Why You Should Not Marry a Muslim

Recently, I received a few emails from women who said they are in love with a Muslim man and wanted my opinion.

One thing you should know about Muslims is that you should never trust them. This blanket statement does not sound politically correct, but it is a fact. They say you can’t paint an entire population of 1.5 billion people with the same broad brush. You can. That is a politically correct statement and it is total nonsense. Here are a few generalized true statements.

  • Vegetarians don’t eat meat.
  • Nordic people are white.
  • Blinds don’t see.
  • Fat people are overweight.
  • Thieves are dishonest.

As you see you can generalize. And the fact that you must not trust a Muslim is a general fact. No Muslim should be trusted specially when it comes to Muslim men wooing non Muslim women.

Ask the most “open minded” liberal and irreligious Muslim who drinks and does not pray what they think of the verse 4:34 in Quran that prescribes abusing one’s wife verbally, psychologically and beating her if the husband fears that she may be thinking of disobeying him? Note that the wife does not have to actually disobey her husband, his paranoia that she may be thinking of disobeying him is enough for him to abuse her and beat the crap out of her.

Wife beating tutorial

Umar reported the prophet as saying: “A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife”. (Hadith Of The Sunan Of Abu Dawud, Chapter 709 – On Beating Women, #2142).

Not a single Muslim country recognizes rape of one’s wife. If a man wants to have intercourse, the wife must comply even if she is sick.

And here are two more gems from the Prophet.

“It is not permissible for a human being to prostrate to another human being. Were it permissible for a human being to prostrate to another human being, I would have commanded the woman to prostrate to her husband because of his great right upon her. By the One in Whose hand is my soul, if he (the husband) had, from his feet to the top of his head, an ulcer oozing blood and pus, and she came to lick it off for him, she would not have fulfilled his right.” (Recorded in Ahmad and al-Nasa’i,)

Abu Sa’id al-Khudri narrated Muhammad saying, “A husband’s right upon his wife is such that if he had an ulcer and she licked it for him, she would not fulfill his right by that.”

First the Quran limits the rights and the power of women to be independent and earn their living by restricting their movement, dress and interaction in the world. Then 4:34 says men are superior to women because they provide for them and as such women must obey their husbands and be grateful to them. Then it prescribes verbal, psychological and corporal abuse.

Ask any Muslim what they think of this verse and whether the are willing to denounce it. Then watch how they lie and beat around the bushes in order to deny the obvious meaning of this verse or minimize its effect. The most ridiculous part of their denial is when they tell you you can only beat her with toothbrush.

The Quran prescribes lying and deceiving the non-Muslims http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/taqiyya.aspx

The Quran prescribes violence and terror. All Muslims believe in every word of the Quran. No Muslim will denounce a single word of the Quran. You don’t have to be Aristotle or an expert in syllogism and deductive reasoning to put the two together and come to the conclusion that you should not trust Muslims. All of them lie. All of them are deceitful. They even lie to me and think they can get away with it. For Muslims lying to advance their faith is a holy deed. It is woven in their psyche. They grow with it and do it naturally. Just as you are taught to smile when your eyes lock with the eyes of a stranger, Muslims are taught to lie to non-Muslims.

There are no moderate Muslims. There are also no radical Muslims. All Muslims believe in the same book, every word of it. They just practice it to different extents. We call those who follow their faith to the letter radical and the wish-washy ones moderate. There is only one Islam: The Islam of Muhammad and the Quran. It is the only Islam that matters. The rest is a bunch of lies. This Islam is violent. It instructs the believer to lie to the unbelievers, to cast terror in their hearts and to murder them.

Muslim men are on the hunt for non-Muslim women so that they convert them to Islam or produce Muslim children. This is called love jihad. It has nothing to do with love, because these men will kill your freedom and suck your vitality. It is about expanding Islam and you are only a tool.

Muslim men are misogynist by their upbringing. They can’t respect there wives. They have not seen it in their own families and societies. It is not part of their psyche. The concept of equality between men and women is alien to them. Believe me I had to adjust to it myself and I did not come from a fanatical Muslim family.

The chances of having loving and meaningful relationship based on mutual respect with a Muslim man is slim. Your chance of having a successful marriage with a non-Muslim is about 50%. Half of marriages end in divorce. Your chance of having a successful and happy marriage with a Muslim man is less than one percent. Why take that risk?

We are all children of God. There is a piece of God in all of us. Islam has killed that spirit in Muslim. What is left in them is the darkness of the Devil. You marry a Muslim, you’ll regret for the rest of your life. Once you have a child with him, you may as well kiss goodbye your freedom. The Muslim man will snatch your happiness, destroy your hopes and reduces you into a shadow of yourself. You enter in a marriage with a Muslim man, you enter in a hell.

But love blinds. I hope there is enough common-sense left in you to save your soul and your life before it is late. Do it for your unborn children. You can throw your life to dogs if that is your choice, but you have no right to destroy the future and happiness of your future children.

Ali Sina

Ali Sina is the author of Understanding Muhammad and Muslims.

85 Responses

  1. blitz2b says:

    Steve says “…That’s right it just a model. The point is not that the model is right the point is this model shows that the universe can have a “beginning” but yet no cause….”
    … which means unless we have evidence of a universe creating itself from nothing, it requires “faith” to keep it afloat. Which seems is like what you are doing to promote it.

    quote “…The Big Bang model doesn’t involve “creation” so this person is talking nonsense….”
    The Big Bang may not “involve creation”, however, it certainly implies it. Nothing never ever produces nothing… and this is fact is not exclusive within the universe only.
    Sure, anyone who doesn’t agree with you, speaks nonsense… right? This person is an astrophysicist, what are your credentials?

    Steve says “.. In either case, “the Big Bang” as an event is also colloquially referred to as the “birth” of our universe since it represents the point in history where the universe can be verified to have entered into a regime where the laws of physics as we understand them..”

    You just agreed with me here… I believe in your copy/past frenzy, you are doing a whole spin doctoring and tail chasing here…. Admit it,

    In response to Leibnez’s cosmological argument, Steve says ” …” The universe is not a contingent thing therefore this argument fails.
    con·tin·gent
    kənˈtinjənt/Submit
    adjective
    1.
    subject to chance.
    “the contingent nature of the job”
    synonyms: chance, accidental, fortuitous, possible, unforeseeable, unpredictable, random, haphazard
    “contingent events”

    Well you obviously didn’t think this one through…. if you have ruled out ” Random Chance” as the originator of the universe, what do you have left….. intelligence?

    Cheers!

  2. blitz2b says:

    Steve says “…“Jewish sources report the Jewish reaction to Jesus and reveal they believed his miracles were sourced in malevolent power.” What sources are these?…”
    You seem to gloss over a lot … the source was mentioned in the same article…

    Scholars have identified the following references in the Talmud that some conclude refer to Jesus:[81]

    Jesus as a sorcerer with disciples (b Sanh 43a-b)
    Healing in the name of Jesus (Hul 2:22f; AZ 2:22/12; y Shab 124:4/13; QohR 1:8; b AZ 27b)
    As a Torah teacher (b AZ 17a; Hul 2:24; QohR 1:8)
    As a son or disciple that turned out badly (Sanh 103a/b; Ber 17b)
    As a frivolous disciple who practiced magic and turned to idolatry (Sanh 107b; Sot 47a)
    Jesus’ punishment in afterlife (b Git 56b, 57a)
    Jesus’ execution (b Sanh 43a-b)
    Jesus as the son of Mary (Shab 104b, Sanh 67a)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_the_Talmud

    Joseph Klausner, a Jewish researcher, sums up some of the conclusions which can be drawn from the Talmudic theories about Jesus: “There are some reliable theories regarding the fact that his name was Yeshua (Yeshu) of Nazareth; that he practised sorcery (that is to say that he performed miracles, as was common in those days) and seduction and led Israel astray; that he mocked the words of the wise and discussed Scripture in the same way as the Pharisees; that he had five disciples; that he said he had not come to revoke the Law, nor to add anything to it; that he was hung upon a piece of wood (crucified) as a false authority and seducer on the eve of the Passover (which fell on a Saturday); and that his disciples cured disease in his name” (J.Klausner, Jesus of Nazareth, p.44)

    Steve says “,,,Also Ehrman believes all of the miracles and resurrection etc are made up (something that you seem to forget)…”
    Forget? really?….
    This is what I said on blitz2b April 5, 2017 at 11:48 pm
    “….“…Erhman, a former fundamentalist Christian turned agnostic, HAS WRITTEN NUMEROUS BOOKS CHALLENGING TRADITIONAL VIEWS OF THE BIBLE HIMSELF…”
    Nevertheless, what Ehrman believes about the miracles and resurrection is irrelevant to the discussion. He believes Jesus exists and has thoroughly debunked your mythicists gurus.

    Steve says “… I don’t give a damn about these people’s opinions – I WANT EVIDENCE for the existence of Jesus….”

    My friend, are you sincere in this quest? ….. if so please take a few minutes of your time and watch this video.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oN2EKL7E2Vg

    Homicide and acclaimed detective J. Warner Wallace speaks on the evidence of Christianity. J. Warner was a conscientious and vocal atheist until the age of thirty-five, when he took a serious and expansive look at the evidence for the Christian Worldview and determined that Christianity was demonstrably true.

    http://coldcasechristianity.com
    http://coldcasechristianity.com/2017/the-case-for-the-historicity-and-deity-of-jesus/

    contd..

  3. Face_The_Truth says:

    Question: Why a non-Muslim woman should not marry a Muslim man?

    Answer: The reason why non-Muslim women should NOT marry Muslim men is Muslim men lose interest so quickly!

    =====================================================================

    Janet Jackson’s billionaire soon-to-be ex-husband Wissam al’Mana penned a touching message to his estranged wife and mother of his child.

    “To the most beautiful person in the world, thank you for your divine love, your eternal support and for being my best friend,” Wissam al’Mana, 42, wrote on his personal website recently under the title “Love”.

    “I love you so much, insha’Allah we will be together in the Great Forever x.”

    LINK

    http://pagesix.com/2017/04/16/wissam-al-mana-pens-message-to-janet-jackson-after-split/?_ga=1.186842216.1511534679.1492285342

    =====================================================================

  4. Hesperado says:

    Whatever happened to “Liberated One”, a female Muslima who left Islam some time back in 2011, to great fanfare on Jihad Watch, and created a blog called “Liberated”? Many readers at the time (myself included) felt she was underestimating the danger she was in, living in a Muslim country, inviting her Christian boyfriend to her family’s house for dinner, and telling her family that she left Islam. Her last post, apparently, was on 2013, titled “Stressed”. The mystery is not only what happened to her — but why has she not been mentioned at all in the Counter-Jihad? Not a word since 2013 from Spencer and Ali Sina about her predicament. Three years ago, I posted a brief essay asking these questions — http://hesperado.blogspot.com/2014/07/whatever-happened-to-liberated.html — (and of course, heard nothing back but crickets…)

    Has she been killed? Is she is deep hiding? After all the fanfare about her from 2011 to 2013, suddenly nothing. Very strange.

  5. Steve says:

    Blitz

    Steve says ~…Big Bang model holds that the universe is boundless and developed from a singularity. In this model the universe is completely self contained and does not rely on any eternal cause…~
    “What you suggest here is just a PROPOSAL put forth by Hartle/Hawkings
    …In theoretical physics, the Hartle–Hawking state, named after James Hartle and Stephen Hawking, is a proposal concerning the state of the universe prior to the Planck epoch….” That’s right it just a model. The point is not that the model is right the point is this model shows that the universe can have a “beginning” but yet no cause.

    Agnostic astrophysicist Dr. Robert Jastrow “Astronomers now find they have painted themselves into a corner because they have proven, by their own methods, that the world began abruptly in an act of creation to which you can trace the seeds of every star, every planet, every living thing in this cosmos and on the earth. . . .That there are what I or anyone would call supernatural forces at work is now, I think, a scientifically proven fact” The Big Bang model doesn’t involve “creation” so this person is talking nonsense.

    quote `….Beginnings (and “causes”) only apply to things inside the universe not the universe itself understand this difference….`
    Wow really?… Is this your hypothesis oh wise one? then it is in stark contradiction to what Hawking himself said
    `…The conclusion of this lecture is that the universe has not existed forever. Rather, THE UNIVERSE AND, AND TIME ITSELF, HAD A BEGINNING in the Big Bang, about 15 billion years ago. The beginning of real time, would have been a singularity, at which the laws of physics would have broken down…` The so called beginning is simple the moment in which you cannot trace the expansion of the universe further back.” In either case, “the Big Bang” as an event is also colloquially referred to as the “birth” of our universe since it represents the point in history where the universe can be verified to have entered into a regime where the laws of physics as we understand them (specifically general relativity and the standard model of particle physics) work.”https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang
    As the Wikipedia article says “Beginnings are entities that have to do with time; because time did not exist before the Big Bang, the concept of a beginning of the universe is meaningless. According to the Hartle–Hawking proposal, the universe has no origin as we would understand it: the universe was a singularity in both space and time, pre-Big Bang. Thus, the Hartle–Hawking state universe has no beginning, but it is not the steady state universe of Hoyle; it simply has no initial boundaries in time nor space.”

    Take a look at this argument…
    Leibniz’s cosmological argument
    1.Any contingent fact about the world must have an
    explanation. (Principle of sufficient reason)
    2.The fact that there are contingent things can’t be
    explained by any contingent things.
    3.The fact that there are contingent things must
    have an explanation. (1,2)
    4. It is a contingent fact that there are contingent
    things.
    5.The fact that there are contingent things must be
    explained by something whose existence is not
    contingent. (3,4)
    6.There is a necessary being. (5)” The universe is not a contingent thing therefore this argument fails.

  6. blitz2b says:

    Steve says ~…Big Bang model holds that the universe is boundless and developed from a singularity. In this model the universe is completely self contained and does not rely on any eternal cause…~

    What you suggest here is just a PROPOSAL put forth by Hartle/Hawkings
    …In theoretical physics, the Hartle–Hawking state, named after James Hartle and Stephen Hawking, is a proposal concerning the state of the universe prior to the Planck epoch….

    Many such proposals have been put forward like the M- theory and string theory, to eliminate the need for a causal agent.

    Agnostic astrophysicist Dr. Robert Jastrow “Astronomers now find they have painted themselves into a corner because they have proven, by their own methods, that the world began abruptly in an act of creation to which you can trace the seeds of every star, every planet, every living thing in this cosmos and on the earth. . . .That there are what I or anyone would call supernatural forces at work is now, I think, a scientifically proven fact”

    quote `…Because of this the Big Bang doesn’t need a cause, it’s like asking what’s north of the North Pole?..`

    Oh brother here you go incorrectly paraphrasing again… I believe it was Hawking who said `… it is like asking what is south of the south pole?…`
    I could easily tell you what is North of the North Pole…. the North Star, used as a navigational reference point… your`e welcome!

    quote `….Beginnings (and “causes”) only apply to things inside the universe not the universe itself understand this difference….`

    Wow really?… Is this your hypothesis oh wise one? then it is in stark contradiction to what Hawking himself said
    `…The conclusion of this lecture is that the universe has not existed forever. Rather, THE UNIVERSE AND, AND TIME ITSELF, HAD A BEGINNING in the Big Bang, about 15 billion years ago. The beginning of real time, would have been a singularity, at which the laws of physics would have broken down…`

    Take a look at this argument…

    Leibniz’s cosmological argument

    1.Any contingent fact about the world must have an
    explanation. (Principle of sufficient reason)
    2.The fact that there are contingent things can’t be
    explained by any contingent things.
    3.The fact that there are contingent things must
    have an explanation. (1,2)
    4. It is a contingent fact that there are contingent
    things.
    5.The fact that there are contingent things must be
    explained by something whose existence is not
    contingent. (3,4)
    6.There is a necessary being. (5)

    Watch here please …

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2ULF5WixMM

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPCzEP0oD7I

    Only have time for this… more later

  7. Steve says:

    Blitz

    “Theories that the universe could have always existed are always being proposed, but the majority of the scientific community still holds that the Big Bang theory is the most likely. Since the Big Bang is considered to be a singularity event. If you believe that the universe simply popped out of nothing, then it begs the question as to why this event is only exclusive to beginning of universes? Why have things not popped in and out of existence ever since the singularity event?” Big Bang model holds that the universe is boundless and developed from a singularity. In this model the universe is completely self contained and does not rely on any eternal cause. Because of this the Big Bang doesn’t need a cause, it’s like asking what’s north of the North Pole? “Hartle and Hawking suggest that if we could travel backward in time toward the beginning of the universe, we would note that quite near what might have otherwise been the beginning, time gives way to space such that at first there is only space and no time. Beginnings are entities that have to do with time; because time did not exist before the Big Bang, the concept of a beginning of the universe is meaningless. According to the Hartle–Hawking proposal, the universe has no origin as we would understand it: the universe was a singularity in both space and time, pre-Big Bang. Thus, the Hartle–Hawking state universe has no beginning, but it is not the steady state universe of Hoyle; it simply has no initial boundaries in time nor space.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartle–Hawking_state

    Beginnings (and “causes”) only apply to things inside the universe not the universe itself understand this difference.

    “How so? One cannot make such reckless statements without expecting repercussions.” Ask advocates of “intelligent design” which includes William Lane Craig (the Christian philosopher who made the Kalam argument above famous) who said the same.

    “the Gospel sources testify that Jesus claimed to be the Son of God and performed unusual signs and wonders to validate his claim.” “Gospel sources” documents written by unknown authors and which wasn’t written until at the very earliest 40 years after Jesus supposedly died. Sound like historical documents don’t they on the same level as the evidence for Cesar?
    “Jewish sources report the Jewish reaction to Jesus and reveal they believed his miracles were sourced in malevolent power.” What sources are these?

    “Justin Martyr’s second-century debate with Trypho, Trypho argues Jesus was a magician” Yeah more than a hundred years after the God man supposedly died sounds like a “eye witness”.

    “Yes and what exactly is wrong with his analysis?” So we are supposed to believe a nobody – a irrelevant Jew who claimed to be their messiah – was the only person to have his life recorded by Roman history? This claim cannot be believed. Also Ehrman believes all of the miracles and resurrection etc are made up (something that you seem to forget). Since the Christians could make up all of these stories then they could make up a flesh and blood Jesus as well.

    ” while no one but a mere fraction of any relevant authority gives two hoots to the spam you mythics believe in…. Conspiracy theories are your domain… Get used to it.” I don’t give a damn about these people’s opinions – I want evidence for the existence of Jesus. And the FACT is their is no evidence at all that such a person walked the earth. The opinions of these experts is irrelevant without evidence to back it up with.

    “It is possible that Dawkins liked the idea since Darwinism fails to address how lifeless molecules are able to develop intelligence far superior to even our most recent super computers…” No intelligence came after life had already started. So it’s explained by Darwinism. Dawkins does not believe in alien creators/designers let’s see what his actual view is – which should keep you from repeating this garbage. “OF COURSE seeding by aliens is more likely than God, but it is still vanishingly unlikely.” https://mobile.twitter.com/richarddawkins/status/446393255950028801?lang=en

  8. blitz2b says:

    Steve says “…If everything has a cause then that includes God…”
    One argument for God’s existence is known as the kalam cosmological argument,
    1.The universe began to exist
    2.If something began to exist, something else must have caused its existence
    3.Therefore the universe was caused by something else

    If you say God needs no cause I will cut your God out and say the universe does not need a cause.
    Well then you must be completely out of touch with reality. Theories that the universe could have always existed are always being proposed, but the majority of the scientific community still holds that the Big Bang theory is the most likely. Since the Big Bang is considered to be a singularity event. If you believe that the universe simply popped out of nothing, then it begs the question as to why this event is only exclusive to beginning of universes? Why have things not popped in and out of existence ever since the singularity event?

