They don't want us to know

[Randall]

What is interesting to the individual is what is important, but credentials won't get you any extra credit.

Like I always say; "Save your credentials for the HR department".

 

[stonehart]

I get burned out of topics myself

I am not just burnt out my friend I am dust in the wind.
and to be frank I just find it hard to get into this sort of debate and enjoy it like I once did.


The great thing about this one here is that for the first time it has been kept civil and that makes me smile, as we had some very disruptive elements that turned it into a personal attack on them and others.

Religion as a topic is not really solvable and I learned this is stage one philosophy of religion. But then again Philosophy was never meant to solve anything but just provide you with the tools to play the game

Now Buddhist philosophy/metaphysics is a bucket load of fun still for me when I get into it.. do I believe it.. No not at all but it is interesting none the less.

As for the pixies post it was a joke and I was taking the piss... so please do not take that as serious debate, its just my warped sense of humor. Trust me it gets very warped indeed... I blame the Paracast for it .. well that's my excuse.

Anyway there is a very good thread running on covert surveillance etc ... this is more my bag these days and I think everyone has a position on it that is worth hearing.

Peace .. lets hit religion another time.... Karma आस्रव would be a cool topic for us all to kick off with.

 

[Ancientsaturn]

Hmmm, so WHICH life -in the endless cycle of reincartnation- are we judged on? Isn't that against the teachings of the bible, that you have one life, live it well for at the end you are judged worthy or not of everlasting life in Jesus Christ?

I am talking about christianity solely cos it's the religion I have had most exposure to. It could be any other so I am not singling out christianity.

So yes, I am stating that the christian mechanism of being saved is flawed because we don't all have the same chance to be saved through christ.
Then you counter by saying that maybe we have more than one life, so, if I get you correctly, we can maybe be exposed to one thing in one life and another in another life etc

But, we are talking about christianity and as far as I remember, the teachings of that religion seem to say we get one life? You cannot claim to be christian and counter an anti-christian argument with beliefs that are contrary to christianity surely? (there can only be one ever-lasting afterlife, so which life does that follow? It just does not make sense and I think people are so desperate not to lose faith that they avoid these huge gaps in religious doctrine by just pretending they don't exist.)

I cut this down because you had too many issues going on in your post. Who owns Christianity? The Catholic church because they were the first ones to organize?

I don't see how anyone owns a religion. It is the same thing with Atheist who say they "own" physics. Just because they can't think about anything beyond physics, they try and co-opt it.

Physics and meta-physics and all religions and ideas are universal. Christianity is especially unique because of the fact that it is the only religion I can think of based on the belief (or experience) of a purely spiritual being incarnating on the earth (one that never incarnated prior). All other religions are based on a man becoming a prophet or purifying themselves while on earth. There are some streams of Hinduism that approach this but are still quite different.

Why I raise this is that the idea of being "saved" is sort of inverted in modern "Christianity". The correct understanding, in my view, is that a helping hand has been offered. We incarnate over and over, and we can seek out this helping hand or not. Now please be clear that I'm not "proving" anything or philosophizing about the existence of God here. This post is if you are on the believing end of the spectrum that there was a Christ being historically. This is not a debate on the existence of the spiritual worlds, but an explanation of another way to view Christianity.

So instead of believing in Christ or going to hell, in this conception you keep incarnating and either seek out spiritual help or do not. There is not one magic incarnation, but a progressive choice to either become enlightened or not. In many ways Buddhism has a great deal in common with such an evolving view of Christianity. You could say "hell" is the choice to keep incarnating and getting hardened in materialism, thus rejecting your true nature.

Now to the argument that views of Christianity can't evolve because that is somehow sacrilege, well that is what science is all about. I mean look at quantum physics vs. Newtonian mechanics. We don't say it is sacrilege to believe in quantum physics. It is an expansion of previous understanding. The same with an updated view of Christianity. This is the quantum physics of spiritual science.

All of this is consistent with a more exact reading of the Bible.

 

[mike]

I couldn't agree more ( well I might reserve the part about the innocent animals because I do love a good cheeseburger ), but let's also think of what the reverse implies. Suppose upon rocking up to the pearly gates God figures you did so well resisting the temptation to question all his evil actions that he grants you admittance. What kind of place is this? Apart from the decorating and all the self-centered rewards you were promised, it's a place filled with hypocrites who care more for their own salvation than the pleas of the helpless and innocent? A place where you are forced to watch all the suffering firsthand while God does nothing to intervene; a place where the guilt you feel because of your own helplessness and comparative comfort would be eternal. Even worse you'd be forced to endorse it through worship or be cast out. Without some serious changes at the top, for me this would be just another kind of Hell.

I was refering to the slaughter of innocent animals for no other reason.
For example the "flood" where millions of innocent animals are supposed to have died, because man was wicked.
A god who can create an entire universe, but he cant deal with the specific problem without wiping out millions of other animals in the process ?

Burnt offerings

Where the animal is killed and burnt on an alter

The name in Hebrew was 'olleh', meaning ascending as smoke, given because this sacrifice was to be wholly consumed and to rise in smoke toward heaven. There is also the poetic term 'kalil', complete (Deut 33:10, 1 Sam.7:9, Psa 51:19) or the Greek 'Holokautoma' (Mark 12:33, Heb.10:6) alluding to the fact that, with the exception of the skin or feathers, it was wholly and entirely consumed

I will give to the LORD the first thing coming out of my house to greet me when I return in triumph. I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering."

"So Jephthah led his army against the Ammonites, and the LORD gave him victory. When she returned home, her father kept his vow, and she died a virgin. So it has become a custom in Israel for young Israelite women to go away for four days each year to lament the fate of Jephthah's daughter." (Judges 11:29-40 NLT)

Abraham at least got to substitute a ram for his child, but the lord let jephthah sacrifice his daughter as a burnt offering.......

They completely destroyed everything in it – men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep, donkeys – everything. (Joshua 6:20-21 NLT)

The men of Israel withdrew through the territory of the Benjaminites, putting to the sword the inhabitants of the city, the livestock, and all they chanced upon. Moreover they destroyed by fire all the cities they came upon. (Judges 20:48 NAB)

god kills a young bull

Immediately the fire of the LORD flashed down from heaven and burned up the young bull, the wood, the stones, and the dust. It even licked up all the water in the ditch! And when the people saw it, they fell on their faces and cried out, "The LORD is God! The LORD is God!" Then Elijah commanded, "Seize all the prophets of Baal. Don't let a single one escape!" So the people seized them all, and Elijah took them down to the Kishon Valley and killed them there. (1 Kings 18:36-40 NLT)

Burnt offering for the crime of menstrating

'When she becomes clean of her discharge, she shall count off seven days. After that, she will be clean.'
'On the eighth day, she will take two doves or two young pigeons to the priest.'
'The priest will offer one of them as a sacrifice for sin and the other as a burnt sacrifice. In this way he makes atonement for her before Yahweh for her unclean discharge.
Leviticus 15:30

God creates women, including a menstral cycle, and them commands two doves a month to make atonement for her unclean discharge ?

This is what the Lord of hosts has to say: 'I will punish what Amalek did to Israel when he barred his way as he was coming up from Egypt. Go, now, attack Amalek, and deal with him and all that he has under the ban. Do not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses.' (1 Samuel 15:2-3 NAB)

Do not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses..............

And yeah who could enjoy heaven, knowing that others for no greater crime than being born in a country where the bible was unheard of, burned in an eternity of torment.......

Reading about the atrocitys commanded by this entity, comparing them to modern standards, only the brainwashed could avoid the clear and obvious vile nature of such a creature.
The good news at least, is its all a fiction.

But i do question the sanity and morality of anyone who can read this vile stuff, and still spin it as "good".

Psychopathy : from the Ancient Greek ψυχή "psyche", -soul, mind and πάθος, "pathos" -suffering, disease, condition is a personality disorder that has been variously described as characterized by shallow emotions (in particular reduced fear), stress tolerance, lacking empathy, coldheartedness, lacking guilt, egocentricity, superficial charm, manipulativeness, irresponsibility, nonplanfulness, impulsivity, and antisocial behaviors such as parasitic lifestyle and criminality

If a human were to do these things, they would rightly be branded a psychopath.............

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Well if anyone chooses to take what they will out of any religion and call it their own it's fine with me. I'm just sore cos it was attempted on many occasions to make me a believer and what's far worse, far, far worse, is that on countless occasions it was assumed I was. Speechless.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

The more we pull it apart Mike the worse it gets......the greatest self-deception trick ever invented is religion. I am positive that those with faith must have an amazing faculty to deny the plainly obvious....but hey ho - I've made other mistakes in life!

 

[mike]

Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

So if a few people in a town worship another god...... ALL inhabitants as well as livestock are to be put to the torch as a burnt offering.

So the next time some Christian tells you about the "love of God", show them this page and ask them "Why does God want me to burn animals and humans?"
Ritual Human Sacrifice

 

[Ancientsaturn]

I'm all for faith if it's what you feel and want. I really am. But at the same time I think people should be willing to call faith faith, not confuse knowable facts with unknowable things like faith.

I promise I'm not trying to be difficult but in my eyes the above point is self-evident.

Can I ask if you believe all of the bible, OT and NT? If not, how can one pick and choose what might be correct and what might not be? Surely if they are the dictated word of god there cannot be any mistake? (I have never received what I consider even a remotely relevant answer to this)

I agree on the faith issue, I just wish materialists would recognize their own faith in materialism. I have no interest in faith and it does not drive me. I believe nothing based on faith, or at least that is my intention. But you also have to define faith. Is faith considering there may be something indicated by some facts that you have not yet seen irrefutable evidence of? Or is faith like the fundamentalist, where they need no indication in evidence to ascribe some meaning?

So I agree that if you define faith as believing in something with no evidence, then it is self-evidently different than knowable facts.

I view the Bible as an historical document that represents the inspiration of the individuals who wrote it. It is only as valuable as the contents have meaning to the reader, or may be properly interpreted. It does not stand alone, but is part of an historical thread in human history. The mystery centers in the far east preceded it. There is Zoroastrianism and Gnostism as well that hold a relationship to its contents. Now as to it being the "dictated word of god", what does that mean? If there is great truth to be found in the Bible, which I do find, then that is what is important. It is the contents that speak for it and the layers of meaning that go on and on beyond any traditional interpretation.

Overall, I see the Bible as representing concepts, and those concepts can be directly perceived with our thinking. With those concepts we can gain curiosity, no need for faith, and explore thought experiments into the nature of knowledge (epistemology) and existence. Ultimately you have to go far beyond the Bible to even start to understand what a human being is, and absorb as broad a base of knowledge as possible. For example, I don't see other religions as inferior to Christianity. They simply have their task and place in history. However, of all religions the one I am least open to is Islam. It is the one religion that is not just a religion but a theocracy. It is the one religion that is against other religions rather than complementing others.

But I digress. Here is the answer to your question: "Surely if they are the dictated word of god there cannot be any mistake?" We all as human beings have direct access to the source of the Bible. Through thinking we have a direct link to the spiritual worlds as thinking is spiritual. The Bible is a manifestation of what can be experienced directly by each individual human being. We used to have such a direct connection consciously, but that was lost historically. Today the conscious link is lost, but the Bible can be a spark to remind us that this latent ability exists. - Now for many this will sound like faith or gobbledygook. But the simple fact of the matter is that no one has anything to stand on except thinking. Thus Descartes famously stated, "I think therefore I am". He came to the point of realization that materialists or devout Christian, no matter who you are, you only stand on thinking. As soon as you argue you are the one who really "knows" you first turn to thinking. It is the greatest presupposition of mankind.

So the Bible represents archetypes that exists, and it is full of profound wisdom. There are so many mistakes in its interpretation that is by far the greater source of errors. Beyond that we would have to discuss what we consider to be errors.

 

[Mystery-Student]

I wonder about many possibilities and don't lean toward ETH more than the Paranormal possibility among others. But say "they" are extraterrestrials( I'm just throwing an idea out here, I don't necessarily believe it) and that there are multiple races and species coming from all diiferent worlds. Imagine that they have a classification for planets with life. We'll say Class 1 has microbial life, Class 2 has more intricate bodied life, and Class 3 has intelligent beings. Now we'll say they have a classification for intelligent life: Class3-1 is intelligent life with basic understanding of tools and communication, Class 3-2 is intelligent life with beings that create a social structure and some higher level of tools(similar to the bronze age), Class 3-3 is beings with a basic understanding of sciences and technology but unable to be spacefaring in a practical sense (where we might be viewd at now), Class3-4 is beings with high level technology/sciences and beginning to be spacefaring. This classification could go on up to classes we can't imaging, but say they have rule to not interfere on a mass scale with any planet below a Class 3-4 /spacefaring race on a practical scale, in order to allow that lower level planet to evolve and mature on its own. That way the future of the species on that planet is responsible for its own course of progression or degression. Imagine it this way, if the EBE's came here and said "this is how you achieve these advancements, or this is how science really works" then we would not figure it out on our own. And during periods of research and learning, new weird and crazy ideas spring up that make new things never thought possible or never even thought of before to be discovered which expands our knowledge. So in that way if EBEs came here and told us how to advance, they themselves might lose out on new advancements or technology that a race might develop if they achieved their high level Class on their own. Also they may not want to interfere with a lower Class planet because before that species is actually able to advance to a spacefaring high level species, they might not be able to handle the responsibilities that come with interacting on a mass scale with other species, or even be able to handle properly the new jump in technology. Just imaginge the power trip some humans would be on if they suddenly had the ability to travel space. Especially the governemtns of many countries. There would be a high likelyhood of a war starting somewhere with some other species if at this time we could traverse the universe and had all the technology that EBE's might have. This is just my opinion but i just feel a great portion of this planet is not mature enough to handle the responsibilites that would come with traveling and interactingwith other species' homeworlds. Do i think it would be great to be able to possess that technology, yes. but until it is actually actually achieved by our species, the true realities of the responsibility necessary for that kind of interaction won't be really thought about on a mass scale. We're to busy fighting over ideology and land and money on this planet at the time, the implications for galactic travel and ET interaction haven't really been thought out and realised by a majority of people. Sorry that was such a long post, it was just on my mind after reading abunch of posts of the who and the why. Anyway its just something to think about. Feedback and criticism welcome, I'd like to hear other peoples thoughts.

 

[Ancientsaturn]

I am correct in saying these are not things that can be seen or touched, having no real physical presence in the world? There has never been a god cadaver or fossil uncovered for example, that would provide a real record of their existence. These are beings presumed to live in a nebulous alternate reality often called the spirit world. There again there is no tangible evidence that this alternate reality exists. Just like no one has ever brought back a alien plant from another planet, or a object from the flying saucer that abducted them, no one has ever brought back an object from any of the variations on the theme of the spirit world. Is safe to say that these are mythological beings, some of which are regarded as "real" by various people in various time periods?

Trainedobserver, doesn't this statement imply the same level of "myth" on the part of materialistic interpretations of the fossil record? In other words, you are implying that there is the "real" rational world, and then there is that "mythical" "made up" world of spirit. What is interesting is how materialists create their own myths and religions. For example, the fossil record has gaps in it. So what do materialists do, they make up all kinds of fantasy explanations for the gaps. These appear like "fantasy beings" to an objective observer. They are purely fantastic. - Now I've done enough arguing about evolution theory that I'm not really trying to go there, but to make a simple point. We all can look pretty silly when we bend our thinking to fit our expected or hoped-for outcomes. Materialist do this all the time, not just those who are religious.

 

[mike]

So is the book of mormon real ?

Did JC go to america ?

Jesus Christ is first mentioned in the Book of Mormon in the very first verse, when Nephi, a prophet of the Book of Mormon, writes that he had been highly favored of the Lord in all his days. It’s been said by scholars that Jesus Christ or his mission are mentioned every 2.7 verses on average, which is more often than the Bible itself mentions Jesus Christ.

The Mormon religion includes the Book of Mormon, which is not the Mormon Bible, but a book used in addition to the Bible. The Book of Mormon story involves a family that left Jerusalem at the time of the prophet Jeremiah. The father, Lehi, was a prophet whose life was in danger when he tried to call the people of Jerusalem to repentance. His family and a few others fled to what is now the American continent, where they began a new civilization. The continent was not empty at the time-they were simply one group among many.

The people of the Book of Mormon brought scriptures with them, equivalent, roughly, to the first five books of the Bible. They knew of Jesus Christ and saw Him in visions prior to His birth. When He was born, they were given signs that had been promised by their prophets, and they also knew when He was killed. After His death, He came to them in person, and spent several days helping them to formally organize His church and teaching them more about God. He gave them blessings, healed the sick

 

[mike]

Welcome to Facebook - Log In, Sign Up or Learn More

 

[Trajanus]

I wonder about many possibilities and don't lean toward ETH more than the Paranormal possibility among others.

You should.

Imagine it this way, if the EBE's came here and said "this is how you achieve these advancements, or this is how science really works" then we would not figure it out on our own.

No need since the exponential rate of our own progress means we'll be there in no time, on the cosmic time scale to which an older race is probably accustomed to think in terms of.

And during periods of research and learning, new weird and crazy ideas spring up that make new things never thought possible or never even thought of before to be discovered which expands our knowledge. So in that way if EBEs came here and told us how to advance, they themselves might lose out on new advancements or technology that a race might develop if they achieved their high level Class on their own.

Very much doubt it, considering the number of independently evolved races which exist and are interacting--based on variety of humanoid types..

 

[Mystery-Student]

Very much doubt it, considering the number of independently evolved races which exist and are interacting--based on variety of humanoid types..

true, I doubt it too, was just another way to look at it.

 

[Randall]

... But say "they" are extraterrestrials( I'm just throwing an idea out here, I don't necessarily believe it) and that there are multiple races and species coming from all diiferent worlds ... Just imaginge the power trip some humans would be on if they suddenly had the ability to travel space. Especially the governemtns of many countries. There would be a high likelyhood of a war starting somewhere with some other species if at this time we could traverse the universe and had all the technology that EBE's might have ...

I tend to think that the more we advance into space the less likely war is. Consider the excellent cooperation between multiple nations on the ISS. And before that we had MIR and Skylab. A major reason for maintaining peace in space is that the resources to get there are so large and the resources available between planets and stars is so small, and your survival is so dependent on maintaining the integrity of the craft that everyone onboard understands you can't screw up. If you go down you don't just fall in the water; you get sucked into space and you're done for. Any space faring race would have to understand this and would be smart enough to want to avoid confrontations that would cause damage to their ships. Of course that doesn't mean it can't happen. It just means that it is probably much less likely than our typical sci-fi space battle scenarios portray. Any wars in space are more likely to be between inhabitants of the same planet, within planetary orbit, and probably carried out with remote controlled or ground based weapons.

 

[SRL+]

Dr. Saturn:

I understand these questions are off topic, and perhaps better saved for another time. However I found some of your off topic dialog interesting.

How did you find your way here?

When you say, “I also review phenomena that goes beyond physics” could you please explain what type of phenomena you are attempting to study , and have you found anything noteworthy?

When you say, “A super computer will never create an original idea, it is by definition "programmed". , are you of the opinion that AI will never be realized, as in, no bing, no qualia, no Kurzweil?

 

[starise]

Thats an excellent point and the one ive been trying to make.

I can quote example after example where both the biblical god and its supposed son express sentiments that by all modern standards are cruel and sadistic.

It even includes a passage that makes the very point

"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil..." (Isa 5:20).

And yet despite the evidence, many can not see the sentiments expressed and activitys attributed to the leading character are vile by modern standards.

It would be ironic indeed if on rocking up to the pearly gates, they found god shaking his head, asking how is it that after giving you free will and the ability to decide whats right and wrong, you held up as dear a book that attributes the killing of babies and innocent animals as something i would endorse...........

Well I see that Stoneheart is getting tired of the whole subject. He is probably not the only one. We could go on and on here.
Still I feel the need to at least clarify some points I made. God knows I love children as much as anyone, but how is the life of a child more valid than the life of any human being?All I keep hearing about are the children. What about the life of the teen, the adult? I get the general feeling here that this is added for dramatic effect as bad as it is.A lot of presuppositions need to be made in order to label God evil. Surely you have heard about the lesser of two(or more) evils. Who gives and takes life every single day?

So which is the more valid death?One day your number will come up as will mine. If God allows it all which is more evil? Death is a consequence of original sin and we will all eventually die.How we die is up to Him.

Was death justified to gain unity in the civil war?It was necessary but terrible. Was death necessary in the revolutionary war for American freedom? Is death evil?No. Is death a consequence of evil?Yes.God never intended evil but man chose evil of his own volition.God then had to initiate damage control.This involved death in some cases.Did God want plan B ???.....NO.
In one case God warned the people for 400 years before He finally acted.He sent Jeremiah to tell the people and they ridiculed Gods man. The people rejected his warnings. God didn't just come out of nowhere with no warnings.


He didn't set anyone up, he gave them a choice. Man is still making the wrong choices today.

Atheists write books wishing harm on those who disagree with their views and wishing for their elimination.Many of them say they are peaceful but they hate other people.How can they then presume to pass judgement on the morality of God or on Christians?There are plenty of imperfect Christians but no imperfect God.

The most successful implementation of atheism has been through communism. Any place where atheism has flourished in a society it has led to torture,oppression,slavery and the devaluing of human life.Look at communist societies today. Do you want to live in North Korea?How about China?These societies are based on communism/socialism/humanism/atheism.They kill Christians in these places.Yes that's right those loving moral atheists .What happened to the USSR?Financial collapse.Run away bureaucracy. Being totally Godless has its rewards.Hitler was a real winner too although he was a deluded satanist but still falls into the anti- God category.

I think George Carlin was hilarious. I even laughed at his Christian jokes....but he had it wrong or at the least an incomplete view IMO.

Some of the things atheists say are witty and revealing. They seem to make sense until you dig deeper.Why do they seem to primarily attack Christianity? Ask yourself that.

I like the people behind atheism here. I like the critical thinking but I can't stand by and let you tell only part of the story,or a revised version of it.

 

[dyingsun]

How about your God doesn't have any say in these matters ? I get where you are coming from , sorry for peeing a little on your parade.

 

[mike]

how is the life of a child more valid than the life of any human being

Thats a stupid argument, the killing of children and babies by adults with swords, is clearly a special example, they cant fight back. It makes what was done to them cowardly as well as cruel.
What possible sin could a helpless baby commit that would warrant god demanding it be killed ?

You worship an entity that commands the killing of helpless babies.... thats very disturbing to me. imo there needs to be something mentally wrong with anyone who can gloss over the killing of helpless babies.

again

What possible sin could a helpless baby commit that would warrant god demanding it be killed ?

And how is it you can process that and still find a way to worship such an entity, to do so you would need to condone HIS actions, The killing of helpless babies should be unacceptable to any sane person.


Killing the defencless is a special category of wrong.

But to answer your question

Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your task right here at the Temple." So they began by killing the seventy leaders. "Defile the Temple!" the LORD commanded. "Fill its courtyards with the bodies of those you kill! Go!" So they went throughout the city and did as they were told." (Ezekiel 9:5-7 NLT)

I will shatter men and women, old people and children, young men and maidens. With you I will shatter shepherds and flocks, farmers and oxen, captains and rulers. "As you watch, I will repay Babylon and the people of Babylonia for all the wrong they have done to my people in Jerusalem," says the LORD. "Look, O mighty mountain, destroyer of the earth! I am your enemy," says the LORD.

Clearly this bloodthirsty beast is happy to see anyone killed, young and old

But its a special kind of sick when it commands

They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children. (Isaiah 13:15-18 NLT)

Is your argument really, showing no mercy to helpless babies , is no big deal since they are no more valid than the life of any human being ?

 

[mike]

And this is hilarious
I see it, others will see it, but you never will

These societies are based on communism/socialism/humanism/atheism.They kill Christians in these places.Yes that's right those loving moral atheists .What happened to the USSR?Financial collapse.Run away bureaucracy. Being totally Godless has its rewards.Hitler was a real winner too although he was a deluded satanist but still falls into the anti- God category.

You recognise evil when its committed by humans, when evidence humans have done evil things is set before you ,you recognise it.
But when that very same evidence as it pertains to god is presented, you twist in the wind making excuses and ducking and weaving away from the same obvious truth.

When a human kills a helpless baby you know thats evil
When a human kills an old person you know thats evil
When a human inflicts torment on another you know thats evil

But when god does it, you make excuses as to why it might be justified

Hitler

from the earliest formation of the Nazi party and throughout the period of conquest and growth, Hitler expressed his Christian support to the German citizenry and soldiers. Those who would make Hitler an atheist should turn their eyes to history books before they address their pews and chat rooms.

Hitler was a Christian


Is the Bible Fit for Worship

Hell, of course, is the mother of all of my problems with the bible. It is perhaps the most despicable and hideous of all of the Christian God’s crimes. Indeed, the cruelest of all concentration camps. (Certainly far worse than the ones created by the Nazis.) Described biblically as the “lake of fire”, “the place of eternal torment with weeping and gnashing of teeth”

Why I am Not a Christian

You can see that the Nazi's concentrations camps are a despicable evil, and yet god created hell, which is a far worse one.

You will never see this, such is blind faith..................