a supreme God and that the Bible was His Word but that was the extent of it. I certainly did not know God, was not trying to pursue Him in any way and wanted nothing to do with organized religion.

    In fact, of all the Christians I personally know, very few were “brought up” that way. Most come from very “colorful” lives if you will accept the expression.

  8. Look David, by all means believe Garstang if you want, but if people who do archaeology for a living and are by all means experts, report on the excavations by referencing John Garstang’s work and saying:

    “Garstang’s excavation techniques unfortunately were quite crude by today’s standards and are thought to be only partially circumstantial.”

    Then I have no choice but to believe what our current proven techniques are telling us.a And these are people who know what they are talking about, unlike you and me. I don’t claim to know much more about archaeology than the average person, and I’m sure you don’t either. That is why the best I can do, is take the word of the people who DO know what they are talking about. You are also more than welcome to take the word of the anonymous writers and compilers who more often than not contradict themselves in their own book.

    Like I said though, when people want to believe something, they will often make their findings explain what they want to believe, much as I expect Garstang was doing, but if people are going to ask why I’m not christian because of bad christians, well, it’s often the easiest thing to point out, that religion doesn’t make you a good person. But as we find less and less reason to believe religion is just a state of mind that is easier for people to deal with compared to just accepting that you get one life on this earth, and it’s worth making the most of, though not still not at the expense of others.

    Most religions certainly claim this to be their goal, the whole point is to be a good christian, which often a good thing. People though give up their own responsibility to dertimine what is right and wrong,and let whoever is in power(in the religion) tell them what is right and wrong.

    We saw it with the crusades, well the pope said this killing was ok, even though killing is never ok unless in self defense, and the arabs were not exactly in england. So even though we have this well intentioned religion, it gets mis-used and misinterpreted. I’m sure though God knowingly gave man religion to believe in though so we could all slaughter each other over who has the better imaginary friend.

    Even now with global terrorism we have religion fueling crazy people, on both sides, there is a documentary about a christian fanatacism camp in the united states, indoctrinating children before they even have the most basic reasoning skills.

    To me personally, Jesus is the santa claus my parents never actually told me was imaginary, with santa it’s a little easier once you catch your parents doing it for you, and kids literally believe he exists when they are young. Unfortunately there is no one to tell you jesus is long gone and dead 2000 years ago. I would find it much more interesting if kids were not taught anything about religion until at least the 18, when they could make the decision for themselves, to believe in religion or not. And if they choose to, which one they want to believe in.

    I guarantee that you (David), were born a christian, just like the other 3 billion people who are not christian were born into their religion. I’m sure, just as I’m sure you are, think oh well I got lucky to be born into the correct religion.

    If you want to hear every single reason I find religion just so unbelievable, I’ll go into more detail, but some people just see things differently, and you should probably worry more about your own life, and less about other people’s often informed choices. Remember, you only get one.

  9. Jesus said,”I am the way,the truth,and the light,no man comes to the father but by me”.The whole Bible just points to Jesus as savior. Born of a virgin,was God manifested as man. He was perfect in every way,{making him a perfect sacrifice}. He was beaten for our healing. Died on the cross as the perfect sacrifice. He was raised again on the third day to show that those who believe in him will have everlasting life. I believe this to the bottom of my heart. That is what I want to share. If you choose to believe me, good for you. If not, that is your choice. I will not twist your arm – that’s between you and God.

    I will still talk to people about Jesus as much or little as they want, or as little as they want. I will always try to do right to people for the rest of my life. When a person knows something good, it is natural to try and share it, but not to force it. If you truly try to seek God you will find him. If you make a half hearted attempt you will be rewarded with a half hearted earthly feeling. If you try with all your heart, you will get out of God what you put into him.

    If you are one of these people that don’t believe in Jesus then please do not try and quote any scripture and or analyze any part of the Bible to use against Christians.

    It’s like trying to fix a car using a manual for a washing machine – it just will not work. Your heart is not in it because you do not understand it. Not because it is complicated, it was made very simple, but because people make it complicated. If you want to read the Bible, don’t start at the beginning, it is not one book.The Bible is a compilation of several books.

    Start in Romans and go from there, and yes it is very historically accurate. If you were to try and prove it as hard as you try to disprove it you will be amazed at all of the documentation.There are writings from the 1st century that could reproduce over 95% of the Bible that we have today. That is just the tip of that iceberg!

    Please make the effort, it’s worth it.

  10. Prove you’re not a murderer, then. Seriously. If you’re not, it should be easy. Right?

    The system of law wouldn’t allow such a burden, so why do you put that upon us? Proving some victim is dead, is easy though. So is proving its murderer. Relatively. But to prove one is not the murderer is impossible.

    Therefore: stop asking atheists to prove there are no gods. The burden of proof is on you.

    About Jericho, I think the point is: which is more likely? God did it, or something else happened? When archeological findings contradicts the story in the Bible, one should take story with a grain of salt. At best.

    And the Bible is full of these: genesis, the flood and the exodus are all contradicted by science.

    As for your question why atheists are angry at christians, I cannot say we are. We’re more annoyed that the world around us are shaped by superstition and not knowledge. And that when we point this out, christians, muslims, jews and the likes screams their lungs out, invoking blasphemy.

  11. @Nick – The link you provided to some history on archaeological studies that have been conducted on the ancient city of Jericho seem to neither confirm nor deny that it was indeed destroyed as the Bible says it was.

    You could believe Kathleen Kenyan’s findings while I could believe John Garstang’s. Who is right?

    What seems to be certain is that the city was destroyed and even contained a network of “collapsed” walls. What is uncertain is if it was actually inhabited at the time Joshua was said to have destroyed it.

    So your point is?

    Atheists many times ask for proof that God does in fact exist. I could also ask that they prove He doesn’t exist. And then if you compared the two, I believe you’d find a lot more evidence that He does exist than He doesn’t.

  12. Let’s clear up something very quickly, as I said before which no one has dared counter point. It isn’t a matter of believing in, as you put it, matter/energy vs God/spirit.