    “…The question of where those aliens come from is not relevant and is a separate question…”
    How so? One cannot make such reckless statements without expecting repercussions.

    “…not that Dawkins believes aliens seeded life or this universe if he did then he would be a deist and not a atheist…”
    Not necessarily. Dawkins’ conundrum was obviously one borrowed from an original idea of Francis Crick the of the DNA fame.
    Read:
    UK Scientists: Aliens May Have Sent Space Seeds To Create Life On Earth

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/03/aliens-send-space-seed-to-earth_n_6608582.html

    The idea of directed panspermia was suggested by Crick, a molecular biologist, who was the co-discoverer of the structure of DNA in 1953. Twenty years later, Crick co-wrote — with biochemist Leslie Orgel — a scientific paper about directed panspermia.

    The abstract of their manuscript states:

    “It now seems unlikely that extraterrestrial living organisms could have reached the Earth either as spores driven by the radiation pressure from another star or as living organisms imbedded in a meteorite. As an alternative to these nineteenth-century mechanisms, we have considered Directed Panspermia, the theory that organisms were deliberately transmitted to the Earth by intelligent beings on another planet.

    We conclude that it is possible that life reached the Earth in this way, but that the scientific evidence is inadequate at the present time to say anything about the probability. We draw attention to the kinds of evidence that might throw additional light on the topic…”

    “…Because you a religious nut who believes in nonsense who refuses to look at evidence against his ridiculous faith….”

    Evidence? really What evidence? The 99.99% of real experts in the field think of you, your ilk and your so-called “evidence” as cooks.
    Here read again…. really slowly and carefully because as from your previous goof ups, you obviously have comprehension issues… Please read the emphasis in bold…

    “….[T]here is not a single mythicist who teaches New Testament or Early Christianity or even Classics at any accredited institution of higher learning in the Western world. And it is no wonder why. THESE VIEWS ARE SO EXTREME AND UNCONVINCING TO 99.99 PERCENT OF REAL EXPERTS THAT ANYONE HOLDING THEM IS AS LIKELY TO GET A TEACHING JOB IN A ESTABLISHED DEPARTMENT OF RELIGION AS A SIX DAY CREATIONIST is likely to land on in a bona fide department of biology….”

    “…So where is the evidence of your Jesus? There is not one scrap of evidence anywhere – which is strange given he was supposed to have performed great miracles and even risen from the dead and appeared to hundreds. ..”

    The ones that are obviously there in plain sight are the ones you reject, so I don’t know what else you are hoping to find that will convince you…

    Comparing Sources of Caesar to Jesus:

    https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/sources-for-caesar-and-jesus-compared

    “The nature of the claims tied to Jesus often gets in the way of such an assessment. Many hesitate to see Jesus in the same light as Caesar since the Gospel sources testify that Jesus claimed to be the Son of God and performed unusual signs and wonders to validate his claim.

    But Jesus had such a big public reputation that a wide array of other sources make similar testimony about the dispute surrounding Jesus’s work. This is beyond dispute and something most don’t think about. Even sources tied to his opponents make this testimony. Jewish sources report the Jewish reaction to Jesus and reveal they believed his miracles were sourced in malevolent power. We see the same thing reported in the synoptic Gospels (Matt. 12:24; Mark 3:22; Luke 11:15). In Justin Martyr’s second-century debate with Trypho, Trypho argues Jesus was a magician (Ag. Trypho 69.7). Similar charges appear in the Talmud, where he is called a sorcerer (b. Sanh 43a). This is significant since it demonstrates no one was arguing that the accounts of Jesus’s actions were fabricated or mythical. An argument so popular today (partly because of our distance to the events) isn’t even made by ancients in their public discussion of Jesus.”

    quote “…yet Ehrman wants us to believe this nobody is the only person or one of the only persons to be recorded in Roman history?…”

    Yes and what exactly is wrong with his analysis?

    quote “….Now who is teaching conspiracy theory nonsense?…”

    You have now completely lost it…. Ehrman is a renowned New Testament Scholar, while no one but a mere fraction of any relevant authority gives two hoots to the spam you mythics believe in…. Conspiracy theories are your domain… Get used to it.

    I have a feeling that the gibberish in your subsequent post is copy/paste from the same “jesus never existed” website, so I will not bother wasting my time on it…

    quote “…That’s why Dawkins DOES NOT actually believe life on this planet was seeded by aliens? If he did he would be calling for intelligent design to be taught wouldn’t he?…”

    Well it’s hard to say what this confused man had in mind… maybe he was trying too hard… his boondoggle was more an attempt to disprove God so he consented to “alien seeding” instead… after all this idea was not “alien” to him, remember Francis Crick’s panspermia? It is possible that Dawkins liked the idea since Darwinism fails to address how lifeless molecules are able to develop intelligence far superior to even our most recent super computers…

    Cheers

  9. madfijian says:

    I am an ex Muslim with a 18 year old beautiful daughter. The day she turned 18 my wife and i set her down and simply said this. You will now start dating and subconsciously start looking for a life partner. That is simply the way biology works. Although i am an Agnostic when it comes to God and an Atheist when it comes to religion i told her that i will except a son in law from any faith no matter how stupid i think his beliefs are with open arms however i will not except a Muslim son in Law. I made it very clear that if she did marry a Muslim i would still love and respect her but she was on her own. Having been born into the faith i know it does not take a liberal Muslim too long too become a dumb ass donkey as he gets older. Alis Sina talks about a virus that seems to awaken in 99% of Muslim men as they get older in one of his earlier posts and i could not agree with him more.

    The 1% who resist this virus end up studying there faith and eventually break out of this brain washed stupor that they were in to become Atheists Agnostics or in some cases out of the fire into the kettle Christianity which is just a milder version of Islam. Any women who marries a Muslim is usually doomed to be a baby factory with as much rites as a cow. There are of course exceptions but they are rare.

  10. Face_The_Truth says:

    Question: Why a non-Muslim woman should not marry a Muslim man?

    Answer: The granddaughter of American publishing titan William Randolph Hearst, namely Victoria Hearst, very interestingly provides a Christian pathway to world’s Christian females to avoid world’s Muslim men!

    =====================================================================

    ‘Who is Victoria Hearst?

    Why does Victoria Hearst hate a magazine (i.e., Cosmopolitan) that presumably helped make her family so rich?

    And, what would Jesus the Nazarene Jew do?

    1. Victoria Hearst became a “born-again Christian” after a bad relationship with a “bad” man:

    In the mid-1990’s, Victoria Hearst was dating and “having non-Christian pre-marital sex” with a man, Victoria Hearst told “The 700 Club”. The relationship didn’t go so well, Victoria Hearst said, and ultimately, “he made me so miserable I gave my life to Christ (i.e., Jesus the Nazarene Jew).”

    Victoria Hearst became a “born-again Christian” following their breakup and never looked back!

    2. God the Father (i.e., Jehovah) told Victoria Hearst to go to Colorado and teach jazz dance:

    Once Victoria Hearst found God the Father (i.e., Jehovah), the Big Man himself began talking to Victoria Hearst!!!

    According to interviews, in 1997, the “Lord told her to told her to move to Colorado”, where Victoria Hearst owned a vacation house, and “teach an after-school jazz dance program”. So Victoria Hearst did.

    3. Victoria Hearst’s original dream was to be an actress / singer / dancer:

    Before devoting her life to God the Father (i.e., Jehovah), Victoria Hearst originally wanted to devote her life to fame. According to the heiress, her dream was to be an actress, singer, and dancer — or as her biography says, “a triple threat.”

    Victoria Hearst took years of dance, voice, and acting classes!

    Victoria Hearst even worked as a part-time mime, lived in Los Angeles, and had a featured role on an episode of General Hospital. But this path didn’t work out for Victoria Hearst.

    According to Victoria Hearst’s biography, “God the Father (i.e., Jehovah) had other plans for Victoria’s life.”

    4. Victoria Hearst speaks Japanese:

    Victoria Hearst first visited Japan in 1979 with her mother on a big trip to “the Orient” (her words) and fell in love with the country and culture.

    Victoria Hearst then decided to learn Japanese and even had a role on a Japanese TV show, speaking both languages. Pretty impressive!

    Victoria Hearst’s also very active with philanthropic work in Japan, working to bring Jesus the Nazarene Jew to the Japanese nation. As Victoria Hearst told “The 700 Club”, “the Japanese love Christians, they haven’t been poisoned against us (i.e., world’s Christians) yet.”‘

    LINK

    http://fusion.net/who-is-victoria-hearst-the-heiress-hellbent-on-coverin-1793849802

    =====================================================================

    Unfortunately, Victoria Hearst DOES NOT speak Arabic and Victoria Hearst DOES NOT want to bring Jesus the Nazarene Jew to the Islamic Kingdom of Saud (i.e., Saudi Arabia — which is actually the most important component of American, Saudi and Israeli war-profiteering global military alliance!).

  11. Face_The_Truth says:

    Question: Why a non-Muslim woman should not marry a Muslim man?

    Answer: Even changing her non-Islamic lifestyle completely by adhering to proper Islamic behaviors for women did not give singer Janet Jackson a lasting, blissful marriage with a Muslim man!

    =====================================================================

    ‘THAT’S THE WAY LOVE GOES: Janet Jackson ‘splits’ from millionaire third husband Wissam al’Mana just THREE MONTHS after giving birth to first child at age 50!!!

    Janet Jackson has split from her husband Wissam al’Mana just THREE MONTHS after the couple welcomed their first child, it has been claimed.

    The Rhythm Nation singer gave birth to son Eissa on January 3 aged 50, after the star cancelled her 2016 world tour to focus on becoming a mother.’

    LINK

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/3290822/janet-jackson-splits-third-husband-wissam-al-mana-three-months-birth-first-child/

    =====================================================================

  12. Steve says:

    Blitz
    When my daughter was five, she asked “…. if God created everything, then who created God?”
    “This maybe a problem for children and the feeble minded, but if you truly understand that the concept does not apply to God then the problem of infinite regress automatically fades away.” If everything has a cause then that includes God. If you say God needs no cause I will cut your God out and say the universe does not need a cause.
    “If for example, you are an archaeologist and while digging you find arrow heads in the dirt, you will immediately infer intelligence rather than chance and necessity. If an explanation is the BEST one then you don’t need an explanation of the explanation.” There is no evidence that life or this universe was designed.

    “Dawkins on the other hand is assuming the possibility of “highly technologically advanced beings” seeding our primitive earth. However the question of who seeded the planet of those advanced beings?, the problem of infinite regress crops up only for beings existing within the created universe, not for the un-created first cause – God.” The question of where those aliens come from is not relevant and is a separate question – not that Dawkins believes aliens seeded life or this universe if he did then he would be a deist and not a atheist.

    “Of course I didn’t bother to look at it, silly man. I simply skimmed through it for maybe ten seconds…” Because you a religious nut who believes in nonsense who refuses to look at evidence against his ridiculous faith.
    “Do you think I have time to waste on conspiracy theory sites? If I gave even the slightest credence to nutters like the authors of the site you associate your links with, then I would also have to show flat earthers, moon landings hoaxes, and the infamous 9/11 conspiracy theorists the same kind of interest, for which I have no time. The only reason I gave you the benefit of the doubt with Josephus, was that actual scholars believe that the early Christians interpolated the text to confirm Christ… which I mentioned.” So where is the evidence of your Jesus? There is not one scrap of evidence anywhere – which is strange given he was supposed to have performed great miracles and even risen from the dead and appeared to hundreds. The Roman Hardman Pilate who slaughtered Jews and messiah claimants and who was known for his cruel inhumanity and antisemitism nevertheless became a big softie and allowed Jesus a nice tomb – instead of leaving his corpse to rot on the cross – as was standard Roman practice? No conspiracy there and where is this tomb by the way as the Christians seem to have forgotten where their God lay for 3 days? And not one word of this is mentioned in history! Conspiracy theory indeed!

    “Read” what the man said very slowly and carefully. “… To the objection that there are no contemporary Roman records of Jesus’ existence, Ehrman points out that such records exist FOR ALMOST no one and there are mentions of Christ in several Roman works of history from only decades after the death of Jesus.”” Oh I see nobody except for Jesus (how convenient) – who Ehrman believes was probably a small time doomsday preacher and messiah claimant and whose small band of followers made up fantastic claims of miracles and rising from the dead decades later – yet Ehrman wants us to believe this nobody is the only person or one of the only persons to be recorded in Roman history? Now who is teaching conspiracy theory nonsense?

  13. Steve says:

    “No Christian ever followed the twisted logic you are trying to interpolate into that Gospel verse. A parable is a parable is a parable…. stop being such a literalist” Apart from the church who would burn people alive and carry out the most gruesome torture. And of course started holy wars in Jesus’s name but yet no Christian ever took those verses seriously did they?
    “Try inserting “faith” in the appropriate blanks that this verse is making, pop up in your brains… it will make a world of sense to you then…” The tale is what Christians are to do with “the good news” while they wait for the return of their Lord. They are spread it and not hide it away like the lazy servant”. This tale is also in Matthew but Luke adds the part about “enemies” being slain.” Luke builds to JC’s big finish in Jerusalem by having his meandering hero tell a series of parables along the way. Luke 19 is the link from Jericho to the Temple itself. In verses 1-10, near Jericho, the godman invites himself into the house of a dwarfish publican called Zacchaeus and rewards the guy with salvation after Zac’ says he is going to give half his goods to the poor.

    At verse 11 a new scene is set: JC is about to depart (and of course he knows crucifixion awaits him); his audience think the Kingdom of God is at hand.

    JC responds with the infamous parable, which is actually an attempt by 2nd century gospel writers to deal with issues raised by the “delayed kingdom”. The believing brethren have the “good news” but what are they to do with it?

    The parable starts with the words “A certain man of noble birth went far to receive a kingdom. And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds.” Is this JC? The answer is to be found in an earlier version of the same yarn – in Matthew:”

    “For the Kingdom of Heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.” – 25,14

    Matthew tells his version of the story using just 3 servants (they represent the Christian brethren, “servants of the Lord’). “After a long time the Lord of those servants cometh” (25.19). There is a reckoning (the Day of Judgement). The lord is well pleased with 2 of them who have successfully “earned interest on his money.”

    “Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy Lord.” – 25,21.

    The third servant however, who denounces his lord as harsh, says he was “afraid” and simply hid the lord’s investment. A displeased lord turns on him as a “wicked and slothful servant” (25:27).

    The point of the story? This is how Matthew rounds it off:

    “For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.

    And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” – 25.29,30.

    In other words this so-called Parable of the Harsh Master / Parable of the Talents is a story about what Christians are to do with the “gospel” as they wait for the coming of the Kingdom of Heaven. They are to spread the word (“grow the Lord’s money”), not hide it away. Correctly understood, this is the parable of the slothful servant, threatened with “outer darkness.”

    When Luke copied Matthew’s efforts he added a new element: “reluctant citizens” of the new kingdom (no doubt he had in mind recalcitrant pagans).

    “But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.” – 19.14.

    Luke followed closely Matthew’s story but replaced the final bit threatening “outer darkness” to lazy brethren with a more immediate and tangible injunction aimed at “enemies”:

    “I tell you, that to every one who has will more be given; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away.

    But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” – 19.27.

    Where did Luke get his inspiration? A nobleman “travelling far to receive a kingdom” is a rare enough event. Josephus’s Antiquities of the Jews – Book 17, chapter 11 maps the story and also provides all the ingredients for both 19.14 and 19.27.

    With the death of Herod the Great, his son Archelaus – of noble birth – journeyed to Rome to “receive his kingdom” from Emperor Augustus. But at the same time an embassy of the Jews petitioned Caesar that “out of their hatred to him” Archelaus not “be set over their kingdom”. Archelaus had slaughtered 3000 of his enemies at the Temple. The emperor eventually removed him and sent him into exile in 6 AD.

    Josephus wrote Antiquities of the Jews around 93 AD so whoever “Luke” really was, he was certainly writing his fable later than that.”

    “and we should believe you, why exactly?” Then why is Jesus talking about about people being burned in hell? We know Jesus believed that heaven is a physical place (he is believed to be there now in his physical body) we know Christianity believes in “resurrection of the dead”. Given this your “interpretation” makes no sense. Are the dead going to rise physically only to have their souls suffer? Then what is the point in resurrecting their body? You are talking baloney.

    Well, it doesn’t sound like a “remote possibility” either…. now does it?…. it sounds much like an enthusiastic eagerness to acceptance of a induced idea” That’s why Dawkins DOES NOT actually believe life on this planet was seeded by aliens? If he did he would be calling for intelligent design to be taught wouldn’t he?

    “I could use those same words to twist meanings to suit my logic… but I won’t waste my time trying.” You have been doing this all the time anyway with Lewis, Jesus saying he will come back to this generation and his talking of hell and burning people and slaying his enemies and coming to spread a sword in the world and divide families and not bring peace.
    “If I make a proposition and am “intrigued with the possibility” of it being true, I am more of a believer in that proposition then a mere hopeful…. If that is what you are implying of Dawkins..” You may find some theory or idea interesting – even if you think the possibility of it being true is very low. For example I could say I find the idea of reincarnation to be “intriguing” – even though I don’t believe in it.
    Let’s see..
    Dawkins: “….well… It could come about in the following way…. It could be that…eh… in some earlier time ..eh…somewhere in the universe.. civilization evolved, by probably some kind of Darwinian means to a very very high level.. of technology, and designed a form of life that they PERHAPS SEEDED ON TO THIS PLANET…
    “A very assertive tone in the first part of his statement… More of a belief than a “remote possibility”.” That’s why he keeps saying “could”.

  14. TJay says:

    @blitz

    Keep up the good work

  15. blitz2b says:

    Steve says “….“….. Do you not see infinite regression in Dawkin’s absurd proposition?” God has the same problem – so I don’t know why you bring this up….”

    When my daughter was five, she asked “…. if God created everything, then who created God?” This maybe a problem for children and the feeble minded, but if you truly understand that the concept does not apply to God then the problem of infinite regress automatically fades away.

    If for example, you are an archaeologist and while digging you find arrow heads in the dirt, you will immediately infer intelligence rather than chance and necessity. If an explanation is the BEST one then you don’t need an explanation of the explanation.
    No Christian would ever dream of suggesting that God was created. The argument, by it’s own admission, is flawed and has nothing to say about an eternal God.
    For the God who created and upholds the universe was not created — he is eternal.

    Dawkins on the other hand is assuming the possibility of “highly technologically advanced beings” seeding our primitive earth. However the question of who seeded the planet of those advanced beings?, the problem of infinite regress crops up only for beings existing within the created universe, not for the un-created first cause – God.
    Hope this helps..

  16. blitz2b says:

    “…Those people are
    addressed in that link – which you clearly didn’t bother to look at….”

    Of course I didn’t bother to look at it, silly man. I simply skimmed through it for maybe ten seconds…Do you think I have time to waste on conspiracy theory sites? If I gave even the slightest credence to nutters like the authors of the site you associate your links with, then I would also have to show flat earthers, moon landings hoaxes, and the infamous 9/11 conspiracy theorists the same kind of interest, for which I have no time. The only reason I gave you the benefit of the doubt with Josephus, was that actual scholars believe that the early Christians interpolated the text to confirm Christ… which I mentioned.

    New Testament scholar Bart Erhman says “….[T]here is not a single mythicist who teaches New Testament or Early Christianity or even Classics at any accredited institution of higher learning in the Western world. And it is no wonder why. These views are so extreme and so unconvincing to 99.99 percent of the real experts that anyone holding them is as likely to get a teaching job in an established department of religion as a six-day creationist is likely to land on in a bona fide department of biology….”

    I don’t think anyone in their right mind should take the opinion of the .01 percent extremists seriously.

