If the man believe that God is on on his side how can any logic remedy the situation?

---

Bush is like a child with a new toy.

---

Bush was capable of absorbing the weak arguments for going to war but was not smart enough to accept the knowledge of those who knew better and were warning him that he had no idea what he was doing. There was never a question that the U.S. could take out a country in a few days. Iraq was the perfect showcase.

---

To say that Iraq is better off now than they were before we invaded them is to say that if a country should emerge or a union of nations emerges that believes that their way is better for us than our way, it is permissible for them to change our government as long as we possess "weapons of mass destruction."

---

The world has been taken back another 300 years in its true advancement by the sucecss of "The Passion of The Christ." Folks, God did not find it necessary to impregnate his own mother in order to be born so that he might be sacrificed in order that he might be capable of allowing himself to forgive Eve for the eating of an apple.Would you rather replace your current scientific knowledge - your health - with the amount of science they knew 2000 or 3000 or 4000 years ago? Would you like to exchange your present system of eliminating your waste with what they used only a few hundred years ago, much less thousands of years ago? If you or a loved one is sick, which treatment would you choose to receive? That treatment available now or the treatment a few thousand years ago? If you base every other aspect of your life on logic, why do you not do the same with the thing you consider most important? Christians claim that heaven is a beatiful and blissful place in which we somehow continue living in utter happiness. Yet they play music so depressing that an experimental rat would find a way to kill himself if he were to be forced to listen to it for two days.

---

"The Passion of Christ" assumes two things in its title. One, that there was passion and two that there was a Christ. It is a play on words in that "of course, we all have COMpassion on anyone dying.

---

This is left brain/right brain stuff and most people haven't evolved to the point that they are beginning to allow the two sides of the brain to "communincate."

---

A religion of some form is to be expected in every human due to the simple natural law which is:

---

Nature will always follow the path of least resistance. Christianity and all other old world religions are kept alive in that they each offer the least resistance to their followers as to some sort of explanation of what happens when we die.

---

We make fun of the fact that they ride about on camels and live in caves yet some of us worship a god who did much the same thing. Many if not most of the Christians attempt to claim "his word" as their word yet they drive Lexus while half the world is starving and convince themselves that "this is what Jesus would do." Jesus would do the opposite of what most of his "followers" do. They worship as a god a man who, if anything was an itenerate preacher. Since the name "Jesus" then was as common as the name John or Paul or George, it means nothing that a man named Jesus died. It meant nothing that he died on a cross. The Bible itself could not be any clearer on the point. He died with "common theives." What does this mean? It means that crucifixon was the means of putting someone to death in that day and time.

---

In today's terms we have a man named John killed in an electric chair in Texas in 1999.

---

It is understood that if a man named John were electicuted in Texas in 1999 came back to life 3 days later, the world would not believe it. As detailed below, there is no evidence that any person named Jesus was ever resurrected from a grave after having made the prediction during his time as a human being that he would be "Just as Jonah was in the belly of a whale for three days and three nights, so will the Son of Man be in the earth for three days and three nights." We all know the story of Jonah being swallowed by the big fishie, don't we? The entire story of Jonah is a humorous treatment by a Gentile of the idiocy of the Jewish religion. Here we have a chosen man of God who throws god's marching papers back in his face. Jonah will not do what his god tells him to do so he winds up asleep during a terrible storm in a boat full of Gentiles. The satire marks well for the Gentile writer in that the men in the boat showed the stowaway a great deal of respect by not doing like the Jewish people did and "kill every man, woman and child." After it was decided by Jonah that he was the cause of the whole mess because God was mad at him, the Gentiles continued to fight the storm. Jonah certainly wasn't of any help. He was sulking. This "man of God" was trying to hide from his own God and was only making a really bad situation worse with his complaining. They tossed him and a whale ate him. But, alas, it was a whale sent from God! And poor Jonah spent three days and three nights in the belly of a whale.

---

And that is what the Bible tells us Jesus said he would do. He would "be in the belly of the earth for three days and three nights just like Jonah had been in the belly of a whale for 3 days and 3 nights." This was the writer of this fable's idea of tying Jesus into the OLD TESTAMENT.

---

Jesus cannot both be a human being who is very bad at math also be the God who created it.

---

Three PM "Good Friday" until "about sunrise" "Easter Sunday" is just over ONE DAY AND ONE NIGHT.

---

Who wrote the book of Job? The book itself does not present as a work of Jonah. It is a story told "about" Jonah. I asked an astute lady at the Church who wrote Samuel I and Samuel II. She looked a bit startled. She replied rather condescendingly that "Samuel wrote it of course."

---

I was amusing myself one last time at a Sunday School Class in an attempt to save a marriage but I can't be a hpocrite anymore than I can share a bed with one. The class had just read aloud the 25th Chapter of I Samuel. Each table was to talk about it amongst themselves and present their conclusion in 20 minutes. At my table were my wife, one of her best friends, and the woman whose husband was one of the deacons they send out for "marriage counseling." If the man aiming his hands in the air and saying "Jesus, Jesus, Jesus, Jesus" is counseling then it certainly seemed to be working for this self-righteous man than it did for me.

---

I am a DJ by trade and am used to "filling in the dead air." No one at the table spoke. I finally interrupted the uneasy silence by suggesting: "I guess a good place to start is to know who wrote the book. If I wrote a novel and signed Steven King's name to it, I'd be in trouble. Can it be any easier for a book allegedly written by God to be written by "author unknown?" We had just read the entire Chapter in that Sunday School and, when I asked the group at the table who wrote the book, she answered by saying "Samuel wrote it." I told her it was odd that Samuel wrote the rest of 1 Samuel and the entire book of 2 Samuel if he had just died in the first verse of 1 Samuel 25 we'd just read out loud in Sunday School.

---

As Americans we can see the many of the Arabic countries are literally living in another time. They are not with us as Americans in the year 2004. In the first place, many of them don't recognize this as being the year 2004. That is the way the Western world measures the calendar. Try to understand it by looking at the fact that more people in the world drink goat's milk than do cow's milk. People in America claim to worship a man named Jesus as God and think about how much he loves them and they love him while driving to the grocery store in their Lexus to buy whatever it is they want to eat.

---

Can you imagine how hard it is for a person who searches for a few grains of rice with which to feed her family of four starving children reacts when she hears that Americans are now so obese that they are spending billions of dollars to LOSE WEIGHT.

---

If you are a Christian, sell your Mercedes and buy yourself a nice dependable Ford and give the difference to the world to make it a better place for others to live as well.

---

An American CEO makes $36 million dollars a year while telling the media what "a bad year it's been" for their company and that they are going to have to "lay off workers."

---

The "tax reduction" Bush is pushing and managed to pass saved Colin Powell over $100,000. It saved Cheney MILLIONS!

---

How much did it save you?

---

Why is a police officer's IQ a determining factor concerning his job yet there is no IQ test for the President of the United States?

---

People acknowledge that "Bush is not a amart man but he has surrounded himself with smart men." That would be like a 5th grader having college level or above "instructors."

---

If he is not as smart as they are, he would become more like a wind-up doll. He is the Neo-Right's puppet. They molded him with is own ego. His ego wanted revenge for his father. One of his advisors justified it for him. Colin Powell at first disgreed but got sucker punched or is not as smart as he appeared to be.

---

He would be easy to persuade in that his mind does not work all that well

---

Try to grasp this. It is really important.

---

Christians blame AIDS on the number of sex partners a "homosexual" man may have yet Christains are the first to condemn a marriage of two men or two women who are vowing before God to remain faithful to each other?

---

THE VOWS We are gathered here this day to unite this these two people who love each other in the bonds of holy matrimony which is an honorable estate. Into this, these two now come to be joined. If anyone present can show just and legal cause why they may not be joined, let them speak now or forever hold their peace. (NOTE: IF YOU WEREN'T THERE FOR THE CEREMONY YOU MISSED YOUR CHANCE TO OBJECT TO A VOW MADE BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE AND THEIR GOD. ONCE TWO PEOPLE ARE MARRIED IN A SACRED AND HOLY VOW BEFORE GOD, NO MAN NOR ANY LAW HAS THE RIGHT TO CIRCUMVENT THAT VOW. THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO OUR CONSTITUTION PROHIBITS THE GOVERNMENT FROM ESTBLISHING ANY RELIGION. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO ESTABLISH A RELIGION OVER ANOTHER RELIGION WHICH IS PRECIDELY WHAT THE GOVERNMENT WILL BE ATTEMPTING IN MAKING NULL AND VOID GAY MARRIAGES OR PREVENTING FUTURE MARRIAGES. THESE PEOPLE HAVE, IN LOVE AND FAITH BEFORE GOD MADE A SOLEMN VOW. NO GOVERNMENT CAN MAKE THEM SWEAR IN COURT ON A BIBLE WHILE AT THE SAME TIME REQUIRE THEM TO DISOWN A PREVIOUS VOW ON THAT SAME BIBLE).

---

You cannot believe in a book in which Solomon had a combined total of 1000 wives and concubines, somehow rationalize that concept by saying "it was God's way of populating the earth" without recognizing the fact that two men or two women do NOT create babies. If you can "in faith" understand that Solomon's 1000 wives were God's way of populating the earth you cannot deny that God is saying "We are getting overcrowded down there. I am sending a spirit upon you that will slow the population of this earth because, on your present course you are doomed. I am interceding. I am Nature. Follow me. Don't resist me."

---

Here is the curent world poplation as it happens. Click here.

---

Bill of Rights Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

I don't understand why a man would want to kiss another man or a woman kiss another woman but because I don't understand it does not make it wrong. When you don't understand something in the Bible you are told to accpe it in "faith." Accept in that same "faith" that these people don't think the way you do. Lots of guys are into feet. They can explain it until they are blue in the face and most people just aren't going to understand it. Can you imagine trying to explain a foot fetish to Attorney General John Ashcroft? He would want to know where it was written in the Bible that a man should lust for feet? I would ask him where in the Bible it says it matters. Because Mr. Ashcroft or Mr. Bush just can't see beyond the twisted lens of Christianity, does that make it wrong?

---

Because we don't understand something does not make it wrong anymore than our "faith" in something makes it right.

---

Yes. "Marriage" has always meant the union of a man and woman. "That is the way it's been for thousands of years." Fine. So was slavery until we wised up. It took a war and hundreds of thousands of lives to get the ball rolling. It took brave black men and women who spent time in jail or worse for having the courage to stand up for the FACT that they are not second class citizens because of the color of their skin. The extremely shallow argument often follows "But blacks were born black" (as if being black somehow justified their slavery). People aren't "born" gay. It is their choice." Upon what research to you base this opinion? Do you look to science? Or do you look for the answer in the Bible? The Bible condems homosexuality yet exhorts slavery.

---

"1 Peter 2: 18] Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. [19] For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. [20] For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God."

---

If the Bible is the "living" word of God, then those words are just as much alive now as they were when they were first written. If you are allowed to pick and choose to believe only those verses that make the Bible palatable to you, then logic woud dictate that I have that same right and in that some of the verses in the Bible are noble and honorable, I am just as much entitled to call myself a Bible believing Christian as you do.

---

Shopping for verses that are pleasant to your taste is like shopping for groceries. If you and I go into the same store with $50 each, I can guarantee you that we won't come out store with the same items. But I can guarantee you that we've both shopped in the same store.

---

If Michael Jackson had been a priest he would have the entirity of the Catholic faith supporting him even if he is found guilty of child molestation.

---

The Catholic Church believes the law is being "too harsh" on those priests who have sexually abused little boys. The Catholic Church seems to want us to accept the "three strikes and you are out" rule regarding child molestation.

---

---

Mel Gibson is praised by some for showing us "just how horrible it was for Jesus."

---

Now, let's do the same thing with words. The following will be my attempt to get inside the head of a priest who would hide behind a so-called God to engage in unimaginable acts on a little boy.