    Faith in itself, is a placeholder, it’s used to fill in the gaps in our knowledge as humans. You assume he is saying matter/energy created runs and maintains the universe, just as you suppose a god does. But you’re missing the point, and I can’t speak for every person who believes there are no gods, but in general I hope this holds true

    1. There are many things left to be learned, left to be fully understood.

    2. You in your infinite wisdom, just like the people of 2000 years ago, believe they understand the universe they live in.

    3.An atheist/agnostic completely acknowledges that for every person on the planet, no one understands the world around them to the degree they wish/think they do.

    4. The bible says God is omnipotent(also says the opposite too but lets focus on the all powerfulness for now, which would certainly be more God-like, and not some alien with advanced technology)

    Now with those four things in mind, lets define what it is you call faith.

    You willingly accept that a book written, compiled, and edited by dozens of people with nothing but the integrity and (hopefully) lack of personal motivation of those people in mind. Then, these stories they compile, were passed mouth to mouth in those days and the purpose of this book was to try and provide some consistency so this religion could grow without so much contradiction(though they still left quite a lot in there)

    Now when amazing things happen in those days, say jericho is a very good example. What you have is a city that according to the bible, The israelites came, then the walls fell, cause god did it.

    http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/archaeology/sites/middle_east/jericho.html

    evidence says, the city wasn’t anything more than rubble when joshua arrived there, though it’s not like there was some sort of history book where everyone else could have known, oh that city fell hundreds of years ago, most people were a bit distracted with subsistence survival. Yet word spreads that there is this invisible all powerful being that is going to take care of them, and look how it helped this army destroy this city, surely this must be truth, it’s kind of hard for people to pass on that sort of good news, when they are used to so little.

    Also keep in mind when people want to believe in something badly enough, they’ll search for something that supports it, even if it’s a bit of a stretch, and not the most likely answer.

    Now, as someone with a lack of faith, i’m not saying i have faith in some alternate answer to the many questions we dont know for sure yet, but i’m admitting i dont know, not accepting the easy way out and saying, god did it, especially since everything that has been attributed to a god, was done so out of a lack of knowledge to help fill in gaps until that gap is filled with real knowledge.

  13. Please forgive the length. But I believe some response is demanded.

    Just cant said – “Your use of the phrase “the fact” implies that you have evidence for your claims…… what is it? And atheism is a lack of faith, not faith. And the world didn’t come about “by chance”. To suggest this is what non-Christians think is another glaring example of your lack of understanding. Really, the same old apologetics really do get old.”

    Just cant, what do you accept as evidence for your beliefs? Of course we all have heard that as an atheist you lack faith. But some of us are incredulous. I mean you really deny any core beliefs about life & existence. If this is true, then how do you justify your arguments which, I think most would agree, quite clearly are designed to convince others of your system of beliefs . . . that is, how you give meaning to & explain existence? If faith is steadfast belief & trust in what one accepts as true. And it looks to me as if you are steadfast in your beliefs & trust in what you accept as true. Then, it follows that you are a man of faith. The very fact that you are on the net arguing about the superiority of your system of thought – Atheism, or as you say “lack of faith” is evidence of your faith, trust & deep conviction in your own set of beliefs. You therefore contradict yourself.

    However, I’m certain that you will put no faith in my definition of faith because I did not add those five little words that you atheists faithfully believe sets you above all other religious adherents; those words are . . . ‘despite the evidence against it.’ Never the less, Just cant, you know as well as I do, you are a man of deep faith. You can deny that you put your faith in the scientific method & reason ‘despite the evidence against it,’ but you cannot live it out & be consistent or have integrity. The evidence is all around you. Every time you get out of bed, get on the road & go to work, talk to a friend or argue with an opponent; ever action you take flows from the faith you put into the core beliefs with which you explain your existence.

    Finally, Just cant, I’ll give you a ‘fact.’ It is a fact that you argue using reason . . . you argue to Dave – “the fact” implies that you have evidence for your claims.” In other words Just cant, you say in essence – Dave, you either have evidence for your faith or you do not! And you cannot both have evidence & not have evidence at the same time & in the same respect. This is very reasonable but also very ironic. See, though you faithfully rely upon the presupposition that no consistent thought is possible with out logic, you provide absolutely no evidence or explanation for that which you put your faith in, that which describes the ultimate, timeless, universals of reality. I am referring to the laws of thought. But, for those of us who believe in a transcendent God, we have no problem explaining the ontological reality of the laws of thought & mind. You however, must try to explain them through natural causes ‘despite the evidence against it.’ After all Just cant, how do you provide a valid natural causal explanation for that which must be presupposed throughout that entire explanatory process without contradicting yourself? But, of course it appears as though you have no problems with being inconsistent.

    Just cant, you have no integrity & worse no humility. You call Dave a fool, which is ironic because in our bible, it is written that “Yes, they know God, but do not worship him as God or even give him thanks. They begin to think up foolish ideas of what God is like. As a result, their minds became dark & confused. Claiming to be wise, they instead became utter fools.” You see Just cant, even men like Einstein & Popper had the humility & integrity to admit that science only deals in probabilities & not in truth. Einstein declared his theory as just that, a theory. He would not, even if all predictions came out right, regard it as a truth. And Popper said, ‘Our attempts to see and find the truth in the sciences are not final, but open to improvement; . . . our knowledge, our doctrine is conjectural; . . . it consists of guesses, of hypotheses, rather than of final & certain truths.’ These men of science had integrity & humility because they had the confidence to acknowledge that inductive arguments, the arguments upon which all scientific laws are based, in the end reduce themselves to a formal fallacy, commonly referred to as the problem of induction; they would not deny that empiricism relies not only upon transcendental deductive, a priori universal & necessary categories & concepts, without which experience alone gives nothing, it also presupposes, without any evidence what so ever & all reasoning to the contrary, that all scientific laws (like the theory of gravity) will obtain in the future as they have in the past.

    Here is a faith beyond reason!

    Just cant, please demonstrate for us, using strict empirical methods, the principle of uniformity . . . without assuming it to be true at the out set. Please demonstrate for us ignorant Christians how the statement . . . an object’s total energy is equal to the sum of its potential and kinetic energy, does not presuppose the truth of this statement . . . objects exist in space & time; and finally, how this statement does not presuppose a priori the truth that space & time provide the basis for all external experience, but are not themselves dependent upon experience. You can imagine there is no redness, no hardness, no sensible qualities what so ever to a ball, but you can never destroy the space once occupied by the ball in thought. You cannot imagine the nonexistence of space time without presupposing your relation to it.