    Steve says “…This guy contradicts himself first he says no Roman records exist for anyone and then he says their are mentions of “Christ” in Roman works of history. So which is it?…”

    Man, you seriously have comprehension issues…. Nowhere does he say … “no Roman records exist for anyone”.

    Read what the man said very slowly and carefully. “… To the objection that there are no contemporary Roman records of Jesus’ existence, Ehrman points out that such records exist FOR ALMOST no one and there are mentions of Christ in several Roman works of history from only decades after the death of Jesus.”

    Let me make this simple for you….If a kid named Bob wore a blue shirt to school and everyone else in the school wore red T-shirts, would it be alright to say that ALMOST no one in the school wore blue and Bob’s blue Shirt had a collar? It seems like complex sentences boggle your mind.

    Steve says “…..” Paul himself probably didn’t exist …”

    Sure…. it seems that the best way for nutters to deal with an issue is to take the easy way out …. make the main characters disappear…. problem solved…
    If God is a problem… no problem…. He does not exist. Now rinse, replace with whatever other historical character bothers you the most and repeat the process…

    Steve says “… he actually says is “I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people …”

    Congratulations…. I finally actually got you to quote C.S Lewis verbatim …. A far cry from your earlier one…

    Steve said (on March 21, 2017 at 12:57 pm) “…Even the famous Christian apologist C.S Lewis admitted if Jesus is not God AND THE WORLD IS ABOUT TO END then he is just another ranter..”

    No point flogging a dead horse… I think with your warped interpretations, you’ve made the poor man roll enough in his grave… we’ll give this issue a rest… (BTW, no pun intended….I used a figure of speech… did not intentionally call C.S Lewis a dead horse… just in case you were wondering)

    Steve “…” No “in words this so-called Parable of the Harsh Master / Parable of the Talents is a story about what Christians are to do with the “gospel” …”

    No? ? ? really? Did we not have enough of your warped C.S Lewis fiasco, now you wish to try to interpret the Gospels for us too. No Christian ever followed the twisted logic you are trying to interpolate into that Gospel verse. A parable is a parable is a parable…. stop being such a literalist

    quote “I tell you, that to every one who has will more be given; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away…”
    Try inserting “faith” in the appropriate blanks that this verse is making, pop up in your brains… it will make a world of sense to you then…

    Steve says “…No and neither is Jesus…” and we should believe you, why exactly?

    Steve says “AND AN INTRIGUING POSSIBILITY…Doesn’t sound like a “admittance of life being “seeded by aliens”

    Well, it doesn’t sound like a “remote possibility” either…. now does it?…. it sounds much like an enthusiastic eagerness to acceptance of a self induced idea… The “seeding of life by aliens” was after all a germ in Dawkins’ own mind… was it not?

    Steve says “…“Intriguing” doesn’t have anything to with the probability. If you was sold a Van Gogh painting you would find it a “intriguing possibility” that is a original worth millions of dollars and not a worthless copy – even though the possibility may be very low..”

    mmmm good one ! ! ! …. speaking of mental gymnastics, I’d say you’re trying to pull a fast one right about now with your semantics routine…
    I could use those same words to twist meanings to suit my logic… but I won’t waste my time trying.

    If I make a proposition and am “intrigued with the possibility” of it being true, I am more of a believer in that proposition then a mere hopeful…. If that is what you are implying of Dawkins..

    Let’s see..
    Dawkins: “….well… It could come about in the following way…. It could be that…eh… in some earlier time ..eh…somewhere in the universe.. civilization evolved, by probably some kind of Darwinian means to a very very high level.. of technology, and designed a form of life that they PERHAPS SEEDED ON TO THIS PLANET…

    A very assertive tone in the first part of his statement… More of a belief than a “remote possibility”.

    Enough said…

    Cheers

  17. Face_The_Truth says:

    http://www.kyroot.com/

    ‘BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION

    The biological evolution of life on our planet is a story of many starts and stops, many catastrophes that resulted in mass extinctions, and the incredible suffering of animals up and down the food chain.

    This simply does not jibe with the Christian story of a God the Father (i.e., Jehovah) whose principal interest was to create beings in his own image and test them for future rewards and punishments!

    Biological evolution has been proven beyond any doubt based on substantial fossil discoveries and analysis of the DNA relationships among all living matter, pointing to a 3.8 billion year process of natural selection of beneficial mutations.

    Here are some good resources:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_evolutionary_history_of_life

    http://ideonexus.com/2012/02/12/101-reasons-why-evolution-is-true/

    Our discovery of biological evolution is perhaps the single most important piece of evidence that Christianity is false.

    It is not possible to combine the science of biological evolution and Christianity into a unified coherent theory.

    They DO NOT mix.

    Christians who assert that they believe God the Father (i.e., Jehovah) used biological evolution to create mankind are not thinking on anything other than a superficial level.’

    http://www.kyroot.com/

  18. Steve says:

    Blitz
    “Even if I did give you the benefit of the doubt as far as Josephus was concerned, you have failed to address all the others I brought forth…. Tacitus, Pliny the younger, the Talmud accounts and Lucian.” Those people are
    addressed in that link – which you clearly didn’t bother to look at.

    “Arguments for existence
    Bart Ehrman surveys the arguments “mythicists” have made against the existence of Jesus since the idea was first mooted at the end of the 18th century. To the objection that there are no contemporary Roman records of Jesus’ existence, Ehrman points out that such records exist for almost no one and there are mentions of Christ in several Roman works of history from only decades after the death of Jesus.” This guy contradicts himself first he says no Roman records exist for anyone and then he says their are mentions of “Christ” in Roman works of history. So which is it?
    “The author states that the authentic letters of the apostle Paul in the New Testament were likely written within a few years of Jesus’ death and that Paul likely personally knew James, the brother of Jesus….” Paul himself probably didn’t exist http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/saul-paul.htm “One is informed by Acts that St Paul’s early day stance was as “Saul, the Christian persecutor”. Yet if Saul really was a vigilante for orthodox Judaism at the time of Stephen’s stoning (Acts 7.58-8.3), becoming the chief persecutor of Christians, no less – one wonders just where was Saul, not long before, when a supposed radical rabbi called Jesus was stirring up whole towns and villages?

    Paul’s role as religious policeman seems not to have awakened until shortly after the godman’s death. But in itself this suggests Jesus of Nazareth had no great impact. After all, Saul was a contemporary of Jesus in time and place, raised in Jerusalem (“at the feet of Gamaliel” – Acts 22.3) at precisely the time the godman was overturning moneychangers in the Temple and generally provoking Pharisees and Sadducees.

    Would not Saul, a young religious hothead (“exceedingly zealous of the traditions” – Galatians 1.14) have waded into those multitudes to heckle and attack the Nazarene himself? Would he not have been an enthusiastic witness to JC’s blasphemy before the Sanhedrin? And where was Saul during “passion week”, surely in Jerusalem with the other zealots celebrating the holiest of festivals? And yet he reports not a word of the crucifixion?

    Paul, another “witness for Jesus”, saw and heard nothing!”

    “However, you are still misrepresenting Lewis by taking his quote out of context.Here, my friend, is the catch 22 that you keep excluding… with the kind of exorbitant and outrageous claims Jesus made, one CANNOT say that He was merely a good MORAL teacher. Lewis is NOT “admitting” he is making the “Lunatic, Liar or Lord” Proposition that everyone is faced with.” You are the one misrepresenting Lewis’s statement NOWHERE does he say “MERELY a good moral teacher” what he actually says is “I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said WOULD NOT BE A GREAT MORAL TEACHER. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice” Just like your claim that when Jesus said “this generation” he actually meant “future generations” is nonsense and a lie you are also lying here. “Lewis’s trilemma is an apologetic argument traditionally used to argue for the divinity of Jesus by arguing that the only alternatives were that he was evil or deluded.” (And not “merely a moral teacher”. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis%27s_trilemma
    “Oh yeah?? then please bring forth those pagan philosophers quotes with sources.” See http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/seneca.html even though you probably won’t bother.

    “Another Muslim like argument…. This is a passage ripped out of context from a parable of a wicked king… The Parable of the Ten MinasPlease don’t insult your own intelligence by behaving like ignorant Muslim apologists… this is one of the verses they love to quote to try to prove that Jesus was as hateful and violent as Mohammad was…” No “in words this so-called Parable of the Harsh Master / Parable of the Talents is a story about what Christians are to do with the “gospel” as they wait for the coming of the Kingdom of Heaven. They are to spread the word (“grow the Lord’s money”), not hide it away. Correctly understood, this is the parable of the slothful servant, threatened with “outer darkness.”

    When Luke copied Matthew’s efforts he added a new element: “reluctant citizens” of the new kingdom (no doubt he had in mind recalcitrant pagans).

    “But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.” – 19.14.

    Luke followed closely Matthew’s story but replaced the final bit threatening “outer darkness” to lazy brethren with a more immediate and tangible injunction aimed at “enemies”:

    “I tell you, that to every one who has will more be given; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away.

    But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” – 19.27.”

    “Oh for heaven’s sake it’s a METAPHOR…. notice the word “LIKE” ? ? ? Do we have to go through this all over again?” When he says they are going to burn in hell its not metaphor. If a white supremacist says “we will beat the dog shit out of them monkeys” is he speaking in metaphor? No and neither is Jesus when he says unbelievers will be burned in hell like branches cast into fire.

    “If that is not admittance of life being “seeded by aliens” …straight from the horse’s mouth, than what else should I bring forth for you to believe? ….” “um that is a possibility.. AND AN INTRIGUING POSSIBILITY…” Doesn’t sound like a “admittance of life being “seeded by aliens”. Also note Dawkins was talking to believers in “intelligent design” and Dawkins is talking about the possibility of their being intelligent alien designers of life. (“Intelligence design” people claim not to identify who or what the “designer (or indeed designers) are. They could be Jesus, Allah the Greek or Nordic gods or indeed aliens from outer space.

    “….. Do you not see infinite regression in Dawkin’s absurd proposition?” God has the same problem – so I don’t know why you bring this up. (Also note according to ID people the origin of the designer(s) is irrelevant to the question of whether life is “designed” or not. E.g if we found an arrow because we don’t know where it came from or indeed where it’s designer came from doesn’t mean it wasn’t designed. Where the designer came from is a separate question.

    “…the theory of evolution only deals with explaining the diversity of life – not its origin….” Well then tell that to Dawkins…. his SiFi theories seems to somewhat convince ….. at least himself…” Where did life come from is different to the question of where the diversity of life (forms) comes from. Please understand the difference.

    “. “remote possibility”? ? really??? I don’t hear him use that term at all… I do in fact hear him say that it is an “INTRIGUING POSSIBILITY”
    Remote possibility….. Slim chance
    Intriguing possibility….. A provocative, exciting, or stimulating chance….” “Intriguing” doesn’t have anything to with the probability. If you was sold a Van Gogh painting you would find it a “intriguing possibility” that is a original worth millions of dollars and not a worthless copy – even though the possibility may be very low.

  19. blitz2b says:

    Steve says “…He does not believe aliens seeded life…” Really? Have you even bothered to watch the video?
    Here again…. watch…
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDvaPzg32W8

    Transcript from the video watch from 0.45 – 1:25

    Dawkins: “….well… It could come about in the following way…. It could be that…eh… in some earlier time ..eh…somewhere in the universe.. civilization evolved, by probably some kind of Darwinian means to a very very high level.. of technology, and designed a form of life that they PERHAPS SEEDED ON TO THIS PLANET…um that is a possibility.. AND AN INTRIGUING POSSIBILITY… ah I suppose you might find evidence… of that if you look … um in the detail … details of biology of biochemistry, ah molecular biology….and a signature of some sort of designer…”

    If that is not admittance of life being “seeded by aliens” …straight from the horse’s mouth, than what else should I bring forth for you to believe? ….

    quote “….Nor do “Darwinian process” seek to explain to the origin life…” Well Dawkins seems to believe that… From the same transcript this is what he says….
    “….It could be that…eh… in some earlier time ..eh…somewhere in the universe.. CIVILIZATION EVOLVED, BY PROBABLY SOME KIND OF DARWINIAN MEANS… ” So does the “Darwinian means” that this supposed “civilization” evolved from, that Dawkins mentions here, preclude the origin of life? …. Where do you think this very very high level of technologically advanced civilization’s life originate from?….. were they “seeded” by some even technologically higher level of civilization? ….. Do you not see infinite regression in Dawkin’s absurd proposition?

    quote “…the theory of evolution only deals with explaining the diversity of life – not its origin….” Well then tell that to Dawkins…. his SiFi theories seems to somewhat convince ….. at least himself…

    quote “….That’s all Dawkins considers the explanation of “seeded life” a very speculative and very remote possibility. …”

    Correction,…. I’d say you are now doing to Dawkins what you have been doing to C.S.Lewis all along…. Will you please stop paraphrasing people to suit your own twisted agenda…. “remote possibility”? ? really??? I don’t hear him use that term at all… I do in fact hear him say that it is an “INTRIGUING POSSIBILITY”

    Remote possibility….. Slim chance
    Intriguing possibility….. A provocative, exciting, or stimulating chance….

    Steve says “….You should stop speaking nonsense…” A typical case of the kettle calling the teapot black…
    No offence man but I think that I have been constantly correcting your nonsense throughout this discussion…. you should really think things though before you present them….

    Cheers mate…

  20. blitz2b says:

    ” Explained here. http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-etal.html

    You could try to sell ice cubes to Eskimos before you begin to believe nonsense about the non existence of Jesus. Even if I did give you the benefit of the doubt as far as Josephus was concerned, you have failed to address all the others I brought forth…. Tacitus, Pliny the younger, the Talmud accounts and Lucian.

    “Arguments for existence
    Bart Ehrman surveys the arguments “mythicists” have made against the existence of Jesus since the idea was first mooted at the end of the 18th century. To the objection that there are no contemporary Roman records of Jesus’ existence, Ehrman points out that such records exist for almost no one and there are mentions of Christ in several Roman works of history from only decades after the death of Jesus.[1][3] The author states that the authentic letters of the apostle Paul in the New Testament were likely written within a few years of Jesus’ death and that Paul likely personally knew James, the brother of Jesus….”

    “…Erhman, a former fundamentalist Christian turned agnostic, has written numerous books challenging traditional views of the Bible himself.[3] Did Jesus Exist?, however, contains scathing criticism of the “writers, bloggers and Internet junkies who call themselves mythicists”.[2] Ehrman says that they do not define what they mean by “myth” and maintains they are really motivated by a desire to denounce religion rather than examine historical evidence.[1] He discusses leading contemporary mythicists by name and dismisses their arguments as “amateurish”, “wrong-headed”, and “outlandish”….”

    Your argument about the non existence of Jesus Christ is moot…

    Steve says “…” Bin Laden existed no Jesus Christ God man ever did…”
    It’s ironic how a non-existent personality could have such a massive impact on human history that there is not a single human being on planet earth who could wake up in the morning and who’s life could not be indirectly referenced by this “non-existent” entity…. don’t you think? As I said before You may love Him or hate Him, believe in His existence or deny it you are still in conversation about His impact on your life…. If you don’t accept this, you are living in denial.

    Steve says “… Lewis admits if Jesus is not God he must a evil man or a sick man…”

    Well unlike your earlier rants, you are finally starting to gravitate towards a common sense approach….Staying as close as possible to the actual quotes without interpolating your biases into it unlike your earlier rants…

    “Steve said (on March 21, 2017 at 12:57 pm) “…Even the famous Christian apologist C.S Lewis admitted if Jesus is not God AND THE WORLD IS ABOUT TO END then he is just another ranter..”

    However, you are still misrepresenting Lewis by taking his quote out of context.Here, my friend, is the catch 22 that you keep excluding… with the kind of exorbitant and outrageous claims Jesus made, one CANNOT say that He was merely a good MORAL teacher. Lewis is NOT “admitting” he is making the “Lunatic, Liar or Lord” Proposition that everyone is faced with.
    Lewis was obviously still a Christian when he said this, so it was highly unlikely that he would make such an admittance.
    I sincerely hope that we are now able to put this issue to rest…

    Steve says “…“who taught people to love their enemies and to do good to others.” Something pagan philosophers taught hundreds of years before your God man supposedly lived….”

    Oh yeah?? then please bring forth those pagan philosophers quotes with sources.

    Steve says “..And also note Jesus commanded his enemies to be burnt and slain so again he is a hypocrite liar. (“But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” – Luke 19.27)…”

    Another Muslim like argument…. This is a passage ripped out of context from a parable of a wicked king… The Parable of the Ten MinasPlease don’t insult your own intelligence by behaving like ignorant Muslim apologists… this is one of the verses they love to quote to try to prove that Jesus was as hateful and violent as Mohammad was…

    “John 15:6
    6 If anyone does not abide in me he is thrown away LIKE a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned…”

    Oh for heaven’s sake it’s a METAPHOR…. notice the word “LIKE” ? ? ? Do we have to go through this all over again?

    contd…

  21. Steve says:

    Blitz
    “You should really do a little research for yourself…. Here read these quotes from non-Christian sources…” Explained here. http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-etal.html

    “That is a very strange statement… Bin Laden is dead and his corpse had been digested and decomposed by creatures of the deep. He will probably be forgotten pretty soon. However our whole of history is divided by a single personality (B.C and A.D)…. by none other than the one you despise so much.” Bin Laden existed no Jesus Christ God man ever did.

    “As for the families of Jesus’ followers “starving to death”… A bit of a hyperbole …. don’t you think? I mean, if you analyze middle eastern families since the days of Christ till today, they consist of many offspring, for economic reasons. If one or more dies, there were many others to care of the remaining members of the family.” The same family the God man told them to hate and abandon? Another great moral teaching from the God man – leave your offspring with your family to be taken care of – in the hell fire.

    “Don’t you get tired of chasing your own tail?…. C.S Lewis said no such nonsense, stop disrespecting him by your incorrect paraphrasing or attributing your twisted interpretations onto him …. I’m afraid that this does not merit a response from me.” Lewis admits if Jesus is not God he must a evil man or a sick man.

    “who taught people to love their enemies and to do good to others.” Something pagan philosophers taught hundreds of years before your God man supposedly lived. And also note Jesus commanded his enemies to be burnt and slain so again he is a hypocrite liar. (“But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” – Luke 19.27) “If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned” – John 15.6. http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/murderers.htm#luke19

    “but finally realizing how the Darwinian processes fail to explain how the actual creation of life and information in a single cell, absurdly admits that extraterrestrials may have created or seeded life here on earth” He does not believe aliens seeded life. Nor do “Darwinian process” seek to explain to the origin life – the theory of evolution only deals with explaining the diversity of life – not its origin.

    “Speculative nonsense out of science fiction novels are eventually becoming religion to atheists.” That’s all Dawkins considers the explanation of “seeded life” a very speculative and very remote possibility. You should stop speaking nonsense.

  22. Steve says:

    “The Influence of Christianity on Western Civilization.” This is the influence that Christianity had on western civilisation. “Raised to the status of the State religion the Christian Church reigned over the destruction of civilization.
    As the centuries passed religious barbarism grew ever more vicious.

    Christianity was the first creed in history to exterminate its adversaries in the name of love”

    “With ruthless ambition, and by enforcing an ideology of ‘sin and redemptive sacrifice’, Christian clerics enslaved the Mediterranean world. But the ambitions of Holy Mother Church were not readily sated. By aggressive warfare, heathen tribes also were brought into the embrace of the Lord’s henchmen. Masters of the whole of Europe for more than a thousand years, sadists in the uniform of Christ terrorized and brutalized a continent. They then exported that terror to the four corners of the globe.”

