Skip to main content

The Question Needing an Immediate Investigation

By Carl S ~

Several years ago on this site, a reader mentioned questions he used in conversations with religious believers. The subject was "The problem of evil." Why is there evil in the world? This is explained by the religious as, "Evil came into the world and persists because human beings have free will. Humans freely chose and still choose to do what is wrong." Our questioner pursues this, asking, "So, does this mean humans have the free will to lie?" The answer to this is, "Yes." Our inquirer then comes to the question: "Since humans have free will, how then do you know that those who wrote the scriptures were telling the truth?"

The author does not mention any responses, and we have good reasons to doubt he got any, or ever will, based on our own questions to believers. It is an excellent question, a demanding one that won't go away. Scriptural writers tell the reader to believe what they write because "it's the truth," and the reason it's the truth is because they say it is! (And the believer's hair-trigger answer to the initial "problem of evil" question, "free will," was invented by those same writers!) They have the gall to say the source of their “inspiration" is an invisible, absolutely silent, and unconfirmable spirit, which they claim is also an Absolute Authority. Notice: they have free wills to also fabricate any demands the "authority" makes, any desires it has. To "confirm" what the writers say, hearsay is offered as "evidence." We might come to the conclusion they not only lied in the first place, but, of course, also lied about the motives for their lying.

Those writers created fantastic, grandiose stories. Facts are irrelevant when constructing grand narratives, and make-believe replaces reality. For example, the Egyptians left no record of a Moses in their histories, which are extensive, and the historians of the time when the alleged "Jesus" allegedly lived and performed many miracles, never mention "him." How many lies will scriptural writers be caught in before they are called out?

What if what people WANT to believe is all lies, but they are fearful of using THEIR free wills to investigate those lies? How does this affect others?

The question: If human beings have free will to lie, and human beings wrote the scriptures, how do you know they weren't lying?" needs an immediate answer. Because, if they were lying, then humans who believe they'll gain after-death rewards promised to them by liars should stop exploding themselves NOW. What if it's all a scam? Look first - don't leap! Look at the obvious evidence: bodies don't re-materialize.

At present, many national heads of state sincerely believe what are lies and misrepresentations of reality based on ancient ignorance, promoted as truth. Men who believe, according to their mutual ancient writings, that some human beings floated up, unaided, from Earth through airless space to a celestial wherever, are making decisions about our destinies. Will beliefs in ancient tales, if not examined, lead to international conflicts? What were the consequences when an American president, with a Christian habit of sticking with beliefs no matter what, followed his belief-habit of rejecting evidence to the contrary, and thereby felt justified to invade a sovereign country? We must ask the question NOW, before something like that happens again.

When scriptural writers made up "glorious" histories for their tribes, weren't they exaggerating? Scripture writers portray men who became overjoyed, overwhelmed in glory, after slaughtering their enemies, while standing in their blood. The "glory" of their all-righteous god demanded the slaughter, and brought those celebrations. Envision, as they did, the ultimate ecstasy, the overwhelming of those same feelings, resulting from the destruction of the world itself! What rapture! Thus spoke all the emotionally perverse liars who promise what one writer defined as, "A higher existence, achieved through absolute destruction." The greater the destruction, the higher the existence. This madness has to stop NOW.

Parents are indoctrinating their children to believe what potentially lying writers claimed thousands of years ago is absolutely true. If parents CAN'T PROVE what the writers wrote is true, they should stop NOW. They should cease especially if what was written was the "sincere lying" of the well-meaning. The free-will ability those men exercised to lie must not go on being ignored, for the evil that men promote in lying lives after them, as long as it is unchallenged. Humans should not be kept in the dark of belief because they're told it's the light. The time for questioning, for maturation, is NOW. No more "martyrs," killing and maiming innocents. Not one more human being imprisoned or executed as a "heretic," because that person posts questions challenging the writings of ancient liars. Halt all that. Investigate. NOW.

All people on earth should feel free to eat pork NOW, and no Jewish or Islamic child should be denied that pleasure because some "deity-authority," fabricated by unknown potential liars, forbade it. (Because perhaps at one time, someone got sick from eating undercooked pork?) Why should starving lower caste peoples of India go hungry just because their priests tell them what the lying writers wrote: Don't eat the cows roaming the streets in front of you; they are"holy." (Notice that those who DO eat pork and cow meat are no more virtuous nor wicked than those who don't? In fact, those who are wantonly raping, beheading, and slaughtering, do not eat pork.)

Women have been killed as witches, as cohorts of evil spirits, temptresses of men into evil thoughts and deeds, because men, who felt lustful, naturally occurring desires for them, wrote that their bodily presence alone is morally dangerous. For these scriptural reasons, they must be held under strict control, and even destroyed. Thus, these "holy inspired" writers, by lying to themselves, conveyed their "truths" about the real nature of women. Their motives must be examined NOW.

No woman's body should be covered without her permission. Observe: women all over the world are in various stages of dress and undress, and in those places where they are not covered against their wills, there is neither no more nor less caring of humans for one another. In fact, wherever women are freer to be themselves, there is more caring and mutual respect amongst humans. It is only the ignorant who have eyes but will not see, and liars, who proclaim otherwise. All women need to be free of male-dominated religious traditions, NOW. All women should be respected for their individual self-worth, uncondemned for their sexuality, NOW. Let the investigations begin. Without delay.

Polite society urges us not to confront religious beliefs at all. We are told to "Let people believe whatever they want to believe," as if doing so is always harmless. Demanding exemption from criticism is the stuff on which tyrannies thrive.


Popular posts from this blog

Are You an Atheist Success Story?

By Avangelism Project ~ F acts don’t spread. Stories do. It’s how (good) marketing works, it’s how elections (unfortunately) are won and lost, and it’s how (all) religion spreads. Proselytization isn’t accomplished with better arguments. It’s accomplished with better stories and it’s time we atheists catch up. It’s not like atheists don’t love a good story. Head over to the atheist reddit and take a look if you don’t believe me. We’re all over stories painting religion in a bad light. Nothing wrong with that, but we ignore the value of a story or a testimonial when we’re dealing with Christians. We can’t be so proud to argue the semantics of whether atheism is a belief or deconversion is actually proselytization. When we become more interested in defining our terms than in affecting people, we’ve relegated ourselves to irrelevance preferring to be smug in our minority, but semantically correct, nonbelief. Results Determine Reality The thing is when we opt to bury our

So Just How Dumb Were Jesus’ Disciples? The Resurrection, Part VII.

By Robert Conner ~ T he first mention of Jesus’ resurrection comes from a letter written by Paul of Tarsus. Paul appears to have had no interest whatsoever in the “historical” Jesus: “even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, we know him so no longer.” ( 2 Corinthians 5:16 ) Paul’s surviving letters never once mention any of Jesus’ many exorcisms and healings, the raising of Lazarus, or Jesus’ virgin birth, and barely allude to Jesus’ teaching. For Paul, Jesus only gets interesting after he’s dead, but even here Paul’s attention to detail is sketchy at best. For instance, Paul says Jesus “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” ( 1 Corinthians 15:4 ), but there are no scriptures that foretell the Jewish Messiah would at long last appear only to die at the hands of Gentiles, much less that the Messiah would then be raised from the dead after three days. After his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus—an event Paul never mentions in his lette

Christian TV presenter reads out Star Wars plot as story of salvation

An email prankster tricked the host of a Christian TV show into reading out the plots of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air and Star Wars in the belief they were stories of personal salvation. The unsuspecting host read out most of the opening rap to The Fresh Prince, a 1990s US sitcom starring Will Smith , apparently unaware that it was not a genuine testimony of faith. The prankster had slightly adapted the lyrics but the references to a misspent youth playing basketball in West Philadelphia would have been instantly familiar to most viewers. The lines read out by the DJ included: "One day a couple of guys who were up to no good starting making trouble in my living area. I ended up getting into a fight, which terrified my mother." The presenter on Genesis TV , a British Christian channel, eventually realised that he was being pranked and cut the story short – only to move on to another spoof email based on the plot of the Star Wars films. It began: &quo


By David Andrew Dugle ~   S ettle down now children, here's the story from the Book of David called The Parable of the Bent Cross. In the land Southeast of Eden –  Eden, Minnesota that is – between two rivers called the Big Miami and the Little Miami, in the name of Saint Gertrude there was once built a church. Here next to it was also built a fine parochial school. The congregation thrived and after a multitude of years, a new, bigger church was erected, well made with clean straight lines and a high steeple topped with a tall, thin cross of gold. The faithful felt proud, but now very low was their money. Their Sunday offerings and school fees did not suffice. Anon, they decided to raise money in an unclean way. One fine summer day the faithful erected tents in the chariot lot between the two buildings. In the tents they set up all manner of games – ring toss, bingo, little mechanical racing horses and roulette wheels – then all who lived in the land between the two rivers we

Morality is not a Good Argument for Christianity

By austinrohm ~ I wrote this article as I was deconverting in my own head: I never talked with anyone about it, but it was a letter I wrote as if I was writing to all the Christians in my life who constantly brought up how morality was the best argument for Christianity. No Christian has read this so far, but it is written from the point of view of a frustrated closeted atheist whose only outlet was organizing his thoughts on the keyboard. A common phrase used with non-Christians is: “Well without God, there isn’t a foundation of morality. If God is not real, then you could go around killing and raping.” There are a few things which must be addressed. 1. Show me objective morality. Define it and show me an example. Different Christians have different moral standards depending on how they interpret the Bible. Often times, they will just find what they believe, then go back into scripture and find a way to validate it. Conversely, many feel a particular action is not

Why I left the Canadian Reformed Church

By Chuck Eelhart ~ I was born into a believing family. The denomination is called Canadian Reformed Church . It is a Dutch Calvinistic Christian Church. My parents were Dutch immigrants to Canada in 1951. They had come from two slightly differing factions of the same Reformed faith in the Netherlands . Arriving unmarried in Canada they joined the slightly more conservative of the factions. It was a small group at first. Being far from Holland and strangers in a new country these young families found a strong bonding point in their church. Deutsch: Heidelberger Katechismus, Druck 1563 (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) I was born in 1955 the third of eventually 9 children. We lived in a small southern Ontario farming community of Fergus. Being young conservative and industrious the community of immigrants prospered. While they did mix and work in the community almost all of the social bonding was within the church group. Being of the first generation born here we had a foot in two