    It appears to me Just cant, that perhaps you are the one afraid to think for yourself. You appear, to me anyway, to be just another fanatical religious zealot, whose core doctrines you know very little about, but accept anyway upon blind faith. You believe in something divine, that is, something possessing the status of being nondependent upon anything else for its existence, and that everything else in existence is dependent upon & can be explained by the divine. The only difference between you & I is what we consider divine. I claim God/Spirit & you claim matter/energy.

    Welcome to faith!!

    Oh by the way, why are you so angry at Christians?

    Now go ahead & roll your eyes as you formulate a compositional fallacy to discredit the fact but, the Catholic Church is the largest non-governmental institution in the United States. It’s the largest operator of private schools, running over 200 colleges. It is also by most measures the largest charity in the U.S. And a recent report by the United Nations agency estimates that up to 70 per cent of the health infrastructure in Africa is currently owned by faith-based organizations.

    What are you doing besides hating?

  14. @David Wallace:

    We atheists think we are wiser in that aspect that we accept our not knowing everything without applying simple, unverifyable and ancient superstition to it. We don’t reject ‘the fact that there is One Creator’, as this cannot be verified as a fact at all. There’s no faith to it either. It’s a complete lack of faith; if you cannot back a bold idea (that there is a creator) with a single proof, you walk away from that bold idea. And don’t come dragging that Bible, claiming everything is to be answered there. It’s no more valuable for answering your questions than any other fairytale.

    One tiny step towards reason is to question your ways. A big one is to question how a quilt of a story, accumulated over hundreds of years, and edited by people of power, should bear any knowledge the modern man no longer posess. The more you study the Bible, the more you will find it’s nothing more than a best-of-scriptures.

  15. “John you said – “I don’t believe in a god because I don’t see any evidence for a god. It’s not because of any particular “bad” Christian. I think you’ll find this is the case with most atheists.

    There’s an old saying: “I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” (Stephen F. Roberts)

    So it’s not because of any particular person that I’m an atheist. I’m an atheist regarding YOUR god for the same reason you’re an atheist regarding Zeus, Apollo, Odin, and many of the thousands of other gods that people have worshiped over the years.”

    Following Stephen F. Roberts logic – All who disagree about what is God are that which are atheists. And John, Stephen & St. Paul are that which disagree about what is God. Therefore, John, Stephen & St. Paul are that which are atheists.

    Here is Johns Crazy logic . . . If all that which disagree about what is murder are that which are saints. And the Marquis de Sade, Hitler & Mother Teresa are all that which disagree about what is murder. Therefore, The Marquis de Sade, Hitler & Mother Teresa are that which are saints.

    I am assuming that there are probably as good of reasons not to include The Marquis de Sade & Hitler into the class of saints as there are for not including athiests into the class of believers. Never mind the fact, that in so doing atheists like john, in accordance to his own logic, become believers.

  16. @Just Can’t – You said, “But is is insulting to them (and us) for you (and others who can’t seem to grasp reality) to say that we don’t believe because we are judging all Christians by the bad ones.”

    Uumm, I didn’t say that.

    You also said, “And it is insulting to say that we haven’t actually read the book and made up our own minds.”

    Didn’t say that either.

    You said this as well, “And it is insulting to say that current atheists weren’t “real christians” in the first place.”

    Also did not say that.

    You then said, “And it is insulting to say that we aren’t atheists at all — we’re just mad at god.”

    That doesn’t make any sense and how can you be mad at someone you don’t believe in?

    And finally, you said, “Your use of the phrase “the fact” implies that you have evidence for your claims…… what is it? “

    I think I summed that up in my first set of comments directed towards Joshua. The evidence is there. You just don’t want to look at it.

  17. I love this hypocrisy – Joshua says – “Many feel that these religious institutions undermine human rights also. Many women feel many of these religions objectify them, and enforce their supposed subservience. These doctrines condone brutality against those who do not agree. They make suggestions that those who do not agree are less human than those who do. And ultimately create segregation amidst the people of the world. The actions of many of the churches enforce these negative connotations as well. An aggressive stance against sexuality, womens rights to choose when they conceive. In the past the churches held white only policies, and demonized ethnicity that wasn’t European. Fundamentalists often create more negatives, but outrageous attacks, such as protesting at funerals of fallen soldiers and citizens who were homosexual, bombing abortion clinics and so forth.” who are you to say ‘Bad Christians?’”

    And then he makes this comment – “It is not you who have the right, nor the responsibility to judge others. That is left to your God, and only your God.”

    Wow! I guess Joshua is the only one with the right to an opinion regarding Christians & how “Bad” they are.

    Hey Joshua, I have a question . . . where do your human rights come from . . . Other men? Like university science professors . . . maybe culture or society? No . . . I bet it’s the government?

    It’s true that in order to protect basic human rights government must creates laws. However, if science, culture, society or government, in our case the constitution, is the final authority in deciding what are human rights & what is lawful, then on what moral & legal grounds do you argue for justice? This makes no sense to me.

    You say, “Religious institutions undermine human rights also. Many women feel many of these religions objectify them, and enforce their supposed subservience. These doctrines condone brutality against those who do not agree.” And yet, when the society, culture &/or government, which I am assuming, you esteem as the highest authority in the universe, come into conflict with your own values & concepts of right & wrong, which they have & do, otherwise we would not be having this discussion, you make an appeal to some other higher law for justice.

    This is like, in my opinion, a black in the south surrounded by an angry mob of KKK members who are preparing to lynch him when he cries out . . . ‘I appeal to society & popular culture for justice! The majority of those in society consider murder unfair . . . as unjust!’ to which two voices thru their hoods reply, we are society & popular culture. We make the rules & decide what is just & unjust. And we’ve decided justice is for white men only. Then I plead to a higher more objective authority! I appeal to academia & the sciences. To which a local science professor cloaked in white laughs . . . science knows nothing of justice. Can justice be quantified . . . can it be measured or reproduced in a lab? We in the sciences of anthropology, evolutionary biology & eugenics follow the teachings of the prophets of natural selection & social evolution . . . such men as Darwin, Linnaeus, Comte, Schopenhauer, Spencer Galton & Grant who prophesy that Justice is ensuring the survival of the fittest through the elimination of the defective & inferior. And since science has proven that Negroes are an inferior species to whites, we are simply carrying out justice. Chesterton be damned! Well, then to Jefferson, Franklin & Lincoln & our countries Bill of Rights I plead. Too which the entire rabble just laughed out loud.