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/cruelty.html
    And here
    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/darkness.html

    “A 4th century power struggle that played out across the Mediterranean world brought a minor sect of religious extremists to centre stage. Finding themselves on the winning side in a civil war and rewarded by cosseting within imperial residences, bishops of the Christian Church were able to impose their faith upon a demoralised population using all the sanctions of the State. And as the empire fragmented and fell, ambitious clerics of Christ disseminated a cancer of superstition, fear and brutality far beyond the old imperial frontiers.”

    “The terrifying history of a morbid cult that destroyed the ancient world”
    ” Shadowy Mr Big behind worldwide criminal organisation. Known variously as ‘Jesus’, ‘Christ’, ‘Lord’, and ‘Saviour’. Persistent rumours of a brief appearance in 1st century Palestine though unknown in official records. Cult members convince themselves JC is alive today. Intelligence suggests never actually existed.”

  23. Face_The_Truth says:

    http://www.kyroot.com/

    RESURRECTION CONSEQUENCES

    The New Testament Bible suggests that Jesus the Nazarene Jew rose from the dead and made appearances to hundreds of people before ascending into Christian heaven.

    It is unlikely that this would have escaped the notice of Herod and Pilate and the vast majority of the Roman occupiers, not to mention the Jews, who would have either directly witnessed this amazing phenomenon or heard about it from credible sources!

    This would have provided proof that Jesus the Nazarene Jew was a divine being, prompting Herod and Pilate to convert along with the Romans and the Jews, with Christianity then becoming the official religion of Judea.

    Obviously, this did not happen, and the fact that it didn’t suggests strongly that Jesus the Nazarene Jew did not rise from the dead.

    One thing is certain: If Jesus the Nazarene Jew actually rose from the dead, there would be no separation between Judaism and Christianity — they would be one and the same.

    http://www.kyroot.com/

  24. blitz2b says:

    Steve says “…It is the inventions and ideas of people clever people like Dawkins which made civilisation…”

    Your “clever people” like Dawkins has problems believing that a God could be responsible for initiating life in the universe, but finally realizing how the Darwinian processes fail to explain how the actual creation of life and information in a single cell, absurdly admits that extraterrestrials may have created or seeded life here on earth…

    Please this spin doctor spin and spin….. it will make your head whirl.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiVoS78lNqM

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYb8gliZZEA

    Speculative nonsense out of science fiction novels are eventually becoming religion to atheists. The flying spaghetti ET monster has flown in from another planet to become the “god of Dawkin’s gaps” to plug in the holes in that Darwinian evolution cannot fill…. Ironic isn’t it?

    quote”…if it was left in the hands of death cults like Christianity we human beings would be extinct a long time ago….”
    Your claims are false based on your utter disgust of Christianity. FYI, secularism and free thought that you seem to espouse arose from western civilization which has it’s basis in the Judeo-Christian teachings.
    The Influence of Christianity on Western Civilization.

    Please read the following:

    “The positive influence of Christianity is far reaching especially in the rich history and culture of Western Civilization despite a long standing ignorance or adamant denial of its contributions. The Bible itself is responsible for much of the language, literature, and fine arts we enjoy today as its artists and composers were heavily influenced by its writings. Paul Maier, in writing the forward to the book How Christianity Changed the World by Alvin J. Schmidt, says this about the profound impact Christianity has had on the development of Western Civilization:

    “No other religion, philosophy, teaching, nation, movement—whatever—has so changed the world for the better as Christianity has done. Its shortcomings, clearly conceded by this author, are nevertheless heavily outweighed by its benefits to all mankind” (Schmidt 9).

    Contrary to the history texts treatment of the subject, Christian influence on values, beliefs, and practices in Western culture are abundant and well ingrained into the flourishing society of today (Schmidt 12). In the Old Testament book of Hosea the writer states: “my people are destroyed for lack of knowledge,” a statement that can well be applied to those today who are forgetful of the past (The Reformation Study Bible, Hosea 4.6a).

    Schmidt writes regarding liberty and justice as seen by today’s culture:

    “The liberty and justice that are enjoyed by humans in Western societies and in some non-Western countries are increasingly seen as the products of a benevolent, secular government that is the provider of all things. There seems to be no awareness that the liberties and rights that are currently operative in free societies of the West are to a great degree the result of Christianity’s influence (248). History is replete with examples of individuals who acted as a law unto themselves “often curtailing, even obliterating the natural rights and freedoms of the country’s citizens (249). Christianity’s influence, however, set into motion the belief that man is accountable to God and that the law is the same regardless of status. More than one thousand years before the birth of Christ the biblical requirement given by Moses comprised an essential component of the principle that “no man is above the law.”

    http://crossandquill.com/journey/the-influence-of-christianity-on-western-civilization/

    Steve says “..If so it has nothing to do with the non existent mythical Jesus Christ who even if he did exist would be nothing more than a grandiose, psychopathic and delusional cult leader and failed lying messiah…”

    You are hilarious my friend…. Just listen to yourself… What you are now doing is babbling rants out of hatred. Wake up and smell the coffee…. It has everything to do with Jesus Christ…. You have not bothered to answer why Christian missions outnumber all other religious and secular ones, all because people have decided to dedicate their lives to teachings of the messiah, who taught people to love their enemies and to do good to others. Jesus Christ is the one every single human on earth has some kind of contention about… If not, why are we even having this conversation?
    Jesus Christ asks… Who do you say I am? to every human being….
    C.S Lewis merely provokes you to thinking more clearly who this astounding personality means to you.

    Cheers

  25. blitz2b says:

    Steve says “..So then is Jesus going to come back from heaven yes or no? Does the bible say Jesus ascended to heaven (his physical body)? …”

    Don’t know where you are going with this, because I never denied the second coming of Christ.

    Steve says “…Bin Laden claimed the same why I shouldn’t believe this criminal but I should accept the claims of an eccentric cult leader from 1st century Palestine?…”

    That is a very strange statement… Bin Laden is dead and his corpse had been digested and decomposed by creatures of the deep. He will probably be forgotten pretty soon. However our whole of history is divided by a single personality (B.C and A.D)…. by none other than the one you despise so much.

    Every morning when you wake up to a new day or write the date on a document, it will remind you of the God-man who’s birth marks the start and end of events of our everyday life…
    Love Him or hate Him, the impact of Christ’s existence is proof of His indelible impression in even your own life.

    quote “…What death and resurrection? There is no evidence Jesus even existed – let alone that he was resurrected…”

    You should really do a little research for yourself…. Here read these quotes from non-Christian sources…

    Tacitus:
    “Nero fastened the guilt … on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of … Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome….”[5]

    Pliny the Younger
    “They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food – but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.”[10]

    Josephus
    “About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he … wrought surprising feats…. {(He was the Christ.) … Interpolation} When Pilate …condemned him to be crucified, those who had . . . come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared … restored to life…. And the tribe of Christians … has … not disappeared.”[17]

    Talmud
    “On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald … cried, “He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy.”

    Lucian
    “The Christians … worship a man to this day – the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account…. [It] was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws.”[27]

    Please read in it’s entirety here…
    http://www.bethinking.org/jesus/ancient-evidence-for-jesus-from-non-christian-sources

    contd…

  26. blitz2b says:

    Steve says “…Then why is Jesus so arrogant and disrespectful towards his family? Also his followers (on his command) left their families to Starve to death so again JC is a hypocrite…”

    I don’t think that Jesus was ignoring His family or that He was being disrespectful to them. That is simply your interpretation of it. As for the families of Jesus’ followers “starving to death”… A bit of a hyperbole …. don’t you think? I mean, if you analyze middle eastern families since the days of Christ till today, they consist of many offspring, for economic reasons. If one or more dies, there were many others to care of the remaining members of the family.

    Steve says “…This is what Jesus in fact taught – I.e have no thought for tomorrow hate your families abandon your businesses and come and be saved by me from the hellfire which is coming soon. This is a sick immoral teaching and only a sick immoral man could preach it – unless (as Lewis says and which is his point) he is God…”

    Don’t you get tired of chasing your own tail?…. C.S Lewis said no such nonsense, stop disrespecting him by your incorrect paraphrasing or attributing your twisted interpretations onto him …. I’m afraid that this does not merit a response from me.

    Contd..

  27. blitz2b says:

    Steve, I have a few moments to spare so I will tackle some of the questions…

    Steve says “….Rubbish and you also lied when you said all three accounts placed the timing before the transfiguration…”

    How did I lie.. Here read for yourself…

    Mathew 16:28 “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”
    Mathew 17;1 Narrates the events of the Transfiguration..

    Mark 9:1 Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power.”
    Mark 9:2 Narrates the events of the Transfiguration

    Luke 9:27 “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God.”
    Luke 9:28 Narrates the events of the Transfiguration.

    That could have been one way that some of the disciples “saw” the Kingdom of God,

    Another explanation of “seeing” of the Kingdom of God might be pointing more towards the ascension of Christ shortly before Pentecost.

    Acts 1:6-11 (ESV)
    6 So when they had come together, they asked him, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” 7 He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority. 8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” 9 And when he had said these things, as they were looking on, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight. 10 And while they were gazing into heaven as he went, behold, two men stood by them in white robes, 11 and said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven.”

    And yet another explanation could have meant that Jesus was describing what happens to someone when He becomes their Savior, or as in the scripture above, He was saying the Kingdom of God had already come because the Messiah was on earth. Those that accept Jesus as Savior will see the Kingdom of God before they die.

    Also many of the disciples actually “saw” the kingdom of God.
    Acts 7:54
    54 “When the council members heard Stephen’s speech, they were angry and furious. 55 But Stephen was filled with the Holy Spirit. He looked toward heaven, WHERE HE SAW our glorious God and Jesus standing at his right side.56 Then Stephen said, “I SEE HEAVEN OPEN and the Son of Man standing at the right side of God!”
    John and Peter “Saw” visions of Jesus in His kingdom during their lifetimes.

    contd…

  28. Face_The_Truth says:

    http://www.kyroot.com/

    HELL

    Christianity’s invention of HELL is a gift to anyone seeking truth because it decisively reveals the man-made nature of the Christian faith.

    HELL is not discussed in the Old Testament, but that didn’t stop Jesus the Nazarene Jew from announcing it many times in the Christian Gospels, mostly in a very threatening tone!

    Jesus the Nazarene Jew made sure to let us know that most people will be sentenced there to suffer unending physical pain.

    Here are three of the forty-five Gospel scriptures where Jesus the Nazarene Jew mentions HELL:

    Matthew 5:28-29:

    “But I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.”

    Matthew 13:41-42:

    “The Son of Man will send forth His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all stumbling blocks, and those who commit lawlessness, and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

    Mark 9:45-46:

    “And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.”

    A belief in HELL is unavoidable if one is to believe in Jesus the Nazarene Jew.

    If HELL doesn’t exist, then why would God have allowed it to be so prominently addressed in the Bible?

    This point cannot be overstated.

    If God is as most Christians claim, all-knowing, all-seeing, and all-powerful, then God would not have allowed a concept so ultimate and absolute as Hell to be documented in the most important scriptures of the Christian faith (the Gospels) if it was not a factual place of post-life punishment(s).

    This elicits an unsettling comparison.

    Adolf Hitler dispatched captured Jews to the concentration camps and gas chambers for no reason other than their ethnic identity.

    This was a temporal punishment; it sometimes lasted only a few days!

    God, on the other hand, is prepared to send good, well-accomplished, and generous people to a place of everlasting punishment and torture for the ‘crime’ of not believing in something for which no credible evidence exists.

    The God of the Bible is, in effect, worse than Adolf Hitler.

    This brings up another interesting point.

    Christians claim that the Bible is the backbone of the United States Constitution.

    The Eighth Amendment to the Constitution states that “cruel and unusual punishments [shall not be] inflicted”.

    It should be obvious that placing a person in HELL is both cruel and unusual.

    Consequently, Christianity violates the United States Constitution!

    Any person possessing critical thinking skills can understand that a magnificently powerful God would have no incentive, interest, or even the slightest inclination to inflict pain and suffering on already dead people who are non-believers of Christianity.

    HELL makes no sense and it represents an ill-fated and entirely avoidable error in the foundation of Christianity.

    http://www.kyroot.com/

  29. blitz2b says:

    Steve….. I’m a little pressed for time these days… Will respond to you soon though…
    Have a good one!

  30. Face_The_Truth says:

    http://www.kyroot.com/

    THE BOOK OF REVELATION AND THE MISINTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE

    Modern Christians consider the BOOK OF REVELATION to be about the end of the world.

    This is not the case.

    The BOOK OF REVELATION was written by a Jew who may or may not have been named John, but definitely NOT one of Jesus’s disciples, while he was stationed on the Greek island of Patmos.

    It is likely that the author was a preacher.

    The book is principally about what the author considered to be the end of his world, specifically the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans in AD 70.

    At that time 60,000 Roman soldiers stormed Jerusalem, burned down the Jewish Temple, and killed countless Jews, but Jewish God Jehovah did NOT help miserable Jews!

    It was end of the world for those Jews who had expected Jesus the Nazarene Jew to return and restore the holy land to Jewish God Jehovah’s chosen people.

    What happened was the exact opposite of these expectations!

    The author was trying to rally the Jews and present his vision that Jewish God Jehovah would return to destroy the Romans and restore the Kingdom of the Jews.

    The reference to an Anti-Christ is a metaphor for the Roman Emperor, Nero, and the number 666 spells out Nero’s imperial name with the Jewish numerology system.

    The author did not feel safe at the time to actually spell out Nero’s name!

    So, in essence, the BOOK OF REVELATION is a lamentation for the disaster at Jerusalem, a call to rally the Jews to a brighter future, and a screed against the ‘demonic’ Romans, the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.

    Elaine Pagels, one of the world’s leading biblical scholars did extensive research to untangle the mystical nature of this BOOK OF REVELATION.

    http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/31/four-big-myths-about-the-book-of-revelation/

    Modern Christians have used their misinterpretation of this BOOK OF REVELATION, which was one of many similar books but the only one that made it into the Bible, to define a whole host of religious dogma, including the appearance of an Anti-Christ, the Tribulation, and the Battle of Armageddon, all seen as future apocalyptic events!

    What this shows is that scripture is widely open to being misused and thus it becomes an unreliable guide to defining reality.

    The Christian failure to understand the BOOK OF REVELATION, its inclusion in the Bible, and the false doctrines that it spawned is solid evidence against the authenticity of Christianity.

    http://www.kyroot.com/

  31. Steve says:

    Steve says”…..Visions of the future not metaphors if you don’t take it literally because it’s absurd then by rights you have to claim all the other absurd nonsense in the bible is “metaphor”.
    “Have you ever had a vision Steve? Or have you ever spoken to someone who has? … Your comments are subjective and amateurish…
    People have seen visions and had dreams that almost always contain symbols…. Ever heard of Nostradamus?” So then is Jesus going to come back from heaven yes or no? Does the bible say Jesus ascended to heaven (his physical body)? Yes it does. Does it say Jesus will return in the clouds with Angels and the stars will fall from the sky? Yes it does. Therefore this is your belief – which is not accepted by any mainstream form of Christianity and not supported by the scriptures- and therefore worthless. https://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-in-the-clouds.html

    Quote “…Your omnipotent God could have done that but he must have too busy being nailed to a cross …”
    “I guess if you believe in an everlasting life hereafter then the salvation of souls would take precedence over their temporal lives now wouldn’t it?…. Bin Laden claimed the same why I shouldn’t believe this criminal but I should accept the claims of an eccentric cult leader from 1st century Palestine?

    “His death and resurrection proves that He was so much more” What death and resurrection? There is no evidence Jesus even existed – let alone that he was resurrected.

    Quote “…I don’t believe that I don’t even believe a Jesus Christ figure ever even existed….”
    Fair enough… With Christ absolutely no compulsions are required. You eventually choose to be in the presence of God…. Or not…. “No one will drag you kicking and screaming.” Actually that is exactly what Jesus and Christianity teaches.
    Quote”…They claim its “in his name …”.And what harm do you see in that?…. ” Because a mad man and his insane doctrines get credit for things which he shouldn’t be credited for.

    Quote “….all people that do good should be praised for it – but not their gods and prophets who had nothing to do with it….”
    Have you done any thing good to or for someone in the name of Dawkins recently?… “He states that there is no such thing as good or evil…. People simply dance to the tune of their DNA….” That’s right you have no choice about a having conscience – if you have one. Empathy is wired in the genes.

    Has Lawrence Crouse ever motivated you to feed the hungry clothe the naked or shelter the homeless? Again I say if they have then kudos to you….” It is the inventions and ideas of people clever people like Dawkins which made civilisation if it was left in the hands of death cults like Christianity we human beings would be extinct a long time ago.
    “People need inspirations to be motivated.

    The life and teachings of Jesus Christ have inspired millions to do works of charity in His name… That is why Christian missions out number all other secular or religious missions.” Is this the same Jesus who commanded his followers to give up their livelihoods and leave and hate their families and join him to be saved from the soon to arrive hellfire? The same Jesus who rather the poor starve to death so he can have expensive perfume on his corpse (which soon after rose again and ascended to heaven, does heaven have a shortage of perfumes or something?) If so it has nothing to do with the non existent mythical Jesus Christ who even if he did exist would be nothing more than a grandiose, psychopathic and delusional cult leader and failed lying messiah.

  32. blitz2b says:

    Steve says”…..Visions of the future not metaphors if you don’t take it literally because it’s absurd then by rights you have to claim all the other absurd nonsense in the bible is “metaphor”.

    Have you ever had a vision Steve? Or have you ever spoken to someone who has?… Your comments are subjective and amateurish…
    People have seen visions and had dreams that almost always contain symbols…. Ever heard of Nostradamus?

    Quote “…Your omnipotent God could have done that but he must have too busy being nailed to a cross …”
    I guess if you believe in an everlasting life hereafter then the salvation of souls would take precedence over their temporal lives now wouldn’t it?…. This is where C.S Lewis’ words would ring true…. Jesus cannot simply be considered a good moral teacher. His death and resurrection proves that He was so much more.

    Quote “…I don’t believe that I don’t even believe a Jesus Christ figure ever even existed….”

    Fair enough… With Christ absolutely no compulsions are required. You eventually choose to be in the presence of God…. Or not…. No one will drag you kicking and screaming.

    Quote”…They claim its “in his name …”.And what harm do you see in that?…. If the ulterior goal is to help humanity, why should motive bother you?
    Quote “….all people that do good should be praised for it – but not their gods and prophets who had nothing to do with it….”

    Have you done any thing good to or for someone in the name of Dawkins recently?… He states that there is no such thing as good or evil…. People simply dance to the tune of their DNA….Has Lawrence Crouse ever motivated you to feed the hungry clothe the naked or shelter the homeless? Again I say if they have then kudos to you….

    People need inspirations to be motivated.
    The life and teachings of Jesus Christ have inspired millions to do works of charity in His name… That is why Christian missions out number all other secular or religious missions.

    Cont’d…

  33. Face_The_Truth says:

    http://www.kyroot.com/

    CHRISTIANITY STARTED AS AN END-OF-THE-WORLD CULT

    In much the way we view the cults of David Koresh, Wayne Bent, Jim Jones, and Marshall Applewhite as being erroneous movements predicting the imminent end of the world, we can view Jesus the Nazarene Jew in the same light!

    It is clear from Jesus’s ministry that Jesus the Nazarene Jew believed the end was very near, as described in these scriptures taken from:

    https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateAChristian/comments/3m1hxn/i_contend_that_christianity_is_descended_from_an/

    IMMINENT END OF THE WORLD:

    1 John 2:18 “Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the anti-christ is coming, even now many anti-christs have come.

    This is how we know it is the last hour.”

    Matthew 16:27-28 “For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory o His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds.

    Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.”

    Matthew 24:34 “Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.”

    Matthew 10:23 “When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another.

    Truly I tell you, you will not finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.”