---

In the first place, the priest has vowed a life of celibacy in honor of the God that gave him the penis and the testicles and the hormones which created the desire for sex. This is called Nature. Nature creates within us the desire for sex. Nature also tells us when it's time to do number 2. Would it not be just as "gratifying" to God for this man to "hold it" for an hour? Would God be even more pleased if the man held it for 2 hours? Would God be so pleased that he would cry a tear if a man ignored the Nature that God had built into him and went without a poop for 24 hours? If so, by this time God's jubiliation would be nearly orgasmic in that that it was directly related to how long a man could hold a poison that is begging for just one thing: to get the hell out the guy's asshole. (If Mel can be graphic, so can I)! What kind of God do we wind up with when we concoct absurdidies to His nature that would demonstrate the ultimate "faith" by sticking our fingers up our ass holes and holding back the bowel movement until we were nearly dead. Wait! There is even a greater sacrifice we can make to this "god" that will be the ultimate gift we can show him! We can just vow not to take a dump. And hold it so long that we eventually create enough poisons in our body that he will probably pass out. If he passes out, there is going to be a mess in that nature will run her course when the man's completely idiotic thought process is corrected long enough for the body to relieve itself.

---

"Nature calls" us in many areas of our intricate make up. It tells us when we are hungry. It tells us when we need water. It tells us when we itch. It tells us when we need to urinate or have a bowel movement.

---

Strange isn't it that many a good Catholic woman has said that "Men think with their dicks" yet these same women don't take the time to realize that priests are men. With dicks. That they think with.

---

God doesn't sit up there and get his jollies when you don't have sex. How twisted a god can you concoct here?

---

Need we look past life in prison to understand that it is man's nature to have sex?

---

Imagine how you would feel if you were put in jail with a bunch of hardened criminals who were bigger than you were and had formed their own "gangs" or "groups" and if you didn't go along, something very bad was going to happen to you? What if you were much much younger and were told by a man you were told represented God Himself that God had called this man to teach you about your sexual desires. You are now too young to think beyond what you've been told by your parents and your church and your priest and thus, by your God. Now imagine being coerced oral sex and being made to believe that it was "God's will."

---

You don't eliminate the weed unless you pull up the roots. The roots of the sexual abuse issue is the belief that God is pleased when a man goes without sex.

---

Did the man get into the priesthood to molest little boys or is the entire concept of pleasing God by not having sex something that should be placed into evidence as the root cause? The fact is, it has to be one or the other. If these men claim that they got into the priesthood for noble reasons then we can only assume the latter.

---

Little boys are being tortured in a way Christ wasn't and our concentration is to be on a piece of paper that allows two people who love each other to vow to each other that they will live together through thick and thin.

---

---

Of course, Mr. Bush stands on this issue where he stands on most. Somewhere in the year 1959.

---

The CRUCI-FICTION. MEL GIBSON'S PASSION FOR PAIN.

Mel Gibson making a movie about Christ's "torture" is like Michael Jackson making a movie about how "Jesus loved all the little children."There is something twisted about Mel Gibson's passion for pain.

---

For the initial reviews of the movie:Click here.

---

From "Lethal Weapon."

---

---

Please note that this site has a relatively small bandwidth and can only handle so many hits a day. If the page comes up for you I strongly suggest you save it now.

---

I am an individual represented by no organization. This page does not ask for money. It asks something far more expensive. It asks you to think.

---

For future reference, here is the: Bill of Rights Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

---

This site is not intended to be viewed or understood in one reading. This site is much more like a text. Follow it. Check the links. You will find a great deal of knowledge on these pages as we study the beginnings and present state of world religions.

---

The argument could be made that many actors are repeatedly into violent movies. James Bond. The governor of California.

---

I, for one, have never not seen in any other five actors combined the explicit torture scenes contained in one Mel Gibson movie.

---

Put another way, if every Adam Sandler movie had a character with a foot fetish, how many movies would it take to convince you that the guy had a real thing for feet?

---

---

Do we all see the comparison here?

---

It is quite possible to be motivated by two factors at one time.

---

Mel Gibson has found the perfect vehicle for his passion for pain.

---

---

---

The pattern of torture contained in Mel Gibson's movies is just off the charts.

---

I do not like pain nor do I like to look at any living creature that is in pain.

---

To dare bring other, less godly motives into the picture is, for some, the same as questioning the justification for the timing of the war in Iraq.

The amount of logic you have given up equals your religious fervor.

---

Even if Mel Gibson's true passion was the story of the last hours of Christ, the movie is tainted by his fact that those hours happen to epitomize the torture that Mel Gibson seems to enjoy portraying.

---

Fear motivates. Bush used fear to get his war just like preachers talk about hell to fill the pews. If we don't have a right to question a war, why are the soldiers fighting it? "They are fighting for freedom."

---

This truly is not rocket science. Like we all have the right to question the war we retain right to question a movie.

A comment from the following website:"Looks like Mel Gibson has finally figured out how to make an ENTIRE MOVIE around the obligatory Mel Gibson torture scene." For more comments and to post yoursClick here.

---

A brief look at almost every single movie Mel Gibson has starred in depicts "hard to look at" torture scenes. They are hard to look at for anyone who does not have a fetish for torture/bondage. Here are some past reviews of Gibson's movies:

---

Guy Movie of the Week, 7/19/99: Lethal Weapon ... Mel Gibson gets his standard torture scene (here are two more examples, Murtaugh gets ... Lethal Weapon was followed by three sequels (to date, but kick me in the ... www.leisuresuit.net/Webzine/articles/GMOTW_32.shtml - 17k - Cached - Similar pages

---

‘Lethal Weapon’ (R) ... An apparent suicide kicks off "Lethal Weapon" -- a pretty hooker jumps off a penthouse ... A long, graphic torture scene toward the end may be painful to watch ... www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/movies/ videos/lethalweaponrharrington_a0aa2d.htm - Similar pages

---

Here's a secular review of "The Passion."advertisement By David Ansen Newsweek ..."It's the sadism, not the alleged anti-Semitism, that is most striking. (For the record, I don't think Gibson is anti-Semitic; but those inclined toward bigotry could easily find fuel for their fire here.) There's always been a pronounced streak of sadomasochism and martyrdom running through Gibson's movies, both as an actor and as a filmmaker. The Oscar-winning "Braveheart" reveled in decapitations and disembowelments, not to mention the spectacle of Gibson himself, as the Scottish warrior hero, impaled on a cross. In "Mad Max," the "Lethal Weapon" movies, "Ransom" and "Signs" (where he's a cleric who's lost his faith), the Gibson hero is pummeled and persecuted, driven to suicidal extremes. From these pop passion plays to the Passion itself is a logical progression; it gives rise to the suspicion that on some unconscious level "The Passion of the Christ" is, for Gibson, autobiography..."

---

Do you realize what you have to believe in order to see "The Passion of Christ" as something "good" or "holy" or "right" or "religious?"

---

Crucifixion was the common means of execution in that day. Some 400 years earlier Socrates was sentenced to death and given a glass of hemlock to drink. It was not a pleasant way to die: "eg, salivation, nausea, emesis) within 15 minutes, rapidly followed by CNS effects (eg, excitation, convulsions, seizures, coma)."Socrates died because he was a thinker. He didn't kill or rape anyone. He was a philosopher who challenged the beliefs of the day when those beliefs made no logical sense. Socrates based his thinking on logic. He died for it. It doesn't make him holy. Besides crucifixion being the means of execution at the time, the name "Jesus" was as common then as the name "John" is today. Hundreds if not thousands of men named Jesus were crucified during the same era.

---

Execution does not make one holy.

However, if someone were to die and then come back to life as they had predicted: "Like Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days and three nights so will the Son of Man be in the belly of the earth for three days and three nights,"all bets would be off. If Jesus did die and really was "resurrected" after three days and three nights, the world should be Christian "under one God" and Pat Robertson should be president.

---

The facts prove otherwise. If a man named Jesus died on a "good" Friday at about 2pm and "rose" on "Easter Sunday," that is simply not three days and three nights. From 2pm Friday to 2pm Saturday is one day and one night. From 2pm Saturday to midnight is 10 more hours. From midnight to around 6am on Sunday morning is another 6 hours. That is slightly more than a day and a half. If a miracle such as a resurrection is to be believed, there can be no room for doubt. When we doubt, we don't believe. Whenever "faith" replaces logic we are in trouble. Faith drove men to expect 72 virgins once they crashed jets into the World Trade Centers. When someone believes in "faith" they have short-circuited their mind. Why is it that everything we do depends upon logic. Our system of justice is based on logic. Why should the most important belief we have be set to lower standards in order to be believed?

---

Matthew 27:50 And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit. Matthew 27:51 And behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth shook and the rocks were split. Matthew 27:52 The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; Matthew 27:53 and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many.

---

Jesus' one and a half day "death" pales in comparison to the above. You mean to tell me that "saints" such as Moses or Joshua or Samuel or David actually climbed out of their graves and "appeared to many?" What happened after that? Did they die again? How did they die? Why did we not hear volumes on just what these "saints" had to say?

---

The crucifixion proves nothing. But what about the ascension? Had this event acutally occured there could not have been a doubter among the Jews. Each of the four gospels spells out in pure Mel Gibson form the execution of a man named Jesus. The "facts" contained in one book do not necessarily agree with the "facts" contained in the other three, but at least they agree in general that a man named Jesus was executed. Which proves nothing miraculous. A supernatural ascension would be miraculous.

---

Matthew does not mention an ascension: 28:19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,28 28:20 teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”Mark devotes more time to snakes and poison than he does any ascension: 16:18 they will pick up snakes with their hands, and whatever poison they drink will not harm them;11 they will place their hands on the sick and they will be well.” 16:19 After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God. 16:20 They went out and proclaimed everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the word through the accompanying signs.

---

John does not mention a word of any ascension.

---

Thus, to call yourself a Christian you have to believe that God impregnated his own mother in order to be born so that he might be sacrificed in order that he might be capable of allowing himself to forgive Eve for the eating of an apple. If God hadn't done this, all of us would spend an eternity with an evil creature named Satan who was such a really bad angel that God had Gabriel fight him and win and throw him out of heaven. So you mean to tell me that even God couldn't put up with this creature so he decides to put "his new creation of which he was pleased" (man) on the same speck of dust as this very same creature that had been thrown out God's own home? > Let's put it in terms we can understand. Would you let a known drug dealer babysit your kids? So, let me get this straight. God doesn't want Satan living in his neighborhood but it's okay for him to live in ours? Christians begin to "see" catastrophic events as earthquakes as hurricanes and famine and hunger and sickness as "the result of evil." Pray with as much fervor as they can muster and they can't pray away a hurricane. In fact, all of the world religions praying at once could not pray away the flies from a Sunday School picnic.

---

Do we agree that the "evil one" tells a lie and the true "God" tells only the truth? That is fair, isn't it? Here's what "God" said in Genesis: 2:15 The Lord God took the man and placed him in the orchard in Eden to care for and maintain it. 2:16 Then the Lord God commanded48 the man, “You may freely eat fruit from every tree of the orchard, 2:17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will surely die.”

---

Here's what Satan told Adam and Eve with the results:3:4 The serpent said to the woman, “Surely you will not die, 3:5 for God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will open12 and you will be like divine beings who know good and evil.” 3:6 When the woman saw that the tree produced fruit that was good for food, was attractive to the eye, and was desirable for making one wise,18 she took some of its fruit and ate it. She also gave some of it to her husband who was with her, and he ate it. 3:7 Then the eyes of both of them opened, and they knew they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves. Satan was honest with them if this story were to be believed. Their eyes were opened. They did not die. Of course, the Christian response to that is that they would die "spiritually." So he pits them up against an evil angel who can disguise himself as a serpent and talk to them and they don't think it's unusual talking to a snake yet they are supposed to be able to know who to believe? Of course Christiam preachers will "explain it all away (apologetics) by saying that God meant "a spiritual death." Yet "God's" same book tells us that we will judge angels.

---

1 Corinthians 6:3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life?

---

Here is what is wrong with that argument.

---

Where would the 30 million dollars it took to make this movie be best spent?

---

To depict the brutality of a death and, in doing so, prove nothing?

---

Feed the hungry?

---

Which interpretation of "feed the hungry" are we gonna use here? Feed the hungry as in feed starving children. Or "feed the hungry" as far as giving them "spiritual" food?

---

They are starving to death and throwing up their own guts and they have sores all over their body and they are hurting as much as Jesus Christ ever thought about hurting yet their pain goes on for days and weeks and months.

---

How dare we allow ourselves to glorify pain and suffering by going to a nice movie theater, spending $10.00 on a big bag of popcorn and a couple of soft drinks that cost the theater less than a quarter in the name of Christ when half the world is starving. For a moment, open your eyes and see the world around you. Click here.