    Then just as the Negroes head is slipped thru the noose a voice from the darkness yells out, “Reason, which is the Law, teaches all mankind, who would but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his Life, Health, Liberty, or Possessions.” Says who rumbles the crowd peering into the dark. God! God says so! Exclaims the voice. ‘The almighty, creator of heaven & earth has created man and we are all His property, including that man on the end of that rope. Our chief end set us by our creator as a species and as individuals is the lords own end. Don’t be afraid to show yourself abolitionist says a man in a purple cloak. Why, you’re among believers here. You lie! For if that were true you would know, ‘Our wise and omnipotent God, having made all peoples and sent them into this world by his order and about his business, are the lords property & workmanship, they are made to last during his, not one another’s pleasure: and being furnished with like faculties, sharing all in one community of nature, there cannot be supposed any subordination among us, that may authorize us to destroy one another, as if we were made for one another’s uses, as animals. The laws of our legislators must be conformable to the will of God and that human laws cannot contradict any positive law of Scripture.

    With that the crowd became quiet & slowly began to break up, but just then the Negro yells out, “Foolish moralizing Christians! I don’t care what your religion says about racism, slavery & oppression! The only authorities intelligent & reasonable men will accept are those of science & government, not religion. Religion is but fairy tales with nothing rational to say. The only God of man is man. The mob thought for a moment, shook their heads in agreement & lynched both men.

    The point, in case it has not been made clear, is that if science & governments are sufficient to give rights & make laws, then they are sufficient to take them away as they did in 1935 with the Nuremberg race laws, where it was not only illegal for Jews to marry or have sexual relations with Aryans but it was illegal for a Jew just to exist. As a result, they were deprived of human their rights in the name of eugenics & social purity.

    Now Joshua, if you were living in Germany during this period, on what scientific or legal grounds could you object? Following your logic there is no valid reason to object because all truth & justice come from science & government. And as I asked earlier, can truth & justice be measured tested & retested. Joshua, what exactly or roughly is the molecular structure of justice? Where on the periodic table is it found? What is its mass? What are its physical properties? Oh! it must have physical qualities – size, shape, temperature, weight? Because we know that according to you & science . . . that which cannot be measured doesn’t exist? So, until science creates or discovers justice, you should perhaps stop complaining about what is & is not just. Unless of course, you are able to cite academic papers, peer reviewed & replicated mind you, proving that such a thing as justice exists.

    However, knowing that what science & government cannot create they cannot destroy, we foolish & naive Christians, will continue to put our faith in that which is unseen . . . truth & justice being just two examples.

    In closing, I am constantly mystified by the inconsistency & out right hypocrisy of theophobic atheistic scientism which shouts so indignantly. . . “Science is the only method of obtaining knowledge.” Yet, this self proclaimed paragon of knowledge & intelligence is incapable of not only securing mans’ demands for justice, freedoms, privileges & rights but of even explaining there nature. But, like all men & women who have suffered injustice or who have had their freedoms, privileges & rights taken away by someone more powerful, stronger or more intelligent, atheists will presuppose the existence of an ultimate authority. They will renounce & betray their allegiance to science & government the moment science & government labels them defective & undeserving of rights & justice. They will plead for justice when, for their beliefs, their children are taken from them & lined up between a shallow grave & machine gun. If they had integrity however, & were consistent in their beliefs they would not cry out for justice, for they would realize that justice is but a fairytale created by religion as way of preserving the weak & defective.

    And if science & government has determined that they & their children are weak & defective & must be exterminated in the name of social hygiene, then so be it. But seriously, who would believe such garbage. The truth is that these atheists would be crying out to the only God of truth & justice. To the God who created man in his image. To the God they deny & despise. For in their conscience they know that truth & Justice presupposes the existence of this God. The Judeo-Christian God.

    It’s curious, you all cry ‘Freedom & Justice’ never pausing to consider that freedom is secured only by the Judeo-Christian proposition “Man is created by God in his own image with sacred dignity & a special end. To this end God alone has legitimate authority over the conscience.’ This is why in the federalist papers the ‘Almighty’ is considered the provider & sustainer of the revolution & the guiding hand behind the drafting of the constitution.

    So, Joshua have integrity. If God has nothing to do with rights justice & freedom, just a bunch of men in lab coats with fancy electron microscopes & a document with some man made rights written upon it, when someone comes to take that those rights away, to brutalize that which is most precious to you, remember according to your god science there is no such thing as truth & justice, only scientific probabilities & natural selection. Then, be consistent & say ‘you are right!’ we are all merely a collection of atoms, an accident of random chance, a social construct created by society. Then go quietly into that dark night!

  18. David Wallace said: “And why do you atheists think you are wiser than everybody else anyway? Because you reject the fact that there is One Creator who created us and everything around us and holds it in the palm of His hands? I call that faith greater than mine if you believe that this world came about by chance.”

    Your use of the phrase “the fact” implies that you have evidence for your claims…… what is it? And atheism is a lack of faith, not faith. And the world didn’t come about “by chance”. To suggest this is what non-christians think is another glaring example of your lack of understanding. Really, the same old apologetics really do get old.

    David Wallace said: “Oh, and sorry Ian – I removed your link. You can insult me all you like but I’d be a fool to allow you to link to your own site. So… poof – it is gone!”

    LOL…. why is that David?? Are you afraid that a link to another site may make people think for themselves? They may look at something you don’t approve of? LOL. BTW…. it wouldn’t take you allowing his link to make you a fool. If that is what you are worried about, well, the horse has already left the barn!

    It really is quite sad. Hey — quick — delete this one too — you may look a fool!

  19. @ David Wallace:

    The post is not for atheists — just for “christians” that no longer pursue the things of god? They don’t sound like christians to me. They sound like atheists — or people who have figured it all out. But is is insulting to them (and us) for you (and others who can’t seem to grasp reality) to say that we don’t believe because we are judging all christians by the bad ones. And it is insulting to say that we haven’t actually read the book and made up our own minds. And it is insulting to say that current atheists weren’t “real christians” in the first place. And it is insulting to say that we aren’t atheists at all — we’re just mad at god.

    All of these arguments suggest real lack of understanding for the thought processes people use when they leave a belief system. In your belief system — such thoughts appear to be impossible for you to comprehend. And that is OK.

    Just don’t write articles about it. It showcases this lack of understanding and also your comments suggest an arrogance that is, unfortunately, quite common with people who follow your reasoning (if you can call it that).

    You can quote scripture all you want but it makes no difference to those of us who have decided it (your book of ancient desert superstition) is a work of fiction. What is Corinthians saying? It really doesn’t matter. There’s no proof for any of it.

    I mean, if you have any proof — what is it? Otherwise — don’t bother answering — you’ll likely just embarrass yourself quoting your rule book again.

  20. There is no reason to believe that the bible is an accurate representation of the world around us. It is filled with contradiction and a perverse morality that I find offensive.
    You are wasting the only life you are ever sure to have.
    God is imaginary.

  21. @Ian – Let me quote from I Corinthians 1:26-31:

    26.Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. 27.But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. 28.He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things–and the things that are not–to nullify the things that are, 29.so that no one may boast before him. 30.It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God–that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. 31.Therefore, as it is written: “Let him who boasts boast in the Lord.”

    What is this saying? The wisest person on Earth pales in comparison to God who is not only the author of wisdom but is all-wise. I am glad therefore that he has chosen those who are not “so wise” at least by the world’s standards so those people cannot accredit their salvation to any wisdom they themselves hold. That is not to say that God does not save “wise” and “educated” people as well as I have met many people that have much wisdom.

    And why do you atheists think you are wiser than everybody else anyway? Because you reject the fact that there is One Creator who created us and everything around us and holds it in the palm of His hands? I call that faith greater than mine if you believe that this world came about by chance.

    Finally, I’d like to remind all you atheists that have commented in this post that I welcome your feedback but the article was not written for you. It was written for Christians who no longer pursue the things of God.

    Oh, and sorry Ian – I removed your link. You can insult me all you like but I’d be a fool to allow you to link to your own site. So… poof – it is gone!

  22. Maybe people “stumble” because it’s hard to by into this garbage unless you’ve been indoctrinated with it since birth.

    David Wallace, you are in serious need of an education.

  23. Let’s all just accept a few things about reality, as in, this world, everything that happens here at your home, and far off in other countries, there is much suffering.

    I went to church for a couple of years in my youth, the first church was a juggernaut. Started small in a gym, is now on several acres and treats sermons like a show of entertainment.

    The second church was more what I believe is common where it had a building, maybe 300 people attend.

    Both of these churches had something in common, you don’t really learn anything. I attended my roommates church too recently and I always have the same disappointment when it comes to sermons. There is a reason they are boring, they are repetition of the same, skin deep logic. If you actually pay attention to any sermon, it can be summarized as just treat people in any situation, fairly.

    Really that’s the most any human can ask of any other human in a world that is typically unfair. In the end,I hope I speak for most people who are absent of any sort of faith in higher powers or higher beings of god qualities when I say, treating every human you meet fairness is the bare minimum. Charity is always a nice thing to partake in, and when possible within reason, encouraged.

    Understand though that religion itself though is a tough thing to actually believe in. When I say believe I mean you very LITERALLY believe there is a creature that operates outside the laws of physics and every other law of the reality we live in. If you have convinced yourself that God somehow operates within these boundaries, well then he really isn’t a god is he? Prayer requires something that can be truly called God to operate outside the boundries we have observed in this REAL world.

    So when you see all the problems, that a god capable of fixing, chooses not to, because of some twisted social experiment which in any other situation would be considered downright psychotic, remember god made much more sense before the world started understanding the world around it.

    When volcanoes erupted in ancient times, people didn’t know why, so they attributed it to a Volcano God. We figured out there is not a Volcano God, but there are forces which lead to the eruption of Volcanoes.

    With all our knowledge, the mysteries left today, how the Universe began or continues renewing itself(whichever may be the case) oh there is a God of the universe you say?

    When coincidence happens, instead of understanding all the tiny, fraction of a second things that led to something happening at the that particular time, oh a God did it.

    When we don’t know what happens to our personality, self awareness, or as you might think of soul, when we die. Though the obvious answer is we cease to be, such an answer is horrible to consider for one who enjoys being self aware and alive and frankly hard to accept for just about every person on the planet. So God happens, and we continue being self aware, just in a different place in another place that God created so that we may live our lives without being fearful of the end, though it may rob some of actually living while they’re here.

    People are all different, if believing in religion, which ever it may be, is what you need to convince yourself to live a life of relative goodness, then I’m not writing this to convince you otherwise. But understand those who simply don’t have the capacity to ignore certain facts which they hold true about the very REAL world we live in, so that they can combine it with a very speculative world that you believe exists in parallel.

    Some people, through life experiences, whether religious or not, are going to do bad things, religion is simply not a factor in determining a person. But religion can also be twisted to convince people of many things, whether it’s for a crusade, a jihad, or simply to get a large group of people to agree on anything in particular that someone could use as an advantage.

    I know this is a long post, but I will end with simply saying: When most people believe something strongly, they feel they need to help others see it the way they do. Whether some religious people believe more death is caused by non-religious people and vice versa. Attributing death to an ideal, especially ideals that simply don’t encourage killing, is ignorant. It’s blatant confirmation of the gullibility of humans in general.

    -those are my thoughts

  24. Looking at these comments, I have to wonder, why don’t the Christians read the unbelievers’ arguments? How can you skim over them without due consideration?

    It is as though your faith seals you away from society, splits you up into dissociative, autistic strangers, dampens your skills for communicating, reciprocating, empathizing, & adapting, strips you of common sense & etiquette, & hinders you from interacting properly with your fellow humans, perhaps to prevent outsiders from breaking your delicate, laborously constructed suspension of disbelief.

    Though you may have joined your church for fellowship, admit, you found a cozy, little hermit cave. Since when is it civil or considerate to regard by default outsiders as criminal & other people’s ideas as thought-poison? Does that not strike you as hostile, superstitious paranoia? It would if you caught someone else doing it to you. Before you get to old to, please consider that maybe becoming a unquestioningly gullible, blindly obedient slave wasn’t the breakthrough you first presumed it to be.

    Perhaps poor social skills more than low IQ reinforce faith. Without knowing intelligent people who know about atheism, you repress any attempt to see past you beliefs. Maybe Christians just need real friends to replace their imaginary one.

  25. I am atheist, it was my choice after years of being told I was Christian by my parents. It wasn’t any “bad” Christians that made me change my beliefs. I thought that there was no way that a fundamentally loving and merciful God who was also all powerful would allow people in this world to suffer, and to condemn people to an eternity of suffering. To me it was a flaw in the belief structure at the most basic level.

  26. It is not that judge all christianity by the behavior of some — it is that we dislike all christianity. Yes — the way YOU do it too. We find it ALL silly and needless. It would be so much easier if we had just been disappointed by a small percentage of you — but that isn’t the case.

    So please…….I’ll answer your plea with one of my own: Stop “guessing” that we are just mad at The Inquisition and realize that it is much more than that. I’m sure this has been pointed out to you before!

  27. You know, it was a bad Sunday School teacher that acted as the final straw, but bad Christians aren’t the reason I don’t attend church.

    My distancing from Catholicism had been brewing for several years. It just took a certain level of maturity before I could choose to leave the church. I stopped attending regularly when I was 10 and only attend now for funerals and weddings.

    Back then my reasoning probably wasn’t sufficient grounds for leaving but it was based on certain flaws with the church, like the lack of rights within it. I felt that fathers should be able to be married and raise their own families and that women should be allowed into the priesthood.

    You’d say the solution to that would be to join another more welcoming church.

    But, as I’ve grown older I’ve seen even more reasons not to belong to a religious organization. Too many simply promote hate and shun members by condemning everything from gay marriage to abortion to other religions (from which converts may have originated).

    Isn’t it better to do than say? Wouldn’t the world be a much better place if people volunteered for their communities during the time they’d otherwise spend at church?

    The way I see it, the only logical thing to be is agnostic. There is no solid evidence that a god or a group of gods exists. However, there’s no way to disprove that existence either. As far as morality, one should strive to act in ways that don’t cause harm. None of us is free of sin but we can all do our bit to be kind to one another, help those in need, and protect resources for future generations.

    If God is real, I don’t think he saves those that pray to him. He sure isn’t stopping that genocide in Darfur and plenty of the world’s most faithful have suffered through horrible illnesses only to die in agony. People shouldn’t count on God to fix things, they should act to fix it themselves. Sometimes, you can’t fix things and you have to accept the inevitable.

    If God is real I’d like to think that he wouldn’t prohibit someone from heaven solely based on the fact that they don’t worship him. A moral life should be enough to get into heaven and if a God is so self-absorbed and cruel that he wouldn’t let a good atheist into heaven is that the kind of heaven anyone would want to experience?

  28. I am human, I have the same heart, brain, feelings and thoughts as all humans on Earth. But what I cannot understand is that people seem to think there is a “higher power”…and not only do they know that this exist but they know its mind??? What it wants you to eat, that you should mutilate the genitals of infants (circumcision) etc

    I do not beleive in the deity of the abrahamic religions just as most of you dont believe in Zeus. There are mysteries to life, but to answer with ‘god’ is an ideas dead-end and stops people looking.

  29. Many people have been hurt by other people. The church is made up of people. None of us is perfect. Errors are made. That is where forgiveness comes in, Thank God. Just because you are not able to see something, does not means that it can’t exist. Atoms are not able to be seen, but the atom bomb has been proven effective. God is real HE exists, Hell is real, it exists. When you accept Jesus in your heart, you escape hell. Simple

  30. @Brian – I am sorry for your negative experiences so far in encountering the true God.

    The only encounter my grandfather, rest his soul, ever had with God was the one time he went to a Methodist church and following the service, they paid a follow up visit to his home and seemed to only be interested in how he was going to pay his tithes. It turned him off from church for the rest of his life.

    That being said, even though mankind mis-represents God many times over, it does not mean that God is still not who He says he is.

    I would encourage you to read the Gospels (Matthew, Luke, Mark and John) with an open heart and look at the life of Jesus. There you will find the character of God.

    @Brad – Actually, I know many people who still believe in God and believe they are following Him but no longer attend church (a local body of believers that meets physically on regular basis) because of an offense.

    True many do leave church and the pursuit of God because they no longer believe. However, that is not the type of person I am targeting with my post.

    Thanks for sharing.

    @Joshua – You assumption that this article was targeted to aetheists and agnostic is in error.

    It is targeted to people who believe themselves to be Christians but no longer actively pursue God by attending church services, reading the Bible, talking to Him in prayer, trying to order their lives by His will, etc.

    Furthermore, your statement that “there is no physical evidence to support the claim of any god, or gods” is not entirely true, at least with respect to Christianity. Jesus Christ was a real historical figure, in the same way that Napoleon, Abraham Lincoln, Christopher Columbus or any other person that is no longer with us was real. He really was crucified and really did rise from the dead. In fact, something like 500 or so people witnessed Jesus being crucified and then being alive after he had died.

    If you were to put Jesus on trial as to whether He rose from the dead or not and listen to testimony for everyone who witnessed this historical fact, that would amount to more testimony than any court case in history that I am aware of.

    So there’s your physical evidence. Not to mention that the Bible is historically and archaeologically correct as well. More physical evidence that God is who he says He is.

    @Fatikis – You border on committing the “unpardonable” sin with your comments but thanks for sharing.

    @Bill – I feel your pain. I have had to leave three churches in my almost 20 years of being a Christian and in between churches have visited several that left bad tastes in my mouth.

    Good churches are hard to find these days but they are out there. I am in one now but am constantly shocked at the state of today’s Church as a whole. But then I remind myself that we are in the last days where the Bible prophesied that the Church as a whole would be lukewarm (Rev. 3:14-22).

  31. I have been a clergyman since 1973. I served my last church from 1978-2004. I was asked to leave because of personal problems that went against the teaching of my church. I then worked for another church for a year and certain things transpired that left a very bad taste in my mouth and spirit. I have been looking for a church to worship at ever since. The current church I belong to just lost their pastor because he took another call. I have tried going to that church with him gone but the interim pastor they have leaves me cold. Also, it is a very cold congregation, very difficult to make new relationships.

    There was a time when I questioned God and He proved Himself real to me time and again. My faith is strong in Him – I just cannot find a church in which to worship him. I would lie to start my own but do not know how. Yes, the church is not perfect and I know I offended many during my years of ministry. But I have also learned that we, the Church, the body of Christ, need to re-examine ourselves and change the way we treat people.

  32. Or there is no good Christians unless they or ignorant ones. Well, all Christians are ignorant but I am referring to ignorance of the evil that they worship as a deity. Anyone who has read the bible and willfully submits themself to this deity can be considered evil.

    So have a nice day being evil.

  33. Sorry for double posting but I’d like to say I agree with you Christian(hehe). The idea behind this article is good but it’s a bit fallacious to say that people are running from god because they reject the christian religion. You are begging the question that most people have of whether Christianity is the one true religion. One might use this article to reject the idea that Christianity is bad because it’s adherents aren’t perfect and make stupid human mistakes, which in itself I think exemplifies what is good about Christianity. That is, it isn’t about what you as an imperfect human can do, it’s about asking for forgiveness and wanting to do better, in this case as lined out in the bible.

    Choice of title is important in a potentially inflammatory article such as this, as people have a tendency to see the words you use instead of the message itself. And really those are the people you should be catering to with an article like this because the Christians who have accepted that people suck sure as hell don’t need an article to explain it to them.

  34. I have never really agreed with the “science vs. religion” ideology, they really are about two different things. Science explains how the universe works and religion explains why. In my mind, this is akin to a videogame character looking for evidence of a programmer and when he fails (given that the programmer exists on a wholly different level outside the character’s reality) then he decides not to believe in him due to a lack of evidence. I believe that attempts to verify or disprove the existence of a metaphysical being by physical means make no damn sense whatsoever.

    Ultimately though attempting to argue a point with someone over the internet is a ridiculous endeavor so I will instead pose a question. If reality is all there is, is there really a you?

    Our universe is dictated by natural law and as such everything is simply cause and effect. One might argue that we are more than that and in light of recent theories there is in fact randomness in the universe but so what? In this case we are nothing but glorified chemical reactions that occasionally hiccup and produce an unexpected result, there is no will or intellectual motivation behind it on it’s most basic level. If this is the case then I believe humanity will ultimately devolve into nihilistic apathy because we have no will and only really give the appearance of existing at all. In short, there’s no point.

    Say what you want about the existence of god or lack thereof but don’t claim that physical evidence is the determinant of a metaphysical being, that’s just ignant.

  35. ** no self-respecting ape is religious **

    The falsity of ‘intelligent design’ is proved by the existence of those who can believe it.

    bipolar2
    © 2008

  36. I, for one, really enjoyed this article. This is something that I’ve struggled with in my own walk with Christ. It’s easy to get discouraged by Christian people who don’t act in the way you believe is correct. Or, it’s hard to not stumble when you see other Christians sinning unrepentantly. But, as you pointed out, that’s no excuse. Besides, the whole point of Christianity is that we are all fallible but God is not.

  37. I do not use “bad” Christians as an excuse for not pursuing God. I don’t pursue God for the same reason I don’t pursue Santa Claus. Asking Santa Claus for a present may get you something that you want, but only through the work of other people. The same way that praying to God may help, only because other people heard your cries.

  38. ALL gods are false

  39. I agree with what you have said, but in my case, it was somewhat different. I was a trainee lay preacher at the time, when I disagreed with the IDEA promulgated, that man knew better than God with regards to his word.

    I pointed out a number of errors in a few of the books I was told to read, and was roundly disciplined for my honesty and forthrightness, all the errors were in the main to do with context, and previous usage.

    The Bible interprets itself in one of three ways, in the verse, in the context, or previous usage, there are also, several figures of speech. These were hard to find, but they can be seen if looked for, and I was also informed that the book of Esther has no mention of God in it at all. My questioning of the authority of the great and good theologians according to them was seen as a lack of faith and commitment to God!

    Since then, I have run house fellowships, spoken the word of God as often as I may, and ignored the ignorance of those who know only traditional teachings according to man’s ways.

    Yours sincerely and may God bless you abundantly.

    Emmanuel

  40. This I find to be so painfully ironic.

    Other Christians who may interpret the Bible differently to you will decry you and your denomination as ‘bad’ Christianity. And you didn’t even have to commit any crimes.

    In Islam, those that commit and support ‘martydom’ (a.k.a. suicide bombing) are considered ‘evil’ by the rest of the Muslim community. But are they evil, or are they simply interpreting thier religion differently?

    Then you have those who are simply insane. A self-professed Christian who also happens to be a serial killer (‘its God’s will’) is an example. But notice how you speak out to unbelievers using a moral compass that one requires no religion to use.

    Just a few in-your-face ironies that I just wanted to muse at.

  41. Judges 1:19 And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.

  42. Your premise is wrong. There are no such thing as a “bad christian”, unless you would categorize all christians as bad. Which I doubt. Ill-informed, misguided and confused all christians are. But one shouldn’t hold that against them. They probably they were fooled into it by well meaning peers.

    Also, avoiding God is not a possibility. As there also are no such a thing. One cannot avoid nothing.

  43. Atheists do not use bad Christians as any excuse. It is simply that there is no physical evidence to support the claim of any god, or gods. Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Shintoism, Buddhism, Raelians, Scientology, and all others do not offer sufficient evidence, scientific or otherwise to support their claims. Let alone prove that the scriptures were written by who they are claimed to be.

    More over, many scientific advances have shown many teachings in all of these doctrines to not be the case. Many feel that these religious institutions undermine human rights also. Many women feel many of these religions objectify them, and enforce their supposed subservience. These doctrines condone brutality against those who do not agree. They make suggestions that those who do not agree are less human than those who do. And ultimately create a segregation amidst the people of the world.

    The actions of many of the churches enforce these negative connotations as well. An aggressive stance against sexuality, womens rights to choose when they conceive. In the past the churches held white only policies, and demonized ethnicity that wasn’t European. Fundamentalists often create more negatives, but outrageous attacks, such as protesting at funerals of fallen soldiers and citizens who were homosexual, bombing abortion clinics and so forth.

    What also keeps people from turning to God/Gods, is that when they ask questions that question its very existence, they receive “Have faith” and “He works in mysterious ways” and in recent times, a poor attempt at using pseudo-science to back up claims that the world cannot be older than 12,000 years.

    When arguments like this are made, people feel disappointed. There is a lack of understanding on behalf of the theist movements, in science. There is a further reluctance to teach their children, and their children make these arguments with less persuasive material than their parents and so forth.

    Those of us who have turned away from God/Gods did so because they are revolutionary thinkers. They do not merely submit to an idea that is fed to them. Their minds are hungry for answers, their minds are critical, and no theist, as of yet, has been able to fulfill those needs.

    So in closing, again, Atheists do not use “Bad Christians” to support their arguments. They use scientific facts and theories, they use the redundancy and the irrelevancy of scripture and christian argument.

    Also, who are you to say “Bad Christians?” It is not you who have the right, nor the responsibility to judge others. That is left to your God, and only your God.

    Also, in terms of Christian argument against Evolution, I would like to point out that it is incredibly restricting on an Omniscient, Omnipotent being, for a human being to say what they can and cannot do. It is, if God were to exist, entirely possible that he created the means for us to evolve.

    What many theists disagree with about Evolution, is not the science, because they do not understand the science, rather, it is because they have a fear of being animals. They have been taught that they are privileged, and godly, as they were created in the image of God, and they cannot accept that we may have had to grow to this point in order to achieve this status.

    So this article lacks premise. It was not well thought on, and seems as if it was merely an attempt to belittle Atheists and Agnostics.

  44. Perhaps they are stumbling because there is no reason to believe any of it is true, and not just because of some “bad” experience?

    Seems like a big assumption on your part.

  45. ALL christians are bad

  46. I’ve been thinking just the same sort of thing recently.

    People will either say “The greatest wars have been caused be religion” – which is not true – look up “War” in Wikipedia and you will find about 1 in the top 20 wars to be caused by religion.

    Or they will say “all pedophiles are priests” which is also untrue. 40% of Australian sexual assault is caused by family members, 20% by strangers – so priests would be only a part of the 40% left – I am trying to find out the exact figure..

    Or “I know this lady who is really religious but a hypocrite” – but I really wonder if the are making this up or if they have any proof that the lady exists or how they know she was religious or what she is supposed to have done that is hypocritical???

    Any excuse to stop them taking responsibility for their own choices! It’s always someone else’s fault..

  47. I came to the conclusion some years ago that there is no God, and that our sole purpose is to love and be loved, to learn, to discover, to care for each other and to show compassion. Not because we have faith, but because we have empathy. I think people of faith have every right to practice as they wish, so long as it does not infringe on another’s freedom. I am not an atheist because of ‘bad christians’, in the same way I do not use homeopathy because of ‘bad homeopathists’. I simply do not believe in it, in any way at all.

    I celebrate Christmas with my family, and I just went to a large Catholic wedding. I respect your rites and your duty. I would like you to respect my independence and my freedom of choice as well.

  48. Most people who do not pursue god (i.e. Atheists) don’t pursue god probably because they are intelligent enough to reason that the entire universe was not created for human benefit and there is and exceeding amount of evidence to substantiate that argument granted there will never be enough evidence to eradicate a belief what with human nature, stupidity, ignorance and what not.

    I do not have any disdain toward any imaginary friends you may have and i do not blame them for the problems of the world much less for anything in the universe.

  49. Maybe religion is just a bad influence on our society. Maybe these people that refer to ‘bad Christians’ are just upset at the way religion has corrupted otherwise good people.

  50. So what you’re saying is that you want to keep people Christian by being nice to them? Shouldn’t they want to be Christian by having a relationship with God/Christ, not because they get suckered in with smiles? Because if they’re just there for the social niceties, and not really accepting Jesus Christ because shooed away by something as innocuous as an annoying fellow believer, they’re not really being saved, are they?

  51. I don’t believe in a god because I don’t see any evidence for a god. It’s not because of any particular “bad” Christian. I think you’ll find this is the case with most atheists.

    There’s an old saying: “I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” (Stephen F. Roberts)

    So it’s not because of any particular person that I’m an atheist. I’m an atheist regarding YOUR god for the same reason you’re an atheist regarding Zeus, Apollo, Odin, and many of the thousands of other gods that people have worshiped over the years.

  52. I have never been one to go to church . During my early living, I had to watch my mother die from cancer while I had no parental supervision. I had a clergyman or two try to walk me to God, but nothing really happened…until someone walked me there.

    So on the spiritual side of things, I left on my own. I met a WONDERFUL woman at the age of 22. She basically introduced me to so said ‘GOD’. After many months, I realized I was involved in a cult (The Way…anyone here veer heard of it????). After learning of their mission, the parents of said woman split us up, due to mental persuasion. All in all, the first show of God became a show of control.

    To this day I wish I could believe in one God. but from my past experience, the people who profess God in a great manner are just people who trying either control people.

    I have lost faith. If you are true to your word on this site, and true to the word yourself, you will contact me. I will not hold my breath.

    We shall see

  53. Personally, I have faith that there is some sort of higher power. Who or what that higher power is I do not know. I do not believe that I must do like or be like a certain anyone else to fit in to this world or the next…What ever or where ever that may be. I do not force my beliefs onto anyone and I do not like it to be done to me (Do onto others as you would have them do onto you) I do not disrespect other in their beliefs. But, My beliefs seems to come into question on ever turn. I do not mean to disrespect you or your faith (Christianity). But, I believe that I do not need to be part of a mass group/religion/cult to have people respect me or my faith.

    May peace be with you and all your loved one.

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *