Atheist Central -- Ray Comfort's Blog: The Atheist Worldview

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

The Atheist Worldview

"There've been several hundred gay marriages enacted in California in the past few days. Maybe a couple of thousand by now, I haven't checked the numbers. And in the non-gay-marrying Midwest, they're fighting floods, while in California it's fair and dry. How is The Golden State managing to escape the wrath of your imaginary friend, I wonder?" Weemaryanne

Maryanne. At present there are 840 wild-fires that are burning at once in California, destroying many homes. The fires were started by lightning strikes. Guess who’s in charge of the electrical department? These are from thunder storms that have no rain. Guess who gives the rain? You said "while in California it's fair and dry." We are having the worst drought in our recorded history. Last year 1,155 homes were destroyed. You live in an imaginary world. I suggest you get out more.

285 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 1 – 200 of 285 Newer› Newest»

t said...: Amen Ray this was a great post; June 24, 2008 8:24 PM
AllFiredUp said...: ouchie!

Very true, yeah it's no fun and games with the California fires. Many people lost and are losing their homes.; June 24, 2008 8:27 PM
Geoff said...: Ray,

You are a bigot who uses your ancient mythology to cover the ugliness of your twisted beliefs.; June 24, 2008 8:29 PM
Kirsti said...: Ray said:

"You live in an imaginary world. I suggest you get out more."

Sorry, but I don't think that Weemaryanne is the one living in an imaginary world.; June 24, 2008 8:59 PM
keywesthaven1@msn.com (Terry) said...: Praying for you Ray and the people of California.

You have a very valid point. More signs of the times, and still certain people refuse to believe in Almighty God and His Son.

I handed out a million dollar bill to a homosexual the other day, and he came back with a angry voice and said "So I'm going to hell am I ? " He freely admitted he was gay. I answered him with "What does the Bible say about sodomy?"

He answered his own question. I tried the "good person" question, but he walked away with the bill.
Hopefully the "seed" will take root and convict him. God Bless!; June 24, 2008 9:05 PM
KiwiInOz said...: Guess who’s in charge of the electrical department?

Ancient Near East
* Teshub (Hurrian mythology)
* Adad, Ishkur, Marduk (Babylonian-Assyrian mythology)
* Hadad (Levantine mythology)

Eurasian
* Perkwunos (Indo-European mythology)
o Tarhunt (Hittite/Luwian mythology)
o Zeus, Brontes (Greek mythology)
o Jupiter, Summanus (Roman mythology)
o Indra, Parjanya (Hindu mythology)
o Taranis (Pan-Celtic); Ambisagrus, Leucetios, (Gaulish mythology)
o *Þunraz (Germanic mythology; Anglo-Saxon Þunor, German Donar, Norse Þórr); and Thor (Norse mythology)
o *Perkunos (Balto-Slavic; Lithuanian Perkūnas, Slavic Per(k)un )
o Perëndi (Albanian mythology)
o Gebeleizis (Dacian mythology)
o Zibelthiurdos (Thracian mythology)
o Ukko or Perkele (Finnish mythology)
* Horagalles (Sami mythology)
* Aplu (Etruscan mythology)

East Asia

* Lei Gong (Chinese mythology)
* Ajisukitakahikone, Raijin (Raiden-sama, Kaminari-sama), Tenjin (kami) (Japanese mythology)
* Susanoo (Japanese Mythology)

Americas

* Thunderbird (Native American mythology)
* Xolotl (Aztec and Toltec mythology)
* Chaac (Maya mythology)
* Apocatequil (Incan mythology)
* Cocijo (Mexican mythology)
* Aktzin (Mexican mythology)
* Jasso (Mexican mythology)
* Haokah (Lakota mythology)
* Tupã (Guaraní mythology, Brazil)

Africa

* Set (god) (Egyptian mythology)
* Shango (Yorùbá mythology)
* Oya (goddess of thunder, Yoruba mythology)
* Azaka-Tonnerre (Voodoo)
* Mulungu
* Xevioso (alternately: Xewioso, Heviosso. Thunder god of the So region)

South Pacific

* Haikili (Polynesian mythology)
* Tawhaki (Polynesian mythology)
* Kaha'i (Polynesian mythology)
* Uira (Polynesian mythology)

OK, I give up. Which one?; June 24, 2008 9:08 PM
Lelouch said...: Ray, how do you get your kicks out of making such disgusting claims, as natural disasters (wild fires) are divine punishment against homosexuality?

It sickens me that you could label such unfortunate incidents so. I detest your religious view and the views all other religionists. Your shallow, barbaric, fantasy outlooks on life rob you of understanding the true nature of reality. Wake up Ray.

Please get the professional help you are so desperately in need of.; June 24, 2008 9:15 PM
Patte said...: Imaginary worlds are for people who want to pretend that nothing will ever happen to a nation who murders over a million innocent human beings each year.

A man (or a woman or a nation) who is laden with the guilt of human blood
Will be a fugitive until death (& then comes the judgment of God); let no one support him (her or a nation that sanctions the shedding of innocent blood).
Proverbs 28:17; June 24, 2008 9:15 PM
Irukandji said...: Wildfires? In California? Well, that certainly never happened until they started letting gays get married.

Hold on - I'm receiving a divine vision! Sometime in the next century or so, God is going to further punish California with an earthquake, probably somewhere near the San Andreas fault. Take that, you modern-day Sodom!

We are having the worst drought in our recorded history.

Hmmm. Perhaps we are experiencing a rapid shift in weather patterns due to the 35% increase in atmospheric C02 and 150% increase in atmospheric CH4 from pre-industrial levels. Or perhaps the magic man in the sky is just that hung up on what we do with our genitals. One of these two options is a rational explanation . . . but I just can't seem to figure out which!; June 24, 2008 9:36 PM
euthyphro037 said...: Yeah, how blind can you be, weemaryanne? Everyone knows that Thor is "in charge of the electrical department." And we all know that Thor hates those homersekshuls marryin'.; June 24, 2008 10:04 PM
Lance Christian Johnson said...: Ahh yes, and there has never been drought or wildfires in California before the whole gay marriage thing.; June 24, 2008 10:20 PM
Rob Penn said...: Hey, Ray, do you have an email addy?

Is it just raycomfort at gmail dot com?; June 24, 2008 10:43 PM
Steven J. said...: So, Ray, are you saying that the drought in California is, in fact, the wrath of God? I suppose we could measure the actual toll, in deaths and homes destroyed and economic productivity lost, and see how "pro-Christian" areas fare compared to "anti-Christian" regions, but it seems to me that from a Christian standpoint the entire effort would be misguided.

Did not Jesus tell his listeners that those on whom the tower of Siloam fell were not greater sinners than the general run of humanity, and that Galileans massacred by Pilate's soldiers were not viler than Galileans in general? Did not early Christian leaders warn their followers, in time of plague, that they would suffer along with their Roman persecutors?

Would it not be better to insist to Weemaryanne that there is no orthodox Christian expectation that God will rain down judgment on sinful states in this lifetime? You seem willing to uphold views of God's judgment that Christ himself rejected, in order to annoy your critics.; June 24, 2008 11:08 PM
The Holy Bible said...: Now on the same occasion there were some present who reported to [Jesus] about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. And Jesus said to them, "Do you suppose that these Galileans were greater sinners than all other Galileans because they suffered this fate? I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. "Or do you suppose that those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them were worse culprits than all the men who live in Jerusalem? "I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish." (Luke 13:1-5); June 24, 2008 11:15 PM
Chris said...: And in all the states, there are heaps of people that work on Sundays who aren't being properly stoned to death.

And unruly children who curse their parents, and aren't being put to death.

There are even evil people who go so far as to wear garments made of two different threads.

I wonder which of the current natural disasters are actually God punishing people for these flagrant transgressions of his law?; June 25, 2008 12:13 AM
Eric said...: I would agree Ray. California will be facing the wrath of God very soon (and is currently under the wrath). For the one who needs to get out more, in case you don't know, Iowa (where most of the flooding has occurred) recently allowed 1 gay marriage, enacted a 'civil-rights' code for homosexuals, and allowed for the destruction of embryos with state money. There are countless other 'atrocities' that are occurring at the hands of the government of Iowa. I think Iowa is facing the wrath of God, but I don't think it is too late for us (or California) to repent.; June 25, 2008 12:49 AM
The Celtic Chimp said...: Ray,

On a slight aside,

Q4: Do you believe that the book of Genesis calls for a literal interpretation? DEFINITELY. JESUS LITERALLY BELIEVED IT, SO DID THE APOSTLE PAUL.

I am interested in how you would support the assertion that Jesus and Paul literally believed in genesis. I should make my reasons for asking clear. I have debated many times with "moderate" christians and most of them suggest that genesis should not be taken literally. One point on which you and I would agree is that whoever authored the bible it was their intention that genesis be taken literally (or at least there is no strong evidence that I am aware of to the contrary)

Gary.; June 25, 2008 2:23 AM
The Amiable Atheist said...: Do you really mean to say that the gays are responsible for California wildfires and drought? Unbelievable.

And I find it really amusing that you tell the commentor that she is living in an imaginary world. According to you, an imaginary world is one in which science can explain the weather, not one in which it is attributable to God's wrath?; June 25, 2008 2:41 AM
David W. Irish said...: Hahahahahahahaha!!!!!

First of all, Ray, the question she asked was probably not worth answering. Second of all, California has always had to deal with wild fires. I remember back 40 years ago, the news reports of wildfires in California were a yearly phenomenon. To say that the fires are a punishment from God because of gay marriage is not just absurd, it's idiotic -- God would have to have started punishing California decades before it adopted gay marriage.

Even worse, the state I live in, Massachusetts, adopted Gay marriage several years ago. I don't see any natural disasters here. In fact, I'm willing to bet that right now, you're thinking of scouring new reports for any bad news at all that might be happening in Massachusetts, just to say it's God punishing us for gay marriage.

Oh, here, the Fung Wah bus got into an accident and an old lafy got killed by a phone pole that fell on her when the Bus hit the pole. No word on whether she was gay or favored ga marriage.

Then there's CANADA! Oh, yes, we can see, that Canada allows Gay marriage. What natural disasters are happening to punish them.

Then we have Amsterdam, and several other European countries. Oh, God's not punishing them, apparently, because they're all atheist countries, and he's only punishing Christian nations who backslide. No need to punish nations that are already going to hell...

Hmmm, but the Euro is beating the dollar... Hmmm... Well, he's being nice to them before they all go to hell...

Hey, Kansas hasn't adopted gay marriage, and they get hit by more tornadoes than any other state. I wonder what Kansas did to anger the Lord? Oh -- maybe it was the failure of their anti-evolution bill -- THAT MUST BE IT! Got knew Kansas would fail to make creationism mandatory, so he started punishing Kansas back when the first settlers arrived there (Tornadoes have plagued Kansas since people have lived there).

Really, Ray, your rationalizing any natural disaster as a punishment from God puts your thinking clearly in to the dark ages. Yours was the type of logic that primitives used to explain why the weather was bad, or why there was an earthquake. If you were a Pagan evangelist, you'd probably be telling us to sacrifice a virgin to the volcano Gods to prevent them from sending more earthquakes.; June 25, 2008 3:41 AM
captain howdy said...: @Ray--

Maryanne. At present there are 840 wild-fires that are burning at once in California, destroying many homes. The fires were started by lightning strikes. Guess who’s in charge of the electrical department? These are from thunder storms that have no rain. Guess who gives the rain?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

That still doesn't explain why the devout, Godly midwest is under 10 feet of water.

It also doesn't explain why California had mudslides, fires and earthquakes years and years before California's supreme court legalized gay marriage. What sin were they being punished for then?; June 25, 2008 3:54 AM
weemaryanne said...: This post has been removed by the author.; June 25, 2008 4:01 AM
weemaryanne said...: This post has been removed by the author.; June 25, 2008 4:05 AM
Rev. BigDumbChimp said...: You live in an imaginary world.

Pot. Kettle. Black.; June 25, 2008 4:29 AM
Gavin said...: An imaginary world? As opposed to explaining a well understood natural phenomenon like lightning by evoking an evidence free explanation like a god? I think it is clear whos world is imaginary here.; June 25, 2008 5:07 AM
Craig said...: Ray,

Are you implying the wild fires are Gods' wrath?

To hear the Right tell it, gay marriage was allowed by a few "activist judges".

Does it ever concern you that God is so sloppy with His wrath? I mean, all the collateral damage. I suppose you just shrug and say, "Gods will". It's so Fred Phelps.

Otherwise, great post.; June 25, 2008 5:13 AM
Thoracantha said...: So God's punishing lightly populated areas in chaparral and scrub pine habitats, while leaving the densely populated areas such as downtown San Fransisco, Los Angeles and Sacramento. It's almost as if He is acting like a completely natural phenomenon.

Ray, do you believe that God can't aim? Why is he setting fires to areas that are not promoting gay marriage, and leaving San Fransisco untouched? It's like when God flooded New Orleans because of the Gay Pride Parade, but missed and flooded the poor neighborhoods next to the gay pride parade

(google Wilfire map california); June 25, 2008 5:20 AM
Random Cosmologist said...: Meh. Wildfires in California? That's about as surprising as rain in Florida. Happens every year. When lightning starts striking the places where gay people are getting married, then you might have a point. So far as I know, that hasn't happened yet.; June 25, 2008 5:28 AM
Nate said...: Wow, just wow. So if you're in a somewhat conservative, God-fearing part of the nation, God brings down his wrath with floods. If you're in a liberal, God-denying state, God shows his wrath with catastrophic fires. You can't win with this God, can you?

I hear Norway also just passed gay marriage into law, what do you think God is brewing up for them Ray? If you could, give me some insight, I'm planning on vacationing there soon.; June 25, 2008 5:41 AM
Rarus vir said...: Besides some bronze age writing, how do you figure that God is in charge of rain, or lightening? We know why these things happen, and despite our poor planning, we chose to make cities and build homes in such places. Earthquakes and fires are just a part of the land in that part of the country, God has nothing to do with them at all.; June 25, 2008 5:52 AM
Ed Trefzger said...: The so-called "gay marriages" are in themselves part of the wrath of God. See Romans 1:18-32, which begins, "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth."

And then specifically verses 26 and 27:

"For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error."

That God gives people over to their sin is His wrath. Reading Romans 1 would lead one to conclude that this is a nation and California is a state under wrath.; June 25, 2008 5:53 AM
theShaggy said...: From your implication, Ray, it seems like God is going a bit overboard by breaking one of his own commandments (thou shall not kill) on a state which isn't. Eye for an eye and all that.

Isn't something they kinda say "don't do" entirely less important than something God clearly says "DON'T DO ON PAIN OF DAMNATION?" Why does he get out of punishment?

It's nice and sunny here in Toronto, in the middle of one of the largest Pride celebrations in the world (and the first place on the continent to perform gay weddings). Sure it stormed like nothing else last week, but we'll see what it's like on Sunday, since the last four years of the Pride Parade have been hot, sunny, and beautiful.; June 25, 2008 6:05 AM
SteveNJ said...: Ray - California has wildfires every year, so I find it a bit disingenuous to now pin these on a moral breakdown and Gods' Wrath on this particular occasion. And if God is showing his wrath, I am also surprised that the target wasn't more specific, say wildfire that affected Sacramento where the laws are passed, not that this would constitute any sort of proof.

What of all the other breaches of moral code...the trillions of breaches that happen every day...all the coveting, all the graven images, the stealing, the cheating. Surely there should be wrath for all these?

In many cases it appears that one needs to really stretch to see the specific hand of God as opposed to God's Universe just doing what it does. If there is a God, you do him a disservice by speaking for him in this manner. People can't possibly know what God is thinking, there is only guessing. After all - can all the people who think they know what God wants be right? Some of ya must be wrong... How to choose?; June 25, 2008 6:09 AM
Rev. BigDumbChimp said...: Ray, why is God's aim so incredibly poor?; June 25, 2008 6:11 AM
flinging dust said...: This post has been removed by the author.; June 25, 2008 6:21 AM
Rebecca said...: The valley in which I live is so filled with smoke coming over the mountains into NV from those fires that my kids can't even go outside. It has been all over national news - how on earth did Weemaryanne miss that?; June 25, 2008 6:28 AM
Keippernicus said...: I find both the question and the response to be rather narrow minded and frankly a bit offensive. Why should nature's lack of sympathy for mankind be interpreted as the wrath of a God or Gods?

Rain, floods, wildfires and tsunamis are all naturally occurring events whose conditions and origins can be traced to previous events and conditions. Believe what you want but it makes no sense to invoke a deity for making the kettle whistle after leaving it on a hot stove.; June 25, 2008 6:39 AM
Geoff said...: Ray,

If you make a point to call some one out by name in a post, could you at least directly address their point or question? Here you just give wink-wink nudge-nudge suggestions without directly saying whether you believe the fires are a punishment for gay marriage, whether the midwest floods are a form of punishment, etc.; June 25, 2008 6:41 AM
Rev. BigDumbChimp said...: Ray was it all the gay Elk and Atheist Grizzly Bears in Yellowstone in 1988 that brought God's wrath?; June 25, 2008 6:44 AM
Iago said...: Hey Ray,
Are you sure you are not Jewish ? There was an Orthodox Rabbi saying that God caused earthquakes near the Golan heights because the Jewish state tolerated gays.
You certainly sound like him right now.; June 25, 2008 6:47 AM
Lance Christian Johnson said...: After reading all of the posts of the skeptics on this blog, I gotta say that I feel like I'm in good company. I'm proud of you guys! Stick it to 'em!; June 25, 2008 6:53 AM
EvoDevo2004 said...: Patte said:
Imaginary worlds are for people who want to pretend that nothing will ever happen to a nation who murders over a million innocent human beings each year.

Hey wait, not even God considers killing the unborn murder...
If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life. -- Exodus 21:22-23; June 25, 2008 7:01 AM
Tri-County Photography Blogspace said...: Ray,
though I agree with your philosophy, I think we are missing the big picture here ...

I dont think Calif is being punished selectively, I believe the entire world is in one form or another ... all because we have turned our backs on God!!

we chase him out of the schools, the courts, the family .... then wonder why or how he can allow these terrible things to happen.
Go Figure...

just my 2 cents
thanks for the blogs and keep writing my friend; June 25, 2008 7:13 AM
gawker said...: nice parody blog. keep up the good work.; June 25, 2008 7:23 AM
NaFa said...: I'm afraid I'm going to have to side with Ray on this one. If we look at the moon we can craters from when God pummeled it for eons with asteroids. Obviously, God was smiting the Moon-People because of gay-marriage.
What’s that you say? There were no Moon-People? Well, maybe, but that’s just because God knew as soon as He made Moon-People that they would just start totally gaying-out. It's called a pre-emptive strike. He knows what He doing...; June 25, 2008 7:27 AM
EvoDevo2004 said...: Patte said...@June24,2008 9:15pm
Imaginary worlds are for people who want to pretend that nothing will ever happen to a nation who murders over a million innocent human beings each year.

But if you read the Bible it is clear that God does not consider killing the unborn "murder"...
"If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life." -- Exodus 21:22-23

I tried to post this earlier but made the fatal mistake of not capitalizing "God" so my post was automatically deleted. God must hate the work of e.e. cummings!; June 25, 2008 7:27 AM
Moses said...: Maybe, Ray, Invisible Man is punishing California because you made a fool of yourself on YouTube with your banana argument... Seriously, epic fail on your part to not know that the modern banana was developed by centuries of artificial selection. Like modern wheat, cattle, dogs, potatoes, etc., etc., etc...; June 25, 2008 7:32 AM
AllFiredUp said...: Wow talk about leaping to stupid conclusions. Ray never said that God was creating the lightning to cause wildfires in California because of gay marriages.

Atheists are as illogical as they get.

Ray merely said that God is in control over everything, including lightning.

It's atheists who are making the leap that God is destroying the midwest by flood (weemaryanne) and California fires (other atheists).

Atheists, you've caught the FiM disease.; June 25, 2008 8:05 AM
David W. Irish said...: Thoracantha said...
"So God's punishing lightly populated areas in chaparral and scrub pine habitats, while leaving the densely populated areas such as downtown San Fransisco, Los Angeles and Sacramento. It's almost as if He is acting like a completely natural phenomenon."

Oh, don't you just know that as soon as a major earthquake hits California, Ray and scores of other apocalyptic Fundamentalist Evangelicals will say that it's God punishing all the hippies, gays, Hollywood, and other people that they don't like there?

Of course, that would not explain why there were disasterous earthquakes there in the 1880's, before all the liberals, gays, hippies, and Hollywood even existed.

But never mind, evangelicals with Dark Age thinking can spin anything into God's divine punishment for whatever they want. Heck, if we hear of a Tornado destroying an Evangelical church and killing all the people inside, Evangelicals will say "They must not have prayed hard enough!" or "Someone in the church must have been bad!"; June 25, 2008 8:31 AM
David W. Irish said...: Captain Howdy wrote:
"That still doesn't explain why the devout, Godly midwest is under 10 feet of water."

Wait, let me guess!!!!

It's because Obama is a liberal, isn't it? God is punishing the midwest for being Obama's home and chief supporters. Yeah, that it... that's the ticket...; June 25, 2008 8:33 AM
Dark Heart said...: Hello Mr.Comfort,

Just have a quick question, I live in Canada and we have alowed gay marrage for a long time but God has not done anything about it can you explain this? Does God care more about America or is it just because you live in America that God does more things there?

I hope to get an answer from you on this, Thank you for your time.; June 25, 2008 8:37 AM
David W. Irish said...: Rev. BigDumbChimp said...
"Ray was it all the gay Elk and Atheist Grizzly Bears in Yellowstone in 1988 that brought God's wrath?"

Yeah -- one would think that the Allmighty would have a better aim with his lightning strikes. He could have pinpointed the Gay section of SanFrancisco, Hollywood's porn industry, or the homes of Gay people and their supporters, but instead hits empty wilderness areas, at right about the same time during the year that other wildfires have a tendency to occur in, making it look like it's just the annual wildfires that burn every year.

Why can't the supreme being have a better aim?; June 25, 2008 8:38 AM
Kristina said...: Incredible. It is sad when people are blinded by their own circumstances.

I also find it very interesting how most of the negative comments are from people who have a million preconceptions about Christians and Christianity. Do they really think all of us are like the Westboro Baptist cult, wishing hell and judgment upon the world? If so, that is a tragedy.; June 25, 2008 8:56 AM
Brittany said...: Great post Ray!

In Christian Love,
Brittany; June 25, 2008 9:23 AM
AllFiredUp said...: Wow, I never seen so many strawman attacks from atheists in one sitting.

Every single atheist making the attacks has little to zero evidence but then they have created imaginary attributes of God, and then attacked those instead.

Sheesh, was that a big hot wind or what?!?!; June 25, 2008 9:42 AM
george.w said...: Hurricanes in the gulf, floods in the midwest, fires in the mountains... all these things happened even before those areas were settled.

Ray, why is it that the wrath of God always coincides with naturalistic explanations? I mean, always. Never once not explainable in terms of the natural world. Is God just that camera-shy?; June 25, 2008 9:42 AM
JOSHUA S BLACK said...: Iago: "Hey Ray,
Are you sure you are not Jewish ? There was an Orthodox Rabbi saying that God caused earthquakes near the Golan heights because the Jewish state tolerated gays.
You certainly sound like him right now."

Ray is Jewish. I thought you knew that.; June 25, 2008 10:04 AM
Kristine said...: Yes, indeed, let's all get out more.

Let's go to Albania, where for the past 500 years women have been dressing as and pretending to be men (as featured in today's New York Times article).

But now this venerable tradition is threatened, and more and more girls who would have pretended to be men (a la Boys Don't Cry) are now dressing like girls and getting married - due to that evil influence, feminism.

Feminism is threatening transsexualism in Albania! Well, raise my rent - I guess that's why there's so many floods/fires in Albania, right Ray?

Sure is a big world when you "get out more" - right, Ray?; June 25, 2008 10:26 AM
camport said...: Rays just stating facts about the fires. Nowhere does he insinuate that they are due to gay marriage.

All of the "do you mean...?" and "are you suggesting...?" Why not just read the words he wrote instead of getting all in a tither over what he maybe, possibly, could've, should've meant?; June 25, 2008 10:37 AM
Moses said...: Maryann asks:

And in the non-gay-marrying Midwest, they're fighting floods, while in California it's fair and dry. How is The Golden State managing to escape the wrath of your imaginary friend, I wonder?"

Ray answers the question by pointing out Invisible Man is smiting CA:

Maryanne. At present there are 840 wild-fires that are burning at once in California, destroying many homes. The fires were started by lightning strikes. Guess who’s in charge of the electrical department? These are from thunder storms that have no rain. Guess who gives the rain? You said "while in California it's fair and dry." We are having the worst drought in our recorded history. Last year 1,155 homes were destroyed. You live in an imaginary world. I suggest you get out more.

Allfiredup says:

Wow talk about leaping to stupid conclusions. Ray never said that God was creating the lightning to cause wildfires in California because of gay marriages.

I get a big laugh because alfiredup doesn't seem to understand. Really, it doesn't take a stretch. Maryanne made a mocking, rhetorical question. Ray Comfort answered. Ray gets mocked and the peanut gallery goes into defense mode.

It's like Don Imus and the Pacman comments. Spin all you want, Imus is a racist gas-bat and it as obvious as the nose on Jimmy Durante's face.; June 25, 2008 10:39 AM
Dave Grossman said...: So, the fires in California are caused by God because of gay marriages? Seriously? Are you really this daffy or is this a joke? Please tell me this is a joke response to a facetious post.; June 25, 2008 10:43 AM
howeird said...: Nice try, Ray, but there is not a single instance in the Bible where God uses lightning to punish his children. Floods, on the other hand, seem to be his method of choice.; June 25, 2008 10:46 AM
Emily said...: Great post Ray. Everything is certainly not sunshine and oranges here in California. lol.

Anyway, Maryanne's point has no real meaning in terms of God disapproving of gay marriage. It honestly doesn't matter if, the day after gay marriage was instated in California, the next morning was the most beautiful, perfect morning with 100 rainbows in the sky, the war ended and a world peace treaty was signed, and all the children world over gathered together in circles holding hands and singing kumbaya.

It is meaningless because God makes the sun shine on both the saved and the unsaved. Our God is merciful and doesn't want anyone to go to hell, He wants EVERYONE to repent of their sin.

Even the natural disasters happening now are nothing compared to what God could do. He has no limitations. And when He is ready to pour His wrath on the world that rejects Him, believe me He will, and sadly some of you may be around to not only see it but experience it. Life on earth will be so horrible you will want to die but you will be unable to even kill yourself. And even then some of you will still reject that this is God's wrath. I can just see some of you as you sit there being rained upon by firey meteors under a blood red sky: "It's the rapid shift in weather patterns due to the 35% increase in atmospheric C02 and 150% increase in atmospheric CH4 from pre-industrial levels!! ITS NOT GOD!!"

Sad.

Also, it doesn't matter what laws are created or repealed. The bottom line is this... HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN IN THE EYES OF GOD and nothing and no one is going to change that or take it away. Its not the biggest sin or the worst sin, but it is nevertheless a sin, and homosexuals being "married" is an abomination to God.

Marriage is a biblical concept. Homosexuals can't marry because marriage is for a man and woman to be unified under the eyes of God. And all the laws in the world can't and won't make God sanctify an UNNATURAL abominable relationship. All homosexuals have accomplished is to *continue* to live in denial that their lifestyle is immoral and sinful, while creating a contract with the state.

Sorry, your relationship is not blessed by God. It never was. It never will be.

"Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them." (Romans 1:24-31)

That's God's Word!! =); June 25, 2008 10:46 AM
Emily said...: @ WeeMaryanne: "Funny you should mention lightning. A friend of mine was caught in a thunderstorm on a golf course the other day. Doncha think it's funny that the Chief Electrician manages to set forests on fire while completely missing a young man who's living with his girlfriend that he's not married to."

Because God loves them and doesn't want them to go to hell. Pretty simple.; June 25, 2008 10:49 AM
Gringo Steve said...: Hello Ray,

I'm glad to see you wear your intellectual dishonsety on your sleeve by quote mining both Einstein and Hawking. Neither believe(d) in a supernatural diety of any sort and were very clear about it.

If you were an honest man you would show all of their quotes about God and religion in context. That would include the fact that neither ever even alludes to a belief in Jesus, salvation, eternal life or any form of evangelical creationism.

Please explain why creationists must consistently resort to this sort of willful misrepresentation to make their case.; June 25, 2008 10:49 AM
Emily said...: "From your implication, Ray, it seems like God is going a bit overboard by breaking one of his own commandments (thou shall not kill) on a state which isn't."

Hey Shaggy ... sorry to butt in God doesn't and is incapable of breaking any of His commandments. He is Holy and Perfect.

"Eye for an eye and all that."

Not sure why you referenced this after the previous paragraph, I assume you're referring to "eye for an eye" contradicting "you shall not murder"? Well first of all, murdering someone is not the same as killing someone. EX: You can kill someone in defense of your own life or in defense of the lives of your loved ones, in a life or death situation. Or you can pick up a gun and kill your wife because she decided to leave you. Are these two "killings" the same?

"Why does he get out of punishment?" By definition, God is a perfect, holy God. You seem to be bringing God down to your own human level. It doesn't work that way. =) God is not the president that we voted on as ruler of the universe. If He does something we don't like, we can't take another vote and remove His sovereignty. God is omniscient and omnipotent; He has always existed and He will always exist--without end. He is exempt from punishment first of all, because He is perfect and holy, but also because He is the CREATOR. He is the reason we have the commandments you refer to. If in your estimation God has broken His own commandments, you are not only mistaken, you speak blasphemy.; June 25, 2008 11:16 AM
Rob Penn said...: Bad stuff happens. The universe is broken, and bad stuff happens.

The fires in California happen every year, it seems. It's not unusual. There's no reason to believe that God did it to specifically target the gay marriages there.

There are floods, earthquakes, tsunamis and hurricanes, lightning storms, droughts, and all manner of natural disaster all over the world. To cherry pick one and say "God did this to punish you," is not a good thing to do.; June 25, 2008 11:33 AM
Rob Penn said...: @ JOSHUA S. BLACK:

Ray is Jewish. I thought you knew that.

Ray is of Jewish Decent. He's a Christian by faith.

Gotta be careful to distinguish between the two.; June 25, 2008 11:35 AM
Patte said...: Sorry Evodevo,
"so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow" Infants who are born minimally prematurely (within weeks of full term) may not suffer any permanent harm. If the 'mischief' follows, or the infant was seriously harmed, the perpetrator of the harm is to suffer the punishment of 'an eye for an eye'. Eye plucked out if child's eye was damaged. Leg cut off if leg was damaged, head crushed if head crushed, etc.

That sounds reasonable to me.

Let's see, how would that work for those who dismember babies in the womb through all nine months of pregnancy? Ooooh. Hard to imagine drawing & quartering a live mother or father or abortionist the way they did to William Wallace in Braveheart.

Do a bible search on 'eye for eye' for yourself.; June 25, 2008 11:48 AM
Rev. BigDumbChimp said...: Because God loves them and doesn't want them to go to hell. Pretty simple.

Simple as in simplistic and myopic.

What about the god fearing and not god fearing people of the Gulf coast that were killed during Katrina?

What about the ones that didn't die?; June 25, 2008 11:50 AM
Rev. BigDumbChimp said...: HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN IN THE EYES OF GOD

SO IS EATING SHRIMP

OH NOES!!!!; June 25, 2008 11:54 AM
Rando said...: Allfireup:

Wow talk about leaping to stupid conclusions. Ray never said that God was creating the lightning to cause wildfires in California because of gay marriages.

Atheists are as illogical as they get.

Ray merely said that God is in control over everything, including lightning.

It's atheists who are making the leap that God is destroying the midwest by flood (weemaryanne) and California fires (other atheists).

Atheists, you've caught the FiM disease.

Logic. You're doing it wrong.

Ray says God is in control of everything, including lightning. But it is a leap in logic to blame him when those forces that are under his control cause floods and wildfires? Huh?? Either he isn't in control of them, and can't be blamed. Or he is in control of them, and all the damage these disasters cause are his fault.

You can't have it both ways, dude.

Wow, I never seen so many strawman attacks from atheists in one sitting.

Every single atheist making the attacks has little to zero evidence but then they have created imaginary attributes of God, and then attacked those instead.

Sheesh, was that a big hot wind or what?!?!

Psst...Allfiredup. All attributes of God are imaginary.; June 25, 2008 12:06 PM
Seth said...: Ray,

If I were to claim that the California wildfires or Midwestern floods were caused by the wrath of Zeus, or Odin, or Ra, or Shiva, or (you get the idea), you'd dismiss me as a kook because you _know_ that those Gods are all the fictional creations of human minds.

You're comfortably and unapologetically an atheist when it comes to Zeus, Odin, Ra, Shiva, etc, as you should be.

There are dozens of Gods that you don't believe in.

Let's say that the number of Gods you don't believe in is expressed as "N".

The number of Gods that I don't believe in is expressed as "N+1".; June 25, 2008 12:14 PM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: I don’t get all the hubbub coming from the atheists.

Natural disasters happen all the time.

People are killed all the time and wicked people harm others every day in what appears to be arbitrary situations (wrong place wrong time).

Christians understand that death is inevitable and we don’t know the time or place or how each person will die, but we also know that there is a sovereign God who is in control – and so we also have the hope of true justice and hope in the resurrection all because of Jesus Christ.

BUT yet atheists only have an impersonally, amoral, indifferent cosmos – which cares nothing for people and offers zero hope. It also allows the natural disasters, the wicked atrocities of evil men, but cannot guarantee justice (we fail more often than win), and it cannot provide any hope of eternal life at all. For the atheist all is vanity. All is pointless. All is an utterly meaningless existence awaiting death.

And so here’s the part I don’t get. The atheists here hate God on what they consider moral grounds, but speak nothing against the cold, dark, pointless universe. Some atheists here call God immoral for allowing death (completly ignoring the reason why we die and the fact that physical death is a door to something else), but they have no problem with Nature for teasing us with a breif taste for life and then ripping it away in death, randomly picking off people for no reason at all, and with no hope at all.

With God, there’s a chance to understand why we exist, and be remembered forever in paradise because of His grace.
With atheism, your just living dirt wasting a short amount of time and in a few hundred years it will be the same as if you never were. It seems very hypocritical to make any judgment against the only One who can forgive your sin, and grant you everlasting life, but then withhold that same judgment against a universe that doesn’t care at all – and only promises nothingness.

K.; June 25, 2008 12:21 PM
Shaze said...: Dear Morons,

Belief and Religion makes you look absolutely crazy to everyone around you. You should all feel ashamed and stupid for worshiping a crappy religion.

For shame.; June 25, 2008 12:24 PM
John said...: Maybe people would be more receptive to these Signs of the End Times, were this perfect being of yours to come up with a few that weren't totally ambiguous.

For example, give every minister presiding over a same-sex marriage ceremony a harelip. Instant harelip, bang, all at the same time. Each one of these little reminders could vanish at exactly the same moment three days from the moment of affliction. I guarantee someone would think to compare notes and find the common denominator, causing the most cynical nonbelievers to sit up and take notice. This, without even something so coarse as actual words booming down from the heavens telling us at long last what the hell we're doing wrong.

Instead, we get wildfires. He might as well smite a random goldfish in an attempt to inform. Even Lassie does better than this; "woof woof" and a pointed glance in the direction of the abandoned refrigerator, "woof woof" and a frantic pawing at the ground over the collapsed mine shaft; whatever needs communicating, your entire god is easily trumped by a smart housepet.

I think if he's to be taken seriously, he needs to try a bit harder.; June 25, 2008 12:35 PM
george.w said...: Keith, a couple things you're not getting - which could be why you are an "ex-atheist".

First, when we point out the moral depravity of "God", we're not mad at God, because we don't believe there is one. We're pointing out inconsistencies in your mythology.

Second, it doesn't matter which world view offers hope, or doesn't offer hope, or whatever. You don't get to choose reality based on how it works out for your mental health; it just is. In our best estimate, there isn't any God... like it or not. If we thought there was a God, we'd give more credence to creeds.

As for us not having any hope, or being nihilists or whatever, some are, some are not. I just try to realistically hope in (find meaning in) things that can actually happen as I understand reality. And I work towards the things I hope for. I don't hope for eternal life because I don't think it's possible. The mileage of others, may vary.

Where we get testy is when religionists try to make their ancient myths the law of the land.; June 25, 2008 12:44 PM
Emily said...: @ Chimp ...

"What about the god fearing and not god fearing people of the Gulf coast that were killed during Katrina?"

"for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust." (Matthew 5:45)

"What about the ones that didn't die?"

"The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." (2 Peter 3:9)

"HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN IN THE EYES OF GOD-SO IS EATING SHRIMP"

Nope. The Bible says, "Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.” (Matthew 15:11)

Shrimp is good and tasty. =) OH NOES, LESS SHRIMP FOR YOU!! ;)

Actually, that last quote is a good one for you to know, Chimp. You know why?

"But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment." (Matthew 12:36)

I know its not very scary now as you sit in comfort at your computer. But if you die an atheist, you will stand before God and have to give account for your many blasphemies.

"That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Philippians 2:10-11)

Even YOU will say it Chimp, and I hope its not something you cry out for all eternity from the depths of hell. I hope you confess it here on earth, and experience the blessing of spiritual rebirth from God, not just for the benefit of what you can experience through Christ in your lifetime, but so that you will experience God's Glory in Heaven and live in PARADISE forever. =)

Is this just a story I'm making up because I have nothing better to do with my time? Or is there more to what I'm saying? Why don't you search for the one true God and find out for yourself, Chimp? =); June 25, 2008 12:50 PM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: Seth said...
Let's say that the number of Gods you don't believe in is expressed as "N".

The number of Gods that I don't believe in is expressed as "N+1".
__
If someone told you that they didn't believe 2+3=5 because you don't believe that the answer could be 2,3,4,6,7 or all the other numbers but ‘5’ that exist, i.e. {N} and they made the argument that, "The number of answers that I don't believe in is expressed as N+1" how would you respond to them? I’m going to reply with some sarcasm because this atheist argument I feel is one of the more absurd ones.

• When you see a one-way street going east, do you think that since you can't go west, north, or south, that only a fool would think that they could drive east on that street?

• By your logic I'm guessing you don't have a mother or father. After all, I could genetically test the 3 billion men on earth and find out that none of them is your father, so it would seem unfair or illogical that only one them could be your dad.

• Do you use cash to buy things? I’d be surprised if you did – after all there are counterfeits out there and who really can tell the difference between them and the real thing? Let’s just both admit that all money is fake and has no value – give up your cash – don’t pick up a $20 bill on the ground, don’t take change from people, don’t accept a cash gift – be an achasist. That way you’ll be more consistent in your worldview.

K.; June 25, 2008 12:55 PM
Sye TenB said...: Geoff said: "You are a bigot who uses your ancient mythology to cover the ugliness of your twisted beliefs."

While I disagree with your assessment of Ray, could you please tell me by what absolute standard bigotry is wrong?

You see, Geoff, even in attempting to insult Ray, you borrow your standard of absolute morality from our worldview. Your inconsistency is showing.

Cheers,

Sye; June 25, 2008 1:17 PM
David said...: It is hateful to suggest that the good people of northern California are enduring wildfires because of the wrath of God. Shame on you and your religious nonsense!; June 25, 2008 1:18 PM
AllFiredUp said...: Rev. BigDumbChimp said...

"HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN IN THE EYES OF GOD SO IS EATING SHRIMP
OH NOES!!!!"

It's obvious that you have no understanding of the specific food laws that God gave the Jews while under the old covenant. Athiests tend to take all those laws that were only for the Jews, and lump them to mean for everyone. So it's obvious you don't read the Bible.

You blame Christians for not reading their science books and getting heavy into science to understand evolution, yet you do the very same thing with the Bible. You don't read it, but make judgmental statements about it.

That's called hypocrisy.; June 25, 2008 1:54 PM
Kseniya said...: Keith, must you anthropomorphize everything?; June 25, 2008 2:23 PM
likestrayvoltage said...: this blog is a joke, right?

no one could be this deluded could they?

could they??

surely mankind has moved past blaming the big giant cookie monster in the sky for every plight that befalls them.

most christians i know have even moved past that.

and as for those quotes from Hawking and Einstein at the top of the page; if this guy is for real he clearly knows nothing about the views of either of those scientists, or has willingly and dishonestly taken them entirely out of context.

how embarrassing.; June 25, 2008 2:37 PM
SteveNJ said...: Keith -

IMO - Atheists are not made at God and they don't hate God... they just don't think that God is a satisfying explanation for anything. Most Atheists won't pretend that they "Know" God doesn't exist, we all know that you can't know God doesn't exist anymore than you can "Know" that the sun will rise tomorrow. It just seems to us that there is no evidence for God that can't be easily explained more satisfactorily in other ways.

Most of the rants here are against trying to pin disasters on a God because of a violation of a moral code. That's just wrong. We don't believe there is a God and hence natural disasters all happen for the simple reason of cause and affect.

You can't hate a God that you don't believe in, but you can be disgusted by people who claim to know the thoughts of a supposed Omnipotent being to make their point.; June 25, 2008 2:39 PM
Sealy Fischer said...: All around the world there is rape, murder, worship of "false Gods", people who lie, animal cruelty, abortion,adultery, atheists, lack of prayer in schools, tribes that are born and die everyday who have never even heard ( or will ever hear ) the name of Jesus. I'm sure some of those fires burnt down the houses of wonderful Christian people and yet God is punishing gay marriage by burning down the houses of innocent people. If the fires only targeted gays, that would be semi-impressive. However, this is not the case. If God really punishes peoples sins by means of natural disasters, then the whole world should just explode. The whole scenario seems like a 3rd grade explanation of why bad things happen. It was ok 3000 years ago, but now we actually know what causes rain, lightning, fire, hurricanes etc. California gets fires every year, even before gay marriage. This explanation is just as ridiculous as the Noah's Ark story. God destroyed the "whole world" because the people he created disappointed him. (He knew they would by the way...ie: all knowing) In both of these stories God is actually far more immoral then the "sinners". He's a pretty bad example actually; June 25, 2008 2:43 PM
Brandon said...: Keith, just because something sounds nice and makes you feel good doesn't mean it is true, just in the same way that just because something upsets you or seems hopeless does not make it false.

Atheists don't rage against god because they don't believe in one. They're speaking hypothetical to you who DO believe in god and trying to get you to see it logically. They are saying that if god existed, he would not be a particularly great fellow, what with his wild mood swings, arbitrary allergy to "sin" which is at the best of times poorly defined, and his petulant attempts at genocide.

Now nature may be cruel and hopeless, but it doesn't have an intelligence and so it can't really be yelled at, now can it? Are you saying you think atheists should be mad at nature for its cruelty? That's a little crazy, but I think you may be projecting. You take for granted that there is some intelligent agency at work that favors you and pays attention to everything you do, and so in the back of your head, you may assume that everyone else must think this too, at least on some small level. I'm afraid not.; June 25, 2008 3:02 PM
Jay-Jay said...: I do believe you are referring to God being in charge of Electricals. He is a Great Smiter, that One! He is probably not only infuriated with the Gays, of which He expects naught at all (seeing as how they lay with men, such as one lies with a Woman), than he is with all those Christians whom have failed to put these abominable creatures to death, a remedy prescribed for such Sin in Leviticus. I only wonder what great act of fury our Lord and Savior will enact upon these lethargic and not-so-dedicated Christians. The time of Miracles is truly upon us with this latest drought sent by God, and I await in anticipation His next move to eradicate sin! All Glory Onto HIM!; June 25, 2008 3:23 PM
dale said...: Keith,

You said,
"With God, there’s a chance to understand why we exist, and be remembered forever in paradise because of His grace."

Keith, my friend, it is understandable that you are looking for the best "chance" to beat the odds of our inevitable death. You are in the majority here (maybe.)

You "think" that you are going to heaven and live eternally doing something, or whatever, and,

I, "think," I am going to die and I have had a certain amount of years to help educate my kids in every manner that I could. I have inspirered them and many others in the way of science through my love of herpetology. I have so many positive memories (even the ones where I didn't have enough money to buy one pound of coffee) that I can never run out of them. Even as a lay dying, if it happens that way, I will have positive thoughts the whole way through, unlike you, who will still be looking for a...... "chance."

Respectfully submitted, /d; June 25, 2008 3:31 PM
dale said...: Keith,
You said,
"Christians understand that death is inevitable and we don’t know the time or place or how each person will die,...."

And so......? Atheists think they are not going to die? What's the point, grasshopper?; June 25, 2008 3:38 PM
dale said...: Keith,

Man, I got to your second paragraph to find this little gem,

"BUT yet atheists only have an impersonally, amoral, indifferent cosmos – which cares nothing for people and offers zero hope."

You sit across the table from me and say that looking into my eyes and I will run you off to yo mama, sonny.; June 25, 2008 3:45 PM
TW Faurot said...: I can't even begin to understand how people can believe in this primitive nonsense. It doesn't hurt to open your eyes. I swear.

And you're disgusting.; June 25, 2008 3:56 PM
SimonPure said...: So God is punishing California by setting fire to it. People will lose their homes, including many who are opposed to gay marriage.

It appears to be the practice of this deity to punish the innocent for the sins of others (see the Old Testament for plenty of that).

Why isn't God directing the lightning at married gays, places where they marry, or the political institutions that support them, instead of grassland?; June 25, 2008 4:04 PM
Jacob said...: Keith, morality is an evolutionary concept. Kthxbye.; June 25, 2008 4:05 PM
Rodger said...: Keith,
Atheist don`t hate God,how can you hate something that does not exist?Why should we hate the universe,rather irrational ,don`t you think ?
Science does not pretend to have all the answers , but God did it aint one them.
So all the people that lost their homes in natural disasters ,not Christian or not Christian enough?If Gods in control not very caring is He?
Of course Religion is a good little earner for some,isn`t it Ray, always some gullible fool ready to be parted from their hard earned cash.; June 25, 2008 4:09 PM
Atheist Okie said...: Ray,
Seriously, your posts have been fantastic lately. This post and your recent one about light being invisible have made me laugh so hard I got cramps. My face literally hurt from my face muscles.

For the longest time I thought Ray Comfort was a manifestation of Poe's Law.; June 25, 2008 4:12 PM
weemaryanne said...: This post has been removed by the author.; June 25, 2008 4:19 PM
weemaryanne said...: This post has been removed by the author.; June 25, 2008 4:36 PM
weemaryanne said...: This post has been removed by the author.; June 25, 2008 4:41 PM
Irukandji said...: @ Patte:

Let's see, how would that work for those who dismember babies in the womb through all nine months of pregnancy?

You are aware that 90% of all abortions in the US take place within the first trimester, right? And that 37 states strictly limit access to late-term abortions?

@ Keith:

It seems very hypocritical to make any judgment against the only One who can forgive your sin, and grant you everlasting life, but then withhold that same judgment against a universe that doesn’t care at all – and only promises nothingness.

In my understanding, meaningful moral judgment can only be passed on sentient beings (a category to which your God presumably belongs). The universe is not a sentient being; why would I expect it to care about human welfare, or reprimand it for failing to do so? Your God, on the other hand, is supposedly an omnipotent being with a profound concern for human wellbeing. We have every right to expect better conduct from such a being (or at least we would if He weren't imaginary).

Let's say a small child is drowning in a shallow pool, while the lifeguard does nothing but sit in her chair and watch. Am I a hypocrite for not condemning the chair together with the lifeguard? After all, neither of them did anything to help.; June 25, 2008 4:51 PM
The Holy Bible said...: Thus says the Lord of hosts: Consider your ways. Go up to the hills and bring wood and build the house, that I may take pleasure in it and that I may be glorified, says the Lord. You looked for much, and behold, it came to little. And when you brought it home, I blew it away. Why? declares the Lord of hosts. Because of my house that lies in ruins, while each of you busies himself with his own house. Therefore the heavens above you have withheld the dew, and the earth has withheld its produce. And I have called for a drought on the land and the hills, on the grain, the new wine, the oil, on what the ground brings forth, on man and beast, and on all their labors. (Haggai 1:7-11); June 25, 2008 4:58 PM
weemaryanne said...: This post has been removed by the author.; June 25, 2008 5:16 PM
weemaryanne said...: This post has been removed by the author.; June 25, 2008 5:25 PM
Jim Gardner said...: Ray. Can we start from the beginning, so I'm clear on where you're coming from, please?

What is 1+1?; June 25, 2008 5:33 PM
weemaryanne said...: This post has been removed by the author.; June 25, 2008 5:38 PM
weemaryanne said...: This post has been removed by the author.; June 25, 2008 6:18 PM
Rev. BigDumbChimp said...: God hates Shrimp

These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.
10 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:
11 They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.
12 Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.

OH NOES!!

And emily, quoting scripture is the furthest thing from providing me any proof that you could do.

Try again!; June 25, 2008 6:25 PM
Rev. BigDumbChimp said...: Even YOU will say it Chimp

All will bow before the might of the Cosmic Muffin. Even YOU Emily.

See! I can do it too!; June 25, 2008 6:27 PM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: Jacob said...
Keith, morality is an evolutionary concept. Kthxbye.
___
If you start with an evolutionary worldview then isn’t everything an evolutionary concept? What’s was your point? There was morality before the hypotheses of evolution – evolutionists weren’t the first to discover the concept of morals. Evolution cannot answer where morality comes from. It cannot answer why we think in term of good and bad. It cannot even answer what is good or bad. Atheists have told me here that evolutionists try to only explain what ‘is’ – not what ‘ought’ to be. If one species kills off another one, evolution cannot say that was “bad” or that was “good.” Same is true for race or individual. Evolution is indifferent to morality – it’s foundation (the universe itself) is amoral.
I start with a Biblical worldview that believes in moral absolutes because they are grounded in God; who exists whether we know Him or not, believe Him or not, or like Him or not.
You can try to hide your sins from the judgment of a Holy and righteous God in an “evolutionary concept” or you can repent, trust Jesus Christ and receive complete forgiveness and the gift of everlasting life. Think about it.
And enjoy your day,
Keith; June 25, 2008 7:28 PM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: dale said…
Keith, my friend, it is understandable that you are looking for the best "chance" to beat the odds of our inevitable death. You are in the majority here (maybe.) You "think" that you are going to heaven and live eternally doing something, or whatever, and, I, "think," I am going to die and I have had a certain amount of years to help educate my kids in every manner that I could.
Even as a lay dying, if it happens that way, I will have positive thoughts the whole way through, unlike you, who will still be looking for a...... "chance."

I don’t “think” I have a chance for heaven – I “know” it. And I know you don’t understand how someone could know something like that, yet you think you know that no one can know they're going to heaven.
Before I was a Christian and was thinking about the claims of Jesus Christ, it appeared as a ‘chance’ and compared to all the other worldviews it seems to offer the best promise, the greatest hope, and really the easiest defense. When I first trusted in Jesus Christ I figured if this “Christian” thing is a lie, I’m going to find out soon enough, because if God wouldn’t support me, give me the faith to believe, and answer most of the thousands of questions I had, I would quickly walk away and return to my atheism. But 11 years later, here I am sold-out to Jesus Christ. I don’t believe in ‘chance’ anymore. God offers His promise - and that is a 100% guaranteed hope.

Dale also said in reply to this comment,
BUT yet atheists only have an impersonally, amoral, indifferent cosmos – which cares nothing for people and offers zero hope.
”You sit across the table from me and say that looking into my eyes and I will run you off to yo mama, sonny.”

If you have the time – explain this reply because I really don’t get. At first I thought you might be offended that I called the universe impersonal and indifferent towards you and me, but why would that be offensive if it's true?

In likewise respect,
K.; June 25, 2008 7:53 PM
Rob Penn said...: @ Shaze:

Belief and Religion makes you look absolutely crazy to everyone around you. You should all feel ashamed and stupid for worshiping a crappy religion.

Yeah, as if this straight jacket didn't do it well enough for me...

Ya mind helping me out?

;)

I don't feel stupid at all. Nor do I feel ashamed.; June 25, 2008 8:10 PM
Rob Penn said...: @ Rev.BigDumbChimp:

And emily, quoting scripture is the furthest thing from providing me any proof that you could do.

Actually, if you're saying that God condemns us from eating Shrimp, that's exactly what she needs to do, because that conversation assumes a Biblical God. Even if only hypothetically on your part.

Quoting the kosher food laws from Leviticus and ignoring the part where God says "I have made this clean," is pretty bad quote mining, however.; June 25, 2008 8:13 PM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: Brandon said...
"[Atheists] are saying that if god existed, he would not be a particularly great fellow, what with his wild mood swings, arbitrary allergy to "sin" which is at the best of times poorly defined, and his petulant attempts at genocide."

Of course the “god,” whom you correctly lower cased for this description, isn’t close to the God of the Bible, Who is holy, just, righteous, merciful, longsuffering, benevolent, and good. You can isolate the attributes of anyone and take select actions or words they’ve spoken to present them like a monster, but that’s dishonest. It’s like the illustration I’ve used many times before – if you describe one man shooting another in cold blood you can make him look evil, but ignoring that the man is an honest, respected officer of the law – who gave more than an adequate warning to the criminal intent on doing his own wicked thing – it’s not right.

Do you think I love the kind of God you’ve so poorly described?

"Now nature may be cruel and hopeless, but it doesn't have an intelligence and so it can't really be yelled at, now can it? Are you saying you think atheists should be mad at nature for its cruelty?"

When I was an atheist I was mad at the universe, for having been thrown into a world of confusion, pain and suffering, and the utter futility of life itself – that death would be my reward for a life time of work. I was even angrier at humanity because they seemed to not care about the absurdity of life and existence. I thought about suicide a lot. If it wasn’t for the amazing grace of God, my life would probably have been a tragedy - and possible like the kind you hear about on the news. I know not all atheists are as disturbed as I used to be – but it was because of my worldview that allowed me to rationalize all of my twisted thoughts and behavior. It was only by the grace of God he saved me – and changed my heart 180d with love for life and a love for people – especially those who may be struggling like I did in my late teens and early twenties.

Enjoy your day,
Keith; June 25, 2008 8:24 PM
Ethan said...: Sealy Fischer said...
If God really punishes peoples sins by means of natural disasters, then the whole world should just explode.

Exactly, Did you know that you were in line with what the Bible teaches when you made that comment?
2Peter 3:9-12
The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.
But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.
Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of people ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness,
looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning, and the elements will melt with intense heat!; June 25, 2008 8:32 PM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: Irukandji said...
” In my understanding, meaningful moral judgment can only be passed on sentient beings (a category to which your God presumably belongs). The universe is not a sentient being; why would I expect it to care about human welfare, or reprimand it for failing to do so? Your God, on the other hand, is supposedly an omnipotent being with a profound concern for human wellbeing. We have every right to expect better conduct from such a being (or at least we would if He weren't imaginary).”
___
Can you elaborate on this “better conduct?” I can only assume it would be that God would give us heaven. No death, no pain, no suffering, no confusion, no doubt, no worries, no sadness, infinite awe and righteousness and paradise. Anything less would still have room for “better conduct.” But, my God is going to freely given me all these things in Jesus Christ, and He offers it to you as well… is there still more that you want from God?

If currently you believe that God is not prefect and not real then you know there is hope because it makes sense that an imperfect God would be imaginary. An imperfect God couldn’t exist. And so what you believe makes sense on some level. Once you know the true and living God, you’ll only know Him as prefect.

K.; June 25, 2008 9:12 PM
noah said...: If there is a god, he made civilization so he could laugh at you Ray.; June 25, 2008 9:54 PM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: george.w said...

First, when we point out the moral depravity of "God", we're not mad at God, because we don't believe there is one. We're pointing out inconsistencies in your mythology.
___
What I find a little ironic is just like the other atheists that make this statement – you don’t back it up. You don’t show the inconsistencies. I’ve seen very few examples – and every one of them is clear in scripture that God is simply exercising His justice and sovereignty. The so-called inconsistencies is basically, “Look here, God is love, but then over there, He has wrath.” It’s not inconsistent for someone to both love and hate. God loves righteousness but hates evil – that’s very consistent. Judges who love people and love justice lock up criminals. They’re actions are consistent with love. God’s judgments are just and good – were the ones who are inconsistent with His moral law.

When an atheists tries to make a claim that there is “moral depravity” in the character of God He’s claiming to have a greater understanding of morality then God – that’s true arrogance. And it’s especially strange for atheists to make moral judgments against a being that they believe is imaginary. I have never heard anyone ever make a moral judgment against Santa Claus for his “making a list and checking it twice” as being a cruel, self-righteous, blackmailing, gluttonous man. Of course not – He doesn’t exist except as an invention of man, so why think twice about it or waste your time expressing your feelings about Santa? Yet, there’s sure is a lot of “expressed feelings” about God here.

If atheists aren’t angry at God then why don’t I see comments like, “I wish I did believe in this God you believe, because after all, how awesome would it be if it were true, the forgiveness of sins, eternal life, in the presence of a the benevolent Creator of all things, that would be great! - but I just don’t believe it.” I know there are atheists who would say that, but I haven’t seen it here. It’s like there are two views of God here – one is “morally depraved” and everyone rejects him, the atheists and Christians – the other God is good and just and prefect – and the Christians know Him and love Him but the atheists still think we’re talking about the god they described… they haven’t given up their effigy… they can’t give it up. It’s like, “God must be cruel otherwise we might be wrong.” I don’t know why this is, unless there is a repressed anger in those who say in their heart “There is no God.”

In hindsight – I can clearly see that I was anger at a God I claimed to not believe, all because He wouldn’t make Himself known to me. I think there is a sense of self-delusion and a hardening of the heart – and in sense atheists are giving God the silent treatment. Now before you think I’m insulting you and other atheists – you also believe that Christians are self-deluded if they really believe what that claim to believe. So I understand that you can say the same thing about me, and I don’t take offense to it. One or both of us is very very wrong.

K.; June 25, 2008 10:18 PM
Yarnosh said...: Sure... God is punishing California because of gays getting married. Ok, lets go with that.

Care to guess how many of those homes that are burning down are *not* owned by homosexuals? How many of those homeowners are, in fact, Christians or otherwise against gay marriage?

You'd think an omnipotent God would be just a little bit more precise in his punishments. Pretty sloppy, if you ask me. How hard would it be to, I dunno, set a few gay bathhouses on fire? Or rain on a gay wedding ceremony?

For all we know, He is just punishing California for not allowing gay marriage sooner! Maybe the floods here in the good ol' Midwest are sign telling us that we need to jump on the gay marriage bandwagon.; June 25, 2008 10:51 PM
JQ said...: Although I have never agreed with anything I've heard Mr Comfort say I would like to congratulate him on his unusual level of honesty on one point when compare to many other prominent creationists. Many prominent creationists delete negative comments or comments showing any sign of doubt on sight, trying to give the false impression that everybody agrees with them; I was quite gratified to notice that Mr Comfort is at least honest enough not to engage in this practice.; June 25, 2008 10:54 PM
KiwiInOz said...: Captain Howdy - "That still doesn't explain why the devout, Godly midwest is under 10 feet of water."

I can answer that. It's to protect the area from God's misdirected fire. Others have already commented on what a lousy aim he's got. It's just protection against collateral damage.; June 25, 2008 11:03 PM
Brian & Emma's Pacific Adventure said...: It amazes me that believers think that an all-powerful being would use a weapon as imprecise as a forest fire. Is it too much to expect an all-powerful being to actually aim?; June 25, 2008 11:23 PM
KiwiInOz said...: KiwiInOz returns the ritual ORC greeting to weemaryanne, and congratulates her on yet another magnificent coup. Not only has she made the front cover of the Soap Box, but she made the front cover of Pharyngula!! (Bows and scrapes while creeping backwards) "I am not worthy".

Ray has been PZumped!

Anyway, I'm still waiting for someone to give me the name of the deity in charge of thunder and lightning. I am leaning in favour of Thor, but maybe it is El Shaddai?! I left him off the list. Someone? Anyone?; June 25, 2008 11:34 PM
Peetu said...: Hi,

On a slight aside...

I always wanted to ask you this question. Please reply.

Refering to your video where you said that the existance of ridges on a banana that matches your hands' is proof that God exists. Since Apples don't have ridges, is it proof that God does not exist? Or that God did not create the Apple?

Please also consider Pineapples, Cabbage, Carrots and pretty much every eatable fruit except bananas.; June 26, 2008 12:14 AM
Reynold said...: Keith (ex-atheist) said...

I don’t get all the hubbub coming from the atheists.

Natural disasters happen all the time.

Is your deity in charge of that stuff or not? If so, then he's responsible for murder, just like any human is who deliberately causes the death of another.

What about that "absolute morality" you people yak about?

And so here’s the part I don’t get. The atheists here hate God on what they consider moral grounds, but speak nothing against the cold, dark, pointless universe. Some atheists here call God immoral for allowing death (completly ignoring the reason why we die and the fact that physical death is a door to something else), but they have no problem with Nature for teasing us with a breif taste for life and then ripping it away in death, randomly picking off people for no reason at all, and with no hope at all.
The cold universe or nature, is an inanimate object. It has no consciousness. It doesn't make a conscious decision to kill someone or to mess with their lives.

See the difference yet?

AllFiredUp said...

Rev. BigDumbChimp said...

"HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN IN THE EYES OF GOD SO IS EATING SHRIMP
OH NOES!!!!"
It's obvious that you have no understanding of the specific food laws that God gave the Jews while under the old covenant. Athiests tend to take all those laws that were only for the Jews, and lump them to mean for everyone. So it's obvious you don't read the Bible.
I daresay that he has read the bible; when one does, one will notice that it's more than those dietary laws that were given to the Jews. All those laws were given to the Jews because that's the only group he "spoke" to, really, in the OT. Then in the NT things were supposed to have changed somehow? There's a verse where in a dream sequence (a dream of a bunch of animals in a net, with a voice saying "eat em" or something) some guy gets told that anything is now good to eat; but that doesn't deal with all the other hundreds of laws that the OT has, including the ten commandments.

How can you say that some laws are meant only for the Jews, yet some are meant for everyone?

You blame Christians for not reading their science books and getting heavy into science to understand evolution, yet you do the very same thing with the Bible. You don't read it, but make judgmental statements about it.

You've made an inaccurate assumption here, I suspect.

Sye TenB:
You see, Geoff, even in attempting to insult Ray, you borrow your standard of absolute morality from our worldview. Your inconsistency is showing.

You people do not have absolute morality...such would say that killing babies is always wrong. Yet the OT deity ordered babies and pregnant women killed because their parents ticked him off.

The excuses that the ancient Isrealites didn't have the resources to take care of them don't wash, because 1) "God" could have provided it 2) they took in as booty at one time virgin midianite women.

How's an atheist explain this? Assuming that those events happened, the Isrealites whacked another tribe who was either threatening them or competing with them for scarce resources. They wrote that their god wanted that done.

As farming and animal domestication developed, those kinds of actions became less necessary, so people didn't do them as much, and eventually, made laws against such things.

Morality on a certain level, has evolved through time. You can see the difference yourselves between the OT and the NT. But, because you people are still supposed to worship that same "God", you also have an inconsistent morality. You people just refuse to admit it.; June 26, 2008 1:48 AM
C3P0R2D2 said...: Keith (ex-atheist) said...

Jacob said...
Keith, morality is an evolutionary concept. Kthxbye.
___
If you start with an evolutionary worldview then isn’t everything an evolutionary concept? What’s was your point? There was morality before the hypotheses of evolution

Keith, you are really hitting a new low. What are you trying to say?
Do you believe that gravity didn't exist until Newton made his Hypothesis?
This is really a new level of stupidity. Evolution didn't begin when Darwin first described it, it has been going on for a couple of billion years before we knew anything about it. So saying 'There was morality before the hypotheses of evolution' is really, really, really dumb.

Have a nice day,

C2P0R2D2 a.k.a. Richard List; June 26, 2008 2:13 AM
C3P0R2D2 said...: Keith said...

Evolution cannot answer where morality comes from. It cannot answer why we think in term of good and bad. It cannot even answer what is good or bad.

That's because the field of evolution tries to explain the diversity of life, not morality, Abiogenesis or the beginning of the universe. Evolution also does not explain why your car stops when you forget to put fuel in it.

Try Philosophy for an understanding of good and bad, but I think you'll just run against another wall since it's usually the context that describes good or bad.
Small example. If I shoot a guy through the head, most people will agree that's bad. But if said person was a hostage taker, threatening to kill a dozen children with a bomb, most people would agree that that killing the person was a good idea.
So the context, not the action defines right or wrong.

Have a nice day,

C3P0R2D2 a.k.a. Richard List; June 26, 2008 2:23 AM
Sye TenB said...: Reynold said: You people do not have absolute morality...such would say that killing babies is always wrong.

Well, since you are not the standard for absolute morality, I hardly expect you to get it right, killing is far too generic a term to ascribe absolutes. Still though Reynold, since you are responding for Geoff, is bigotry absolutely wrong?

Cheers,

Sye; June 26, 2008 2:38 AM
Sye TenB said...: George W. said: "We're pointing out inconsistencies in your mythology."

Just out of curiosity George, why are inconsistencies in reasoning not allowed according to your worldview?

Cheers,

Sye; June 26, 2008 2:43 AM
weemaryanne said...: This post has been removed by the author.; June 26, 2008 5:08 AM
someguy said...: We've had gay marriage in Canada for over 5 years. Weather's great.; June 26, 2008 5:23 AM
Craig said...: Keith said,

I have never heard anyone ever make a moral judgment against Santa Claus for his “making a list and checking it twice” as being a cruel, self-righteous, blackmailing, gluttonous man. Of course not – He doesn’t exist except as an invention of man, so why think twice about it or waste your time expressing your feelings about Santa?

Hi Keith,

My daughters I-dog is far too complex to have been man made. It could only have been Created by elves in Santas workshop. "Educated" people have tried to convince me otherwise but I know the Truth. I am starting a movement to have my worldview included in the classroom. They don't have to throw out the "manufacturing" fairy tale, just teach the controversy. Of course that's silly, we can prove that I-dogs are made by child labor in Chinese sweatshops.

The God of the bible and all other ancient gods created in the minds of men to explain their world are just as silly. I'm sure you're 100% convinced God exists but you can't know unless you redefine the word know.

I couldn't care less what you believe, it's when you want your superstitions validated through public policy and foisted on everyone else. That's what I can't stand. If you want Creation taught, the banning of Fed. stem cell research, the stoning of gays or anything else then make your case. Saying, "it's in the bible" isn't making the case.

Well, my point is in there somewhere. Hope you find it.
P.S. I have a swell life. There's ups and downs but I'm not waiting for a glorious eternity in paradise to bail me out. Reality is awesome.; June 26, 2008 5:44 AM
Marcel said...: If sin is reason for the wrath of God, then I wonder why my home country is pretty safe. I live in The Netherlands, known for it's liberal values. Prostitution is legal here, atheism is at an all-time high, gay marriage has been allowed here for as long as I can remember and I'm pretty sure we are very materialistic - we want what others have, a sin, according to the Bible.

Yet we suffer from no earthquakes. No forest fires. No drought. No disease. No economic disasters. No terrorism to speak of. No floods since we actively battle the forces of nature (or God, if you will).

To all believers out there: open up, think about why you believe. Most likely because your parents taught you so. And their parent's did the same to them.

Ask yourself why you believe, despite the underwhelming amount of evidence - none.

Aren't you just afraid of your own mortality? Or just plain afraid of death in general?

Believing is easy. Asking questions is hard. Changing your beliefs even harder.

I went from believing in God to being atheist. Not agnostic, but atheist. There is not a doubt in my mind that God, or any other form of deity, is made up. A story that was invented to control the masses, offer a solution to unanswered (ancient) questions, and a solution to death - whether it be relatives, or your own.; June 26, 2008 5:49 AM
Sye TenB said...: C3POR2D2 said: "If I shoot a guy through the head, most people will agree that's bad. But if said person was a hostage taker, threatening to kill a dozen children with a bomb, most people would agree that that killing the person was a good idea."

Surely you are not suggesting that morality is based on majority opinion are you??? If you are, let me ask you, is the majority always right?

Cheers,

Sye; June 26, 2008 6:46 AM
verandoug said...: Did not Jesus tell his listeners that those on whom the tower of Siloam fell were not greater sinners than the general run of humanity, and that Galileans massacred by Pilate's soldiers were not viler than Galileans in general? Did not early Christian leaders warn their followers, in time of plague, that they would suffer along with their Roman persecutors?

Would it not be better to insist to Weemaryanne that there is no orthodox Christian expectation that God will rain down judgment on sinful states in this lifetime? You seem willing to uphold views of God's judgment that Christ himself rejected, in order to annoy your critics.

Stephen J.,
I read another post by you the other day. You have twice now presented a partial truth about Christianity and it is beguiling the way you pull out passages to prove your point while neglecting others. Having a tower fall on you is a far cry from a huge natural disaster. Jesus told His followers "For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines, pestilences and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of sorrows. "

I predict more earthquakes as well. A LOT more.

O my God, make them like the whirling dust,
Like the chaff before the wind!
As the fire burns the woods,
And as the flame sets the mountains on fire,
So pursue them with Your tempest,
And frighten them with Your storm.
Fill their faces with shame,
That they may seek Your name, O LORD.
Let them be confounded and dismayed forever;
Yes, let them be put to shame and perish,
That they may know that You, whose name alone is the LORD,
Are the Most High over all the earth.

Storms and natural disasters are reminders to us that there are things that are bigger than we are. We think we're all that and don't need God until we are in such a moment. God's purpose is to get you to seek Him and for you to know that His name alone is Lord.

This is their second purpose. America is one nation, not individual states in God's sight. If one area suffers, we all suffer. God commended Lot and Noah in their days for standing up and declaring righteousness.

You know, you can see the natural way these things occur. However, I know men who are in NOAA who have done extensive research on global warming and it is not significant.

This is from one article by Stan Goldenberg taken from his article entitled 2001: The recent increase in Atlantic hurricane activity: Causes and implications. Science 293, 474-479

Some have asked whether the increase in activity since 1995 is due to anthropogenic global warming. The historical multidecadal-scale variability in Atlantic hurricane activity is much greater than what would be expected from a gradual global temperature increase attributed to global warming, although it is possible that a small fraction of the increase in hurricane activity might be associated with the gradual, long-term SST increase.

I will place a link on my blog for the whole article.

Vera; June 26, 2008 6:48 AM
verandoug said...: Did not Jesus tell his listeners that those on whom the tower of Siloam fell were not greater sinners than the general run of humanity, and that Galileans massacred by Pilate's soldiers were not viler than Galileans in general? Did not early Christian leaders warn their followers, in time of plague, that they would suffer along with their Roman persecutors?

Would it not be better to insist to Weemaryanne that there is no orthodox Christian expectation that God will rain down judgment on sinful states in this lifetime? You seem willing to uphold views of God's judgment that Christ himself rejected, in order to annoy your critics.

Stephen J.,
I read another post by you the other day. You have twice now presented a partial truth about Christianity and it is beguiling the way you pull out passages to prove your point while neglecting others. Having a tower fall on you is a far cry from a huge natural disaster. Jesus told His followers "For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines, pestilences and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of sorrows. "

I predict more earthquakes as well. A LOT more.

O my God, make them like the whirling dust,
Like the chaff before the wind!
As the fire burns the woods,
And as the flame sets the mountains on fire,
So pursue them with Your tempest,
And frighten them with Your storm.
Fill their faces with shame,
That they may seek Your name, O LORD.
Let them be confounded and dismayed forever;
Yes, let them be put to shame and perish,
That they may know that You, whose name alone is the LORD,
Are the Most High over all the earth.

Storms and natural disasters are reminders to us that there are things that are bigger than we are. We think we're all that and don't need God until we are in such a moment. God's purpose is to get you to seek Him and for you to know that His name alone is Lord.

This is their second purpose. America is one nation, not individual states in God's sight. If one area suffers, we all suffer. God commended Lot and Noah in their days for standing up and declaring righteousness.

You know, you can see the natural way these things occur. However, I know men who are in NOAA who have done extensive research on global warming and it is not significant.

This is from one article by Stan Goldenberg taken from his article entitled 2001: The recent increase in Atlantic hurricane activity: Causes and implications. Science 293, 474-479

Some have asked whether the increase in activity since 1995 is due to anthropogenic global warming. The historical multidecadal-scale variability in Atlantic hurricane activity is much greater than what would be expected from a gradual global temperature increase attributed to global warming, although it is possible that a small fraction of the increase in hurricane activity might be associated with the gradual, long-term SST increase.

I will place a link on my blog for the whole article.

Vera; June 26, 2008 6:59 AM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: Reynold said...
Natural disasters happen all the time.
Is your deity in charge of that stuff or not? If so, then he's responsible for murder, just like any human is who deliberately causes the death of another.
What about that "absolute morality" you people yak about?
___
It’s your comment “just like any human…” where you get messed up when you think about God. God isn’t like any human. He’s holy, just, good and righteous. He’s our creator – and He gets to do what ever He wants (It’s a perk for being God). Those who actually know Him realize that His mercy and grace is truly amazing and that His love for us is beyond measure. Those who don’t know Him don’t know of His mercy and grace yet… but they could if they would soften their heart.

K.; June 26, 2008 7:03 AM
Peetu said...: Ray... please understand this.

Atheists are not AGAINST God. Atheists simply don't believe in the unproved hypothesis that God exists. I accept that the premise that God does not exist has not been conclusively proven either. Every human has the choice to believe either since both are not proven by science.

I figure that you would vehemently oppose any scientific factor that would turn the table against your belief. But a perfect rationalist would be willing to change his beliefs in case some verified proof does emerge that God exists. I am not atheist. And I am not a pussy Agnost either. I am a rationalist.

There are only three types of people on this earth, rationalist, idiots and people who don't realize that they are idiots. I am not trying to insult you. I used to be an idiot too. I was a Latin Catholic who later converted to (protestant) Pentecost Christian. I eventually had to face the hard truth.

Realizing from my own rationalization and experience that God does not exist was tough. I lost the only emotional support that I ever had, God. I lost the most strongest shoulders I had to cry on. I lost a friend who stayed by my side all day long and loved me. But I had to come face to face with the truth. This friend did not exist. I had realized when I was 6 that Santa was fictional. Now it was time to realize that God was too.

I have immense respect for Jesus. He was one of the greatest rebels who ever lived. Consider this - As a boy, he teaches grown theological experts and lectures them. He performs magic tricks to convince the naive mass of humanity to listen to his philosophy. He rewrites the obnoxious laws of the old testament to be compatible with the improved morality of the civilization he was brought up in. Then he proceeds to teach people how to love others like yourself and to demand his followers to lead a live of peace and love. Jesus was the personification of love.

And you... You and the rest of the Christian Taliban (if I may call it so, the politically correct version would be 'christian fundamentalists') use His words to justify your hatred of Homosexuals. What I do with my genitals is my business entirely. I am not gay, nor have I been friends with anyone who was. In my country (India), they tend to keep a low profile due to the social stigma attached with it.

I was once propositioned by a gay person and in my shock I lashed out against him verbally and publicly humiliated him. I have never after humiliated or disgraced a person in my life and I regret and repent for what I have done, because I know God (if he exists) would love him more than me. Why? "Because, only a patient needs a doctor (Jesus)" and he was the patient there, he was the one in pain. Don't know where in the bible Jesus says those words? look it up in the bible. In the same bible you quote to justify your hatred of homosexuals.

Let me repeat this. I am not a homosexual, and convincingly so. But when you use the bible to justify hatred against a section of the society, it is blatant racism which is despicable. If I let this pass, I will have to let it pass when - in the future - you and your brethren will use the same bible to justify your hatred of Jews or any other community you don't belong to.

Such blatant misuse of the bible to justify hatred and negative propaganda is what drove me out of Christianity. I still hope that a God exists and that he would be kind enough to give me some solid empirical proof of his existence because belief in a God is a great experience (I know since I have been there). But belief in God, as of now, is only possible after suspension of your logical and rational faculties.

I do not know if you are using the bible to justify your irrational hatred of Atheists. If you are, why don't you expand that to include Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs and Agnosts. Then we could officially designate you as a fundamentalist. And a fundamentalist is a step away from being a terrorist (according to your countries defenition).

Well one last thing before I close this. Let me just remind you that when people hear you speak or when they read your blog posts, they are not always people who rejected the God of your Bible. Most probably they are people who thing Thor is in charge of thunder and rainfall (like other readers have suggested). Please get out more and make sure you understand that Christianity is not the only religion in this world.

Peter Pawan EJ,
Ex-Christian, Rationalist, Geek; June 26, 2008 7:15 AM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: Craig said...
I couldn't care less what you believe, it's when you want your superstitions validated through public policy and foisted on everyone else. That's what I can't stand. If you want Creation taught, the banning of Fed. stem cell research, the stoning of gays or anything else then make your case. Saying, "it's in the bible" isn't making the case.

If you think that Christians are trying to politically take over the government then you live in a fantasy world. You buy into the liberal media sound-bites hook line and sinker. If I said atheists only want anarchy and chaos to rule, I’m sure you’d be offended by such a generalization – and yet you’re doing the same thing with your “boogieman” of Christian dominionism. Of course there are a very small fraction of atheistic anarchists as well as handful of on-the-fringe Christian dominionists, but lets not paint each other with such a large brush. Christians have as much right as you do in the public square of ideas. We both can present our views, opinions, and make our appeal to public policy – that’s democracy. If you want to silent the Christian worldview, then that’s communism. If we believe that “embryonic” stem cells are life, then we have a right to make our case heard. (I notice that you left off that word “embryonic,” which is the key to the that issue – liberals do that all the time). Stoning homosexuals? Seriously – I haven’t even seen the wacko Phelps group get arrested for that. Find me one quote by any well known Christian who’s wanted to make that law? If you truly believe that a Christian should not be allowed to bring their opinions and convictions into the debate of public ideas – and must be stopped – then you’re the type of person we should all fear.

K.; June 26, 2008 7:30 AM
The Voice of Reason said...: To those who support the whole "It's mentioned in the NT, so shall it be" philosophy...

Jesus healed slaves.

Slavery is most obviously part of The Christian Faith as it's explicitly detailed in the Old Testament that 'good' Christians own slaves (part of the argument for having slaves in the early part of our country - USA... heh).

So, why pick and choose only homosexuality? Why aren't you owning slaves? Not owning them might anger God just as much as not stoning homosexuals!

Bible:
Own slaves!
Just don't beat them TOO hard!

Oh... Jesus also never said anything about homosexuality. Other people writing the Bible did.

Luke 7 and Matthew 8; June 26, 2008 7:46 AM
DnA said...: What are you talking about?

Everyone knows ZEUS is in charge of the lightning department.; June 26, 2008 7:48 AM
euthyphro037 said...: Allfiredup,

I'm guessing you're some kind of dispensationalist. What with the different sets of rules for different times. Well, I'm here to spread the good news. God came to me and told me we are now living in the next dispensation. In this new time, all those silly old rules he set up for everyone else don't count anymore, so we can feel free to read they bible as a myth. Also he's going on vacation to another universe for a while, so we can all just forget that he exists (after all that smiting, he deserves a little r-and-r).

I'll be accepting your humble donations to start my new church.; June 26, 2008 7:59 AM
EvoDevo2004 said...: @Patte said:
"so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow" Infants who are born minimally prematurely (within weeks of full term) may not suffer any permanent harm. If the 'mischief' follows, or the infant was seriously harmed, the perpetrator of the harm is to suffer the punishment of 'an eye for an eye'. Eye plucked out if child's eye was damaged. Leg cut off if leg was damaged, head crushed if head crushed, etc."

Don't be absurd...it is obvious that in this particular passage "fruit depart her" means the loss of the unborn and "no mischief follows" refers to any further harm, i.e., the death of the woman. Should the woman die then, yes, the bibles says "eye for an eye".
Regardless the infant mortality rate in the mideast TODAY is an appalling 6.5%--that's with at least some limited access to modern healthcare. A premature baby born to uneducated, bronze-age desert nomads would have about as much chance of surviving as a snowball in hell (YOUR imaginary hell, that is) so your point about premature babies is ridiculous.; June 26, 2008 8:09 AM
Craig said...: The Dutch score.

Dykes- 1
God- 0; June 26, 2008 8:16 AM
Sunny the Truckie said...: "And in all the states, there are heaps of people that work on Sundays who aren't being properly stoned to death."

Sorry, Chris, the Fourth Commandment says it's the Seventh Day, not the first. Most Xians should be stoning themselves.; June 26, 2008 8:17 AM
The De-Crapinated Grind said...: Wow! What a completely ignorant, bigoted, and just downright stupid post. You have really shown just how big a moron you are (not that we didn't know that already).

Your lack of a coherent thought process is shocking, though not unexpected.; June 26, 2008 9:12 AM
JOSHUA S BLACK said...: Rob Penn:
"@JOSHUA S. BLACK [who wrote to Iago]:

'Ray is Jewish. I thought you knew that.'

"Ray is of Jewish Decent. He's a Christian by faith.

"Gotta be careful to distinguish between the two."

The Apostle Paul didn't.; June 26, 2008 9:24 AM
JOSHUA S BLACK said...: "My daughter's I-dog...Of course that's silly, we can prove that I-dogs are made by child labor in Chinese sweatshops."

So, Mr. Morality: why did you buy one for your daughter? Have you no concern for other people's daughters slaving away in said sweatshops? Or does money speak louder than your supposedly-superior-to-Christianity conscience?; June 26, 2008 9:30 AM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: @ Peetu

It’s very clear by what you shared that you never were a Christian. Maybe in title that was your “religion” for a time, but you didn’t actually know the Lord. (And you really don’t have a basic grasp of the teachings of Jesus Christ). I say this after reading your comments about Him.

”I have immense respect for Jesus. He was one of the greatest rebels who ever lived. Consider this - As a boy, he teaches grown theological experts and lectures them. He performs magic tricks to convince the naive mass of humanity to listen to his philosophy. He rewrites the obnoxious laws of the old testament to be compatible with the improved morality of the civilization he was brought up in. Then he proceeds to teach people how to love others like yourself and to demand his followers to lead a live of peace and love. Jesus was the personification of love.”

Have you read the Gospels? Someone who claims to be God, claims to be the fulfillment of a thousand years of prophecy, someone who talks about heaven as literal, that there is a God who will judge the world by His own words, who taught in a literal hell, who warned people to flee from the wrath to come, who claimed that salvation would be only found in Him, that He was the only way, that to deny Him was to parish, who taught His followers to make converts, and to preach salvation in His name (while living a life of peace and love) – if these things aren’t true, How can you say that you have “immense respect for Jesus?"

K.; June 26, 2008 9:37 AM
verandoug said...: Wow! What a completely ignorant, bigoted, and just downright stupid post. You have really shown just how big a moron you are (not that we didn't know that already).

Your lack of a coherent thought process is shocking, though not unexpected.

That's an ad hominem argument, DCG. Want to try again?

Vera; June 26, 2008 9:46 AM
glasnostic said...: not sure if anybody already said this but i will chime in here.

from what i have seen, there have been very few, if any, deaths as a result of the wild fires in California.

but in the Midwest there have been hundreds of deaths as a direct result of tornadoes and floods. as a matter of fact, while California's wildfires this year are about average for the year, the Midwest is seeing one of the worst floods in recorded history, as well as one of the worst years for tornadoes.

so.. why is the Midwest being singled out?; June 26, 2008 10:02 AM
Craig said...: Keith,

I don't want to shut anyone up. I clearly said make your case. You can bring any worldview or not-of-this-worldview to the table but policy is made on the merits. In our secular society "it's in the Bible" is not an argument.

I didn't say Christians want a theocracy but can you deny they're trying to get Intel Design (Creationism) into schools despite nothing to merit it. If you doubt it's Creationism and there is zero evidence to support it, peruse the transcripts of the Dover, PA trial.
I would suggest the testimony and cross of Michael Behe.

Embryonic stem cell research (is that better?). Your winning that one. I trust your also vehemently opposed to invetro fertilisation since far, far more blastocysts are destroyed in that process.

Don't forget wanting to put huge granite 10 commandments monuments all over public spaces. Doesn't the establishment clause in the 1st amendment of our Constitution break, like, 4 of the commandments.

There are lots of laws Christians would like to see passed but if all they have to recommend them are religious texts, that's not enough. Bring your Christianity to the public square. You have as much right as anyone but don't forget a rational argument.

I really don't think anyone wants to stone gay people. Do you? Just my lighthearted sense of humor.

Keith, reread it. Carefully.; June 26, 2008 10:33 AM
Steven J. said...: Verandoug replied to me,

I read another post by you the other day. You have twice now presented a partial truth about Christianity and it is beguiling the way you pull out passages to prove your point while neglecting others. Having a tower fall on you is a far cry from a huge natural disaster. Jesus told His followers "For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines, pestilences and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of sorrows."

I read that passage back when I was still a creationist, and wondered about its meaning. Nations threatening or making war against other nations, famines, epidemics, earthquakes ... that's a description of any period of human history, not some unique catastrophic lead-in to the end of the world. Even references to stars falling from heaven, the sun turning to sackcloth, or the moon to blood could be references to comets and meteor showers, and solar or lunar eclipses. Was Jesus' point that these were unique signs of the end of the world, or that those who looked for portents would never lack for them, but that the portents don't mean anything ("the end is not yet")? There are two different strands of descriptions in the New Testament of how Christ will return: one involves a series of warnings (the "man of sin," the great apostasy, etc.) and the other tells that he will come "as a thief in the night" "at an hour you do not expect." These are usually reconciled by ignoring one strand and emphasizing the other.

Verandoug continues:
This is from one article by Stan Goldenberg taken from his article entitled 2001: The recent increase in Atlantic hurricane activity: Causes and implications. Science 293, 474-479

Some have asked whether the increase in activity since 1995 is due to anthropogenic global warming. The historical multidecadal-scale variability in Atlantic hurricane activity is much greater than what would be expected from a gradual global temperature increase attributed to global warming, although it is possible that a small fraction of the increase in hurricane activity might be associated with the gradual, long-term SST increase.

Climate is constantly changing and is difficult to model; that current models don't exactly match up to current observations (that is, that climatologists haven't figured out the exact right equations and exact right values to plug into them) does not seem to me sufficient evidence that current climate changes are miracles. Within recorded history, we've been through "years without a summer" caused by volcanic eruptions, the "little ice age" of a few centuries back, quite a few killer earthquakes over the centuries, etc. and yet "the end is not yet."; June 26, 2008 10:33 AM
Rob Penn said...: @ The Voice Of Reason:

Slavery is most obviously part of The Christian Faith as it's explicitly detailed in the Old Testament that 'good' Christians own slaves (part of the argument for having slaves in the early part of our country - USA... heh).

So, why pick and choose only homosexuality? Why aren't you owning slaves? Not owning them might anger God just as much as not stoning homosexuals!

There is never a comandment in the Bible that says we should own slaves.

And besides, slavery was MUCH different in those days and in that culture. It actually more closely resembled a job. You're not forced to work because you were caught and they'll kill you if you don't cooperate, you're working because your master is paying your debt. You're working for pay.; June 26, 2008 11:06 AM
Robin Lionheart said...: keywesthaven1@msn.com writes:
I handed out a million dollar bill to a homosexual the other day, and he came back with a angry voice and said "So I'm going to hell am I ? " He freely admitted he was gay. I answered him with "What does the Bible say about sodomy?" He answered his own question. I tried the "good person" question, but he walked away with the bill.

So, someone took your tract as a condemnation, and you respond by trying to convince him he's not a good person. Way to drive someone away.

Hopefully the "seed" will take root and convict him.

Seems like you only convicted yourself, in his judgement.; June 26, 2008 11:07 AM
Sye TenB said...: The De-Crapinated Grind said: "What a completely ignorant, bigoted, and just downright stupid post.

By what standard do you call anything ignorant, bigotted, or stupid? For that matter, by what absolute standard do you even call ignorance, bigotry, or stupidity wrong? If it's only your opinion, pardon me, but why should anyone care what you think?

Cheers,

Sye; June 26, 2008 11:14 AM
dale said...: Vera,

You said,
"America is one nation, not individual states in God's sight."

And it says that where in the bible? Or did you just make that up like you do most of what you say?; June 26, 2008 11:17 AM
Sye TenB said...: Peetu said: Atheists are not AGAINST God. Atheists simply don't believe in the unproved hypothesis that God exists.

Problem is, this very statement shows that you believe in the concept of ‘proof’ which itself is impossible without God. Proof of anything requires, knowledge, logic, and truth, perhaps you can tell us how you account for any of those concepts according to YOUR worldview?

I figure that you would vehemently oppose any scientific factor that would turn the table against your belief.

Well, since the scientific principle itself is dependent on God, this would be impossible. You see, science would not be possible if one did not proceed on the assumption that nature is uniform, problem is, without God, there is absolutely zero basis for such an assumption.

There are only three types of people on this earth, rationalist, idiots and people who don't realize that they are idiots. I am not trying to insult you. I used to be an idiot too.

Well, perhaps then you can tell us how you know that the reasoning with which you came to your rationalizations is itself rational? You may have to change the tense of that last sentence of yours.

Realizing from my own rationalization and experience that God does not exist was tough.

You ceased to honour God (if you ever did) the second you put your rationalization and experience above God.

But I had to come face to face with the truth.

Alright Peter, what is the truth, and how do you know it?

What I do with my genitals is my business entirely.

Problem is Peter, they ain’t yours.

But when you use the bible to justify hatred against a section of the society, it is blatant racism which is despicable.

You are burning down a straw-man. I am quite sure that Ray has never lashed out at any homosexual like you say that you have. I have no doubt that he, out of Christian love, would be more inclined to help a homosexual, then you, who have no absolute reason to.
Just out of curiosity though, by what standard do you call hatred or racism ‘despicable?’ Without God, it just comes down to personal opinion.

Such blatant misuse of the bible to justify hatred and negative propaganda is what drove me out of Christianity.

No, your autonomy did. You put yourself above God, and made decisions based on what others have done, wrongly or rightly.

I still hope that a God exists and that he would be kind enough to give me some solid empirical proof of his existence

Do you believe that all knowledge is gained via the senses?

But belief in God, as of now, is only possible after suspension of your logical and rational faculties.

What standard of logic are you using to come to this conclusion, and how do you account for that standard?

Okay Mr. Rationalist, let’s see how rational you really are.

Cheers,

Sye; June 26, 2008 11:35 AM
verandoug said...: A premature baby born to uneducated, bronze-age desert nomads would have about as much chance of surviving as a snowball in hell (YOUR imaginary hell, that is) so your point about premature babies is ridiculous.

EvoDevo2004, you should pay more attention to what is being said. She said "within weeks." That is easily a 36 weeker and trust me, 36-38 week gestation does not require medical intervention. The colostrum is rich in antibodies and so, these babies had a good chance of survival. What may have gotten to them is natural adversities like cold or heat. Also, who knows how many of those babies were born with congenital anomalies. The point being that a normal healthy baby could survive at 36 weeks. Seen plenty of them do just that.

Vera; June 26, 2008 11:49 AM
verandoug said...: Well, I'm here to spread the good news. God came to me and told me we are now living in the next dispensation. In this new time, all those silly old rules he set up for everyone else don't count anymore, so we can feel free to read they bible as a myth.

All those commandments have stood the test of time. Check your conscience.

Also he's going on vacation to another universe for a while, so we can all just forget that he exists (after all that smiting, he deserves a little r-and-r).

Not to worry, euthyphro037. The day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night when He pours out His wrath against all those who hold the truth in unrighteousness. The Bible tells us that it is a sorer punishment than those that broke the commandments under the Law.

He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.
It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

I'll be accepting your humble donations to start my new church.
The church of humanism/atheism/evolution/anti-Christ is now taking donations. What next?

Vera; June 26, 2008 11:56 AM
verandoug said...: Slavery is most obviously part of The Christian Faith as it's explicitly detailed in the Old Testament that 'good' Christians own slaves (part of the argument for having slaves in the early part of our country - USA... heh).

This statement just goes to show you how little you know. I have a very long article on my blog entitled The Bible, Slavery, and America's Founders. This is in the May area. The article is way too long for this list but suffice it to say that the Bible condemns forced slavery. Slavery was only agreed to if the person wanted to be a slave.

Oh... Jesus also never said anything about homosexuality. Other people writing the Bible did.

The word translated "fornication" was the word pornea which meant any sex outside of marriage. The apostles expounded Jesus' words. To suggest that Jesus had to say it for it to be true is a ludicrous statement. You do, however, have to understand what the writer is saying; and to understand that, you have to read these letters in their entirety. Nevertheless, homosexuality is condemned in both the Old and New Testaments.

Vera; June 26, 2008 12:04 PM
Rufus said...: Keith:

You mean on the fringe dominionists such as D. James Kennedy?

"Our job is to reclaim America for Christ, whatever the cost," Kennedy says. "As the vice regents of God, we are to exercise godly dominion and influence over our neighborhoods, our schools, our government, our literature and arts, our sports arenas, our entertainment media, our news media, our scientific endeavors -- in short, over every aspect and institution of human society."

I recently read Ray writing about how one of his pieces was being broadcast on Coral Ridge radio.

By the way. You're not an ex-atheist. You were never a true atheist. You were a false convert.; June 26, 2008 12:08 PM
verandoug said...: Dear Peetu,

Thank you for sharing your situation with us.

There are only three types of people on this earth, rationalist, idiots and people who don't realize that they are idiots.

You would assume that the rationalist doesn't believe in God and the rest are idiots. I think if you take a step back and see that creation demands a Creator, you will have to admit that there is One. Reasons to Believe is a great place to start to see that there are quite a few scientists that do not hold to a creation account that lacks intelligence and they have quite a bit of compelling evidence.

How could you receive comfort from something that doesn't exist? If God doesn't exist then your faith would have made zero impact in your life. The very fact that you were comforted by a God you cannot see, should tell you that He is real.

We do not hate homosexuals. On the contrary, we care for them. We wouldn't be here if we didn't. I would simply let them do their thing and inherit hell's fire, if I didn't care. After all, what happens to them will not effect the outcome for me. I say that but I do believe that God does hold us accountable if we take that type of attitude toward these people. If nothing else, we should verbally and prayerfully support the people that are trying to reach them.

To tell someone they are sinning is not an easy thing. I do not like confrontation and believe it or not, my husband will not just arbitrarily confront someone unless he feels he has to. We limit our confrontations to real sin and keep each other accountable in that way not taking the little irritations of life like the inefficiency of the cashier and making this out as sin.

Homosexuality is a perversion of God's creation. 1 Cor. 6:9-11 warns us not to be deceived about the place that the homosexual stands before a Holy God. Just because you didn't handle that situation that you felt unexpectedly confronted with in a way that you felt made sense, doesn't suggest that homosexuality is right. I understand how difficult that must have been for you. Nevertheless, what you should have done was express your concern for his eternal soul and tell him in a calm caring way that all homosexuals will inherit hell's fire and that God has provided a way of escape through the blood of His Son, Jesus Christ, the power of His Spirit and the Word. See, that is the message. God is not supposed to fulfill all our wishes. He is transforming us into the image of His Son. That is what the message of redemption is all about. We have a righteousness that changed us by grace through faith and this not of ourselves, it is the gift of God, not of works lest any man should boast.

I hope this helps!
Vera; June 26, 2008 12:54 PM
Reynold said...: Sye TenB
Reynold said: You people do not have absolute morality...such would say that killing babies is always wrong.

Well, since you are not the standard for absolute morality, I hardly expect you to get it right, killing is far too generic a term to ascribe absolutes.
Your "God" obviously hasn't set a good standard for absolute morality either.

So, what' your point?

Aren't you "pro-life"?

Still though Reynold, since you are responding for Geoff, is bigotry absolutely wrong?
I'll answer that only if you can answer why baby killing is not absolutely wrong.

It sounds to me like you support bigotry. No surprise, since the bible itself does come out supporting slavery in many instances.

Meh, I'll answer anyway. The only times that bigotry would be justified is if an individual did something wrong and he had to be taken out because of the law he broke.

Note that I said individual, not groups. Bigotry by definition refers to groups.

I'm sure you can figure out my answer from that.; June 26, 2008 1:12 PM
Reynold said...: Keith (ex-atheist) said...

Reynold said...
Natural disasters happen all the time.
Is your deity in charge of that stuff or not? If so, then he's responsible for murder, just like any human is who deliberately causes the death of another.
What about that "absolute morality" you people yak about?

It’s your comment “just like any human…” where you get messed up when you think about God. God isn’t like any human. He’s holy, just, good and righteous.
How can you show that from his actions?? If a human does the slightest thing wrong, then he's not "holy" or "righteous". Your deity can order babies and pregnant women killed, yet you still call him "holy" and "righteous".

Care to define what those words mean then, since it's apparent that actions can't be used in their definitions.

He’s our creator – and He gets to do what ever He wants (It’s a perk for being God).
So then if someone sells you a painting, he's still able to come to your house and wreck the painting whenever he wants? Are parents allowed to kill their kids?

One would think that the creator/painter/parent would be obligated to protect, not destroy what they made.

Those who actually know Him realize that His mercy and grace is truly amazing and that His love for us is beyond measure. Those who don’t know Him don’t know of His mercy and grace yet… but they could if they would soften their heart.

It's pretty hard when we have to follow the example of a being who doesn't follow his own rules. What's the name for someone who doesn't follow his own rules again?

It's not "morally consistent", that's for sure.

**Note: to Sye TenB:

I forgot to mention that I myself don't believe in absolute morality. When I was talking about it earlier, I was merely pointing out that morality evolves. You people just refuse to admit it.

As an example, in the OT, cripples weren't allowed in the temple at all. In the NT, Jesus was supposed to have touched them and healed them.; June 26, 2008 1:25 PM
C3P0R2D2 said...: Sye TenB said...

Surely you are not suggesting that morality is based on majority opinion are you??? If you are, let me ask you, is the majority always right?
Yes. morality is a majority opinion, that's why it changes over time. Around the year 0, slavery was normal and accepted, in the middle ages, putting people on the rack was no big deal, as were crusades. Nowadays, we try to behave a bit more decent towards our fellow humans. So Yes, what is moral is simply behavior that most people will accept as moral.

As for the second question (Is the majority always right) You guy's elected GWB as president, TWICE (or did the first one not count?), so it's clear that the majority can be disastrously wrong. We can also remember that Adolf Hitler was legally elected as chancellor, so again the majority isn't always right.; June 26, 2008 1:29 PM
Sye TenB said...: Reynold said; Your "God" obviously hasn't set a good standard for absolute morality either.

And what exactly is a ‘good standard’ according to your worldview?

The only times that bigotry would be justified is if an individual did something wrong and he had to be taken out because of the law he broke.

Says who? What if bigots ruled the world, why couldn’t they set the standard that bigotry was cool, and non-bigots should be ‘taken out?’ Is bigotry wrong, or isn’t it?

Cheers,

Sye; June 26, 2008 2:31 PM
Sye TenB said...: C3POR2D2 said: Yes. morality is a majority opinion… …it's clear that the majority can be disastrously wrong.

Don’t you see the problem here??? If the majority determines what is right, it CAN’T be wrong. Your inconsistency is showing.

Cheers,

Sye; June 26, 2008 2:32 PM
zencycle said...: Did you notice how ray didn't answer maryannes question?

It was asking about the flood, ray....; June 26, 2008 2:34 PM
Craig said...: joshua s black,

Oy; June 26, 2008 2:53 PM
Irukandji said...: @ Verandoug:

Tell him in a calm caring way that all homosexuals will inherit hell's fire.

You should do stand-up comedy. No, really. You missed your calling.; June 26, 2008 3:11 PM
Reynold said...: Sye TenB

Well, since the scientific principle itself is dependent on God, this would be impossible. You see, science would not be possible if one did not proceed on the assumption that nature is uniform, problem is, without God, there is absolutely zero basis for such an assumption.
Tell that to the ancient greeks, or the ancient chinese.

You're making unjustified assumptions again. Your worldview is the one that has things like sticks turning into snakes, water turning into blood, etc.

How can you possibly get the idea that nature is uniform if you believe in a being who can overturn the laws of nature at will?; June 26, 2008 3:27 PM
Sye TenB said...: Reynold said: ”Tell that to the ancient greeks, or the ancient chinese.”

I would but, they’re ah dead.

How can you possibly get the idea that nature is uniform if you believe in a being who can overturn the laws of nature at will?

I get the idea from an understanding of God’s revelation, the question is, on what basis do YOU proceed with the assumption that nature is uniform? More simply, how do you know that the scientific principle is valid?

Cheers,

Sye; June 26, 2008 3:56 PM
dale said...: Verily, verily I say to you; He who argues with SyetemB will be sucked into a vortex of absolute circular death. Yes, death I say. He will suck your head to the size of a walnut. At that point, your head will reach critical mass by the formula, nothing devided by nothing is indeterminate. And then your head will explode. Yes, resist. I only engaged him until I needed glasses. If you know what I mean......just sayin'.

Just a friendly reminder. Care, /d; June 26, 2008 4:38 PM
jparenti said...: Careful there, Ray. Punishing the homosexuals with wildfires? You're dangerously close to sounding like Fred Phelps.; June 26, 2008 5:04 PM
Sye TenB said...: Dale said: ”Verily, verily I say to you; He who argues with SyetemB will be sucked into a vortex of absolute circular death. Yes, death I say. He will suck your head to the size of a walnut. At that point, your head will reach critical mass by the formula, nothing devided by nothing is indeterminate. And then your head will explode. Yes, resist. I only engaged him until I needed glasses. If you know what I mean......just sayin'.”

Thou dost engageth him until thou realizeth that thou hast no argument – eth. :-)

Like in that other thread where you said that you could prove that scientists exist. Still waiting for your proof there mister. But I dost not holdeth my breath. :-)

Cheereth,

Sye; June 26, 2008 5:30 PM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: Rufus said...
Keith:
You mean on the fringe dominionists such as D. James Kennedy?

Do you understand any of the phrases that Kennedy used?

He’s not advocating a theocracy. He’s not a Dominionist. If you want to read about true dominionism look up the Chalcedon Foundation. He’s preaching was for the Church to start acting like the Church and truly represent Christ in all areas of life. Notice that the phrase he used was “godly dominion.” Of course Christians can be an influence in what every field or vocation or position they are called to. And of course we want as many people saved as possible – but Christians know that we won’t win the lost through legislation. We want our government to do what is right - but that's not the Christian goal - to use the government to do the work of the Chruch. Kennedy also didn't want Levitical law to rule this land. He just wants to see our society to have the kind of spiritual revival and awakening that it has had in the past – and that’s not going to begin in the Whitehouse, but in the pews. Have you actually heard any full length sermon of Kennedy? Have you actually compared it to true Dominionists? Personally, I don’t agree with every thing He’s advocated, but he still has a right to express his opinion.

By the way. You're not an ex-atheist. You were never a true atheist. You were a false convert.

I didn’t know atheist called themselves “converts.” So maybe you’re right about me not being a true atheist (I’d like to hear your definition). After I first acknowledged the reality of God I knew that in the past I just hated Him for being so hidden. I realized that I was suppressing the truth of His existence. But I believe that’s true of all atheists, that they’re all false converts (if convert is the right word).

K.; June 26, 2008 5:41 PM
Dark Heart said...: Hello, once again Mr.Comfort

I am really disaponted that you did not post my question about homosexual marage in Canada. If your not comfortable talking about it in such an open forum then I would welcome a private email from you about it. My email is DarkHeart_696@hotmail.com and I welcome any coments you have about Homosexual marage in Canada and the fact that God has done nothing to stop it.

Thank you for your time once again.

Nicole; June 26, 2008 6:08 PM
Reynold said...: Sye TenB said...

Reynold said: ”Tell that to the ancient greeks, or the ancient chinese.”

I would but, they’re all dead.
In that case, I guess you'll have to crack open a few history books and learn something then, won't you? That's what I was trying to say in the first place, but it seems that sarcasm is beyond you.

Bottom line, your religion can not take credit for the scientific method or the uniformity one sees in nature. The greeks noticed it way before Paul brought his foreign religion into the mix.

How can you possibly get the idea that nature is uniform if you believe in a being who can overturn the laws of nature at will?

I get the idea from an understanding of God’s revelation,
Yeah, that's the same "revelation" that mentions that he likes to overturn the laws of nature when he wants to in the first place. You haven't answered the question at all.

the question is, on what basis do YOU proceed with the assumption that nature is uniform?
Because none of that stuff has ever been observed to happen in real life? That, and the fact that the scientific method is what has let us learn about how the world works around us. It's what's let us eventually come up with things like, oh, these computers that we're talking to each other on, as well as little things like medicine, CAT scans, etc, stuff that actually works to an extent, as opposed to, say, faith healing.

More simply, how do you know that the scientific principle is valid?
See what I just said above. How do you know that this "divine revelation" is valid? Seen any water turning into blood lately?

Think that by getting a few believers together you can arrange a demonstration of such a thing? Remember, the NT says that if several believers get together and pray for something at the same time that the prayer would be answered.; June 26, 2008 6:11 PM
Dark Heart said...: Mr. Comfort

I would like to apologise i'm sorry i have found my comment.

Once again i'm sorry

Thank you for taking the time to aprove it.; June 26, 2008 6:22 PM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: Reynold said...
Your deity can order babies and pregnant women killed, yet you still call him "holy" and "righteous".
___

Holy means “set apart”
Righteous means “does what is right”

God is set apart from us and only does what is right. Whenever someone dies whether by the direct hand of God, through the agency of another by God’s command, or in natural disaster, or in old age… death is death… God’s in control. It’s wrong for people to play God and take a life for there own personal reasons. You cannot take what isn’t yours. God has given only a few exceptions. War, capital punishment, and self-defense. God made those the rule, not us. A soul absent with the body is present with the Lord. So if God decides to bring judgment on an entire nation, since He gave them all life, He can take it away. God owns everyone – so He cannot ever be guilty of murder. You only see it as an immoral act because you don’t know God, you don’t know His goodness, and you don’t believe that He can make things right in the end. This world is not right at the moment – it is fallen, sin cursed, and awaiting death. God will make all of it right in the end.

Suppose if God made sure that no one died until after age 40. You can’t even imagine such a world – would that mean everyone is invincible until then? But suppose it could happen. Then you would still be complaining about those who only make it to 40 and not 100. You’d still judge God. The problem is still that you see God as a man who kills but then does nothing else. That’s not God. He can kill, but the soul lives in His presence, and there is also the promise of the resurrection, which means that only He has the power to give us a new life in a world with NO more death.

As far as babies, there is not a single example of a baby going to hell is Scripture. There is not a single example to indicate that a baby ought to repent and trust in the Savior. Jesus died for original sin, for sins, and for sinners. The first thing covers everyone conceived and born, but when they reach a point of rebellion, and they can understand the gospel, then they are accountable. Only God knows the age of accountability for personal sins, and He will be just (fair). So even if He takes the life of a young child or baby, I can rest assured knowing that my God is righteous, and I we will all see it perfectly when we stand before Him. You argument is based on a worldly point of view. It’s not considering that this life is only temporary but with God it’s eternal. It’s also not considering that God can do anything, including bring them back to life.

Hope that helps,
Keith; June 26, 2008 6:31 PM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: Reynold said...
So then if someone sells you a painting, he's still able to come to your house and wreck the painting whenever he wants? Are parents allowed to kill their kids?
___

The problem is that God’s never given us our own lives to do as we will. A painter can wreck his own painting – but not if he’s give ownership to someone else. God didn’t make Adam alive and say, “It’s you’re life now, do what you want with it.” He’s always kept the ownership – We’re the ones who said, “No – I want to run it myself, do my own thing, be my own boss.”

Also, the same is true with Children. God never told us that they are ours to do what we will (even though many do kill their unborn kids) but rather God has entrusted us with Children. They still belong to Him.

You said…
It's pretty hard when we have to follow the example of a being who doesn't follow his own rules. What's the name for someone who doesn't follow his own rules again?

It's not "morally consistent", that's for sure.
___

If you made some rules for your children:

No going outside without your dad.
Don't touch the stove.
No second desserts.
No driving the car on weekdays.
No talking back.

Are you going to follow them yourself (every single one of them) because after all, you don’t want to be a hypocrite and inconsistent with the example you set for your Children.

Some rules are wise for everyone – like don’t drive 100mph, don't lie, don't hit... But your rules for your children are for their good, not your own.

God made the rules for us – to protect us.
If he never made humans then murder would never be a moral issue. It’s only an issue for us – not God.

God can’t covet – He owns it all.
God can’t steal – again He owns the universe.
God can’t murder – He owns his creatures, He gave them life, He can take it back. (If you don’t like this truth it’s because you know you’re not ready to die; you’re not ready to meet God)
God can’t dishonor his mother and father – He didn’t have any, He’s eternal.

But yet as a man in Jesus Christ – God followed every single commandment. Why don't you look at the life of Christ for a moral judgment of God - then you can apply your "earthly" view of what God did as one of us - and then you'll see that God really is sinless.

K.; June 26, 2008 7:00 PM
Sye TenB said...: Reynold said: it seems that sarcasm is beyond you.

Au contraire :-)

Bottom line, your religion can not take credit for the scientific method or the uniformity one sees in nature.

Prove this please.

The greeks noticed it way before Paul brought his foreign religion into the mix.

Um, noticing uniformity and accounting for it are two different animals. Plus the question was on what basis do you PROCEED with the assumption that nature IS uniform, not WAS nature uniform in the PAST.

Yeah, that's the same "revelation" that mentions that he likes to overturn the laws of nature when he wants to in the first place.

Hmm, I know not of which revelation you speak. You haven’t read your Bible have you?

You haven't answered the question at all.

Sure I have, you just don’t happen to like my answer.

Okay, I asked: “On what basis do YOU proceed with the assumption that nature is uniform”

You ‘answered:’ “Because none of that stuff has ever been observed to happen in real life? That, and the fact that the scientific method is what has let us learn about how the world works around us. It's what's let us eventually come up with things like, oh, these computers that we're talking to each other on, as well as little things like medicine, CAT scans, etc, stuff that actually works to an extent, as opposed to, say, faith healing.”

Hey I agree, science has produced many wonderful things, the question was: On what basis do you proceed with the assumption that the scientific method is valid? Saying “Science is great” – now THAT is not an answer!

How do you know that this "divine revelation" is valid?

By the impossibility of the contrary. No other worldview can account for the uniformity of nature, or logic, morality etc. etc. [sarcasm]Why don’t you tell us that the uniformity of nature, logic, and morality are really cool, see how it works this time [/sarcasm]:-)

Cheers,

Sye; June 26, 2008 8:14 PM
Rob Penn said...: @ JOSHUA S. BLACK:

Rob Penn:
"@JOSHUA S. BLACK [who wrote to Iago]:

'Ray is Jewish. I thought you knew that.'

"Ray is of Jewish Decent. He's a Christian by faith.

"Gotta be careful to distinguish between the two."

The Apostle Paul didn't.

The Apostle Paul worked incredibly hard in the Book of Romans to build in the minds of the Roman Christians one group boundary;

Christian and Not Christian.

In Christ, and In Adam.

He most certainly made a distinction between some one who had faith in Christ and some one who didn't.

My appologies for the rudeness. I forsaw a semantics epedimic and sought to avoid it.; June 26, 2008 11:01 PM
Peetu said...: Understanding just the first statement in the response requires you to shake whatever is left of your rational thinking from your brain before you can comprehend it. Sye says, “Problem is, this very statement shows that you believe in the concept of ‘proof’ which itself is impossible without God.” Is Sye on crack or does he really thinks that God should be involved for any scientific proof to be possible? Lets say I am being pulled over and charged with DUI. I demand the police officer what proof they have when they charge me and he informs me that a blood test would be conducted to prove that I was drunk. I am guessing that the test results would contain the words “God tells me that he is drunk”. I was just being sarcastic here but lets carry on. Proof of anything requires, knowledge, logic, and truth. Yes I whole heartedly agree. Why do you need God to get involved whenever you are trying to scientifically prove something?

Sye just insists on a statement “concept of ‘proof’ which itself is impossible without God.” without suggesting a rationality behind his assumption. I am expected to swallow it with a glass of water. I apologize Sye, but if you would like to play the rationalist game, you better start mentioning the rationality behind your assumptions. When you eloborate it and base it on already proven scientific facts, it is called proof. I hope you don’t have to use the God variable to prove whatever you are saying.

Later, ” You see, science would not be possible if one did not proceed on the assumption that nature is uniform”. You see Sye, science does not proceed on assumptions at all. I think you should study some science before you make this comment. And “Nature is uniform” is a broad statement that can be interpreted to mean anything at all.

“Well, perhaps then you can tell us how you know that the reasoning with which you came to your rationalizations is itself rational”. Here is the answer, “Because anything is better than some story written in a desert a few thousand years ago”. Sye, you are suggesting that a more rational approach would be to not rationalise at all but to blindly believe everything that was written in a few thousand year old book that has no scientific basis. Would that be more rational? Let me send you another holy book written in India a few thousand years ago, it is full of dumb approaches to scientific problems. What would you do about this book? If this book says that you should kill anyone who works on a thursday, would you do that? The bible says you should kill anyone who works on a Sunday, and I do work 7 days a week. Would you kill me if you met me?

Let that go.

Alright Peter, what is the truth, and how do you know it? Right back at you, Sye. It would be quite interesting to hear you state the truth without rationalisation or proof.

Problem is Peter, they ain’t yours. If my genitals don’t belong to me, whom did I lease it from? Lol, ok lets discuss this seriously. I believe that you are suggesting that my body belongs to God or something similar in that direction. I cannot oppose that statement with any rationalisation. Actually that statement is so baseless and empty, all I can say is “You are dumb”.

Sye, you are used to just stating things without any proof or rationality behind it. I am not. Let me give you some food for thought. Here are some non-rationalistic :) statement from your Holy Book. Please let me know whether you do even see something wrong with them or if you find them all handsome and wonderful.

The Earth Doesn’t Move

You [God] fixed the earth on its foundation, never to be moved. (Psalm 104:5 NAB)

Does that seem to be infringing on a few scientific principles? You had said that concept of ‘proof’ which itself is impossible without God. Could you show where in the proof for the scientific fact that the earth goes around the sun is God involved. Please refer some science text books and see whether any proof involves a God.

You could actually quote the above from the bible and insist that science is wrong.

God Approves of Slavery

When the Lord has pity on Jacob and again chooses Israel and settles them on their own soil, the aliens will join them and be counted with the house of Jacob. The house of Israel will take them and bring them along to its place, and possess them as male and female slaves on the Lord’s soil, making captives of its captors and ruling over its oppressors. (Isaiah 14:1-2 NAB)

And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.(Exodus 21:20-21)

Does that seem to promote a lower level of morality than our current collective morality that does not accept slavery?

You want to know my world view. My world view includes many religions. It includes my friend Sreedevi’s opinion that Shiva is the maintainer and the ultimate destroyer of the universe. It includes my friend Ashwin’s faith that Bhrahma created the universe. It includes my viewpoint that scientific minds will eventually figure out exactly what happened. I am open to multiple viewpoints, even yours that says that the world was created in 6 days flat. Thankfully, I do not have the ego to claim that I know everything. I am in the search of knowledge through rationality. I think I knew everything once, back when I thought that everything I needed to know was already in the bible. Boy, was I wrong!; June 26, 2008 11:21 PM
Rufus said...: Keith:

Oh, okay. Kennedy wasn't really a Domionionst. And he only had Rushdoony and Gary North on his program because he so strongly disagreed with them. Gotcha. Thanks.

I was being facetious about not being a true atheist. I know that true believers, of any stripe, have to say and believe things like atheists only pretend that God doesn't exist, they just love their sin and want to continue sinning. It can never be that our disbelief and doubt is honest.; June 27, 2008 12:01 AM
Rufus said...: Rob Penn;

First, let me say, concerning some of the flack you've taken here recently, I'm glad we're not in the good old days. True believers knew how to make examples out of heretics like you back then.

I have a Christian friend who once compared "Biblical" slavery to being a butler or a maid. I laughed until I had a little accident.

Does that mean when the Israelites kept those virgin Midianite girls it was for purely "romantic, courtly love"?; June 27, 2008 12:10 AM
Reynold said...: Keith(ex-athiest)

God owns everyone – so He cannot ever be guilty of murder. You only see it as an immoral act because you don’t know God, you don’t know His goodness, and you don’t believe that He can make things right in the end.
I was one of you for about 14 years. Don't go making assumptions about what/who I do or do not know just because I disagree with you.

This world is not right at the moment – it is fallen, sin cursed, and awaiting death. God will make all of it right in the end.
Nice assumption. Except of course, for those who're maybe in hell because they never heard of him.

Nice way to get out of a murder rap. He can do whatever he wants, eh? Easy to be "sinless" and "righteous" when you have followers who will excuse your actions, no matter what.

Suppose if God made sure that no one died until after age 40. You can’t even imagine such a world – would that mean everyone is invincible until then? But suppose it could happen. Then you would still be complaining about those who only make it to 40 and not 100. You’d still judge God.
And you assume that because??? I'm only concerned with people who get killed by him before they die of old age or disease or the fault of man. Like babies, for instance. Aren't you "pro-life"?

It looks like it's not the action itself is wrong, it just depends on who does it.

The problem is still that you see God as a man who kills but then does nothing else. That’s not God. He can kill, but the soul lives in His presence, and there is also the promise of the resurrection, which means that only He has the power to give us a new life in a world with NO more death.
If you deity was smart, he'd have sent all the fallen angels into hell instead of letting them loose on earth to lead people astray. It's like dropping your kid off at a park where you know drug dealers and other criminals hang out, and then wondering why your kid gets into so much trouble while he's there.

As far as babies, there is not a single example of a baby going to hell is Scripture. There is not a single example to indicate that a baby ought to repent and trust in the Savior. Jesus died for original sin, for sins, and for sinners. The first thing covers everyone conceived and born, but when they reach a point of rebellion, and they can understand the gospel, then they are accountable. Only God knows the age of accountability for personal sins, and He will be just (fair). So even if He takes the life of a young child or baby, I can rest assured knowing that my God is righteous, and I we will all see it perfectly when we stand before Him. You argument is based on a worldly point of view. It’s not considering that this life is only temporary but with God it’s eternal. It’s also not considering that God can do anything, including bring them back to life.
Try reading ChristianAnswers net about that topic.

What is the eternal destiny of an infant or young child who dies? is the header for the article.

They go on to say: We cannot simply assume that children are "innocent" and are therefore exempt from the penalties of sin. The Bible teaches clearly that infants are in a state of sin and need to be regenerated. They, like all humanity, can be saved only through Christ.

Ps. 51:5 — "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me."

John 3:6 — "That which is born of the flesh is flesh."

Rom. 5:14 — "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the likeness of Adam's transgression."

In Matthew 19:14, Jesus warned against forbidding children to come to Him. This account testifies that children, just as adults, need to come to Christ.

They then just go on and make a bunch of assumptions like you do, ignoring the fact that the bible itself says that everyone needs "Christ" to get to heaven. The book made an absolute statement.

You talk a lot about me judging "God". What do you think you people do whenever you call him "righteous"? You use examples of things that people consider good as examples of his "righteousness" but whenever he does something that we consider "bad" well, it just doesn't count.

What would "God" have to do before you would say that what he did was wrong?

What we've got here is not a being who is moral by your standards, but one who's merely above the law.

That's different than being a moral being who follows the law himself.

Somehow, I knew you'd say what was coming up next:
Keith (ex-atheist) said...

Reynold said...
So then if someone sells you a painting, he's still able to come to your house and wreck the painting whenever he wants? Are parents allowed to kill their kids?

The problem is that God’s never given us our own lives to do as we will. A painter can wreck his own painting – but not if he’s give ownership to someone else. God didn’t make Adam alive and say, “It’s you’re life now, do what you want with it.” He’s always kept the ownership – We’re the ones who said, “No – I want to run it myself, do my own thing, be my own boss.”

Also, the same is true with Children. God never told us that they are ours to do what we will (even though many do kill their unborn kids) but rather God has entrusted us with Children. They still belong to Him.
You seem to have missed the part about where the owner is obligated to protect them...putting people in the same place where he's exiled the "fallen angels" so they could mislead him seems a real bang-up way to do things.

That kind of shoots down your "God made the rules to protect us" thing, doesn't it? He set up a self-defeating scenerio
God made the rules for us – to protect us.
If he never made humans then murder would never be a moral issue. It’s only an issue for us – not God.

God can’t covet – He owns it all.
God can’t steal – again He owns the universe.
God can’t murder – He owns his creatures, He gave them life, He can take it back. (If you don’t like this truth it’s because you know you’re not ready to die; you’re not ready to meet God)
God can’t dishonor his mother and father – He didn’t have any, He’s eternal.
So what would he have to do then, before you'd consider an action of his to be immoral? It's easy to be sinless when any action you do is summarily excused.

You have a being who is not moral, but rather just above the law. That's not the same thing.

But yet as a man in Jesus Christ – God followed every single commandment. Why don't you look at the life of Christ for a moral judgment of God - then you can apply your "earthly" view of what God did as one of us - and then you'll see that God really is sinless.
Thanks for the opening:

Since I'm lazy, I'll just refer you to Nontract #12
Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. or maybe From the Internet Infidels site, an interesting article On Musonius Rufus: A Brief Essay (1999); June 27, 2008 1:36 AM
Reynold said...: Whoops. That was stupid of me: to say: They then just go on and make a bunch of assumptions like you do, ignoring the fact that the bible itself says that everyone needs "Christ" to get to heaven. The book made an absolute statement.. The Christian Answers people explicity admit that all need to accept "Christ" before they can get to heaven. That's why I quoted them in the first place.

They just make the same assumptions that you do that things'll somehow work out in the end. That's what I was going to say.; June 27, 2008 1:41 AM
weemaryanne said...: This post has been removed by the author.; June 27, 2008 2:53 AM
Pandammonium said...: Keith said:

God can’t dishonor his mother and father – He didn’t have any, He’s eternal.

So where did he come from, then?

--

Ray insinuated that God punishes people in gay marriages by fire caused by the lightning from thunder storms without rain. That's an interesting way of putting it. The people in the Midwest are fighting floods, but "[g]uess who gives the rain" - I think the answer Ray's looking for here is "God". God gives the rain to these good people in the Midwest. Is that their reward? Does that mean Noah was a baddie after all?

Anyway, I digress. Assuming that God uses what I call acts of nature as punishment for gay marriages, let's look at my country, the UK.

The UK made civil partnership legal in December 2005. A civil partnership is more or less the same thing as a gay marriage. The highest number of provisional ceremonies booked at that time was in Brighton and Hove, so that's clearly the city in the UK that's most evil with respect to homosexuality.

Since December 2005, we have had three earthquakes, one in Lincolnshire, one in Kent and one in Dumfries and Galloway, none of which were particularly dreadful. Let me assure you, however, Brighton and Hove is not in any of these places, although I suppose it's quite near Kent.

We have a lot of tornadoes, relative to our size, in the UK, but there haven't been any that I am aware of that have struck Brighton and Hove. Since December 2005, there has been only one, and in London, which I suppose isn't that from Brighton, but it's not exactly adjacent.

So, what's happening here? Assuming God is punishing people for having gay marriages, he's either punishing innocent people for these sinful homosexuals' acts or he has a bad aim, but that can't be it because he's omnipotent, so he must have meant to hit those other places. Removing the assumption, maybe some acts of nature happened because of plate tectonics and air currents and things like that.

Oh, I know what it must be! You know at school when someone does something bad, and they won't own up, so the teacher punishes the whole class? He's making gay people feel bad for what they're doing because it's causing other people to suffer.

But what I don't get is why he made gay people in the first place, if he's that bothered. Or, in fact, any people at all, if he knew it would all all go to pot, which of course, he did, because he's omniscient.

(I'd back my statements up with references, but I can't because links are disallowed, apparently, from comments. You'll just have to do your own search. I used Wikipedia and the BBC's website.); June 27, 2008 4:08 AM
Pandammonium said...: Reynold said:
You talk a lot about me judging "God". What do you think you people do whenever you call him "righteous"? You use examples of things that people consider good as examples of his "righteousness" but whenever he does something that we consider "bad" well, it just doesn't count.

In other words, people are using non-Godly morality to determine whether or not something is good or bad, and hence, we don't need a deity or divine book to tell us right from wrong: we already know.; June 27, 2008 4:20 AM
Sye TenB said...: Alright Peetu,

Like all the non-Christians I debate here, you conveniently failed to answer some of my questions, the most important of which is: How do you know that the reasoning with which you came to your rationalizations is itself rational? You avoided that question because you realize that the answer would undermine your entire worldview.

Still, though, I will address your post in the hopes that you will actually respond to my questions.

Lets say I am being pulled over and charged with DUI. I demand the police officer what proof they have when they charge me and he informs me that a blood test would be conducted to prove that I was drunk. I am guessing that the test results would contain the words “God tells me that he is drunk”. I was just being sarcastic here but lets carry on.

No, it would not contain those words, but it would contain the assumption that nature is uniform, which cannot be accounted for outside of God. You see, if one did not assume the uniformity of nature, one could not proceed on the basis that the breathalizer would produce an accurate result.

Proof of anything requires, knowledge, logic, and truth. Yes I whole heartedly agree. Why do you need God to get involved whenever you are trying to scientifically prove something?

Well, if you had even attempted to answer my questions from the last post, you would see that you cannot account for ANY of those concepts without God. Let me try again:
1. How is it possible for you to know anything?
2. How do you account for the universal, abstract, invariant laws of logic?
3. How do you know anything to be true?

Sye just insists on a statement “concept of ‘proof’ which itself is impossible without God.” without suggesting a rationality behind his assumption. I am expected to swallow it with a glass of water. I apologize Sye, but if you would like to play the rationalist game, you better start mentioning the rationality behind your assumptions.

I did, you just ignored it. Scientific proof requires knowledge, logic, truth, and an assumption that nature is uniform, none of which can be accounted for outside of God, and is accounted for in His nature, and His promises.

I said: “You see, science would not be possible if one did not proceed on the assumption that nature is uniform”.

You answered: ”You see Sye, science does not proceed on assumptions at all. I think you should study some science before you make this comment.”

You have a poor understanding of science. The very foundation of science is inductive reasoning, or the assumption that nature is uniform. If you put two chemicals together one day, you proceed with the expectation that those two chemicals under identical circumstances, will produce the same chemical reaction the next day. When we put someone in a rocket to send them to the moon, we don’t say, “I wonder what will happen wen we push this button?” We expect that pushing of that button will produce the same results that it had in testing. If something goes wrong, we don’t assume that the science has changed, but that something affected the process.

And “Nature is uniform” is a broad statement that can be interpreted to mean anything at all.

Try this, “The expectation that scientific principles which apply today, will apply tomorrow.” That is the basis of ALL science, and as I said, a basis which has no foundation outside of God.

Alright I asked: “Well, perhaps then you can tell us how you know that the reasoning with which you came to your rationalizations is itself rational?”

You answered: “Because anything is better than some story written in a desert a few thousand years ago”.

Problem is, you don’t offer ‘anything,’ you offer ‘nothing.’ Please tell us, how you know that your reasoning is rational?

Sye, you are suggesting that a more rational approach would be to not rationalise at all

Nope, rationality is a gift from God, and He demands it of us.

Would that be more rational?

Well, since you haven’t given us a justification for the rationality of your reasoning, we can’t even compare.

Let me send you another holy book written in India a few thousand years ago, it is full of dumb approaches to scientific problems. What would you do about this book?

Actually I know those books have zero authority, so I’d disregard them.

”The bible says you should kill anyone who works on a Sunday, and I do work 7 days a week. Would you kill me if you met me?”

There are no laws against working on a Sunday in the Bible. The laws against working on the SABBATH were fulfilled in Christ.

I asked: ”Alright Peter, what is the truth, and how do you know it?”

You answered: ”Right back at you, Sye.”

Um, where is YOUR answer. What is truth and how do YOU know it? My answer is simple: Jesus said: “I am the way, and the TRUTH, and the life. No one comes to the father except through me.”

If my genitals don’t belong to me, whom did I lease it from?

Your whole body is God’s.

”The Earth Doesn’t Move
You [God] fixed the earth on its foundation, never to be moved. (Psalm 104:5 NAB)”

You simply do not understand poetic language. Last time I checked the newspaper gave the times for the sunrise, and sunset. You don’t suppose the people who wrote that actually believe that the sun rises and sets do you???

God Approves of Slavery

Well, equating Biblical slavery with modern day slavery would just show ignorance of history. Still though, by what absolute standard do YOU say that slavery at ANY time is wrong?

”Does that seem to promote a lower level of morality than our current collective morality that does not accept slavery?”

Problem is, when you compare two different views on morality, you compare them to a ‘real’ standard. One cannot call one line straighter than another if one has no concept of a straight line. Peter, what is the ‘straight line’ of morality (the absolute standard) according to YOUR worldview?

You want to know my world view.

Nope, just want to know how you account for things ACCORDING to your pick and choose, made-up worldview.

Cheers,

Sye; June 27, 2008 6:48 AM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: Reynold said...
I was one of you for about 14 years.
__
There are plenty of examples of why I know you never were a Christian.

1) A Christian knows the Lord. (Jeremiah 31:34) Did you know Him?
2) A Christian does not fall away from the faith.(1 John 2:19)
3) A Christian doesn’t need to excuse God’s actions, because he knows the faithfulness and trustworthiness of the Lord.
But you say… Easy to be "sinless" and "righteous" when you have followers who will excuse your actions, no matter what.

I don’t doubt that maybe you were good at going through the motions of Church, and saying the right words… but it’s clear in the Bible that you weren't a Christian.

You said…
It looks like it's not the action itself is wrong, it just depends on who does it.
___
Who’s done it, why they do it, and maybe other extenuating factors make a difference. That’s why I use the cop shooting a criminal illustration often.

A life God takes or allows to die young, He can actually use it for His glory. There are countless testimonies of parents who lost a child (I’ve known some) and it was a very rough time in their lives – but in the end, they are closer to God then ever before, they are more spiritual and more sensitive and companionate than others who never face adversity. They also know that God will be just, they will see that little one again, and their faith is stronger then most. They love God more than ever because they know life doesn’t end in death. Their testimonies are a blessing to the body of Christ. They prove that God is our comfort, that He is real, and that He is all we have.

The fact that God can still be glorified when the world around us is falling beneath our feet shows the power of the gospel and the perseverance of Gods people. Just like what He did on the cross. From an atheist point of view an innocent man (maybe you’d say Jesus was a little crazy) but never broke the law, never committed a crime – and yet He was beaten, mocked, and crucified. You might also recall that in Isaiah God says that “It pleased Him to bruise His Son.” And so we learn that it was God who ordained this all. If you stop there the cross looks like a symbol of death, of immorality, or hopelessness – but God used the wickedest event of history – the death of His Son – and made it also the most glorious event of all time. He took a man made invention of death and of sin and of judgment and turned it into a symbol of forgiveness, of hope, of eternal life. As Paul taught, I will only glory in the cross of my Savior. Only God could do something like that – and only God can make the death of baby or of anyone not in vain.

K.; June 27, 2008 7:30 AM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: @Reynold

With the issue of the age of accountability – I’ve gone back and forth. With children, I do believe that it’s younger then most people think. But with babies Dr. Albert Mohler wrote a great article on the subject that I would agree with. It can be found in google if you type “The Salvation of the Little Ones Albert Mohler”

You asked…
What would "God" have to do before you would say that what he did was wrong?

The second he did something wrong he’d no longer be God. That’s like asking, What would a vegan have to do before you would say that they can also eat meat? The second they eat meat their no longer a vegan. My analogy is a little simplistic but I hope you see the point.

I’ll give you an honest answer. If God ignored sin, doesn’t care about justice, lets everyone into heaven for no reason, then I’d see Him as corrupt and immoral – Like a judge letting every criminal in His court room leave unpunished.

You say…
What we've got here is not a being who is moral by your standards, but one who's merely above the law.

YES! My moral standards and everyone else is weak and shallow. God is above the law because He made the laws. He’s not bound by time, gravity, or any physical law. He also cannot brake any moral law, because either they don’t apply to Him or because such a law comes out of His very nature. God can’t lie – because that moral law is a part of His very being. If God were as evil as you think, then He would be the Devil – and yet why even have us obey any laws at all? If God is as cruel as you think, they why does He even care about us being righteous? What do you think God’s motives are from you’re point of view?; June 27, 2008 7:58 AM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: @Reynold said…

You seem to have missed the part about where the owner is obligated to protect them...putting people in the same place where he's exiled the "fallen angels" so they could mislead him seems a real bang-up way to do things.
That kind of shoots down your "God made the rules to protect us" thing, doesn't it? He set up a self-defeating scenario.

That would be true if the Bible stopped there. You’re missing half the story. If all we had was the rules, the law; if all we had was our own righteousness; if all we had was God’s “set-up” then, yes, we would have all failed without hope. But you are deliberately only pulling out what you don’t like about God. You are deliberately ignoring the other half of God’s message. This is why your argument doesn’t hold up – You try to make God’s character inconsistent, but really it’s your argument that’s inconsistent because you’re not looking at the full character of God and the full work of God. Read the Bible.

Enjoy you day,
Keith; June 27, 2008 8:17 AM
Pandammonium said...: Keith(ex-atheist) said: God is above the law because He made the laws.

In the UK, laws are made by politicians. Are you seriously suggesting they are above the law because they made it? If so, there are serious ramifications well beyond the is-there-a-god/isn't-there-a-god debate.

Luckily, in the UK, everyone - including politicians and royalty - has to live by the same laws in this country (despite what Rowan Williams has to say about Sharia law).; June 27, 2008 9:18 AM
verandoug said...: Nowadays, we try to behave a bit more decent towards our fellow humans.

Earth to C3POR2D2. Come in please.

You can't be serious? There are just as many people being tortured today as there ever was. What you are talking about is this nation. See persecution dot org for more details.

Vera; June 27, 2008 9:31 AM
verandoug said...: And it says that where in the Bible? Or did you just make that up like you do most of what you say?

Yet another low blow from our dear sweet dale. :-)

Sometimes it is too much to share so much information but you are right, it is necessary to prove what I say is true.

Revelations 11:18 says, "And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.

This is my personal favorite, And he shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

Matthew 25:32 is yet another.

Vera; June 27, 2008 9:45 AM
Reynold said...: Keith (ex-atheist) said...

@Reynold said…

You seem to have missed the part about where the owner is obligated to protect them...putting people in the same place where he's exiled the "fallen angels" so they could mislead him seems a real bang-up way to do things.
That kind of shoots down your "God made the rules to protect us" thing, doesn't it? He set up a self-defeating scenario.

That would be true if the Bible stopped there. You’re missing half the story. If all we had was the rules, the law; if all we had was our own righteousness; if all we had was God’s “set-up” then, yes, we would have all failed without hope. But you are deliberately only pulling out what you don’t like about God. You are deliberately ignoring the other half of God’s message.
Thanks for lying about me. Just more evidence of your self-righteousness. Anyone with a working brain who's willing to use it instead of making baseless accusations will know why I didn't mention it; everyone and his dog in the entire western hemisphere and many people elsewhere already know the part I "deliberately" left out...the so-called "way to heaven" called "accepting Christ".

Guess what? It doesn't make a lick of difference to my case.

For an example of my point which, for you, I will mention the "resurrection"...oodles of people lived and died in the new world after the "Resurrection" yet before the missionaries came. According to your own bible, unless they knew and accepted "Christ", they're hellbound.

Like I said, it's a messed up system. Perhaps if he hadn't dumped the fallen angels onto the same planet with his creation that he "loved" so much, maybe, just maybe none of this would have happened in the first place.

Even if "adam" still disobeyed, we wouldn't have the "snares and temptations" the devil is supposed to be throwing in our path. Less people would be hellbound, I'm sure.

Besides, I can throw your argument back in your face: You're only pulling out the parts of the bible that put your "God" in a good light.

This is why your argument doesn’t hold up – You try to make God’s character inconsistent, but really it’s your argument that’s inconsistent because you’re not looking at the full character of God and the full work of God.
I have. Look above. As I said, it doesn't really help your case. If a person is truly moral, don't you think that their behaviour would be a little more, oh you know, consistent?

Read the Bible.
I have. It's not my fault you just look at the parts of it that make him look good, and excuse the parts that don't.

Try thinking while you read your bible.; June 27, 2008 9:47 AM
Keith (ex-atheist) said...: Pandammonium said...
Keith(ex-atheist) said: God is above the law because He made the laws.
In the UK, laws are made by politicians. Are you seriously suggesting they are above the law because they made it?

But aren’t some of their laws for certain people at certain times. Age limits for driving, for marriage, for drinking; areas that are restricted to certain personal, the right to make an arrest or to use force in a certain situation. Not everyone is subjected to every law equally. God is not subject to the Sabbath law because He is the Lord of the Sabbath. God is not subjected to the Honor His mother and father law – but as man He would be and He was. I've been here making the point that God is morally perfect - and the only way to find fault in Him is to take His laws out of context or apply the ones that don’t apply to Him. When the atheists do that – they’re lying about God.

K.; June 27, 2008 10:01 AM
Reynold said...: Keith:
You say…
What we've got here is not a being who is moral by your standards, but one who's merely above the law.

YES! My moral standards and everyone else is weak and shallow.
Not really, you just refuse to apply any to him. That doesn't make your standards shallow. It doesn't make his better.

God is above the law because He made the laws. He’s not bound by time, gravity, or any physical law. He also cannot brake any moral law, because either they don’t apply to Him or because such a law comes out of His very nature.
How can you tell it's in his nature if he himself doesn't have to obey them?

If the law comes out of his nature, then why doesn't he obey them? If they're a part of his nature then he wouldn't do stuff like baby killing, etc. as described in the OT...his nature would prevent it.

As I tried to say, you're describing a being who is "amoral", not moral. Yet you still declare him "moral" even though you admitted earlier that there's nothing that he could do that you would call "immoral".

God can’t lie – because that moral law is a part of His very being.
Yes he can...remember the story he told Samuel to use as an excuse in case Saul or his men caught him when he was on his way to baptize David? Or in the NT when Jesus at one point said that he wasn't going to be going to some person's house, but then it said that he just went up there later?

If God were as evil as you think, then He would be the Devil
It may interest you to know that there aren't any verses in the bible that has the devil ordering the deaths of women and babies...that may be assumed from the practices of the "amelekites" but it's only presumed...

– and yet why even have us obey any laws at all? If God is as cruel as you think, they why does He even care about us being righteous?
If he's as righteous as you think, why set up such an inefficient system? Why not have the fallen angels chained in hell from the get to instead of running around on earth where he put man? Why not have had his "angels" proclaim the "good news" to the people of the New World at the time of Jesus's supposed birth?

Just more evidence that the bible is just man made. Surely a loving god would have done all that. If not, why not?

What do you think God’s motives are from you’re point of view?

From my point of view, "God" doesn't exist...the laws were made up in a time of primitive savagery to keep the people in line. As time and technology went on, less extremem measures were necessary, so the laws got tempered. Compare the OT with the NT.; June 27, 2008 10:16 AM

«Oldest ‹Older 1 – 200 of 285 Newer› Newest»