---

If you say you believe in the Bible yet you have not read the Bible, you believe in nothing or you believe in what you were taught to believe. So are the Muslims. So are the Buddists. So are the athiests. So what? You may have also been told that there was a real Santa. You are a grown person. You have a mind. God would not require an intereter anymore than Jesus did. Read the Bible!!! Don't just read it, STUDY IT. Here is a nice reference Bible for you. Click here.

---

center>

---

Faith in something does not make it right.

---

Christianity begins with this premise and only goes downhill from there.

---

"Lethal Weapon" - the series - involves torture as do most of Gibson's works. It is glaring. Something isn't right about it. We don't want to look at it but we do. I stopped going to Mel Gibson movies a long time ago although I enjoyed the chemistry between Gibson and Danny Glover. I'm just not into the torture thing so I missed out on all the fun of "Braveheart." The movie may have had a great message. But I'll bet you it has a more than the usual amount of "torture." The fact that Mel Gibson is into torture cannot be doubted.

---

In an otherwise glowing review, here's what one critic had to say about a later Mel Gibson movie, "Payback": "...a litany of pointless violence (and there's a lot of that, including a torture scene that is uncomfortable to sit through).

---

What better vehicle that the story of Jesus for Mel to "express" his beliefs. Do you believe that Mel Gibson's morals are superior to that of a Priest? Men get into the Priesthood for reasons that we can only guess until time answers. Time has answered. Too many of these men have hidden behind their religion to commit unspeakable acts of sexual abuse on innocent young boys. Like most Christians, those little boys were doing what they were told was "God's will." They believed. They had faith in a man who told them things he wanted them to do that repulsed them. Yet, they went along "in faith." These men still roam the streets and parishes. Their ultimate judge in this life is not the government; it is the Church. How twisted is it that a church should ask for more and more money from their congregations only to prolong the "sentencing" of child abusers? Like Priests may hide behind a facade of religion for sexual gratification, so must Mel Gibson be attracted in a twisted way to torture. He has merely found the ultimate vehicle in "The Passion of Christ."

---

Our government had us believe that Saddam tortured his own people and then went home and it was insinunated that he "got off" on them by watching replays. He was obviously a sick enough man to have done just that. The question is, what was Mel's passion? I can't judge that for you. But I belive it was a combination of belief given a second boost by an erotica involving bondage and torture. Rent one of his movies and see for yourself.

---

What the movie fails to present is the fact that the legend has it that Jesus said he would, like Job was in the belly of a whale for 3 days and 3 nights, "so will the Son of Man be in the earth for three days and three nights." Friday at around 2pm thru Sunday morning at around 6am is more like a day and a half. It is not close to 3 days. If Christians can't add, there isn't much hope in convincing them that Bush a really NOT a good president. It's laughable.

---

Religion is a belief in the supernatural. We may use the words "belief" and "faith" interchangably in that faith in something means you believe it to be true. Thus, a person's "faith" becomes that person's "belief." Thus, President Bush believes "in faith" that the Bible is true. He has managed to assemble beneath him the likes of John Ashcroft who, upon winning senate seat in 1998 immediately had himself "annointed" by his staff. The only "oil" they had available was Crisco. So, Mr. Ashcroft was "annointed" (as in the Old Testament) with oil. In this case Crisco. Does anybody have any idea how completely insane this is? And this is the guy who can look over your shoulder while you write an email or check out a library book? Every religous politician has two agendas he has sworn to uphold. Here's where it gets complex. Bush probably believes that he owes the very office he is in to Jesus Christ. I can hear it now: "Only Jesus could pull this one off. I lost the election but, praise God, here I am in the White House. I am the most powerful man on earth and I owe it all to Jesus."

---

Bush thinks he is "chosen." Perhaps it was not as much Jesus as the priviledge of having a brother (also a Christian) in a state in which the ballots never really got counted because the Supreme Court ruled that Bush was President before they could. Thus, the election came down to the members of the Supreme Court. Bush won by one vote. "This was God telling him something. 'You are chosen, my son.'"

---

Let's backtrack for a moment to the days of the Bush drinking. He had an "alcohol problem" which is as close to "alchoholic" as inbreeding is to bad teeth.

---

So, who got him off the booze? Jesus did. George W. Bush "gave his life to Christ" and prayed and he was suddenly free of the "drinking problem." I have no doubt about this. I have no doubt that it happened and I have no doubt that Bush was at the end of his rope and that he believes Jesus intervened in his behalf and saved him from the drinking problem.

---

The Irrefutable Case Against the 10 Commandments being displayed in a courtroom or any other public place!

Before we debate the merits of the "10 Commandments" let's take a look at other "laws of Moses." Deut.21 [18] If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: [19] Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; [20] And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. [21] And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

---

Most Christians are blissfully unaware of these "other laws" simply because they have not read the Bible; it's been spoon fed to them and they have swallowed. Hook, line and sinker.

---

If we're going to display the 10 Commandments in public, let's display the Confederate flag. One promotes slavery to this day. The Confederate flag is a reminder of slavery. However, since the Bible is "the living word of God," (wink wink) it would have us believe that one man being another man's slave is God's will. (I'll show you the verses from the Old and New Testament below and give you the resources online to look them up for yourself or you can use your own Bible. I'd recommend that you always look up verses to see them for yourself and read them in context. Preachers are famous for telling you the same thing yet they quote bits and pieces of the Bible from Old to New and do precisely that: TAKE THEM COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTEXT).

---

If you don't believe me, read the 10 Commandments for yourself! Most Christians who read this page have not a clue that there are TWO SETS of 10 Commandments. They can't tell you the book in which either is contained. Both versions are listed word for word below.

---

Let's once and for all dispel the thought that our nation was conceived on "good Christian principles." In the first place, there is no mention of Jesus in the Constitution. Period. Many of those who designed the Constitution were Quakers and Quakers didn't have much to say about Jesus one way or the other. Does the fact that America was founded on slavery make slavery right? Didn't think so. The highest ranking member of our great forefathers was Benjamin Franklin. "The faith you mention has doubtless its use in the world. I do not desire to see it diminished, nor would I desire to lessen it in any way; but I wish it were more productive of good works than I have generally seen it. I mean real good works, works of kindness, charity, mercy, and public spirit, not holy-day keeping, sermon-hearing, and reading, performing church ceremonies, or making long prayers, filled with flatteries and compliments, despised even by wise men, and much less capable of pleasing the Deity"[Benjamin Franklin, 1753, letter to Rev. George Whitefield. Works, Vol. VII, p. 75] For more real quotes from Benjamin FranklinClick here.

---

Benjamin Franklin seriously doubted whether Jesus was divine (as noted if you clicked the above link) and to doubt is to not believe it. Thus, by the very definition of the word, Benjamin Franklin was NOT a Christian.

---

Along comes good old Judge Roy Moore. From Alabama. Confederate flags are still "proudly" displayed in Alabama. Confederate flags are offensive to a lotta people and for good reason. Our country was founded for the reasons of ESCAPING PERSECUTION, "Your Honor." Intimidation is persecution and persecution in the hands of a Judge or jury in a courtroom is prosecution. No way around it. A brown Muslim man accused of a crime by the deacon of the First Baptist Church is not gonna get a fair trial whether the judge says so or not. Why? Because it's impossible for a Muslim man NOT to be intimidated by walking into what is obviously a Judeo-Christian countroom anymore than a black man would NOT feel intimidated by having to walk past a Conferate flag on the way to trial for allegedly "raping" a white lady.

---

Certainly the good Judge Bean or whatever his name is is aware of body language in a courtroom. Some people "look" guilty because they "feel" intimidated. Try being black, walking past a Confederate flag inside a courtroom full of "good old boys" and women with beehives and greenish tooth. Not teeth. Tooth. Deal with it. Intimidation is persecution is prosecution, "Your Honor." Just like the Confederate flag is intimidating and offensive to a black man (and to me as well and I'm not black), so are the 10 Commandments intidating to a person of another religious persuasion. Judge Roy Bean or whatever your self-righteous name is, welcome to America. You are not "carrying the cross of Jesus." You are mocking it. The very book the "good" judge promotes in his continuing quest for higher office based on a fundamentalist voter base was the last vestige the South had to cling to in their fight against what was right: The abolition of slavery. Which book do you believe kept slavery alive for as long as it was? Three guesses! Bingo! The same book in which there are 2 sets of 10 Comandments. The "Holy" Bible!

---

---

If makes no sense to attach a bomb to your person and blow yourself up in an attempt to please Allah. Flying jets into World Trade Centers proves nothing more than the fact that you are without an ounce of logic. You are believing in blind faith. Faith in something does not make it right or true or just or Godly. What makes God happy is when we think first of how we can make all of our fellow creatures happy.

---

Just like it is wrong to think that you are somehow pleasing "your god" in taking your own life and the lives of others, it is wrong to believe the following from the NEW TESTAMENT: 1 Peter 2: 18] Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. [19] For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. [20] For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.

---

Excuse me?

---

Are you trying to tell me that in America's recent past a black man was expected to be beaten for doing something good and this was something the black man should look forward to in that it was "acceptable" with God?

---

If you do believe this, you should seek psychiatric care immediately.

---

Biblical Reasons for slavery. Abraham, the "the father of faith,' and all the patriarchs held slaves without God's disapproval (Gen. 21:9-10). Canaan, Ham's son, was made a slave to his brothers (Gen. 9:24-27).

---

The Ten Commandments mention slavery twice, showing God's implicit acceptance of it (Ex. 20:10, 17).

---

Slavery was widespread throughout the Roman world, and yet Jesus never spoke against it. The apostle Paul specifically commanded slave to obey their masters (Eph. 6:5-8). Paul returned a runaway slave, Philemon, to his master (Philem. 12).

---

"Charitable" and evangelistic reasons Slavery removes people from a culture that "worshipped the devil, practiced witchcraft, and sorcery" and other evils. Slavery brings heathens to a Christian land where they can hear the gospel. Christian masters provide religious instruction for their slaves. Under slavery, people are treated with kindness, as many northern visiters can attest. It is in slaveholders' own interest to treat their slaves well. Slaves are treated more benevolently than are workers in oppressive northern factories. Well, goodie. I honestly can't believe people could believe such garbage but they did. Otherwise, explain the Civil War. What was it all about? Slavery.

---

Social Reasons Just as women are called to play a subordinate role (Eph. 5:22; 1 Tim.2:11-15), so slaves are stationed by God in their place. Slavery is God's means of protesting and providing for an inferior race (suffering the "curse of Ham" in Gen. 9:25 or even the punishment of Cain in Gen. 4:12). Abolition would lead to slave uprisings, bloodshed, and anarcy. Consider the mob's "rule of terror" during the French Revolution. Oh great. Now we've classified slaves as "inferior" and we've placed women on a "subordiate" level? And you call this God's writing? Political Reasons

---

Christians are to obey civil authorities, and those authorities permit and protect slavery. The church should concentrate on spirtual matters, not political ones. Those who support abolition are, in James H. Thornwell's words, "atheists, socialists, communists [and] red republicans."

---

You mean to tell me that people who did not believe in slavery were "athiests, socialists, and communists?"

---

Same jargon the conservative talk show hosts use in the year 2003. If you disagree with them they label you a communist. A left-wing Commie drug crazed liberal.

---

My personal thanks to Michael Savage for becoming to radio talk shows what the "Weekly World News" is to check-out lines at the grocery store. Amusingly entertaining at times but out of the the scope of reality. I will be happy to debate him as long as we each get equal time with no yelling or interruptions. He got fired on MSNBC for telling a man he thought was gay to "die of AIDS." Then he called it a "set up." Well, why not tell them to die of AIDS, Mr. Savage? Mr. Savage also portrays Muslim beliefs as cruel and injust and the cause for so much violence. To a degree, he is correct. However, he quietly overlooks the fact that there is not a more cruel book in this world than the Bible in which he claims to believe.

---

Numbers 31: verse 13: "And Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and all the princes of the congregation went forth to meet them without the camp; and Moses was wroth with the officers of the host, with the captains over thousands, and captains over hundreds, which came from the battle; and Moses said unto them, 'Have ye saved all the women alive?' Behold, these caused the children of Isreal, through the council of Balaam, to commit trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the Lord. Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every women that hath known a man by lying with him; but all the women-children that have not known a man by lying with hin, keep alive for yourselves."

---

There is no "political agenda" in being born gay.

---

Mr. Savage and Mr. Beck and, to a degree Mr. O'Reily claim that such cable outlets as CNN are puppets of the liberals. Maybe you're watching a different CNN than I am. Did you not view the repeat series of the woman going underground and managing to have video rolling while she showed you the abhorent living conditions of the women of Afghanistan? Did you not watch CNN when they showed actual footage of Saddam's torture? Did you miss the man being pushed off the ledge of a three story building? Did you miss the beatings shown on CNN? Is this too "liberal" for you?

---

Rush is back on the air. His ratings will soar because he obtained illegal drugs. He is probably smart enough to pull off a strong come back. I wish him well and am proud of him for confessing his addiction and taking measures to correct it.

---

Yet, he is a conservative talk show host. He obtained illegal drugs through illegal means. He will walk.

---

Tommy Chong on the other hand represents more of an "anti-establishment" perspective in that he makes movies about being stoned on a weed that grows freely in nature. He had no prior convictions. Yet he is doing 9 months in prison for "selling bongs" on the Internet. He was prosecuted under the auspices of "Homeland Security."

---

Thank you Mr. Ashcroft for once again proving why you lost your last election to a dead man.

---

Don't let Bush take away the rights that your fathers and grandfathers gave their lives to preserve!

---

Christians are opposed to a person's right to die. (Recent case: Jeb Bush). They wish to make their view the only view. This violates the separation of church and state except in Governor Bush's case. They fail to realize that often, prolonging LIFE is only prolonging DEATH. In the same way and along the same line, Christians were against the use of anesthetics!!! Continue reading this webpage and you'll find out exactly why. Must like the slave thing. Much like the suicide bomber thing. Faith in something that isn't, wasn't nor ever will be true.

---

From the "good Judge.": "Since September 11, we have been at war. I submit to you there is another war raging - a war between good and evil, between right and wrong. For 40 years we have wandered like the children of Israel. In homes and schools across our land, it's time for Christians to take a stand. This is not a nation established on the principles of Buddha or Hinduism. Our faith is not Islam. What we follow is not the Koran but the Bible. This is a Christian nation."

---

The fact is, America WAS NOT founded as a CHRISTIAN nation. It was a nation founded on freedom of or from religion. You don't have to be a "good Christian" to be a "good American."You can be straight or gay or black or white or brown or Christian or Jewish or Catholic or athiest or agnostic and still be a good American, my friend. If America were founded on CHRISTIAN principles, principal among them was slavery. Thus, America was also founded on SLAVERY. Because of our constitution, people from other faiths have found refuge here and have become just as important and entitled to rights as native Americans. But wait! Native Americans were run off their own land. The Indians will tell you that. Excuse me Roy-Boy, but this nation is about a Christian nation as Israel is a "good Christian nation." They don't believe in Jesus your "Honor." Neither do Muslims or Hindus or agnostics or athiests. It may be a big pill to swallow but it's time you took your medicine like a big boy.

---

You are only making a mockery of Christianity. You are appealing to the lowest common demoninator which can only mean that you are either one of them or that you are using them. Either way, the loser is you.

---

The question of whether or not the 10 Commandments are good or bad make no part of the argument as you will see if you will take the time to THINK! This is not about "thout shalt not kill or steal or rape or lie." How very shallow is that. This is not about those universally proclaimed laws that man has written into law. Remember, "All men are created equal" is not a Biblical statement. It is a statement of Freedom which was the idea behind the framing of our Constitution. Does a Mourning Dove need a manual of "the 10 Commandments of Hatching an Egg" to get the job done? No! Does a mother bear need "the 10 Commandments" to give her very life for her young? No! Is a cop able to "read" the surroundings and sense danger after years on the streets? You bet! Did he read it somewhere? No!

---

Read the papers. How many of today's wars are over religious differences? (Much more on that topic further down this webpage and on adjacent pages). The Ultra-Right would mumble such incoherent babbles as to confuse and thus convince their unthinking flocks that to oppose public display of all ten commandments is a vote against all ten. Simple minds believe this. More evolved minds don't really care one way or the other. My personal feeling is, if given the choice, I'd make it illegal to yell into a cell phone while you're standing behind me at a convenience store and just leave the 10 commandments there. I hope some of you realize that this "holy judge" runs a platform for a higher office under the auspices of "The 10 Commandment" candidate.

---

The first thing the person of a Judeo-Christain faith must ask themselves when they are so adamently against the "rule of the law" (freedom of and from religion) is: "Which Biblical account of the 10 Commandments are we discussing?" There are two:

---

Next time you hear the topic on the radio or from your Christian friends you might ask them "which 10 Commandments" are you talking about?" They won't know there are two. They haven't read the book in which they claim to believe "with all their hearts and souls." Oh well. You can lead a horse to water but.... There is the Exodus version: Exod.20 And God spake all these words, saying, I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. [1] Thou shalt have no other gods before me. [2] Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: [3] Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. [4] Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. [5] Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee. [6] Thou shalt not kill. [7] Thou shalt not commit adultery. [8] Thou shalt not steal. [9] Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour. [10] Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.

---

Then there is the Deuteronomy version:

---

Deuteronomy 5 [1] Thou shalt have none other gods before me. [2] Thou shalt not make thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters beneath the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me, And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments. [3]Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain: for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. [4] Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee. Six days thou shalt labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thine ox, nor thine ass, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; that thy manservant and thy maidservant may rest as well as thou. And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the LORD thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the LORD thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day. [5] Honour thy father and thy mother, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee; that thy days may be prolonged, and that it may go well with thee, in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee. [6] Thou shalt not kill. [7] Neither shalt thou commit adultery. [8] Neither shalt thou steal. [9] Neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy neighbour. [10] Neither shalt thou desire thy neighbour's wife, neither shalt thou covet thy neighbour's house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, his ox, or his ass, or any thing that is thy neighbour's.

---

The first problem for the Judeo-Christian believer comes in the sentence preceeding the VERY FIRST COMMANDMENT! "I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage."Who is "God" speaking to according to the BIBLE? The nation of Israel. The Jewish people. Can we admit now that some people are not Jewish and, like the Jews, have conceived of their own god they call Allah? They are raised to believe in Allah and Muhammed as much or more than Christians are taught to believe in Moses and Jesus. Can you see why displaying a Judeo-Christain" belief might be upsetting to someone of another faith? The fact that it can't be understood or meant to be understood any other way than a god speaking to the people of ISRAEL is even more clearly stated in the 4th commandment from the Exodus version: Even more glaring than the fact that the commandments favor one religion over another (a violation of Church and State) is the phrase that kept so many black people in this nation slaves for so many years. It's in the 4th commandment from the Exodus version of the 10 Commandments above. In this phrase there can be no contesting the fact that this is the Judeo-Christian concept of a "God." "And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the LORD thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the LORD thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day."Then comes the blatant and outspoken PRO-SLAVERY! "But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thine ox, nor thine ass, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; that thy manservant and thy maidservant may rest as well as thou."Many very good and patriotic Americans do not believe in the Confederate Flag being displayed in a publc place for the same reason. What if the Bible read: "You must tell your white slave people that they are not to work on the Sabbath?" White folks might take a bit more time in exclaiming the "glory" of a "living" document that was pleased to condone and thus perpetuate their slavery. And will somebody please tell me exactly when the Sabbath Day is? Is it Saturday or Sunday? How literally are we to "take" that commandment? Joe Lieberman is an "Orthodox" Jew meaning he takes this stuff literally. Because of his "faith" he is not to so much as turn on a lightbulb on his "Sabbath" because, according to his "beliefs" that is considered "work." Oh my God. Should planes still be allowed to fly on the "Sabbath?" If so, is the pilot not flying in the face of the commandment that clearly states: "But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work?" Today on the Fox network I saw a man yelling "Put it back! Put it back!" referring to the removal of the block of stone containing one or the other version of the 10 Commandments from a judge's courthouse. A bystander asked him to "stay calm." But the man said: "God told me to say what I'm saying!!!"I think the man believed God has spoken to him. This is the danger inherent in all world religions. Fanatics!I also believe the monumentally brainless terrorists who flew jets into the World Trade Centers honestly believed" that seventy two virgins were going to be awaiting them once they committed suicide and took so many innocent lives in the process. Faith in something does not make it right.

---

Or true.Here in the United States we have a president who claims to honestly be a Christian and a man who has made it a point to say on more than one occation that "the man he admires most is Jesus Christ because he changed my life." Thus, by his own definition of his own beliefs, Bush has declared that he "sees the world though the eyes of his Chrisian beliefs." How would we, as Americans feel if he said he has put his life in Muhammed's hands? Then how to you think the Arab world conceives a president that lies to his own people, declares war on an innocent PEOPLE. What did the people of Iraq ever do to us to deserve the death and destruction imposed upon by them by the strongest ally of the nation of Isreal? It is my personal belief that George Bush really does believe in Jesus Christ. I don't think he's putting that on. I don't think he's smart enough to offend much less of the world by merely referring to "God." Yet this man shatters the 6th commandment in both versions of the 10 Commandments which says "thou shalt not kill" by declaring war on an innocent PEOPLE. And he annialates the 9th commandment: [9] "Neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy neighbour." bush openly and knowing outright lied to the American people. If he didn't, where does the buck stop? Just before Bush almost single-handedly drove the war to Iraq by himself, other nations were trying desperately to present their case. They had the PICTURES THAT PROVED that the pictures of Iraqi officials talking to another nation about nuclear weapons was An old picture Taken by Bush completely out of context. No one listened. If you don't think falsified information was fed to the American public and the world in the days leading up the "war" then you really need to take a look at the following "information" that was fed to a gullible public. It comes from ABC News. But, before you go there, please be aware of "key words" that trigger an immediate response in the fight or flight mode from various groups of people whether they be ethnic or cultural or just plain redneck. Any redneck knows that you gotta support your mama. "He don't believe in his mother, he don't believe in God," When I read this I thought: "You gotta be kidding me? This lady comes out of nowhere just when Bush is needs more ammunition to keep beating the war drums. And he doesn't believe In his mother? Or in God?" The first sentence of a well-written paragraph leaves you wanting more. This articl was well conceived for those who manage to function on a fifth grade intelligence level. I was honestly thinking "Surely these bufoons are not gonna bring Hitler into play." Next sentence: "He went like that. He looks. 'I am Saddam. Heil Hitler!'" Bingo. I was right again. The people who write this stuff are brainless but then so is most of the electorate or Bush wouldn't be there in the first place.Another line from this "Wag the Dog" scenerio expects us to believe "U.S. intelligence officials, who had suspected that Saddam was behind the assassination attempt but were unable to confirm it, told Primetime that Lampsos's account could be damaging to Saddam's regime, and potentially even destabilize it." So, let me get this straight. A woman comes out of nowhere at a crucial time to announce that Saddam hates his mother, hates God, thinks he's Hitler, and this is somehow going to "destablize" his own country? You gotta be kidding me.Then this classic: "Even when relaxing, Saddam's brutal side could come out, she said. According to Lampsos, Saddam loved watching The Godfather, listening to "Strangers in the Night" by Frank Sinatra, or seeing videos of his enemies being tortured. He sometimes donned a cowboy hat, sipped whiskey on the rocks and puffed on a cigar as he watched the torture." The article was obviously conceived by some religious writer or at least a person who was aware of the fact that many people are gullible enough to believe that God found it necessary to impregnate his own mother in order to be born so that he might be made a sacrifice in order to be capable allowing himself to forgive Eve for the eating of an apple. If your daughter were to come to you and tell you she was pregnant by a "Holy Ghost" you wouldn't believe her, would you? If you would, there is not much use in reading on. Why then are we in any way expected to believe such a story written by who knows who and who knows when?Read the article for yourself. Decide for yourself knowing what you know now and are learing each day. Thank you for thinking. Click here.

---

In these times it does not make sense NOT to take in all the news you can from as many sources as possible. The right wing conservativies who you hear on a lot of AM talk stations are only in such a position because AM radio needs something on which to feed. To get a grasp of their audience, listen to their commercials. Judge these talk show hosts on the merit of the company they keep. And remember, YOU ARE A PART OF THAT COMPANY. "Men, would you like to enhance your sex lives? Are you over 25? Are you not the man you used to be? Then you need . They're all natural. And they work! Just listen to Bob of California:" "I'm over 40. I have only taken for 3 months and already I've noticed a newfound me. My wife has also noticed quite a difference." And we are expected to believe their gibberish because we trust some Bob who lives in California whom we've never met nor will ever meet and we are to believe him and the other paid persons tell you what their sponsors tell them to tell you. What do you think the Bible is? Same thing. Quickie quiz: Who is the author of 2 Samuel? If you answered "Samuel" you are wrong. By the Bible's own account, Samuel died in the first sentense of Chapter 25 of 1 Samuel. If Samuel didn't write it, who did? If you don't know who wrote it, how can you believe it anymore than you'd believe "Bob in Califoria?" The Bible does not promise you a happier and more fullfilling sex life. It promises you eternity of bliss. Or, if you are under the influence of another tyrannical moron who is able to twist words in a book into your accepting mind such that you honestly believe you will acquire 72 virgins by killing yourself, I can't do much to help you. Except I can ask you to use the greatest gift that the true God gave to each man equally. Logic.

---

For the ABC article in its entirity: Click here.

---

These UR's (ultra rights) would have you believe that all of the media is LIBERAL except their own specific show. They are like Bush puppets in that he convinced us that almost every other country on earth including our two closest neighbors, Canada and Mexico were "not a coalition of the willing." Yet we've discovered since the war that Canada and Mexico and other nations who were against the war AT THAT TIME, were right. These ultra rright consertives only fanned the flames of war. Just like they ask you "Which of the 10 commandments are you against? Killing? Raping? Stealing?" They conviently leave out the fact that there are two sets of "The Ten Commandments" in two different books of the Bible. They all claim to be "above average in intelligence" and they are to most people who listen to them. Most people. Not YOU if you arm yourself with knowledge and truth. They always and without exception do not address the "other" commandments which make the "10 Commandments" (no matter which version they use) to be a Judeo-Christian belief system exclusive to only that one belief. Just like the Bible and Quoran, they pretend to be gods who convince you that black is white and white is black. It is entertaining to watch them pull this off. But, that's as far as it goes. Entertainment. Shallow entertianment.

---

Before we talk more on religion, let's argue politics. But, let's always do it in love and respect for the other person's view.Here's a letter recently sent to the Democratic Party Headquarters regarding the rampage of a president completely out of control: Text. The ONLY question is: "Was Iraq ever an 'imminent threat' to the US?" The answer was then and remains a resounding NO! Where is the logic in a foreign policy that allows North Korea to directly challenge our President while we are revenging a family feud by invading Iraq. Any politician dumb enough not to realize that the Jr. Bush was finishing off what the Sr. Bush didn't complete at least in the WORLD'S EYES is living in a fantasy world. We engaged in a war upon a nation because it defied UN warnings yet in doing so we ignored those same warnings. The world wanted us to wait. "Give the inspectors more time was the call of the world." (As to be written in future textbooks unless Bush gets control of them as well as he has just about everything else). Did no one realize that while the inspectors were there it was not plausible that Iraq could use weapons of mass destruction while at the same time try to "hide them?" It would been just one helluva lot cheaper in dollars and much more importantly LIVES to share the burden of keeping the inspectors at their jobs for "as long as it takes" than to be now doing the same thing they were doing on a much larger scale and still finding nothing to indicate an "imminent threat." The war was declared on the basis of a country possessing "weapons of mass destruction" yet the Bush think tank is attempting to once again alter the concept to " PROGRAMS of mass destruction. If you are truly and in "the eyes of Jesus" looking for weapons of mass destruction, why not see the bright light coming from North Korea? North Korea isn't dumb enough to challenge us in the real sense of the word and we all know that. Or do we? Could not such a far-reaching war agenda as Bush has regarding Iraq be much easier to establish regarding North Korea? Which brings up the point: "Why Iraq. Why the rush?" If North Korea is making threats with the knowledge that they would be erased from the plant before they could reach the button then their leader is insane. So, let's see. You have an insane person with nukes and you spend your continuing resources invading a country you have already invaded and are STILL tryiing to prove had weapons of mass destruction. How much better are we doing than Hans Blitz? And we have a President who thinks he's John Wayne in a "B" Western calling for the other side to "Bring it on." The next day, an American serviceman was shot in the back of the head. How would we, as Americans, feel about any other world leader who acted like Bush? BUSH MUST END THIS CYCLE IN WHICH THE WORLD BELIEVES HE IS ON SOME SORT OF RELIGIOUS OR ULTRA RIGHT RAMPAGE AND IT'S TIME HE APOLOGIZE TO THE WORLD FOR HIS ERROR IN THE STATE OF THE UNION MESSAGE. The buck stops with Bush. Otherwise, all is chaos. If Tenet can be blamed for an uncomprehendable and unprecedented mistake in the actual context of an American President's very State of the Union Message, could he not also be held responsible for launching nukes? If Tenet is capable of making such a huge mistake, is Ashcroft immune from doing the same with the new powers he has been granted, some of which were last minute "ad ons" just before the bill was passed. Don't believe me. Ask Senator John McCain who refused to sign amendments to a bill he hadn't had the opportunity to study. Hurray for him. Others on both sides of the fence were not as smart or had their mind somewhere else at the time. Bush has managed to surround himself with a virtual fortress of elitist and extremely gifted people. Money attracts that. This think tank surrounding Bush is merely outsmarting most people including many Democrats. It is scientifically verifiable that when someone smiles at the end of a statement or suggestion that our bodies subconsciously and automatically release a similiar hormone as endomorphine which gives us a sense of well-being. Bush has been taught well. The Republican "think tank" is extremely adept at diverting our attention away from the true facts. They are excellent "word players." They have convinced the media, the public and many Democrats that the entire issue is about a mere 16 words. Compare it to writing someone a letter. You are writing a letter without the benefit of the CIA or FBI or any other living human being correcting a mistake you might make. If, somewhere in the context of that letter, you use the words: "I am going to kill you," the number of words or pages you write really doesn't matter. Tenet did not deliver the State of the Union message to a trusting people. DEMAND THAT BUSH APOLOGIZE. He spends millions of tax dollars because he is pleased to dress in official military uniform yet no one seems interested in his TRUE RECORD OF SERVICE. The only Democrat with the insight to see this and the guts to speak out against it for what it was is no longer with us. Maybe at that time he realized that he didn't have a lot to lose. It is truly time that a Democratic candidate emerge who is willing to risk it all for what is right. I leave you with a lesson that Bush, perhaps through his father and/or think tank has learned that the Democrats as a whole haven't grasped: DON'T LET PUBLIC OPINION SWAY YOU. YOU SWAY PUBLIC OPINION. And be upfront. Bush is a likable guy. THAT is all that most people see. The surface. They are more concerned with how they are going to make ends meet than they are world politics. Bush is spending money faster than it can be printed yet prescribing a "tax cut" for "all Americans." Who benefits from that tax cut? Will some Democtat please tell me how much of a deduction a company can get if they buy a gas guzzling Hummer under the new Bush tax proposals? Tell me it's not true that a company can get at least an $88,000 deduction on a Hummer that costs about $105,000. When Politics becomes a Religion.

---

Can you imagine trying to convince a person from India that their deceased father had not "come back" as a cow? Can you imagine how difficult it's going to be to convice Muslims that Muhammed did NOT tether a "winged horse" and ascend into heaven to receive the Quran? It's going to be just as hard to convince the Christians that God did NOT find it neccesary to impregnate his own mother in order to be born so that he could sacrifice himself in order to appease a creature called Satan who would otherwise be granted the pleasure of roasting their souls in hellfire forever because Eve at an apple. Truly. This is not difficult stuff. But are you going to be able to change their minds in your lifetime? No. You can send missionaries into another country to "spread the good news" or you can blow yourself up with a bomb in order to kill others. It would be no easier to quench either the thirst of the missionary of the suicide bomber. They are both on a "holy" mission. A mission

---

they believe to be true. They have what they call "faith" in it. One religion can be no more right that another if they are both based on faith. Faith in something does not make it right.Bush has "faith" that what he is doing in Iraq is "the right thing to do." It does not matter if the rest of the world agrees with him. He is strongly associated with the far-right Christians. He has said that the man he admires most is Jesus Christ because Jesus "changed my life." This is good news for Christians in that he commands the strongest armed forces in the history of the planet. Don't blame Americans on this. We didn't elect him. He lost the popular election by about 500,000 votes. He won the electoral college which is something that most American voters don't even understand. So, if you believe in holy cows or if you believe in flying horses or if you believe in a Jewish god whose story just "HAPPENED" to be written by Jewish authors, you have no right to complain. You have faith in your beliefs no matter how little sense they make to others. So goes Bush. He doesn't care whether or not the world goes along with him. Why should he if he "knows" he is right which is where his "faith" had led him. Just like those who most support him such as Jerry Fallwell and Pat Robertson and the Christian Right believe God actually "talks to them," so may Bush. Remember, when asked what historical figure had most influenced him George W. Bush answered: "Jesus Christ because he changed my life."

---

Bush is a Christan.

---

Like another sect of another religious group did not care what the world thought of their mission on 9/11, so it is with all who have "blind faith." And, in order for something to be defined as "faith" it must permit no exceptions including a "rational exception." In other words, in order to believe in any world religion you must first disbelieve what you know to be true to begin with. Horses don't fly. The Pope is not infallable. Your deceased father is not cow. God is not Jewish. Mary is dead. "Good Friday" from about 3pm until "Easter Sunday" at about 6am is simply NOT "three days and three nights." Jesus was a person who lived and died. Truth fell through time until it became intertwined with legend until the two get interwoven into a "most certain truth." Elvis Presley was a great rock and roller but he was not a God. The man is dead. God is God. He doesn't need Muhammad or Jesus or Mary of the Pope to be God. If He did, he would be limited, wouldn't he? See, "if all things are possible through God" it is possible that God really was Muhammad. Isn't it? Or Budda? Or Elvis? If "all things are possible" nothing is impossible. Is it? President Bush and the leaders of every other religious movement in the world have one thing in common. "Faith" Bush has "faith" in what he is doing. Before you get too critical of him think about those beliefs of yours that will not stand up to the test of "what is radional?" Demonstrations will mean only as much as the White House allows them to mean. Bush is capable of ignoring the demonstrations using the overly simplistic generalized rationalization: "Let them protest. They are only supporting my cause. The people in Iraq can't protest like Americans can, can they? Plus, the majority are still behind me. And the majority of the good American Patriots will never have to take to the streets to show their support." But why should the American people expect a rational answer now from a man they elected who, when questioned about his former drug and alcohol problems only replied: "This is not what the American people are interested in hearing. They are looking to a brighter day in America. They are concerned for their jobs. They are concerned about the ethics." Okay. So, he never answered the question then about drug use and you elected him. I don't know about you, but I DID WANT HIM TO EXPLAIN HIS PAST TO ME. How much dope did the man do? Any? A lot? How much did he drink? How often? What the hell is this man's I.Q? How can it be right to give Police Officers I.Q. tests yet not require the same or more from the President? How can it be possible that Bush is now in control of agencies that can get into your personal records and find out just about anything they want to about you yet you cannot be expected to require the same from Bush before you elect him? This makes no sense. If Bush had been truthful and forthcoming about his past as he would have been required to be in most government or civil positions such as Police Officer, he would most likely not be in office. If we can "forgive" him, why can we not "forgive" the potential cop who has a "stain" on his record? If Bush is capable of "turning his life around through Jesus, who is not? Imagine a man working one hour and receiving a fiest of immense proportions for him and his family. Imagine another man working a week for a loaf of bread. Welcome to America. The CEOs and the working class. Only the numbers have gotten so big that, as a culture we are becoming immune to them. We are told as fact that baseball players receive a quarter of a billion dollars for a contract to play a game in which they hit balls with bats and don't think much more of it than we care whether an actor or actress is worth about that same amount to pretend they are someone else on a movie screen. Americans are still of the mind set as to become totally absorbed in the lives of movie stars or "royalty" such as the death of "Princess Di." Let me set the record straight. She was not a "princess" because no such thing exists. Had she actually been born of "royal" blood, it would not have mattered because all blood is equal. I promise. Until we can get over this "royalty" crap we're never going to begin to understand that Jewish people are equal to all. No less than. No better than. Does this not make sense to you? You won't find a doctor asking "Okay, what blood type are you? Are you O, O positive, O negative, A, B, D, or Royal?" But Americans for the most part just can't seem to get over this royalty deal. The British sre still completely clueless on this stuff. Not content to immerse themselves in the latest plight of the British "royalty" Americans have created their own. Movie stars. CEOs. Singers. Sports stars. You have, no doubt read that OJ is innocent? Most Americans realize how twisted this is but we're too busy trying to make our own payments and put our kids through school that we just don't have time to dwell on it anymore than the time you have to spare on injustices in your country. You read where the far Christian Right strongly influences Bush in that he is one of them yet you are critizied for being on the far end of your religion. Bush says that we must have tolerance for all religions. This would be meaningful rhetoric had he not proclaimed his allegiance to Jesus Christ. You read stories about "good Christian women" who go to church and join in praise and worship to "our lord and savior, Jesus Christ" who said that "to lust after a woman in your heart is to have committed adultry." And these women say: "Amen." And they go home, slap on two extremely expenseive pieces of string they have called a "bikini" and stroll to the beach nearly naked and honestly appear baffled that men "look at them that way." It is easy for me to see where you might think these women were crazy people. I understand. Christians also believe in three gods. That form of thinking can best be described in the following graphic many of them will not see as themselves. Like you have come to conform to your form of life, we have to ours. China for example would not permit many U.S. websites from being seen in their country. Why? America represents porn to them in that that's where most of it is made. Christian women will be the first to tell you that your country and everyone in it are going to hell because you don't believe in Jesus. Yet they are so blinded by their own faith that they cannot see the truth they seek in yours. Muslim women are not seem physically. Christian women reveal a whole lot more of their bodies and consider that within the confines of their religion. Unfortunately, most of these women (and men) only study those parts of the Bible to which they are indoctinated. Here's a newsflas for ya. God would NOT write a boring book. Look around you. Is God boring? I don't think so. You only need look at the sky above you or the nature around you to understand God. God is not "mysterious." "Truth never shrouds itself in mystery." (Thomas Paine) Think of what Paine was trying to tell us. You have been raised to believe that Godis somehow mysterious and can only be explained by someone who has "studied" such things or someone who has been reincarnated until they are "perfection" or "god" on earth for you as in other faiths such as the gentle Buddists. It's not the Buddists who go around killing people. It's the believers in the Bible and the believers in the Quran. Think about it. You have a people who actually believe they were chosen by God to be His own people. He chose THEM. They still obey the laws of Moses and if you ever read the Bible you have discovered that Moses was one of the most ruthless scoundrels that ever disgraced the name of God. (More on some of Mose's "laws" later on this page with Biblical references). So you have the believers in just the Old Testament (Isreal) and the believers in the Old and New Testament (America) fighting those who are of the Muslim/Hindu faith (Arabic countries). Christians still can't seem to make their minds up when it comes to which testament they believe in. When things go their way, they believe in the New Testament. "Turn the other cheek. Love your enemies." Having no where to go in "their" New Testament beliefs, when they are actually slapped in the face they turn to the Old Testament to find "an eye for an eye." They attempt to tie Jesus from the Old to the New Testament. In the first place, there are no such things as prophets. Prophets must have evolved into the word "profit" because they mean the same thing. Control of money. We'll prove the blatant lies in the Christain doctrine that "Christ was in any way referred to in the Old Testament" later in this website). American Christian Churches are divided into so many sects that it would be virtually impossible to tell you with any degree of accuracy just what it is that Americans do believe about religion. The Church of Christ believes the Baptists are going to hell and the Baptists still preach that women are to "submit" to their husbands and the Catholics believe the Pope is infallible and that there should be no form of birth control. I will only mention in passing that "God, the Pope" believes in "three strikes and you're out" if you are having sex with little boys. How sick and twisted does a belief have to be before you look at the products of that belief? Catholics kill Prostants and vica versa and Jews look down on Gentiles and Gentiles think orthodox Jews are going to hell because they are god's chosen people yet they are still rejecting the true god who was jesus and you have a world just like we have today. Chaos. You no doubt read about the killing that still goes on in Northern Ireland between Catholics and Protestants. You see what I mean yet most Americans and especially Catholics can't even phycically see these words. They become enraged amd when you become enraged, you cannot think clearly. There is a not of difficult information to be absored on this website. I suggest that you take a moment to pause. Relax. Reflect. And bookmark or make note of in writing if you believe you will somehow be discrimiated against because of your beliefs. When you return, we will begin to restate our point here.The central doctrine in both the Catholic and Protestant religions can be summed up as a belief in this general principle:

---

These people honestly believe that god found it necessary to impregnate his own mother and be born so that he might sacrifice himself because this is the only way he could conceive of allowing himself to "forgive" all of mankind for the "fact" that Eve ate an apple because a serpent convinced her to.

---

Believe me. I know how completely nuts this sounds to much of the world because it sounds just as nuts to me and I was raised to believe it. Now, try to imagine how difficult it is for many people "come to the understanding" that your father died and came back as a cow. Most Americans are blissfully unaware that you look at us like cannibals. You treat cows with the respect you had reserved for your parents but even more respectfully now since they have been trasported from this life to the next and come back as a cow. As I would agree with you that Christians appear to be nuts, let me tell you upfront that I honestly and in all sincerity do not believe that your deceased father is a cow. I would agree with those who do not believe that Mohammad "tethered his winged horse" and ascended into heaven to receive from allah himself a book. Look at it this way. Ask your god or allah or spiritual guide of whatever it is you believe to allow you a few minutes to just open up your mind to the thought of a world with NO religion. Again, we are at a unique period in human history. American culture is about as hard to stop in countries outside the U.S. as porn is to stop in America. Ultimately, it's either going to be your way or America's way. My vote is for the American way in that it allows me the freedom to choose in any religion including yours. Your faith is taught as freely in America as its own. As a nation we are coming to see less and less difference in skin color but, for some, this will take more time. Now here's where religion is putting the brakes on understanding being human. Some people are born gay. If they weren't born that way genetically, it was a learned behavior. Or a commbination of the two. The fact is, whether any religion likes it or not, they ARE gay and they are not going to stop being gay and they are going to love the country that best affords them that equality and that country is America though America has a long long way to go.

---

Americans have tasted the ultimate addiction. Freedom.

---

I don't believe most of the world has probably ever experiences the kind of freedom I'm talking about. Through our television and movies we are "infecting you" in your eyes. You view us as some sort of demons or something. We eat cows because we don't believe like some of you. You laugh at the story of a book written by Jews just happening to wind up with a Jewish god on either side of the bible and if people don't believe in these books that make no sense whatsoever, they are doomed to hell. I agree with you. I agree with them. What all of you are not seeing is how none of you are right. Is this to say "there is no God?" Let's find out together. Let's stop wasting the time and energy and money and most importantly the LIVES we sacrifice every day in the name of religion to learn to love each other. Why did terrorists do this?Answer: Religion and the faith required to believe it. Every religion requires faith. Actually believing that a woman was impregnated by a "ghost" requires the "faith" that ghosts are capable of impregnating a woman. NEWSFLASH! Women don't get impregnated by ghosts. This is not rocket science, folks. But, once you have been taught something that makes no sense to the point that you believe it---(indoctrination)--- gaining the willpower necessary to discern truth (fact) from fiction becomes extremely difficult. When fiction becomes reality, people do very strange things. They kill abortion clinic doctors because "God told them to." That same fictional God "tells" other people to crash planes into the World Trade Centers. Just like it "told" Moses to command that little babies be butchered!!! (This fact is detailed on our main page. Clck here to go there now. Protestants kill Catholics. The fighting goes on in the Middle-East. Dare we challenge these long-held beliefs? Dare we not!!! To look up the verses yourself in the Bible of your choice, click HERE. All you have to do is use your mind. THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE!!!I was born and raised a Southern Baptist. I know. If faith in something makes it true, every world religion is true for people believe in each faithfully. Any rational mind is capable of discerning that faith in something does not mean that the thing in which one believes is true. Has God ever "talked to you?" He talks to Pat Robertson and Jerry Fallwell. Just like he "talked" to those men who crashed into the World Trade Centers! If "faith" in what our common sense tells us cannot be true is the determining factor in the validity of a religion, all religions are false. Common sense is comprised of logic and deduction. In the Muslim religion, one must believe that Mohammad "tethered his winged horse" on a particular site in Jerusalem before ascending into heaven to receive the Holy Koran. (This fact is detailed on the opening page of this website). If you are a Christian, you may be thinking: "How ridiculous. Ha! Anyone in their right mind knows that horses do not fly! How absurd."Duh!How do you think they feel about your ghosts impregnating women? Thus, the fighting goes on and on and on...One must have "faith" in order to believe in flying horses just like one must have "faith" to believe that a ghost impregnated a woman. The Bible talks in Numbers 22 about a "talking ass." No, not Mr. Ed. This was a talking donkey! According to the text, the donkey actually talked to Balaam. Balaam talks right back to the donkey. Does this sound more like a fairy tale or a truth? A discussion between the ass and Balaam ensues. NEWSFLASH! Donkeys do not talk.

---

Yes, it does take quite a bit of "faith" to believe such an absurdity in that nowhere else in recorded history from any civilization do asses talk to their masters and no one in my lifetime or yours has ever witnessed a talking ass. Or ever will. Your common sense tells you that. Your common sense is composed of logic and deduction or, more simply stated, reality. How can it make sense for God to require mankind to throw away his most precious gift (that being the ability to think logically) in order to believe in Him?

---

Sometimes the truth lies outside what we have been taught. This is often called PROGRESS.We may rebel against anyone or anything that goes "against the grain" of our beliefs. Such has been the case throughout history. And the wars go on and on and on... NEWSFLASH:

---

Ghosts do not impregnate women. Horses do not fly. It is wrong to kill babies. Asses do not talk. Mary is dead. The Pope is not infallible. The Jewish people are not "God's chosen people." Deal with it!!!

---

Does it never strike you as a bit odd that all of the so-called "Gods" of every single world religion "just happen" to be of the same nationality as the authors who wrote about them?

---

Why would God give man the precious gifts of reason and logic only to require him to disregard both and believe in Him in "faith?" The truth is, He didn't.

---

The concept of God forcing "free will" upon his creation is a farce of the first degree. Free means without cost. But "the wages of sin is death." Something cannot be free that comes with a price tag. This is simple math, folks. "Christ paid the price for our sins." Christians, looking through the blinders of superstition cannot see how the thought of "free will" cannot mesh with that of a "price" or a "wage." Christians say that ADAM AND EVE made that choice. What could be more contradictory? If Jesus came so that we might be "forgiven" did he just forget to forgive Adam and Eve who got us into this whole mess in the first place according to the Bible? You mean to tell me this "God of love" still can't get over the "fact" that Adam and Eve ate an apple over 16,800 years ago? How much sense can this make to a rational mind? A fine example of "free will" the God of the Bible represents! He has all the "free will" He wants, yet he cannot find it within himself to freely forgive us for something that two people allegedly did almost 20,000 years ago? You mean to tell me that people honestly believe that they are being rightfully and justifiably punished for the eating of an apple? Christians claim free will was God's way of insuring that He does not "force" himself on us. Christians insist that we must use that free will to disregard all of what we know to be true in order to believe in things that we know in our hearts are impossible and in doing so we will believe in God. This is as ludicrous a concept as was ever imposed upon the mind of man.

---

Christians: "But if we didn't have free will, we would only be God's robots. How would God know that we truly loved him unless at least a measure of faith on our part was required?"

---

The answer is simple. We discover God by using our free will to observe and study those things all around us that He created. The more we study these laws of God, the more we learn. We navigate by His stars. We use his neverchanging laws of math to make this a better world for all, for where would we be without the laws of math? We certainly would not be online if it weren't for God's laws of math and electricity for without each there could be no Internet. No one "prayed" the Internet into existence. Computers are like all the advances that have come to man. It was not "faith" in God that gave us the advances in medicine, science, and technology that we now enjoy. Those discoveries were made through the free will study of God's natural laws. The single-most benevolent intruder into thinking freely (free will) has been and continues to be religion. The singlemost persecutor of free will has been and continues to be religion. To the religious powers that be free will means believing what you are taught or facing an eternity in hellfire. The preacher would argue: "Yes. It is through your own free will that you make that decision." What decision? All world religions REQUIRE that you adhere to their way of thinking or face an eternity in hell or separate from God. Free will means that you can play a game of cards or you can choose not to play a game of cards. Once that card game is over, you will not be sent to hell for your decision to play or not to play. This is free will. To say that you will be damned if you do NOT play cards is not allowing you the free will to play or not to play. At the very least, it is stacking the deck against you. Free will cannot put a gun to your head and force you to believe in something which is precisely what Christianity teaches. Not only does it require you to make the "correct" decision in this life, it follows you to the grave and beyond to punish you for making what it teaches was the wrong decision. This is not free will. It cannot be. For every religion teaches the same thing and it is impossible to believe in all religions in that they each claim theirs is the only way. What is free will. It is the study of LOGIC and the DEDUCTIONS you reach by applying that logic! It is not God's nature to wave a carrot over our heads and expect us to reach out for it in "free will" when doing so will cause us to step over the ledge of the very reality He has created.

---

---

Imagine yourself on the edge of a cliff. Imagine God extending his hand toward you from ten feet away. Imagine a drop to the ground of 30,000 feet separates you from God. Imagine God saying: "I have given you free will. In order to grasp my hand, you must step off the edge IN FAITH." What Christians tend to conveniently overlook is the fact that God made that ledge upon which you are standing. That ledge represents the reality in which we live and upon which we must stand in order to survive. Why ask us to step off the edge of reality in order to believe in Him if he is real?

---

Why disown what we know to be true in order to find The Truth? It makes no sense. How can it make sense to call this free will: "You have two choices here. Heaven in bliss or hell in fire. Which do you choose? After all, it's your free will."

---

For the Christian, free will ALWAYS translates into "blind faith." Blind faith is not free will. Is it free will when one is convinced that if one does not believe it one will burn eternally in hell? That is simply and clearly not free will. That is the imposition of FEAR!That is free will with a price to pay if you do not make what each religion deems the "correct" choice. So, let's not kid ourselves about the "free will" thing. Free will cannot include fear and still be called free will. If it comes with a price, it is not free. "For the wages of sin is death." Wages denotes payment and paying for something means that it is not free. God did not give you eyes to shut or ears to close. No! He did not give you reason and logic only to ask you to toss those precious gifts over that edge in order to reach out and touch him. What the Christian fails to realize is that there is no need for blind faith in order to "see" God all around us. We see Him in His sunsets and his moonlight and the twinkling eyes of a puppy or the playfulness of a kitten.

---

All world religions boast their own miracles as if God must put on a freakish side show in order for us to believe in him!

---

I love my children and neither one of them has ever performed a miracle to impress that love upon me. Why? Because I love them for who they are. No miracles are required for me to love them nor them me. I love God for all of his beauty I see around me. I also question whether it is God I am loving when a tornado or hurricane or earthquake kills thousands of innocent people. Perhaps "nature" is a more precise word for God. Religion is only man's way of "justifying" things he does not and may never understand.

---

Faith does not equal truth.

---

Because you are willing to die for something does not mean that the thing you are willing to die for is true. Does it? If the answer is "yes," then those men who crashed into the World Trade Centers were justified in their "faith." Weren't they?

---

---

Free will means the will to be free. Why then does the Bible place its blessings on slavery? For a quick reference to the many Old and New Testament verses that not only condone slavery but insure its enforcement, click back to our first page here. Click here.

---

Free will means the will to be free. Freedom does not lie in a kind of pseudo-faith that rebels against all that we know to be true and just and good. Logic and reason tell us it is not good now nor has it ever been "good" to kill innocent babies. Yet the Bible is full us just that. As ludicrous as the story is from its very conception, take it a step further: Why would God insure that two of every living creature including rats were placed on an ark so that they might be spared the death of drowning and yet forget to place onboard that ark the innocent babies of those so called "wicked" people he was allegedly out to drown in the first place? Whether it was then or sometime in the future or now: NEWSFLASH!!!

---

KILLING BABIES IS WRONG!

---

When Christian preachers "justify" the killing of innocent people, especially babies, they are justifying killing for what you believe in and in doing so they have just condoned the horrors of the World Trade Centers. Try to grasp this. At no time in the history of this planet is or was it "God's will" to kill innocent people whether it was Moses or the Taliban. Period. Killing innocent people is and has always been and always will be WRONG! How difficult can this be for a rational mind to understand? But wait! Belief in such ludicrous "miracles" as virgin births and talking asses and winged horses IS NOT RATIONAL. Follow the train of thought. Okay?

---

Those same Christians who will tell you that abortion is wrong will delight in telling you that "it was God's will" that those babies mentioned in the Bible were killed. (The flood is only a miniscule example of baby killing found in the Old Testament. Many more references are shown on the preceeding pages of this website located as links at the bottom of this page). What is Godly about killing babies? When you have reached the point of justifying the killing of innocent babies "in the name of God" you have justified the World Trade Center trajedy. It is your FAITH that tells you that killing babies is okay if God ordered it done. It was those men's "faith" that convinced them to crash into the World Trade Centers. It was their "free will." Their "blind faith." It's time to take off the blinders and look around you. The pastor says "some things are just beyond our understanding." Well, duh? A LOT of things are beyond our understanding. So what? That does not make them RIGHT!!!Here's where Christians miss the boat. Killing babies is something that we all UNDERSTAND AND I for one UNDERSTAND THAT IS IS VERY VERY SICK AND TWISTED AND WRONG BY ANY STANDARDS!!! If killing babies is deemed "Godly" under certain conditions, crashing into World Trade Centers had just found its justification. Because both acts are placed in the hands of faith while completely disregarding human LOGIC AND REASON!!! It is not good to kill other people even if that voice in your head tells you it's "God." Forget it. It's NOT God. If the courts won't buy that as a justification for September 11, why should and how can Christians claim it as an "excuse" during Biblical times? They can't. Killing innocent people is, always has been and always will be WRONG!

---

What about abortion? Christians are against it. So am I. So is the mother who finds herself faced with that decision. But if you outlaw abortions, what next? Are you then going to create another law that prohibits her from drinking a fifth of gin everyday to "drown her sorrows" for the situation in which she finds herself? Are you going to "keep an eye on her" to make certain that she doesn't light up the crack pipe? Are you going to handcuff her somewhere inside the church so that she can't go out and contract AIDS?

---

It is perfectly fine for a preacher to teach his flock that abortion is wrong. It is perfectly okay to contain the will of the pastor and his interpretation of a particular verse of "scripture" to his "flock." But it is wrong to attempt to impose YOUR beliefs on the rest of society just like it's wrong for the Taliban to do the same thing. When push comes to shove...when one's "religion" pushes one out of one's comfort zone, people always fall back to the common denominator in all of us. It is called "common sense."

---

Want modern day proof? Catholics consider the Pope infallible. He is like "God on earth." The Pope, in all his high and mighty pompousness deplores birth control. The Catholic Churche's stance on the matter could not be clearer: NO BIRTH CONTROL. Yet, the majority of Cathlics take advantage of birth control.

---

Why should other people be required to follow the teachings of the Pope when even those in his own "flock" do not. And even if they did, that's fine --- within their belief system.

---

But if others do not share those beliefs, how fair can it be to the rest of society if/when we must follow the same dictates?

---

Christianity is not a benign tumor. It spreads outside the congregation like cancer. If homosexuality is wrong for the flock, it's wrong for the rest of society. Are you kidding me, or what? Homosexuality is not the easy choice. If given the easy way to mesh into society, most people would choose to be "straight." People don't ridicule you for being straight. People don't make jokes about you for being straight. So, what logic is there in "being homosexual" unless you have concluded that "it's just the way you are?" Homosexuality may be a factor of heredity or a learned behavior or a combination of the two. It is not true that being gay means that you are doomed to an eternal hellfire anymore than it is true that asses can talk, horses can fly, Mary is still making appearances in her "apparitions," or that the Pope is infallible. And by the way, Jews are only ONE of God's chosen people.

---

Here's how the Christian preacher twists what he wants out of a verse. Let me play the role of the preacher in this case.

---

Mary had a little lamb.

---

Preacher: Notice that Mary had the little lamb. What God is saying here is that Mary had a little child. We know (through logic and deduction - two gifts from God sorely disregarded by Christians) that God is referring here to Christ. And the congregation said: "Amen."

---

It's fleece was white as snow.

---

Preacher: We can now be certain that God is talking about his son Jesus Christ in that Jesus was without blemish. "White as snow" reflects that fact. He was sinless. Notice here how God puts things in language that can be clearly understood. Praise God! Jesus was white as snow. And the congegation said: "Amen."

---

And everywhere that Mary went...

---

Preacher: God is now speaking of the many apparitions of Mary across the earth. She may appear as the bark of a tree or a cloud formation or an indention into a solid wall of rock. The truth that God is revealing here is that Mary is still appearing. Guiding us. Letting us know that she is still watching over us. Praise God. And the congregation said: "Amen."

---

And everywhere that Mary went, the Lamb was sure to go.

---

This is God's way of saying that Jesus is right there with her, blessing those apparitions! Giving them God's blessings in that Jesus IS God. From this simple verse we can see not only that Mary gave birth to our Lord Jesus, but that he was sinless and is right alongside Mary as she reveals herself and God's love to us. Praise you Jesus. And the congegation said: "Amen."

---

What happens when one group of people disagree with another regarding their religious beliefs? The Bible can say whatever you want it to say. The idea of "loving your enemies" falls on it's ass when terrorists strike U.S. soil as rightfully it should. But wait? Those were Jesus' words. He said to "love your enemy." How can we love people we are trying to kill? Simple. Grab up another verse and make it apply. "An eye for an eye." But now we're back to the Old Testament. What happened to Jesus' words? Are we not to love our enemies? Are we not to "turn the other cheek?" Are we not to obey Jesus?

---

"Those who preach this doctrine of loving one's enemies are in general the greatest persecutors, and they act consistently by so doing; for the doctrine is hyporcitical, and it is natural that hypocricy should act the reverse of what it preaches." Thomas Paine

---

Christians send their missionaries into countries whose laws prohibit the teaching of Christianity. So then it seems that when Christians claim that their teachings command them to "obey the law," these teachings do not apply to other nationalities or groups of people who have their own religion because their own religion is not Christianity. Once again, pick and choose your verses in the Bible and you can create your own set of beliefs which is precisely why there are so many denominations among Christians. Each interprets the Bible differently. Each understands it differently. But each understand it "correctly." And anyone who disagrees with any of the various denominations just doesn't understand it at all. We are back to square one: The Bible will "say" what you want it to say. Religion breeds extremists. If one honestly believe in talking asses and in ghosts impregnating women and on and on the Biblical list goes, where is that person's sense of what is real and what is not? If dead people rise out of their graves (as stated in Matthew but in none of the other "Gospels") as the prophets of old did the moment Jesus died on the cross, then what is not possible? Let's face it. Some people are not dealing with a full deck to begin with. Add to their already confused minds the "fact" that asses talk or ghosts impregnate or that horses fly or that dead people climbed out of graves and watch these people who are already on the edge fall into the valley of extremism. What happens then? They kill abortion clinic doctors. They fly jets into the Trade Centers. They tear down the "statues" of other religions. How pretentious can a preacher be to claim to know "what God meant by this verse was" and then give his flock his own interpretation of the scripture. That is like saying: "I'm sorry folks, but God Almighty was incapable of translating his own autobiography to so that you could understand it so let me, the Enlightened one, tell you what he actually meant." How completely contrary this is to God's true laws which need no interpretation. His moon needs no assistance in displaying its beauty in the heavens. His sun warms the rich and the poor alike; his Sun radiates to all. God displays his magnificence in the sunset and the forests and mountains. These are God's true laws and are equally understood by all races at all times regardless of race, color, creed, sexual orientation, heredity, or how much they put into the collection plate each week. And the congregation said: "Amen!"

---

Now look at what these morons in the Taliban were doing just months before the World Trade Centers. Perhaps this quick look back will better prepare us for the next assault should there be one. These idiots were going about tearing down statues of Buddah because they were afraid people were going to worship them. Since when is God, the creator of the heavens and the universe jealous of a statue? What possible reason would God have to be jealous of a block of stone? This is the same Guy who is holding up the entire universe. That would be like you being jealous of a microscopic piece of lint in your back pocket. God is not jealous! Jealousy is a HUMAN characteristic. "My ways are not your ways." Why then would God's ways be precisely like man's? God is God. What can God be jealous of? Just because the Bible says He is a jealous God is no reason to believe that He actually is unless you also choose to believe in talking asses. NEWSFLASH TO PASTORS: Try to get a grip on reality. And the band plays on. THE BATTLE OF THE gods!What could be more ridiculous for grown people to be doing than going around acting like this? Answer: The reason they're doing it. Religion. Taliban Troops Begin Destroying Priceless Statues of Giant Buddhas Friday, March 2, 2001

---

It was impossible to confirm exactly what the troops have destroyed so far, but Reuters and AFP quoted Taliban sources as saying that mortars and cannon were being used to destroy the two ancient, rock-hewn Buddha statues in Bamiyan, 90 miles west of Kabul. The Taliban's supreme leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar, ordered the destruction in an edict Monday, saying such images were contrary to Islam. The militia said they sought to purge the nation of idolatrous images. As troops fanned out with everything from rocket launchers to tanks to destroy statues, cultural leaders worldwide expressed horror. The head of UNESCO asked other Islamic nations to pressure the Taliban to stop, while the director of the Metropolitan Museum in New York pleaded with Afghan officials to give the artifacts to foreign museums. "In Afghanistan, they are destroying statues that the entire world considers to be masterpieces," UNESCO Director-General Koichiro Matsuura said. "This iconoclastic determination shocks me."

---

---

'Gods of the Infidels' "All the statues all over the country will be destroyed," he said. "These idols have been gods of the infidels, who worshipped them, and these are respected even now and perhaps maybe turned into gods again," his edict said. And now, to another world religion no less ridiculous than the others. THE BIBLE Written by men for men by God!

I can tell you without a doubt under the sun that I believe in those parts of the Bible which promote love and patience and tolerance and honesty with as much vigor as any person alive. It is those parts of the Bible that are detestable to the heart of man such as the killing of innocent babies (Noah and the Ark is only one small sampling) that I do not believe. Call this "selective belief" if you will, but show me one Christian who does not practice the same thinking process to decide just who God really is and what He REALLY says, and I will believe in either miracles or I will find myself in a Pentacostal Church in the deep south on a Saturday night with a bunch of sweaty snake-handlers. Christians have this "cause" within themselves to try to explain away those detestable parts of the Bible; I simply don't believe them. So, where are we that much apart? You choose your God. I choose mine. Here are some of the things I do not believe. Decide for yourself whether or not you do. If you do believe these acts were committed by our Holy God, you believe in a revengeful, hateful, spitefull, resentful, non-forgiving God. I merely disagree with you. I think God is just a whole lot better than this. If I told you that one of the laws of Moses says that one way to acquire a wife is merely to rape a virgin, would you believe me? Click here to find out for yourself.Please click on animations or pictures for related websites. Enjoy the ride. If you don't read another book all year, please get a copy of Thomas Paine's "Age of Reason" - or just click here. Holy Spirit vs. Science-Who do you trust? Click here. Check out Einstein's thoughts on religion.

Biblical Goofs:

The last two verses of 2 Chronicles are exactly the same as the first three verses of Ezra which would mean that if God put all of this together, He was in a stupor at the time.

---

---

Regarding the resurrection:

---

There is such a thing as a writer's "perception." If you told the same story to five people, five people would have a different perspective on that story. However, if the author's contradicted each other, this is quite different that "perception." A perception cannot, by its' own definition be a TRUTH anymore than it can be a lie. A perception is nothing more than a theory... PERCEPTION AND THEORY ARE SYNONYMS!!!!... thus, if you believe the Bible, you believe in theory and that is exactly what the theory of Evolution is... thus you must be equally indepted to believe one as the other. And, if God wrote this book, how could God write from perspectives/perceptions which were at odds with each other? Our Creator holds together the very universes, endless as they may be, in the palm of His hand. And Christians would have us believe that He is incapable of translating His own very truths through the centuries from then until now?

---

---

---

The writer of the book of Matthew relates that the angel was sitting on the stone at the mouth of the sepulchre, and this angel said to the two Marys in Matthew 28:7: "Behold, Christ is gone before you into Galilee, there ye shall see him; lo, I have told you." Yet the same writer at the next two verses (8,9) makes Christ himself to speak to the same thing to these women immediately after the angel had told it to them, and that they ran quickly to tell the disciples, and it is said in verse 16: "Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them; and when they saw him, they worshipped him."

---

But the writer of the book of John tells a different story that the writer of Matthew. In John 20: 19: "Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week (that is, the same day that Christ is said to have risen), when the doors were shut, where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst of them." But wait! According to Matthew the eleven were marching off to Galilee to meet Jesus in a mountain according to his own directions at the very time when, according to John, they were assembled in another place, and that not by appointment, but in secret, for fear of the Jews! Yet the writer of the book of Luke in Chapter 24:13, 33-36, contradicts Matthew even more pointedly for he says expressly that the meeting was held in Jeruselam the evening of the same day that Christ rose, and that the eleven were there.

---

Mark says nothing about any meeting in Galilee but he says in Chapter 16: 12 that Christ, after his resurrection, appeared in another form to two of them as they walked into the country, and that these two told it to the rest who would not believe them! Luke also keeps Christ employed the whole day of this pretended resurrection until the evening, and in doing so, completely invalidates the account of going to the mountain in Galilee. He says, that two of them (the disciples), without saying which two, went that same day to a village called Emmaus which was three score furlongs or seven and a half miles away from Jerusalem and that Christ went in disguise with them. In disguise? This "disguise" bit is the exact antithesis of what Christ would have done had he have really arisen. Why keep it a secret? Why wear a disguise? It just doesn't make sense unless you want to put Jesus Christ right up there with Michael Jackson. Jesus allegedly stayed with them unto the evening, and supped with them, and then vanished out of their sight, and reappeared that same evening at the meeting of the eleven in Jerusalem.

---

Regarding the ascension into heaven -- here all fear of the Jews, and of every thing else, must necessarily have been out of the question: it was that which, if true, was to seal the whole; this was the proof!!! As lethal injection is common in our day, so was crucifixion in that day. In other words, there is nothing miraculous about being lethally injected or crucified.

---

However, if a prisoner were to be lethally injected, then arise from the dead and ascend into heaven, it would make front page "U.S.A. Today" to say the least if those men and women reporting this incident agreed on their facts. Otherwise, it would strictly be the stuff for tabloids. Anyone could be crucified. Each of the four Gospels detail the crucifixion. However, to ascend into heaven would end all doubt and all speculation. The world would become one, united under Christ. The Book of Matthew does not mention a word about any ascention. Neither does the book of John. Is it inconceivable that the writers of these books would have been silent on this matter had it been true. The writer of Mark passes the alleged ascension off in a careless manner with a single stroke of the pen. So does the writer of Luke. Yet, even between these two writers, there is not an apparent agreement as to the place where this final ascension took place!!! The writer of Luke says that Christ led them as far as Bethany, and was carried up into heaven from there. Mark however said that Christ appeared to the eleven as they sat at meat, alluding to the meeting of the eleven at Jerusalem; he then states the conversation that he says passed at that meeting, and immediately after says "So then, after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God."

---

Here is the point: One cannot both be an "eyewitness" to a fact, yet not have a clue as to what that fact is. Please read that sentence again. One cannot both be an "eyewitness" to a fact, yet not KNOW THE FACT. A fact, by its very definition must agree with itself. In that there were a total of four Gospels dictates, by that very number "four," that they must all four agree like four pieces of a Divinely inspired puzzle. If the pieces do not fit, they cannot be Divine. Truth is not measured any more by "how much they agree" than a dog can be likened to a cat simply because they both have hair. God is perfect, thus leaving no room for imperfection within what is passed off as His own autobiography - The Bible! The question may come to mind: "If all of this is true, why do so many people believe the story?" Because, like many until this very moment, they hadn't read it.Or, if it is said that "these were only men and men make mistakes," one has just stated that the Bible itself is fallible in that these writers were fallible. If so, which parts of the Bible are fallible and which are infallible? The word "fallible" means "imperfect; capable of error." Yet God is neither imperfect nor is He capable of error, thus these cannot, by definition, be His words.

---

Jonah 1:17:"And Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days and three nights."Matthew 12:40: Jesus: "...As Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days and three nights, so will the Son of man be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights." Click here to look check out the verses for yourself. Most Christians have never taken the time to realize that if Jesus died around noon on "Good Friday," and was "missing from the tomb" on Easter Sunday at around sunrise, that is simply not three days and three nights. It is one day and three quarters of a day. Thus if Jesus were actually God and he said that he would be "in the earth for three days and three nights," he did not understand the laws of math which He Himself created. Have you ever seen an angel or what you thought was an angel? If so, it is very doubtful if you will ever forget how many angels there were, where they were standing, and under what circumstances you saw the angels. Right? If God wrote the Bible, He wrote the accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Each book contains a completely different version of the resurrection. Think about it. If God was Jesus, He was looking down on Himself when He wrote the story about Himself being crucified. If God wrote it, each "inspired" author would tell the same story. However, they do not. Please check out the last chapters of each of the four Gospels for yourself to find out just how much they differ. Do you know who decided which books belonged in the Bible? Do you know that the characteristics of Jesus Christ were debated by men? What could be more ridiculous than a group of men deciding what was and what was not God's word? To top that, it was men who decided exactly who Jesus was. These men could not have "been inspired by the holy spirit," for the Holy Spirit, according to Christian doctrine, IS God and God would not argue with Himself! CLICK HERE TO CHECK OUT FOR YOURSELF JUST WHO DEBATED UPON WHETHER OR JESUS WAS A MAN OR A GOD OR BOTH AND HOW MANY YEARS IT TOOK THESE MEN TO DECIDE. Christians would have us believe that these words decided by men were the infallible words of God. Yet these words were written by men who are fallible. It's like two glasses of water, one pure (the infallible word of God) and one impure (the fallible words of man). When you pour the two glasses of water into one pitcher (the Bible), the result is water unfit to drink (accept) in that the impurity of the one glass of water cannot help but spoil the whole; by default, the result of the combination comprises the impurity of the whole. God is infallible. Thus, the fallible words of the Bible could not be the words of God. God cannot both be fallible and infallible anymore than a cloth can be both a cloth and the plate it cleans. Take awhile on this, please. You can see it without "getting it" in part because it's so simple you tend to overlook it. Click here for reference. The Bible consists of the Old and New Testament. The word "testify" is taken from the word testament. The authors of the Bible were actually testifying on God's behalf. If this were the case, it would be absolutely imperative that the reader know exactly who those authors were. It is inherently incredible that a sane person can claim to be positive that the authors of the Bible were writing the actual word of God if those same persons do not know who these authors were?

---

Open your Bible. You will see for yourself that there is no author listed for many of the books and for those books who claim an author, in many cases, the person was either yet to be born or dead at the time the book was written.If all of the above is true, why would seemingly intelligent preachers, priests and rabbis continue to espouse the teachings of the Bible? Send one man away to Chiropractic College and he will come out several years later believing with all his heart and soul that many illnesses can be helped or even cured by spinal maniuplation. He will probably give you lectures against "taking a pill to cover up a symptom" and will probably argue against surgery unless as a last resort. Send a man to medical school and he will graduate several years later to believe with all his heart and soul that the cure to most of life's ills lies in a particular medication or surgery; he will probably scoff at the idea that manipulating the spine can help and certainly cannot cure any particular illness. However well-intentioned these men may be whether they be chiropractors or medical doctors, they will probably be reluctant to their dying day to change their opinion. Even if a medical doctor were to witness a "healing" at the hands of a chiropractor, he would be reluctant to change his opinion even though he had seen the evidence with his own two eyes. Do you realize that there is not one single word in the Old Testament that prophecies the coming of Jesus Christ unless that verse is taken completely out of context to the point of utter lunacy? Have you ever wonder why the "Christian Doctrine" has lasted as long as it has? CLICK HERE FOR ONE EXAMPLE OF WHAT HAPPENED WHEN ONE'S THOUGHTS HAPPENED TO DIFFER FROM THE CHURCH'S "OFFICIAL" VIEW.Do you honestly believe that a good man could be elected to the office of President of the United States if he did not at least profess to believing in Jesus...or at the very least...God? If you cannot imagine that happenening, you can now see why every man who runs for President just so "happens" to claim to have always believed or have had a sudden "conversion" which changed their lives. Remember, Clinton claims to be a believer, too.

BACK TO MAIN PAGE.
CLICK HERE FOR OUR NEXT PAGE.

Email: soundslikefuntome@yahoo.com