    SELL YOUR BELONGINGS:

    Luke 14:33 “In the same way, those of you who do not give up everything you have cannot be my disciples.”

    Matthew 19:21 Jesus the Nazarene Jew answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in Christian heaven.

    Then come, follow me.”

    Luke 12:33 “Sell your possessions and give to the poor.

    Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in Christian heaven that will never fail, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys.”

    Luke 18:22 When Jesus the Nazarene Jew heard this, he said to him, “You still lack one thing.

    Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.

    Then come, follow me.”

    Please note that only Luke 18:22 and Matthew 19:21 concern the story of Jesus the Nazarene Jew advising the wealthy young man about the difficulty of entering Christian heaven!

    These verses are included for completeness, and to acknowledge the existence of this story because the most common objection I receive to the claim that Jesus the Nazarene Jew required followers to sell their belongings is that I must be talking about this particular story and misunderstanding the message it conveys.

    However, in Luke 12:33 and Luke 14:33 Jesus the Nazarene Jew is not speaking to that man but to a crowd following him, and in 14:33 Jesus the Nazarene Jew specifically says that those who do not give up everything they have cannot be his disciples.

    It is therefore NOT a recommendation, but a requirement.

    CUT-OFF FAMILY MEMBERS WHO TRY TO STOP YOU:

    Luke 14:26 “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters — yes, even their own life — such a person cannot be my disciple.”

    Matthew 10:35-37 “For I have come to turn a man against his father a daughter against her mother a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law — a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.

    Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me!”

    Matthew 19:29 “And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.”

    The reason that Christianity survived whereas most end-of-the-world cults died is that the authorities were able to finesse a transition to a long-world vision of the faith, reducing the doubt that would otherwise rise from the continued failure for the predicted end to happen.

    Most Christian followers are oblivious to the clear indications that Jesus the Nazarene Jew was predicting the very quick ending of the world.

    Somehow, this concept has been removed from the liturgy, expunged from the Sermons, and generally no longer talked about in Christian circles.

    But, the elephant is in the room and everyone who is NOT wedded to Christian falsehoods and Christian dogma can see it clearly!

    http://www.kyroot.com/

  34. Steve says:

    says who?… You brought up revelations not me… Revelations is clearly the visions of John the disciple….” Visions of the future not metaphors if you don’t take it literally because it’s absurd then by rights you have to claim all the other absurd nonsense in the bible is “metaphor”.

    “Yes I agree the money could have bought food to feed the poor for a bit… But hey would it end world starvation for all time?…. Obviously not…” Your omnipotent God could have done that but he must have too busy being nailed to a cross in order to convince himself to lift the curse he himself placed on humanity for eating a apple in a fairytale creation myth.

    “If you truly believed that Christ was God incarnate why would sacrificing a few ounces of perfume be of any concern?” I don’t believe that I don’t even believe a Jesus Christ figure ever even existed.

    “Do you as an atheist praise the efforts of Christian missions world wide? Do you not see the amount of good being done for the poor destitute and down trodden ask over the world in the name of Christ?” They claim its “in his name”.

    “… Talk is cheap… Get down and dirty with the poor yourself before you complain about the reason for this great movement that cares for humanity.. However….if you are already doing that then kudos to you.” If they care for humanity then it’s has nothing to do with with any mythical “Jesus Christ” all people that do good should be praised for it – but not their gods and prophets who had nothing to do with it.

  35. Steve says:

    “Please note that in all three of these parallel accounts that you mention, which all record Jesus’ words of “seeing the Kingdom of God”, were spoken immediately before the Gospels record the Transfiguration, in which indeed only “some of those standing” there actually saw Jesus in a vision of divine splendor, which was indeed a “preview” of Christ in the Kingdom of God…
    Please read the account of the Transfiguration and you will understand why the three disciples witnessing that glorious account were in awe Christ in all His glory…” Rubbish and you also lied when you said all three accounts placed the timing before the transfiguration.

    “Rationalisation #1: Matthew 16:28 refers to Jesus’ transfiguration, not his second coming.
    The transfiguration of Jesus is a story recorded in Matthew 17, Mark 9, and Luke 9. The first problem is that these Gospels place the transfiguration at different times. In Matthew, it occurs after Jesus made the prediction about his second coming. That might make it seem reasonable to think that it was a fulfillment of the earlier prediction. However, Mark and Luke place the transfiguration event before Jesus made spoke the prophecy. Laying aside the obvious discrepency in timing, we can say for certain that an event occurring before a prediction is made can’t be fulfilling the prediction. The “prediction” wouldn’t be a prediction at all.

    The preceding verse (verse 27) starts off the description of Jesus’ coming by saying he would come “in glory” with angels to dole out judgment to “every man”. That is not what happened in the transfiguration stories. Therefore, the explanation doesn’t work. Some try to make it work by separating verse 28 from the preceding verse so that the two verses talk about different “comings”. This is a baseless tinkering with the passage in order to make a doctrine fit the scripture. The same Christians who do this will accuse other of taking verses out of context when they disagree with an interpretation. Yet, this is exactly what they do here.”

    “I also showed you how Jesus made sure that His mother was taken care of, when on the cross He entrusted her care onto one of His disciples, John.” Then why is Jesus so arrogant and disrespectful towards his family? Also his followers (on his command) left their families to Starve to death so again JC is a hypocrite.

    Steve said (on March 21, 2017 at 12:57 pm) “…Even the famous Christian apologist C.S Lewis admitted if Jesus is not God AND THE WORLD IS ABOUT TO END then he is just another ranter – only a sick man and a evil man could preach such a doctrine….”

    Steve said (on March 21, 2017 at 12:57 pm) “…Even the famous Christian apologist C.S Lewis admitted if Jesus is not God AND THE WORLD IS ABOUT TO END then he is just another ranter – only a sick man and a evil man could preach such a doctrine….”
    You are due an apology… But I won’t hold my breath…” This is what Jesus in fact taught – I.e have no thought for tomorrow hate your families abandon your businesses and come and be saved by me from the hellfire which is coming soon. This is a sick immoral teaching and only a sick immoral man could preach it – unless (as Lewis says and which is his point) he is God.

  36. blitz2b says:

    Steve says “….He also says (Matthew 16.28) “Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.” Is he also talking to future Christians then? What mental gymnastics are you are going to perform to try to wiggle out of this one?…”

    Lol… No mental gymnastics will be attempted, however, I would only give you one observation that I hope would somehow quell some of your doubts on this issue, however I will not twist your arm to accept it…

    Please note that in all three of these parallel accounts that you mention, which all record Jesus’ words of “seeing the Kingdom of God”, were spoken immediately before the Gospels record the Transfiguration, in which indeed only “some of those standing” there actually saw Jesus in a vision of divine splendor, which was indeed a “preview” of Christ in the Kingdom of God…
    Please read the account of the Transfiguration and you will understand why the three disciples witnessing that glorious account were in awe Christ in all His glory…

    Quote “…No if your son doesn’t even think of you as family and treats you like a stranger because you don’t believe in his claims to be God you wouldn’t find it disrespectful?

    “because you don’t believe his claims to be God” ? ? ? Really where did you make such a ridiculous deduction? Mary the mother of Jesus was the very first person on earth to be given the news of the her son being divine..
    Luke 1:34“- How can this be, Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?” 35 The angel replied, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the Holy One to be born will be called the Son of God…”

    Please stop projecting your dubious notions onto the text… No where in the Gospels does it indicate that Mary had doubted the divinity claims of her son..

    I also showed you how Jesus made sure that His mother was taken care of, when on the cross He entrusted her care onto one of His disciples, John.

    In another instance at a wedding feast at Canna, when the host ran out of wine, Mary persuaded her son to work His very first miracle of changing water into wine for the benefit of the host. Jesus at first refused, but later complied to His mother’s request..(John 2:1)

    Quote “…..No UNLESS he is Lord and saviour then what he taught was clearly immoral. And if you don’t believe him to be your Lord and saviour then he MUST either be a mad man, a criminal or the devil no sane moral person would have taught this doctrine…”

    Oh for heaven’s sake, please stop with your ridiculous habit paraphrasing, that completely distorts meanings for your benefit …. it is beneath even you…

    C.S Lesis states this “…You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

    Quote “…Where did you get the end of the world rubbish from?” From the bible where Jesus clearly teaches he will return in the lifetime of his disciples – your pathetic attempts to try to deny this notwithstanding…”

    I knew… I just knew it….right after I typed it I just knew you would muddle this up… and right enough you did just that…. I was certainly not referring to “the end of the world” statements by Jesus strewn all over the Bible… How could you possibly think that I would deny that? Notice that comment came right after the C.S Lewis comment.
    I was talking about whatt you said earlier when you misquoted C.S Lewis… (emphasis in bold)

    Steve said (on March 21, 2017 at 12:57 pm) “…Even the famous Christian apologist C.S Lewis admitted if Jesus is not God AND THE WORLD IS ABOUT TO END then he is just another ranter – only a sick man and a evil man could preach such a doctrine….”

    You are due an apology… But I won’t hold my breath…

    Cheers mate…

  37. blitz2b says:

    Steve says ” In that case then Adam and Eve Noah’s ark, Moses, Virgin birth, turning water into wine, the resurrection of the dead and judgement day are all “allegorical” as well… ”

    says who?… You brought up revelations not me… Revelations is clearly the visions of John the disciple….
    I never did dismiss the exorcism of spirits into the pigs… Why do you keep throwing in red herrings?

    “…He only says this after she praises him and calls him master. Before this to Jesus she was nothing but a gentile dog….”

    It’s hilarious how you argue like a Muslim… ” fire the upteenth time, it’s a figure of speech…. People spoke like that all the time and no one took offence to it then…. Why does it bother you now?
    If you have doubts about Jesus’compassion please read how he cured multitudes of deaf blind and lame and even raised the dead…

    I think you realize that too however you are still nit picking to prove your straw man argument right… I believe this argument has now been thoroughly refuted…

    “…The poor you will always have with you,but you will not always have me.” Jesus cares more about having expensive perfume on his body (soon to be a corpse) in time for his burial than feeding the starving poor! What a great teacher of compassion!…”

    Yes I agree the money could have bought food to feed the poor for a bit… But hey would it end world starvation for all time?…. Obviously not…

    If you truly believed that Christ was God incarnate why would sacrificing a few ounces of perfume be of any concern?… It is only the fact that you are an atheist that you show scorn….

    Do you as an atheist praise the efforts of Christian missions world wide? Do you not see the amount of good being done for the poor destitute and down trodden ask over the world in the name of Christ?… Talk is cheap… Get down and dirty with the poor yourself before you complain about the reason for this great movement that cares for humanity.. However….if you are already doing that then kudos to you.

  38. Face_The_Truth says:

    =====================================================================
    This message is for screen-name Passive_Observer_The_Congenital_Christian_Liar:

    [“Please do not mix OT and NT and ask blitz2b “If God can kill millions in the OT why can’t He destroy ISIS, Boko Haram, etc.”]
    =====================================================================

    THE FALLACY OF DISMISSING THE OLD TESTAMENT

    When confronted with the spectacular brutality of the Old Testament, many Christians respond by saying that Jesus the Nazarene Jew superseded the Old Testament and that the Old Testament does NOT represent the face of Christianity.

    Setting aside for the moment that this attitude flies in the face of reality or even the purported words of Jesus the Nazarene Jew, agreeing with the premise leads Christianity down an even more sordid path.

    The following is taken from:

    http://americanhumanist.org/humanism/Some_Reasons_Why_Humanists_Reject_the_Bible

    In the New Testament, Jewish God became far worse in regard to imposing excessively severe punishments.

    It would be hard to imagine anything more cruel and disproportionate than punishing people with eternal torture for mere disbelief that Jesus the Nazarene Jew was the Son of God.

    The inability to believe that proposition harms no one, and it has been disbelieved by some of the greatest benefactors of humanity.

    Nonetheless, Jewish and Christian God promises to punish them and all other nonbelievers with the most horrible pain conceivable!

    Yes, the Old Testament Jewish God was a brute, but at least he just killed people who mercifully became unconscious after he murdered them.

    But, the New Testament Christian God became the heinous tyrant who saw fit to punish dead people, and not just with a degree of separation, but to an actual place of physical punishment, a sentence that he promised would never end.

    Any congenital Christian liar who says ‘that’s just the Old Testament’ is not playing with a full deck of cards!

  39. Steve says:

    Blitz

    “The entire book of Revelation is allegorical or else the burden of it will be upon you to also explain vivid descriptions of dragons, serpents, the four horsemen and such mentioned therein being literal.” In that case then Adam and Eve Noah’s ark, Moses, Virgin birth, turning water into wine, the resurrection of the dead and judgement day are all “allegorical” as well – which means Christianity is a load of confusing nonsense. So for example When Jesus sent demons into pigs was that also metaphor?

    “Mathew 15:28 “…Then Jesus said to her, “Woman, YOU HAVE GREAT FAITH! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment….”” He only says this after she praises him and calls him master. Before this to Jesus she was nothing but a gentile dog.

    “Don’t like His methods… that’s fine, however that doesn’t prove at all that He was not empathetic now does it….?” Also consider another example “When the disciples saw this, they were indignant. “Why this waste?” they asked. 9 “This perfume could have been sold at a high price and the money given to the poor.”
    10 Aware of this, Jesus said to them, “Why are you bothering this woman? She has done a beautiful thing to me. 11 The poor you will always have with you,but you will not always have me.” Jesus cares more about having expensive perfume on his body (soon to be a corpse) in time for his burial than feeding the starving poor! What a great teacher of compassion!

  40. Steve says:

    “Not so my friend, but don’t feel bad many have made that same mistake in understanding the term “this generation”. Most commentators will tell you that Jesus referred to His contemporary generation. So it’s His followers that Jesus is speaking of. So in essence Christ is predicting that there will still be Christians around when He returns.” No it’s not you made this “explanation” up. He also says (Matthew 16.28) “Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.” Is he also talking to future Christians then? What mental gymnastics are you are going to perform to try to wiggle out of this one? Are you going to claim he is referring to people thousands of years into the future when he says “some of those who are standing here”?

    You are speculating too much from the text. When Jesus was speaking to a group of His disciples, someone said that His mother and brothers were outside and asking to speak to Him (Matt 12:46). Maybe you wanted Jesus to leave His teaching and go rushing to see what His family wanted. However Jesus doesn’t do that, instead H uses this opportunity to teach. He asks a rhetorical question: Who is My mother and who are My brothers (Matt 12:48)? It would be absurd to assume that He is speaking of His biological mother or His brothers, He is talking about those who believe in Him, and by believing in Him, they do what He asks. “Jesus was in no way being disrespectful or rude to His mother or His brothers. ” No if your son doesn’t even think of you as family and treats you like a stranger because you don’t believe in his claims to be God you wouldn’t find it disrespectful? And if he only considered his followers- who he taught to hate their family and who they left to starve to death (no concern to the God man) – to be his family this wouldn’t be disrespectful?

    “I guess I do have to spell it out for you…
    In that qoute Lewis meant that you have to decide if Jesus, because of His lofty claims for you is either a Liar, Lunatic or Lord…. You cannot insult Him by claiming that He was a good moral teacher….” No UNLESS he is Lord and saviour then what he taught was clearly immoral. And if you don’t believe him to be your Lord and saviour then he MUST either be a mad man, a criminal or the devil no sane moral person would have taught this doctrine. This is what Lewis is saying to non Christians who claim they don’t accept him to be god but think he was a good moral teacher – and other nonsense which people say about him.

    “Where did you get the end of the world rubbish from?” From the bible where Jesus clearly teaches he will return in the lifetime of his disciples – your pathetic attempts to try to deny this notwithstanding. More evidence from the bible Jesus taught this https://blacknonbelievers.wordpress.com/jesus-failed-prophecy-about-his-return/ )

  41. @Steve
    If you do not understand the difference between the two statements of Jesus, one to the public and the other to the disciples of John, who is also hated by the Jewish clergy, then I don’t think you will understand anything in the scripture. You wish Jesus before starting His 3 year ministry He should say to the Chief Priest “I am the son of God “and God, in the OT style, should save Him from death. Read how they want to trap Jesus in Mark 11: 27-29 and Mark 12:13-17
    Please do not mix OT and NT and ask blitz2b “If God can kill millions in the OT why can’t He destroy ISIS, Boko Haram, etc. This will be a 5th standard student’s question who do not understand the overarching theme of the Scripture and the history’s fulfilment in the eventual plan and purpose of God.

  42. blitz2b says:

    Steve says “…When Jesus is talking of hell (such as here) he is not speaking in metaphor…”

    I have given you another quote from Jesus where He describes hell as the “Outer Darkness”…. Could you please also take that into consideration…

    Quote “… (or when the book of revelation speaks of the burning lake of sulfur neither is that metaphor)…”

    The entire book of Revelation is allegorical or else the burden of it will be upon you to also explain vivid descriptions of dragons, serpents, the four horsemen and such mentioned therein being literal.

    Quote “… “It was her faith that was being put to the test…” Really?…”

    Yes Really! ! ! Jesus mentions it clearly…. If you had trouble locating that phrase, here it is in emphasis…

    Mathew 15:28 “…Then Jesus said to her, “Woman, YOU HAVE GREAT FAITH! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment….”

    Let us be adults and avoid assumptions….. If that is what the historical text says, let us give it some credence.

    Quote “…..“This is all the defense I can offer you on this point.” Because you don’t have a defence for Jesus’s shocking lack of empathy….”

    Absolutely false…. It’s because I don’t know what other you would need to convince you. I think you raise a fallacious straw argument. Consequently, Jesus did heal the woman’s child, it’s not like he left her hanging in despair. Jesus being considered a Rabbi took every opportunity to teach people by first encouraging a response from them…. Don’t like His methods… that’s fine, however that doesn’t prove at all that He was not empathetic now does it….?

    Quote “:….This is what it says in the bible and Jesus taught that the world would end in his generation, 30 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened…”

    Not so my friend, but don’t feel bad many have made that same mistake in understanding the term “this generation”. Most commentators will tell you that Jesus referred to His contemporary generation. So it’s His followers that Jesus is speaking of. So in essence Christ is predicting that there will still be Christians around when He returns.

    Quote “…..From the bible. In Matthew he clearly says only his followers are brothers and not even his mother is family….”

    You are speculating too much from the text. When Jesus was speaking to a group of His disciples, someone said that His mother and brothers were outside and asking to speak to Him (Matt 12:46). Maybe you wanted Jesus to leave His teaching and go rushing to see what His family wanted. However Jesus doesn’t do that, instead H uses this opportunity to teach. He asks a rhetorical question: Who is My mother and who are My brothers (Matt 12:48)? It would be absurd to assume that He is speaking of His biological mother or His brothers, He is talking about those who believe in Him, and by believing in Him, they do what He asks. Jesus was in no way being disrespectful or rude to His mother or His brothers. It is certain that after He said that He went outside to speak with them. These verses don’t say that He totally ignored her either. We can’t read into the text what is not there…

    Quote “… Lewis says exactly what I said. If Jesus was not God (and the world was not about to end) then he must be sick evil man. Lewis admits this….”

    No he does not… sorry to say that you have really lost it…

    I guess I do have to spell it out for you…
    In that qoute Lewis meant that you have to decide if Jesus, because of His lofty claims for you is either a Liar, Lunatic or Lord…. You cannot insult Him by claiming that He was a good moral teacher….

    Where did you get the end of the world rubbish from?

    Nice chatting

    Cheers

  43. Face_The_Truth says:

    My sincere apology to all readers at FaithFreedom.Org website for not including the source:

    My previously quoted sentences were taken from the following book:

    “THE PRIVATE DIARY OF ANAND RANGA PILLAI”

    Translated from Tamil by Rev. J. Frederick Price and K. Rangachari, Madras, 1904, Volume IV.

    LINK

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ananda_Ranga_Pillai

  44. Face_The_Truth says:

    =====================================================================
    An Example Of Historic Christian Crimes On Non-Believers
    =====================================================================

    The following account of what the Christians did to “Hindus” in Pondicherry has been taken from the Diary maintained by Anand Ranga Pillai, scion of a Tamil merchant family from Madras.

    Anand Ranga Pillai’s family along with several others had migrated to Pondicherry at the invitation of the French who occupied that town as the headquarters of their possessions in Indian subcontinent.

    Anand Ranga Pillai was appointed Chief Dubash towards the end of 1747 A.D., five years after M. Dupleix became the Governor of Pondicherry.

    Anand Ranga Pillai held the post till 1756 A.D., two years after Dupleix’s departure.

    Anand Ranga Pillai had, however, kept an account of what he saw and heard since September 1736 A.D.

    Anand Ranga Pillai’s Diary which was written in Tamil continued till 1761 A.D. when Anand Ranga Pillai died.

    The editor of the translation in English writes as follows regarding the treatment of “Hindus” in Pondicherry:

    “The religious policy pursued in the early part of the century at Pondicherry is remarkable.

    It appears to have been ordered that no temple should be repaired; Nainiyappau was ordered to be converted within six months under pain of losing his post as Chief Dubash; “Hindu” festivals were prohibited on Sundays and the principal Christian feasts; even when these regulations had caused the greater part of the town to be deserted, the Jesuits urged that a temple should be pulled down instead of conciliatory measures being employed. (Registre des deliberations du Conseil Souverin, i, pp.125, 140, 142, 153 etc. This valuable collection of documents is being printed by the “Societe di 1’Histoire de 1’Inde Francaise” at Pondicherry.)

    It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that in this zealous Christian proselytising policy lies one reason why Pondicherry was far inferior to Madras as a commercial centre; and perhaps the same cause also contributed to the absolute failure of Dupleix’s efforts to induce the Madras merchants to settle under the French.”

    The Vedapuri Iswaran Temple was the principal place of worship for the “Hindus” of Pondicherry.

    The Jesuit missionaries of Christianism built the Church of St. Paul adjacent to it and obtained an order from the King of France that the “Hindu” temple should be destroyed.

    It could not be done due to strong resistance from the “Hindus” who constituted the most important native community in the town.

    Anand Ranga Pillai gives an account of how the “Hindu” temple was desecrated repeatedly by the Jesuits of Christianism and finally destroyed with active help from the French establishment, particularly Madame Dupleix.

    The first incident at the Vedapuri “Hindu” Temple took place on March 17, 1746.

    “On Wednesday night at 11,” writes Anand Ranga Pillai, “two unknown persons entered the Iswaran Temple carrying in a vessel of liquid filth, which they poured on the heads of the “Hindu” Gods around the altar, and into the temple, through the drain of the shrine of Iswaran; and having broken the pot of dirt on the image of the God Nandi, they went away through apart of the building which had been demolished.

    Early this morning, when the Nambiyan and the servants of the temple, opening the main gate, entered, and saw the nuisance which had been committed, they at once reported the matter to their superiors, and to the Mahanattars; and bringing them to the spot, showed them what had been done.”

    As the report of this sacrilege spread, “Hindus”, “from the Brahman to the pariah”, held a public meeting.

    The Governor, Dupleix, when he heard of it, sent his chief peon to disperse the meeting.

    The peon “struck a Chetti on the cheek” and ordered the people to go away.

    The “Hindu” people, however, defied the order and protested, “You better kill us all.”

    When this resistance was reported to the Governor, he sent for some “Hindu” leaders.

    The Christian Governor reprimanded them but promised to settle the matter in consulation with Anand Ranga Pillai who was present.

    “No sooner,” continues Anand Ranga Pillai, “had the Mahanattars departed than from 100 to 200 Muhammadans of Mahe appeared before the Governor, for the purpose of shooting the “Hindus”.

    As prior to the arrival of these, the Mahanattars had consented to a settlement, he directed the Muhammadans to guard the four gates, so that they could not go out.

    The Muhammadans obeyed this order.

    All this took place before 4 this afternoon.

    What will occur hereafter is not known.”

    Anand Ranga Pillai does not record what settlement, if any, was arrived at.

    The next incident recorded by Anand Ranga Pillai took place on December 31, 1746 A.D.

    “It was reported,” Anand Ranga Pillai writes, “to-night at 7, that an earthen jar, filled with filth, was thrown from within the grounds of the Church of St. Paul, into the “Hindu” temple of Vedapuri Iswaran.

    It very nearly fell on the head of Sankara Aiyan, who was at the shrine of the God Pillaiyar, on his way round the temple, in the performance of religious duties.

    When the jar struck the ground, and broke to pieces, the stench emitted was unbearable.”

    The outrage was reported to Anand Ranga Pillai by ten men including some “heads of castes.”

    Anand Ranga Pillai made a representation to the Christian Governor who deputed some councillors to “inspect the place.”

    But before the officials could start on their job, they were briefed privately by Madame Dupleix, the Christian Governor’s wife, who was in league with the Christian priests of St. Paul.

    An inspection at the “Hindu” temple followed.

    “The gentlemen,” continues Anand Ranga Pillai, “then entered the temple, smelt the broken jar, pronounced that it had contained filth, and judging by the position of the scattered fragments, arrived at the decision that it must have been thrown from the church, and that there could be no mistake on that point.”

    But before a report could be submitted to the Christian Governor, a member of the team insisted that the “priests should be consulted.”

    So the team went to the church and rang its bell.

    “On hearing the sound,” records Anand Ranga Pillai, “the senior Christian priest, Father Coeurdoux, came out, and opening the door, asked the business that had brought them there.

    They then explained what had taken place.

    They remarked that, from the position of the pieces of the broken jar, and an examination of the ground about the “Hindu” temple and Christian church, there could be no doubt that the direction from which the jar came was that of the latter.

    They also noticed that the stones at the base of the temple wall on the side of the Christian church had all been pulled down.

    When those holding the investigation urged that this was not right, the Christian priest exclaimed: ‘It was not our doing.

    They, themselves, must have dug them out, with the view of lodging a complaint, and getting the wall, which is in a ruinous state, restored.’”

    Finally, a report was made to the Christian Governor that “the complaint made was true, and that the Christian priests of the Church of St. Paul were responsible.”

    The Christian Governor asked for a written report and exclaimed, “I will not only write to France regarding this affair, but will also take such action with respect to it, that the Christian priests of the Church of St. Paul will ever remember it.”

    But the Christian Governor went to bed soon after and did not remember the matter when he rose next morning!

    Anand Ranga Pillai, however, brought it to his notice.

    The Christian Governor told him that “with a view to making the people of the Church of St. Paul smart for what they had done, he would consult with the members of the Council and take measures accordingly.”

    Next, the Governor himself accompanied Anand Ranga Pillai to the Christian church in order to make further enquiries.

    The Christian priests who used to be warm when meeting Anand Ranga Pillai were now dead cold towards him, “the reason being that they thought it was I who had brought the matter of the filth being thrown into the Vedapuri Iswaran “Hindu” temple, on the previous night, to the notice of the Governor, and had him to send the Councillors, to inquire regarding it.”

    The Christian Governor agreed to meet the Mahanattars on January 5, 1747 and listen to their complaint about desecration of the “Hindu” temple.

    In the morning of that day, however, the Christian Governor asked Anand Ranga Pillai to advise the Mahanattars not to raise the question of the “Hindu” temple when they met him.

    Anand Ranga Pillai advised them accordingly and in private when they arrived.

    But “in spite of my advice they began to do so” and the Governor “rose up, addressed a few kind words to them and went into his wife’s room.”

    That was the end of the matter so far as the second incident was concerned.

    Anand Ranga Pillai started functioning as the Chief Dubash when the earlier incumbent who was a native Christian and had held the post for 20 years, died on June 25, 1747 A.D.

    Anand Ranga Pillai’s formal appointment, however, was still in the future.

    The Christian Jesuits became more and more hostile to Anand Ranga Pillai because they thought Anand Ranga Pillai was coming in the way of their demolition of the “Hindu” temple.

    The Christian Governor had a low opinion of the Christian Jesuits whom he regarded as “deceitful people.”

    But the Christian Governor was under pressure from Christians in the town and advised Anand Ranga Pillai to meet the Superior in the Church of St. Paul and try to improve his relations with them.

    The Superior who was no other than that criminal, Father Coeurdoux, asked Anand Ranga Pillai to become a Christian when Anand Ranga Pillai met him on September 20, 1747 A.D.

    “We all know,” said Father Coeurdoux, “that you belong to a respectable family that has been held in esteem for generations… But if you had been a Christian, many others would have become so too.”

    LINK

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ananda_Ranga_Pillai

  45. Face_The_Truth says:

    Anand Ranga Pillai was surprised and protested that he had always been impartial between “Hindus” and Christians.

    But the Christian priest persisted, “Say that you will, I am sure that all will become Christian if only you would set the example.

    We should be quite satisfied with you as Chief Dubash if you were a Christian.

    As you are not, we have had several times to urge M. Dupleix to appoint one.

    We have written to Europe, and we will write again.

    We shall do our utmost, we will speak in the Council, for we have got a letter from the King that the post must be reserved for Christians.”

    He also asked Anand Ranga Pillai “to explain to the heads of castes the orders about the Vedapuri Iswaran “Hindu” Temple”, to which Anand Ranga Pillai replied that he “would spare no pains.”

    A man named Annapurna Ayyan came to Pillai on October 8 and reported, “Louis Prakasan came and told me that the Karikal priest [Coeurdoux] wished to see me.

    When I went to him, he told me I was a good man, always did as they wished, and there was a favour I must promise them.

    I asked what it was that I could do.

    He said he had heard that you [Anand Ranga Pillai] would do whatever I asked, and I was therefore to ask you to get the Vedapuri Iswaran Temple pulled down.

    I told him it was impossible, that you would never listen to me, and that, had it been possible, Kanakaraya Mudali would have got it done.

    The Christian priest answered that he [Mudali] did not because he was a Christian and besides he was not so clever as you.

    He said you could persuade people with a thousand reasons, put your opponents to silence, and do as you pleased.

    If I explained the matter to you and got the temple removed, he promised they never would forget it so long as their church lasted.

    That is what he told me.”

    Anand Ranga Pillai laughed and said that “they were always saying things like that.”

    But Anand Ranga Pillai suspected that Ayyan had “promised his [Pillai’s] assistance to the Christian priests.”

    The Christian Jesuits succeeded in destroying the temple in September 1748 A.D. when Pondicherry was besieged by the British Christian imperialists and the bulk of the “Hindu” population had moved out of the town.

    “This morning,” writes Anand Ranga Pillai in his Diary for September 7, “tents were pitched round St. Paul’s Church, and two hundred soldiers and a hundred sepoys were quartered there.

    The Christian Governor, M. Paradis and others went thither and desired that a mortar might be mounted there.

    But they asked that the “Hindu” Iswaran temple should be pulled down.

    I think the Christian Governor may have arranged (through Madame) for their help in certain Europe matters; so, as this is a time of war, there was much talk, a council was held, and the Christian priests were told that the “Hindu” Iswaran temple would be demolished.

    The Christian Governor then went home.”

    LINK

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ananda_Ranga_Pillai

  46. Face_The_Truth says:

    Anand Ranga Pillai was very unhappy when he heard the news, “The Governor,” he wrote, “has dishonoured himself.

    Firstly, he has listened to his wife’s words and allowed her to manage all affairs and give all orders…

    The Christian priests of St. Paul’s Church have been trying for the last fifty years to pull down the “Hindu” Vedapuri Iswaran temple; former Governors said that this was the country of the Tamils, that they would earn dishonour if they interfered with the “Hindu” temple, that the merchants would cease to come here, and that the town would decay; they even set aside the king’s order to demolish the temple; and their glory shone like the sun.

    But the Christian Governor listens to his Christian wife and has ordered the “Hindu” temple to be destroyed, thereby adding shame to his dishonour.”

    The “Hindu” temple was now doomed to destruction.

    “Yesterday,” Anand Ranga Pillai continued in his Diary of September 8, “200 soldiers, 60 or 70 troopers and sepoys were stationed at St. Paul’s Church in view of the matter in hand.

    This morning, M. Gerbault (the Engineer), the Christian priests with diggers, masons, coolies and others, 200 in all, with spades, pick-axes and whatever is needed to demolish walls, began to pull down the southern wall of the “Hindu” Vedapuri Iswaran temple and the out-houses.

    At once the temple managers, Brahmans and mendicants came and told me.”

    Anand Ranga Pillai recollected how the Governor had been working to this end since his arrival.

    “Before M. Dupleix,” Anand Ranga Pillai observed, “was made Governor, and when he was only a Councillor, all the Europeans and some Tamils used to say that if he became Governor, he would destroy the “Hindu” Iswaran temple.

    The saying has come to pass.

    Ever since his appointment, he has been seeking to do so, but he has had no opportunity.

    He tried to get Muttayya Pillai to do it in May or June 1743 A.D.

    But the latter would not consent, though the Christian Governor threatened to cut his ears off and beat him publicly and even to hang him.”

    LINK

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ananda_Ranga_Pillai

  47. Face_The_Truth says:

    Anand Ranga Pillai reflected on the situation that had been deliberately created by the Governor, taking advantage of the British invasion.

    “The Christian Governor,” Anand Ranga Pillai wrote, “allowed the Brahmans to depart, because ten or twenty of them might be bold enough to suffer death, and because he suspected them of being spies; but he ordered that those who went should not be readmitted, thus taking advantage of the war to get rid of the Brahmans, though other caste people might return.

    So all, both men and women, had departed.

    Besides, he has posted soldiers to frighten away even fifty or a hundred persons, should so many come to speak on behalf of the Brahmans.

    The four gates of the Fort have been closed by reason of the troubles; and he has ordered the destruction of the temple.

    What can we do?

    There are not even ten of the heads of castes to assemble and speak.

    We can do nothing, because he has taken advantage of this time of war to accomplish his longstanding object and demolish the temple.”

    So Anand Ranga Pillai advised the Brahmans that “they could do nothing but remove the images and other things to the Kalahasti Iswaran Temple.”

    But they did not agree with him and said, “We will speak to the Governor about it, and tell him that if he insists, some of us will die and none will care to remain here.”

    Anand Ranga Pillai told them that the Governor had made up his mind, that he was not likely to listen to them, that the “Hindu” temple was already being demolished, and that the only thing that could be done was to save the images and other sacred articles.

    “I heard just now,” Anand Ranga Pillai said to them, “that the southern wall and the out-houses had been pulled down, and that they were demolishing the Arthamantapam and Mahamantapam.

    Don’t delay.

    Remember how blindly matters are being driven on.

    The St. Paul’s Christian priests will send the European soldiers, Coffrees, Topasses, and even their parish converts with clubs into the “Hindu” temple to carry away, break and damage all they can.

    If you complain, they will only beat you.

    So you will lose not only the temple, but also the articles, the images used in the festivals, the Pillaiyar and all the other images.

    Anyone can do what he pleases here now, and there is no man to question him.

    Still worse is it in matters connected with our temples.

    By his wife’s advice, M. Dupleix has accomplished what has been attempted in vain for the last fifty years.

    LINK

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ananda_Ranga_Pillai

  48. Face_The_Truth says:

    But now the time has come.

    I cannot describe the boundless joy of the St. Paul’s Christian priests, the Tamil and pariha converts, Madame Dupleix and M. Dupleix.

    In their delight, they will surely enter the “Hindu” temple, and will not depart, without breaking and trampling under foot the idols and destroying all they can.

    So go quickly and remove all the articles.”

    More news came in quick succession.

    “Just then,” proceeds Anand Ranga Pillai, “news was brought that Christian Father Coeurdoux, the Superior of St. Paul’s Church, had kicked the inner shrine with his foot, and had ordered the Coffrees to remove the doors, and the Christians to break the Vahanams.”

    Anand Ranga Pillai now went to the Governor, hoping that the latter would himself mention the subject.

    But the Governor did not, as if he was unware of what was being done.

    Some ten heads of castes also arrived and “salaamed the Governor.”

    The Governor did not talk to them directly but asked Varlam, a native Christian, to find from them what they wanted.

    Varlam told him that “they sought his permission to remove the articles from the temple which was being destroyed.”

    The Governor “gave them the permission but told the peons to beat and disperse the crowd.”

    The Christian Governor’s permission, however, served no purpose.

    Anand Ranga Pillai records: “I heard that the priests of St. Paul’s Church told the Coffrees, soldiers and pariahs to beat the heads of castes when they went to the temple to remove their articles.

    They were scarcely suffered to approach the “Hindu” temple, and when they were removing the Vahanams, shoulder-poles and temple documents, each man was beaten twenty or thirty times.

    It was with extreme difficulty that they rescued the idols used in the processions and the Pillaiyar.

    LINK

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ananda_Ranga_Pillai

  49. Face_The_Truth says:

    “Then Christian Father Coeurdoux of Karikal came with a great hammer, kicked the lingam, broke it with his hammer, and ordered the Coffrees and the Europeans to break the images of Vishnu and the other Gods.

    Madame went and told the Christian priest that he might break the idols as he pleased.

    The Christian priest answered that Madame had accomplished what had been impossible for fifty years, that she must be one of those Mahatmas who established this religion [Christianity or Christianism] in old days, and that he would publish her fame throughout the world.

    So saying the Christian priest dismissed them.

    “Then Varlam also kicked the great lingam nine or ten times with his sandals in the presence of Madame and Christian priest, and spat on it, out of gladness, and hoping that the Christian priest and Madame would regard him also as a Mahatma.

    Then he followed Madame.

    I can neither write nor describe what abominations were done in the “Hindu” temple.

    I know not what fruit they will reap.

    All the Tamils think that the end of the world has come.

    The Christian priests, the Tamil Christians, the Christian Governor and his Christian wife are more delighted than they have ever been before, but they have not yet considered what will befall them in future.”

    Anand Ranga Pillai learnt later on that “the ‘Hindu’ temple had been levelled with the ground and that the whole ‘Hindu’ people were troubled at heart.”

    Anand Ranga Pillai reflected, “The wise men will say that the glory of an image is as short-lived as human happiness.

    The ‘Hindu’ temple was destined to remain glorious till now, but now has fallen.”

    LINK

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ananda_Ranga_Pillai

  50. Steve says:

    Passive Observer

    “knowing he may be killed before finishing his three year ministry in this world.” A god man feared he may be killed? How could he be killed if it was the will of an omnipotent and omniscient God that he was to die on the cross for the “sins” of humanity and then rise again and ascend up to heaven? God is afraid of a few Jews when in the Old Testament he wiped out all humans on Earth (apart from Noah and his family and on board their magic boat).?

    “On these occasions Jews took stones to kill him. However He escaped. Now we know why Jesus warns ordinary people.” If there was any truth to this then he wouldn’t have bragged to Johns disciples about his healing powers.

    “John was a great prophet sent by God to baptise Jesus. John was in the prison; for he warned the king Herod not to keep his brother’s wife. John wanted to confirm before his death whether Jesus was the Messiah and sending his followers to Jesus. So Jesus gave the above reply.” In other words he couldn’t resist bragging to attract attention from influential people – and again suddenly forgot about his fear of the Jews! How convenient!

  51. @blitz2b
    Steve doesn’t have the gift of discernment. He says:-
    “Not true again, In fact it was just the opposite in the Bible Jesus warns people not to tell anyone after he has performed a miracle for them. Every time Jesus performs a miracle every witness comes to believe Jesus is the Messiah.”
    Jesus took a low profile and introduced himself as “Son of Man” instead of “Son of God”, knowing he may be killed before finishing his three year ministry in this world. On two occasions Jesus indirectly hinted that He was God by saying “I was before Abraham” (John 8:58-59 again “I and my Father are one” (John 10:30-31). On these occasions Jews took stones to kill him. However He escaped. Now we know why Jesus warns ordinary people.
    Almost at the end of his ministry Jesus revealed to the Chief Priest of Jerusalem.
    Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”
    62 “I am” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
    63 The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked. 64 “You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?”
    They all condemned him as worthy of death.

    Steve says “But Jesus was not averse to blatant self-promotion when his false modesty failed to elicit narcissistic supply:
    “Go and shew John again those things which ye do hear and see: The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them.” (Matthew 11:2)
    John was a great prophet sent by God to baptise Jesus. John was in the prison; for he warned the king Herod not to keep his brother’s wife. John wanted to confirm before his death whether Jesus was the Messiah and sending his followers to Jesus. So Jesus gave the above reply.
    Steve was not chosen to understand that Jesus’ reply was the fulfilment of His Mission Statement given by His Father through Isaiah (61:1-2) and Jesus Himself read this statement (Luke 4:18) and began His ministry. John understood that Jesus was the Messiah as he knew the Mission Statement of Jesus. Later he was beheaded.
    2 Timothy 3:7 clearly speaks about Steve.

  52. rrronimoni says:

    Another horseshit from SINA . You should be ashamed of yourself knowing that all your activism failed to garner support in mainstream . Still many non Muslim women are opting for marrying Muslim man , a fact should be a living slap on your face . This women of light are marrying muslim mostly bcz they are attracted to a faith far superior to anything else in the market , not excluding yours .

  53. Steve says:

    When Jesus is talking of hell (such as here) he is not speaking in metaphor (or when the book of revelation speaks of the burning lake of sulfur neither is that metaphor) 40 “As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. 42 They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Whoever has ears, let them hear.” If you want to claim this is metaphor then other people could claim the talks of the devil,demons,Angels and the resurrection is just “metaphor”. Clearly they are not metaphors he teaches an actual hell fire just like he taught an actual devil and an actual resurrection and so on.

    “It was her faith that was being put to the test…” Really?

    “This is all the defense I can offer you on this point.” Because you don’t have a defence for Jesus’s shocking lack of empathy.

    “Not true again, In fact it was just the opposite in the Bible Jesus warns people not to tell anyone after he has performed a miracle for them. Every time Jesus performs a miracle every witness comes to believe Jesus is the Messiah.” “But Jesus was not averse to blatant self-promotion when his false modesty failed to elicit narcissistic supply:
    “Go and shew John again those things which ye do hear and see: The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them.” (Matthew 11:2)

    “I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple … For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day … behold, a greater than (the prophet) Jonas is here … behold, a greater than (King) Solomon is here.” (Matthew 12)” http://samvak.tripod.com/journal79.html

    “There is much more to it the way you portray it here, we can either believe your incorrect version or actually investigate what Christ actually said on the issue… I believe that someone with a sincere heart would actually get it, while those with hardened hearts ridicule it…” This is what it says in the bible and Jesus taught that the world would end in his generation. “30 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.” (Mark 13). The man was a dooms day preacher no different from any other ranter.

    “Where are you getting your information from man?” From the bible. In Matthew he clearly says only his followers are brothers and not even his mother is family. So Jesus (and the made up gospels) are contradicting themselves AGAIN no surprise.

    “Please don’t misrepresent what C.S Lewis actually said with your reckless paraphrasing of him. It could hurt your credibility.
    Here for your information” Lewis says exactly what I said. If Jesus was not God (and the world was not about to end) then he must be sick evil man. Lewis admits this.

    “Yes the laws, which He later fulfilled, not the obsolete narration of old wars…. ” Eh no the mythical “day of judgement” hasn’t happened yet. Have you see the stars fall from the sky lately? No therefore it hasn’t been fulfilled.
    “These peoples who bore the brunt of this command, no longer exists anywhere on earth…” So where does the bible say that unbelievers can live and worship without being slaughtered and enslaved? It doesn’t and gentle Jesus also says this stands until the end of the world.

  54. blitz2b says:

    Steve says “….Then why did Jesus say the bible stands until the end of time? The laws of the bible are not descriptive – atheists, “pagans” and people of other faiths are to enslaved or killed.

    Yes the laws, which He later fulfilled, not the obsolete narration of old wars….

    Quote “… Judeo-Christian history is also violent and their books demand violence…”
    Wow! do you even read what you are posting? This is exactly what I posted and what you responded to without full comprehending it…

    I said “…The fundamental error is that Judeo-Christian history—which is violent—is being conflated with Islamic theology—which commands violence.”

    Here let me spell it out for you…

    Judeo-Christian History….. Violent

    Islamic Theology ….Violent

    People (Muslims) usually respond to the Theological instructions….. “I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them.” (Quran 8:12)

    “Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are ruthless to the Unbelievers, but merciful to each other.” (Quran 48:29)

    …Not to Historical narratives… “I will send my fear before thee, and will destroy all the people to whom thou shalt come, and I will make all thine enemies turn their backs unto thee.” (Exodus 23:27)

    Is this an open-ended imperative for present-day Christians and Jews? Hardly. Here’s the next verse:

    “I will send the hornet ahead of you to drive the Hivites, Canaanites and Hittites out of your way”

    “Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the LORD your God has commanded you”

    These peoples who bore the brunt of this command, no longer exists anywhere on earth…

    Hope this clears things for you..

    Cheers mate

  55. blitz2b says:

    Steve said “…Even the famous Christian apologist C.S Lewis admitted if Jesus is not God and the world is about to end then he is just another ranter – only a sick man and a evil man could preach such a doctrine…”

    Please don’t misrepresent what C.S Lewis actually said with your reckless paraphrasing of him. It could hurt your credibility.

    Here for your information

    “I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

    C.S Lewis

  56. blitz2b says:

    Steve says “…Yes Jesus suddenly forget his “lofty” principle – after the woman praised him and calls him master – and compares herself to a dog hoping for scraps of his plate.

    That is an absurd notion that I often hear Muslims use for this verse… It is amazing because even in the Arab culture and language, there are idioms galore. Yet they constantly use this as a a bogus challenge to negate Jesus. However this kind of reasoning from an atheist is surprising. Jesus is neither calling this woman a literal dog nor is He saying that He is craving attention from her. It was her faith that was being put to the test… This is all the defense I can offer you on this point. I am surprised that you nit pick about a figure of speech while ignoring the fact that the woman’s daughter actually got healed…
    Look at the big picture my friend…

    Quote “…Narcissistic cult leaders love adulation…”

    Not true again, In fact it was just the opposite in the Bible Jesus warns people not to tell anyone after he has performed a miracle for them. Every time Jesus performs a miracle every witness comes to believe Jesus is the Messiah.

    Quote “..What message? His message was give up everything for me and be saved from hell as I am God on earth and the “day of judgement” is coming….”

    There is much more to it the way you portray it here, we can either believe your incorrect version or actually investigate what Christ actually said on the issue… I believe that someone with a sincere heart would actually get it, while those with hardened hearts ridicule it…

    Quote “…He also told his followers to hate even their family’s and leave them and he himself has no regard towards his family. (Despite the Christians claims he is a teacher of love, humanity and compassion when he didn’t even have compassion for his own family)…”

    That is simply not true my friend, even in the agony of the crucifixion, Jesus made sure that after He was gone, His mother was taken care of….

    John 19:25 “…Near the cross of Jesus stood His mother and her sister, as well as Mary the wife of Clopas and Mary Magdalene. 26When Jesus saw His mother and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He said to His mother, “Woman, here is your son.” 27Then He said to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” So from that hour, this disciple took her into his home.…

    Where are you getting your information from man?

    contd…

  57. Steve says:

    “Normal intelligent people”? really? Are you discriminating people based on their level of intelligence?” Is a court of law discriminating against a murderer when they sentence him to life imprisoment or the death penalty? No and neither is it “discrimination” to state the fact that only the criminal minded, the mentally disturbed and the foolish and delusional are attracted to cult leaders like Jesus, Muhammed, Charles Manson, Jim Jones etc.

    “You judge people on the basis of your Darwinian standards of “survival of the fittest”,” Just Like a court of law judges a criminal and his behaviour. We judge people on what they do and say this is not discrimination.

    “Jesus had no qualms with accepting people from all walks of life…” Unless they don’t believe he is God on earth and the only to stop him torturing you for all eternity is to beg him for mercy – very much like a dog will beg his master hoping for scraps off his table.

    “At least now your point that he didn’t regard outsiders and enemies as brothers, is refuted.” He only regarded the people who believed in his delusional and grandiose claims to be God on earth and the only way for humanity to save itself from his eternal punishment in the shortly arriving day of judgement to be his brothers. Everybody else – even his own family – he regarded as his enemies who would be shown no mercy and who would be tortured for all eternity in a lake of fire.

    “These two men were both rich, probably educated because of their position in society and also influential enough to talk to Pilate to get Jesus’ body down for burial…” Nonsense story the Romans did not give criminals – and especially criminals convicted of high treason – a nice burial – the usual practice was to leave their rotting corse on the cross as a warning to other enemies of the Roman state and then bury them in a shallow grave. And why is Pilate who had no respect for the Jews and their customs – and who often had conflicts with them and on many occasions ordered the jews to be beaten and even killed – and who Philo describes ” Pilate had “vindictiveness and furious temper”, and was “naturally inflexible, a blend of self-will and relentlessness”. Referring to Pilate’s governance, Philo further describes “his corruption, and his acts of insolence, and his rapine, and his habit of insulting people, and his cruelty, and his continual murders of people untried and uncondemned, and his never ending, and gratuitous, and most grievous inhumanity”.” So is this cruel inhuman, insulting man – also known for his dislike of Jews and their customs – going to allow a Jew convicted of high treason against the Roman state a nice burial and tomb out the kindness of his heart? I don’t think so.

  58. blitz2b says:

    Steve says “…Where is this interpretation of hell supported in the bible? It’s not. Hell according according to Christian Doctrine is a physical place where the resurrected will be tortured for all eternity….”

    You have to understand the language that Jesus uses to convey His message. He uses metaphors, idiomatic phrases and expressions of the day…

    Notice here Hell is OUTER DARKNESS…

    Matthew 22:13 “Bind him hand and foot and cast him into the OUTER DARKNESS. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
    Matthew 8:12 “while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the OUTER DARKNESS. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

    Another reference to hell by Jesus is the UNQUENCHABLE FIRE…

    Mark 9:43 “And if your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than with two hands to go to hell, to THE UNQUENCHABLE FIRE

    If you took both these descriptions as literal, then they clearly contradict each other… How is it that there is an outer “darkness” if there is an “unquenchable fire” present in the same location? Ever been camping where the campfire dispels the darkness of the night? Now If you understood this as a state, then it would work perfectly. You could be excluded the eternal light that comes from knowing God because of your choice rejection of Him and you could burn in a fiery anguish forever.

    Mark 9:48 “……where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched….”

    The fact is that Jesus mentions, “their worm” which refers to their own personal gnawing of their conscience for their lifetime of rejecting Christ and this worm never dies..

    A state or a physical place … Hell is eternal.

  59. blitz2b says:

    Steve says “….Yes only the criminals and the vulnerable was interested in this mad man….”

    Well make up your mind, earlier you said this….

    Quote …”Let’s see the hypocrisy in the saintly Jesus’s words – did he regard outsiders and his enemies as brothers?…”

    Yes He did…. Would you consider “Outcasts, prostitutes, tax collectors and such” as outsiders? … Jesus did not exclude these “outsiders” He went seeking them out…

    Quote “…Just like Charles Manson and Jim Jones etc could only attract the vulnerable and criminals – and not normal intelligent influential people….”

    “Normal intelligent people”? really? Are you discriminating people based on their level of intelligence? How can you get away with what you are saying? people are people, rich or poor, old or young, “intelligent” or “unintelligent”. You judge people on the basis of your Darwinian standards of “survival of the fittest”, Jesus had no qualms with accepting people from all walks of life…

    At least now your point that he didn’t regard outsiders and enemies as brothers, is refuted.

    Quote “…All the educated people mocked him and was glad to see the back of him….”

    Not true…. Please read..

    John 19:38 “..Later, Joseph of Arimathea asked Pilate for the body of Jesus. Now Joseph was a disciple of Jesus, but secretly because he feared the Jewish leaders. With Pilate’s permission, he came and took the body away. 39 He was accompanied by Nicodemus, the man who earlier had visited Jesus at night. Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds.[e] 40 Taking Jesus’ body, the two of them wrapped it, with the spices, in strips of linen….”

    These two men were both rich, probably educated because of their position in society and also influential enough to talk to Pilate to get Jesus’ body down for burial…

    contd…

  60. blitz2b says:

    @Passive Observer …. Thank you for your encouragement friend.

  61. Face_The_Truth says:

    LINK

    http://www.kyroot.com/

    MORMONISM

    In the early 19th Century, Joseph Smith claimed to have been visited by almighty God the Father and almighty God’s only Son and was told by them that all of the existing Christian Churches were false and that Joseph Smith would be tasked to restore the true Gospel.

    Joseph Smith wrote a book, THE BOOK OF MORMON, that claimed that a tribe of Israelites traveled to the Americas by boats several centuries before Jesus the Son was born.

    The THE BOOK OF MORMON discussed wars between two factions of these settlers, the (good and light-skinned ) Nephites and the (bad and dark-skinned) Lamanites.

    Ultimately, the Lamanites massacred the Nephites and became the ancestors of the American Indians (i.e., native Americans).

    Subsequent research has convincingly shown that the history of THE BOOK OF MORMON is fictional.

    The American Indians (i.e., native Americans) originated in Eastern Asia, and no archaeological evidence has been found to validate the fictional battles that were discussed in THE BOOK OF MORMON.

    Additionally, THE BOOK OF MORMON contains a large number of anachronisms regarding animals and industries that did not locally exist at the time!

    Joseph Smith also surreptitiously practiced polygamy and polyamory, marrying teenagers as young as 14 — when Joseph Smith was around 37 — as well as the wives of living husbands whom Joseph Smith had conveniently sent away on proselytizing missions.

    So, what does this Mormonism have to do with Christianity?

    Mormonism has grown to be a successful church with about 10 million active members, including very high-ranking American politicians, despite the obvious problems surrounding its origins, the lack of authenticity of its scriptures, the implausibility of an almighty God that would abandon all of the other Christian Churches, and the foolishness of choosing a conman and sex addict, namely Joseph Smith, as the divine agent for restoring almighty God’s Church on the earth!

    That a false religion could succeed in 19th Century United States of America means that a false faith of Christianism could much more easily have flourished in the First Century and beyond.

    The experience of Mormonism suggests that any argument claiming evidence for Christianity based on the number of adherents is null and void.

    LINK

    http://www.kyroot.com/

  62. Steve says:

    “So the point is that these people: the tax-gatherers, the prostitutes, the maimed, and diseased—basically, the social and religious outcasts—were coming to Jesus and he was receiving them and eating with them.” Yes only the criminals and the vulnerable was interested in this mad man. Just like Charles Manson and Jim Jones etc could only attract the vulnerable and criminals – and not normal intelligent influential people. All the educated people mocked him and was glad to see the back of him.

    “Jesus’ reference to the lake of fire is an eternity without knowing God.” Where is this interpretation of hell supported in the bible? It’s not. Hell according according to Christian Doctrine is a physical place where the resurrected will be tortured for all eternity.

    “If disbelief is your preference then you are condemned by your own choice. You are exercising your own free will to either be saved or not.” It’s not a choice what you believe. Try if you don’t believe me. Try to “choose” to believe that Joseph Smith is a prophet of God. You won’t be able to do it.

    “Sure if you take passages out of context you can make Jesus seem horrendous, however if you bothered to read the events that followed you would realize that He did indeed heal the woman’s daughter. Read below.” Yes Jesus suddenly forget his “lofty” principle – after the woman praised him and calls him master – and compares herself to a dog hoping for scraps of his plate. Narcissistic cult leaders love adulation.

    “If it would help, think of It more in terms of a contention that will by the outcome of his message. Families and friends usually become divided because of it.” What message? His message was give up everything for me and be saved from hell as I am God on earth and the “day of judgement” is coming. He also told his followers to hate even their family’s and leave them and he himself has no regard towards his family. (Despite the Christians claims he is a teacher of love, humanity and compassion when he didn’t even have compassion for his own family).

    Even the famous Christian apologist C.S Lewis admitted if Jesus is not God and the world is about to end then he is just another ranter – only a sick man and a evil man could preach such a doctrine.

  63. Steve says:

    “Steve, Those “Christians” could not be following the verse you quoted because they were simply a narrative of historical events… a “Descriptive verse”, for a specific time period and for a specific period.” Its a COMMANDMENT from Yahwah/Jehovah to slaughter unbelievers rape their women and burn all their temples. It’s not simply descriptive – indeed these verses was used for centuries by the church to justify their violence.

    ” If that were the case you would find Jews more than Christians quoting those verses and applying them to justify terror attacks in the name of YHWH. But you find neither…. Why? because both groups clearly understand that historical verses of the Old Testament are a narrative of events, not a prescription for believers against unbelievers…” Then why did Jesus say the bible stands until the end of time? The laws of the bible are not descriptive – atheists, “pagans” and people of other faiths are to enslaved or killed.

    “The fundamental error is that Judeo-Christian history—which is violent—is being conflated with Islamic theology—which commands violence.” Judeo-Christian history is also violent and their books demand violence.

  64. @Blitz2b
    Your explanation to Steve is excellent. I know Steve well through this site. He is a hard core atheist. He will curse Jesus until his last breath and die. He is not sophisticated enough to understand that Jesus always speak in parables such as “ cut your right hand’ ‘pluck your right eye’, you are the salt/light of the earth, I am the bread of life, I am the good shepherd, I am the way, truth and the life” I am the Alpha and the Omega etc.
    Jesus know people like Steve and said the following verses
    “Whoever belongs to the truth listens to me (Jn 18:37)
    “Whoever have ears let them hear “ (Mtt 11:15)
    Many are called but few are chosen” (Matt 22:14)
    “Not everyone seeing sees; not everyone hearing hears “(Mtt 13:13)
    “Broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it: narrow is the road that leads to life; and few will find it” (Mtt 7:13-14)

    He knows that more than 800 out of 830 Nobel laurates are Christians and Jews. He knows very well that millions of Christian oriented NGOs and 700,000 nuns are working round the clock to make this world a better place to live in. He knows that 130 Christian majority countries are living in peace. When the Pope was shot at by a Muslim Mehamet Accai there was no violence. Yet Steve says Jesus is a bastard and hypocrite.

  65. blitz2b says:

    Steve says “…did he regard outsiders and his enemies as brothers?..”

    Really? ….. On the contrary, Jesus was the one who opened his arms to the social outcasts of society.
    Jesus eats with sinners and tax collectors.
    Mark2:16 When the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw him eating with the sinners and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?”
    So the point is that these people: the tax-gatherers, the prostitutes, the maimed, and diseased—basically, the social and religious outcasts—were coming to Jesus and he was receiving them and eating with them.

    Steve says “… unless you abandon everything and everyone in your life and follow this mad mans message that the world is going end and everyone who doesn’t follow Jesus is going to be tortured in a lake of fire…”

    Well if you begin with this premise, unfortunately you will find negativity where there is none.

    Jesus’ reference to the lake of fire is an eternity without knowing God. If disbelief is your preference then you are condemned by your own choice. You are exercising your own free will to either be saved or not.

    Here is his opinion of gentiles (outsiders)
    “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel … It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs.” (Matthew 15:24-26)

    Sure if you take passages out of context you can make Jesus seem horrendous, however if you bothered to read the events that followed you would realize that He did indeed heal the woman’s daughter. Read below.

    27 “Yes it is, Lord,” she said. “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.”
    28 Then Jesus said to her, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment.

    Steve wrote…. “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.” (Matthew 10:34)”

    I have often gotten this verse from a Muslim who brought it as a challenge to Jesus’ peaceful teachings, and I believed it was just them who had trouble grasping Jesus’ style of teaching through parables, expressions and idiomatic phrases of the day, but it seems that lack of comprehension is not just limited to Muslims.

    Anyhow, Jesus was speaking of the division, clearly sword is a poor metaphor for you. If it would help, think of It more in terms of a contention that will by the outcome of his message. Families and friends usually become divided because of it.
    Consequently, the harsh words you speak about Jesus and the anger you display towards his message, are indeed like a symbolic sword between us…. no?

    I hope this has helped a bit in clearing some of your questions.

  66. blitz2b says:

    contd…

    Steve says”….Those christians was again following the teachings of the bible – where believers have to enslave the unbelievers (the men) and capture the women for sex slaves and if they resist by force you have to exterminate them all…”

    Steve, Those “Christians” could not be following the verse you quoted because they were simply a narrative of historical events… a “Descriptive verse”, for a specific time period and for a specific period. If that were the case you would find Jews more than Christians quoting those verses and applying them to justify terror attacks in the name of YHWH. But you find neither…. Why? because both groups clearly understand that historical verses of the Old Testament are a narrative of events, not a prescription for believers against unbelievers…
    The fundamental error is that Judeo-Christian history—which is violent—is being conflated with Islamic theology—which commands violence.

    Steve says “…Where did Islams laws about killing, enslaving and raping unbelievers come from? They did not come from thin air they come from Judaism/Christianity…”

    You are giving too much credit to the Judeo-Christian traditions. No you’re right, they didn’t come from “thin air” it was the Arab culture the Mohammed preserved…Please read:

    Law and Order:
    “…The only law of the land was lawlessness. In the event a crime was committed, the injured party took law in its own hands, and tried to administer “justice” to the offender. This system led very frequently to acts of horrendous cruelty. If the Arab ever exercised any modicum of restraint, it was not because of any susceptibility he had to questions of right or wrong but because of the fear of provoking reprisals and vendetta. Vendetta consumed whole generations of Arabs…”

    Slavery:
    “…Slavery was an economic institution of the Arabs. Male and female slaves were sold and bought like animals, and they formed the most depressed class of the Arabian society….”

    Plundering:
    “…The nomadic tribes ranged over the peninsula and plundered the caravans and the small settlements. Many caravans and villages bought immunity from these raids by paying a fixed amount of money to the nomadic freebooters….”

    Now what kind of people were Jews and Christians in Mohammed’s day… Let’s see

    Custodians of Education:
    “…Among the Arabs there were extremely few individuals who could read and write. Most of them were not very eager to learn these arts. Some historians are of the opinion that the culture of the period was almost entirely oral. The Jews and the Christians were the custodians of such knowledge as Arabia had….”

    Source: Islamic website
    https://www.al-islam.org/restatement-history-islam-and-muslims-sayyid-ali-ashgar-razwy/arabia-islam

    So you see, Mohammed could have adopted Christ’s commandment of “..Love, forgiveness and mercy” rather he simply adhered to his barbaric Arabic nomadic culture…

    Likewise, Muslims terrorist of today are simply following the “sunnah” of the “perfect example for all of humanity”…. Absolutely nothing to do with Judaism or Christianity.

    Cheers mate…

  67. Steve says:

    Blitz

    Psychopaths in fact preach good behaviour to other people (and of course will enforce the rules on people
    they see breaking them) Even though they themselves break all the rules when it serves their purpose. Let’s see the hypocrisy in the saintly Jesus’s words – did he regard outsiders and his enemies as brothers? Let him speak for himself.

    “Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!” (Matthew 12:47-48)

    Clearly not indeed according to him unless you abandon everything and everyone in your life and follow this mad mans message that the world is going end and everyone who doesn’t follow Jesus is going to be tortured in a lake of fire for eternity then you are not his brother.

    Here is his opinion of gentiles (outsiders)
    “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel … It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs.” (Matthew 15:24-26)

    Let’s see the love and forgiveness Jesus has for his “enemies” (people who did not accept his grandiose claims to be God incarnate and that the world is about end.)

    He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned [to hell].

    “He that is not with me is against me” (Matthew 12:30)

    “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.” (Matthew 10:34)

    14 If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet. 15 Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. (Matthew 10.)

    As you can see Jesus is a hypocrite whose teachings (and his own behaviour) contradicts itself.

  68. blitz2b says:

    Steve says “….Only as long as your neighbour is a fellow believer…”

    Steve that is absolutely not true, and I will let Jesus speak for Himself…

    Luke10:29 But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

    30 In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii[c] and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

    36 “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”

    37 The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”

    Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”

    So you see Christ negates the wrong notion you have about His teachings.

    I hope this helps

    Contd…

  69. Face_The_Truth says:

    Folks, who are old enough to know when Dr. Muhammad Mosaddegh was Prime Minister of Iran — when there was no Islamic Republic of Iran on earth! — there was no stoning to death and no acid attack on Iranian women for not wearing veils.

    Folks, who are old enough to know when Dr. Muhammad Najib’Allah was President of Afghanistan, girls used to go schools!!!

    American and British governments did régime-change in Iran and Afghanistan in order to make them truly Islamic.

    Because, American and British Christian governments always find friendship with Islam.

    And, the outcome of American and British governments’ régime-change activities is acid-attacks on the faces of females who disobey Islam and acid-attacks on the faces of females of all ages who disobey faithful Muslim men!

    Does a woman or girl feel alright when extremely painful, burning, corrosive acid disfigures her for the rest of her life for not wearing veil or for not covering herself from the lustful eyes of Muslim men?

    “Women who are not properly veiled: An outrage, a provocation!

    Dousing women with acid for being not properly veiled: Pleasing to Allah.”

    LINK

    https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/03/iran-alarming-rise-in-acid-attacks-against-women-who-are-not-properly-veiled

  70. Mark says:

    But woman can deny intercourse with his husband if she cannot endure it, according to The Reliance of the Traveller – m5.1, can’t she?

  71. Steve says:

    Blitz

    “… You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart mind and strength and you should love your neighbor as yourself…” Only as long as your neighbour is a fellow believer if they are a “pagan” then you are required to kill them – according to the laws of OT – which the Jesus of the bible claimed is valid until the end of time.

    “Now if you show me in
    history instances where Christians were behaving badly, then obviously they were not following the very
    basic teachings of Christ” Those christians was again following the teachings of the bible – where believers have to enslave the unbelievers (the men) and capture the women for sex slaves and if they resist by force you have to exterminate them all – even their animals and also smash in the skulls of their children with rocks.

    “However with Islam, clear instructions about dealing harshly with unbelievers gives Muslims the inventive to do what they do…
    Hence we have the numerous attacks in the name of Islam. How then is it logical or even sane to lump both religions into one is incomprehensible….” Where did Islams laws about killing, enslaving and raping unbelievers come from? They did not come from thin air they come from Judaism/Christianity.

  72. blitz2b says:

    It seemed that I touched a nerve there….
    Any how it is a matter of common sense that if you are following a religion, what the leader of that religion states about some rules should take precedence over what one, oneself decides to do …. Should it not?

    When asked what the greatest commandment of all was, Jesus Christ said “… You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart mind and strength and you should love your neighbor as yourself…”
    Now if you show me in history instances where Christians were behaving badly, then obviously they were not following the very basic teachings of Christ…. Do you need to chastise the entire faith system for the fault of a few? I don’t think so.

    However with Islam, clear instructions about dealing harshly with unbelievers gives Muslims the inventive to do what they do… Hence we have the numerous attacks in the name of Islam. How then is it logical or even sane to lump both religions into one is incomprehensible….

    How’ver hate can surely embitter a heart….

    Apologies FTT… If you were offended.

  73. Face_The_Truth says:

    Question of this century: WHY do Christian girls and Christian women in America and Europe love Muslim men???

    Answer: A picture paints a thousand words!!!

    LINK

    https://www.teaparty.org/muslims-caught-unthinkable-womens-faces-1500-times-london-224371/

  74. Face_The_Truth says:

    [“True historic Christianism? What does that even mean? You cannot simply invent new words to prove your moot point.]

    THIS MESSAGE IS FOR SCREEN-NAME BLITZ_2_B:

    PLEASE READ FROM THE VERY LONG LIST OF REPUTABLE SOURCES IN ORDER TO GET ANSWERS TO YOUR QUESTIONS INVOLVING THE HISTORY OF CHRISTIANISM AS WELL AS THE ROOTS OF CHRISTIANITY.

    AND, DO NOT INITIATE ANOTHER CONVERSATION WITH ME OR REFERRING MY ANY COMMENT REGARDING EITHER CHRISTIANITY OR ISLAM.

    BECAUSE, IF ONE WANTS TO BELIEVE IN THE FALSEHOODS OF CHRISTIANITY OR ISLAM, THAT’S ABSOLUTELY WITHIN HIS OR HER PERSONAL CHOICE; I DO NOT TRY TO CONVERT ANYONE INTO ANYTHING.

    SO, DO NOT INITIATE ANOTHER CONVERSATION WITH ME OR REFERRING MY ANY COMMENT REGARDING EITHER CHRISTIANITY OR ISLAM.

    =====================================================================

    William Benjamin Smith, “Ecce Deus: Studies of Primitive Christianity”, London, 1912

    l. Gordon Rylands, “Did Jesus Ever Live?”, Watts & Co., London, 1929

    William James Durant, “The Story of Civilization, Part III, Caesar and Christ”, Fourth Printing, New York, 1944

    Paul Johnson, “A History of Christianity”, Penguin Books, London, 1978

    Michael Thomas Walter Arnheim, “Is Christianity True?”, London, 1984

    George Albert Wells, “Did Jesus Exist?”, Second Edition, London, 1986

    Daniel Edwin Barker, “Losing Faith in Faith: From Preacher to Atheist”, Fourth Printing, Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc., USA, 2003

    =====================================================================

    LINK

    http://www.kyroot.com/

    LINK

    https://infidels.org/library/modern/paul_carlson/nt_contradictions.html

    LINK

    http://infidels.org/library/modern/keith_parsons/whynotchristian.html

    LINK

    http://markhumphrys.com/christianity.killings.html

    LINK

    http://www.drabruzzi.com/ZINDLER-JESUS.PDF

    LINK

    https://orphicplatonism.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/jesus-christ-an-artifice-for-aggression-by-sita-ram-goel.pdf

    LINK

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/

    LINK

    http://www.i4m.com/think/bible/historical_jesus.htm

    LINK

    https://www.onfaith.co/onfaith/author/paula-kirby

    =====================================================================

  75. blitz2b says:

    Face_the_truth says “….the true historic origins of both Christianism and Islamism….”

    “True historic christianism?”….. What does that even mean? You cannot simply invent new words to prove your moot point.
    Islamism, yes a set of Islamic laws mingled with politics could very well define that term. I agree the whole Islamism Sharia nonsense is not good for humanity as a whole because it pits one group of people against another, raises the status of one group while it degrades all others.

    How would you define your concocted “historical Christianism” ? And if it meant adhering to the original teachings how is loving your enemies a bad thing? Or doing into others as you would them do unto you? How is turning the other cheek when you are struck going to escalate any conflicts?

    You want me to go through your other postings on this site? ….Why exactly? You never respond to answers but throw in red herrings every time you are cornered.

    it is obvious from your responses that you do not think things through before you post them. Your ideas come from a hate filled heart that simply wants to vent.

    If there is nothing objective about your statements why would anyone want to waste their time reading it
    Subjective, half baked opinions of biased people are very easy to find everywhere. I could simply go to a mosque on Friday and listen to the khutba or better yet turn on the TV and tune into CNN.

    If you think your opinions deserve merit then do a bit of research before you post them…. Provide links if possible.

    Cheers mate

  76. Face_The_Truth says:

    No, my disdain for both Christianity and Islam are based on the true historic origins of both Christianism and Islamism.

    Right now, I do NOT have time to type.

    Otherwise, I could have explained to you in lengthy details.

    Probably next week I will have some free time to respond to you, if you keep on posting one after another Christian falsehood on this website.

    Meanwhile, please feel comfortable reading on this website my many earlier posts regarding Christianism and that should answer your question(s) to some extent.

  77. blitz2b says:

    Face the truth says “…. CHRISTIANITY AND ISLAM ARE 2 SIDES OF THE SAME COIN….”

    That still doesn’t answer the question. You have simply shifted the problem from one shoulder to to both shoulders.

    Your disdain for Christianity seems to stem from your utter ignorance of it.

    Allah in the Koran prescribes this for believers…
    “… Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them …”
    ” ….. Take not friends of Jews and Christians, they are friends of each other….”
    “… Fight the unbelievers until the religion of Allah reigns supreme….”

    I’m paraphrasing but you get the idea…..
    Now compare the above with what Jesus teaches us…
    “… If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn the other as well…”
    “… Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you…”
    “… Those who live by the sword, shall die by the sword…”
    ” ….I am the good Shepherd, and I lay my life down for my sheep…”
    And many many more….

    So how do you justify your statement that Islam and Christianity are two sides of the same coin, when they are two extremes of very different coins…

  78. Face_The_Truth says:

    [Screen-name blitz_2_b says:
    “How is the brutal rape scenario in some part of Europe that you presented, an answer to liberal western women willingly giving herself to a Muslim man for consented sex?”]

    Your sentence is WRONG.

    So, let me correct your sentence by re-writing:

    “How is the brutal rape scenario in some part of Europe that you presented an answer to CHRISTIAN Western women willingly giving THEMSELVES to Muslim men for consensual sex?”

    My Answer:

    CHRISTIANITY AND ISLAM ARE 2 SIDES OF THE SAME COIN.

  79. blitz2b says:

    Face the truth says
    “…..NOW, EVERYONE OF MY READERS KNOWS WHY “THESE WOMEN” LOVE MUSLIM MEN!!!…”

    I’m trying to see the logic or even some sarcasm in your statement but find none…. How is the brutal rape scenario in some part of Europe that you presented, an answer to liberal western women willingly giving herself to a Muslim man for consented sex?

    I have nothing against inter-religious or inter-racial relationships, however as Ali has mentioned in this blog post, is it wise for these brain dead western women with no knowledge about Islam to trust a man whose religious ideology includes submission and beating of women?

    Where have all the feminist of the west disappeared off to?

  80. Face_The_Truth says:

    [] [] [] Screen-name blitz_2_b says:
    “These women are absolutely clueless about the religion of Islam.” [] [] []

    Why “These women” love Muslim men???

    That’s the question of this century!!!

    But, WHERE is the God-damn answer???

    I’ve recently read one answer that I want to share with my readers here.

    ‘When a mother-of-two reported to the police that she had been gang-raped by a group of Muslim migrants, investigators thought it was just a typical sexual assault case.

    However, as soon as they inspected the woman’s dress, the shocked authorities realized that what they were dealing with was something much more horrific than anything they’d ever seen.

    In December of 2015, the woman was attacked in a refugee camp in Smaland by a group of asylum seekers, including 25-year-old Afghan migrant Rafi Bahaduri who was employed by the Swedish Migration Board, 10 News translates.

    …after Swedish police discovered a gang-raped mother-of-two, investigators found 48 different stains of semen on her dress.

    “SHE IS A WHORE. I KNEW THIS WOULD HAPPEN. SHE WANTED IT,” Afghan migrant Rafi Bahadri explained to the police when he was arrested.

    The victim was raped for hours in an asylum center apartment and was later found by police in a pool of her own blood.

    The victim endured such bodily trauma that she was bound to a wheelchair for 4 weeks and suffered from a bruised throat, sore genitals, and minor stomach injuries.

    Unbelievably, one of the rapists, Hedayat Rahmati was sentenced to deportation but has since been freed from jail and is back on the streets.

    “Hedayat Rahmati was the one who started the abuse.

    The first time it was common vaginal intercourse.

    Then, Muslim men took turns raping her.

    BOTH VAGINALLY AND ANALLY.

    Muslim men pressed penises so deep down her throat that she had difficulty breathing,” reads the court verdict.’

    LINK

    https://www.teaparty.org/woman-reports-refugee-gang-rape-cops-find-dress-horrifies-223975/

    NOW, EVERYONE OF MY READERS KNOWS WHY “THESE WOMEN” LOVE MUSLIM MEN!!!

  81. blitz2b says:

    You will be surprised to know the number of liberal western women who have male Muslim partners. There are at least two that I personally know.

    These women at absolutely clueless about the religion of Islam. I only hope for their sake that they are not lured into marriage and coaxed into conversion and ultimate breeding of the new generation of multiracial Muslims.

    The future of the west looks ominous with no hope in the horizon.

    Until someone comes up with an ingenious plan via the media ie film, TV Internet that will totally expose this totalitarian political ideology disguised as religion for what it truly is and open the eyes of the blinded liberal left we should all be prepared to be ruled under Sharia law by the next half a century…

    Speaking of the liberal leftists, It’s amazing that the enlightened human race of the twenty first century are still enthralled by a barbaric cult of an astute, opportunistic nomad the seventh century.

    Diabolical…

  82. More responsiblity comes with Marriage. It is for begetting children and help them grow well. These are not things muslim-marriages are for. If you can persuade your lover to quit Islam then it will be bliss for you, I assure you.

  83. Face_The_Truth says:

    If a girl or woman asks my opinion, I always say “NO”.

    Muslim men want to marry non-Muslim females for the sake of fortifying Islam.

    Marrying non-Muslim girls or women is another form of Jihad as well as Ibadat.

    “Ibadat” is an Arabic word for devotion to Allah.

    World’s Muslims shout “Nara e’Takbeer Allahu Akbar” where the Arabic word “Akbar” means BIGGER or OLDER!!!

    ‘”Akbar” does NOT mean Great or Greatest.

    For example “My house is bigger than your house!” in Arabic “Baiti AKBAR min Baitak”.

    Another example, if one has children and points to the eldest one as “Older than all my other children!” in Arabic “Akbar min kul awladi”.

    In Arabic, English word “Greater” is called AATHAM.

    For example, Great Britain in Arabic is translated to “Britania al’UTHMA”.

    NEVER ”Britania al’Kubra”.

    The reason why — centuries BEFORE Islam’s founder Muhammad metamorphosed the supreme rock God of Pagan Arabia called “Allah” into the Jehovah of the “Super Holy” Bible — the Pagan Arabs also exalted their Pagan God Allah with “Allahu Akbar”, because Pagan Arabs meant that their Pagan God “Allah” was BIGGER than any of all 360 other deities of stone inside the Kaʿbah long before the birth of Islam’s founder Muhammad.

    Islam’s founder Muhammad made “Allahu Akbar” the Battle Cry of Islam whenever and
    wherever Muslims AGGRESS against anyone on the planet be they Infidels or Kuffar or Muslims of any different sect.’

    So, in order to firmly establish Islamic supremacy, Muslim men always prefer non-Muslim females both for sexual pleasure and for reproduction of many more Muslim children.

    Plus, polygamy and instant Islamic divorce system allow Muslim men to exploit non-Muslim females readily.

    For a faithful Muslim man, it is very easy to discard his wife just by uttering the word “Talaq” 3 times or to falsely accuse his wife of committing adultery with another man for the purpose of public stoning to death!

    Many non-Muslim females, however, always fall for Muslim men for Muslim men’s money.

  84. Akua Hinds says:

    This is a very powerful post. Thank you for sharing your insights! I think this post is going to help many people.

  85. Ravindra Singh SIHAG says:

    IF a girl marries a Muslim guy she exposes her children or next generations to beheading innocent people by them or to be killed by dogs in jehad.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: