Take a Deep Breath

Often, the debate on abortion boils down to the question: “When does life start?” Christians may include the added question, “When does an entity obtain a soul?” but as “soulness” cannot be determined by the scientific method, this leaves it in the arguments of the theologians. And while the Bible indicates adult humans have souls (Ps. 16:10) and implies that children may have souls (2 Sam. 12:23) it does not (specifically) indicate individuals or souls exist prior to life.

What the Bible does state, though, is that life starts by breathing. Not before. If the Christian is following God’s morals from the Bible, God’s history from the Bible, and God’s description from the Bible, why abandon God’s science from the Bible?

And, upon learning when life starts according to the Biblical God, can the Christian claim that killing a fetus is ending a life?

I see an intriguing vacillation. In the debate between evolution vs. creationism, we are told that science must bend to the Bible. In a conflict, the Bible must prevail. In the discussion of archeology vs. Tanakh, there is equivocation back and forth whether the Bible should be taken as accurate, or archeology.

But in the debate of the start of life, regardless of what science determines, the Bible is completely ignored. Is it…could it be that in this instance the Bible is considered antiquated, and deliberately overlooked?

Starting with the very first Biblically recorded instance of human life—Adam. God packs together a human out of dirt, but in order to make him alive, he gives him the “breath” of life. Gen. 2:7. Prior to breathing, Adam was a lump of clay.

Ezekiel was given a vision of a field of bones. God told him specifically that in order for the bones to live, they must be given the “breath of life.” To make the point evident, God gives the bones muscles, sinews, organs and skin, yet they are still considered dead. Not until they breath are they alive. They did not even animate until they received breath. Ezekiel 37:4-10.

Repeatedly the loss of the ability to breath is directly equated to dying. God mandated that Joshua kill all that lived, and reiterated this by indicated that all were killed; all that breathed were destroyed. Deut. 20:16, Joshua 10:40; 11:11; 11:14.

Job consistently attributed breathing with living. Job 12:10: 14:10. He specifically states that if he hadn’t left the womb, it would be as if he never existed. Job 10:19

When Jesus died, it was considered he had breathed his last. Mark 15:37 Same with Ananias and Sapphira. Acts 5:5-10. Acts also records Paul as considering life and breath to be the same, although Paul himself never uses the term. Acts. 17:25

When God resurrects the witnesses of Revelation, he gives them the “breath of life.” Rev. 11:11

Over and over we see that breath=life; no breath=death.

Now, there may be an argument from the apologist that “breath” is better translated as “spirit” or “soul” and that what God was imparting was the soul, not just the function of the respiration system.

This has numerous problems. Not the least of which, by virtue of these verses, it answers the question when a soul is imparted—when a person begins to breath. In the abortion debate, therefore, it leaves the exact same question on the table—when does life begin?.

When the widow’s son died, the acronym used was that he became so sick there was no breath left in him. What is more interesting is that Elisha asks that the child’s “soul” be returned to him. Upon the soul being returned, the child begins to breath. This would substantiate the claim that a non-breathing individual does not have a soul, and only a breathing individual does. 1 Kings. 17:17-23.

Animals are considered to have died as well when they ceased having the breath of life. Gen. 7:22. To be consistent, this would mean they, too, had a soul. (Although according to Deut. 20:16 Joshua was to kill “every breathing thing” implying livestock, yet in Joshua 11:14 livestock were specifically excluded from “every breathing thing” leaving us with a possible inconsitency.)

Finally, Daniel uses the phrase “…no strength remains in me now, nor is any breath left in me." And I doubt that Christians would argue this means he was losing his soul. Dan. 10:17

So…life is defined Biblically as breathing, and whether one has a soul or not is determined by whether one is breathing or not. To abort something that is not breathing would not be terminating a life. Nor, would it be damning a soul.

Are there any conflicts in the verses used to discuss abortion?

The Bible is extremely silent on the issue of intentional abortion, leaving little direction. The most oft-used passage is Exodus 21:22-25 which states that if men fight, and strike a woman with child, and she gives birth prematurely (some argue “miscarry”) and there is no “mischief” then the men shall pay a fine. If there is “mischief” then it shall be “eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, and life for a life.” (There is argument back and forth as to the exact meaning of these verses.)

But for the issue of the moment—“when does life begin” these verse provide no insight. These are verses that prescribe judgments for certain actions. As we shall see, taken literally, even a breathing person may not be considered a “life.”

A quick background of the verses prior to, and after. This is a list of deaths and harms, so clearly some type of harm, whether to the woman and/or the unborn child is anticipated.

A man killing a man is punishable by death. Ex. 21:12. But a child cursing his parents is also punishable by death. Ex. 21:17. We would no longer hold this law as deserving of death. But we would still say cursing one’s parents is wrong. A person beating his servant to death is deserving of death. Unless the servant manages to linger on for a few days, in which case it is no longer a crime at all. Ex. 21:20-21 This law is NOT abolished by the New Testament. 1 Peter 2:20. Yet is anyone stating that we should re-institute slavery to conform to Exodus 21?

Is anyone stating that the slave must not have been alive, since “life for life” is not required? Certainly not!

If a person has an animal with a propensity for harm, and it kills another, then the person shall be put to death. Ex. 21:19. Unless it kills a servant, and then it is only a fine. Ex. 21:32

What then, does “life for life” mean? I doubt anyone would argue that a servant is breathing. Could we equally argue that a servant has no soul?

The trouble here is that if the verse intended to state that harm had come to the fetus, it could easily have stated, “if born dead, then either pay a fine, or be put to death.” It does not. It leaves a demarcation of unclear distinction.

All of the other verses lay out a distinct pattern:

1) Death; followed by
2) Punishment either by death or fine or nothing.

But in this one situation, the pattern is abandoned, and we turn to the elusive:

1) The nebulous word “mischief” followed by
2) A broad list of possible punishments.

The pattern of death followed by punishment is picked up again right after this. These verses intend to convey a different meaning than death (even by accident) and following punishment.

One may argue, “But it claims ‘life for life’ which would anticipate a life lost.” The problem with this (other than the fact that we have already seen “life for life” is not accurate with servants) is that it also says “burn for burn.” Does one argue that striking a woman would someone “burn” an unborn child? Or “tooth for tooth.” Would striking an unborn child cause it to lose a tooth? (And yes, I know of children born with teeth. How rare is it? And who could tell?)

Or is the better statement that the general principle applied is the punishment fit the crime, and the list is not given as an exclusive or exhaustive remedy, but a principle. If you think of it, to make exact retribution, the pregnant female should be allowed to strike the man in the uterus, causing his child to suffer the same malformations. Obviously that would be impossible.

Exodus 21 does discuss poking out the eye of a servant, but not exacting eye for an eye in that regard, as a servant is just property. It would seem that the intention of these verses was to compensate the person as best as possible. It does no good for the servant to see his master lose his eye. The next event that may happen is one of those beatings in which the servant lingers a few days before dying!

In the same way, vs. 22-25 appear to be struggling with how to compensate for the loss of a fetus. There is a loss, no one questions that, but it is not property, like a slave, it is not a life, like a Hebrew, it falls into this nebulous category of recompense as best as possible.

Again, it would have been very easy to state that if the child was stillborn, the man must die. The law had stated that previously, and in a few verses later, will state it again. Those that debate this is the equivalent of a life must demonstrate the reason for the variance demonstrated here. It would be the only instance in which an accidental death required a death penalty.

Further, as raised in other debates, it is addressing an accidental abortion, not an intentional one. If two men were voluntarily fighting, there would be no law imposed on striking each other. But if one simply struck the other, then it would. This would be a situation in which the woman obviously did not voluntarily agree to an abortion, and some punishment, or compensation was necessary.

It is not clear that the fetus is considered a life, and, I am informed, scripture must interpret scripture. Overwhelmingly the other verses consider breath to be life. Exodus would defer to these verses.

The other verses used in the abortion debate, those discussing God knowing a person while in the womb do not necessarily impart “life” prior to breathing. If one holds to foreknowledge of God, He would have known everybody both prior to, during and after the fetus stage. And the verses as to God forming one in the womb (Ps. 139:13; Job 31:15) also do not impart life. God fully formed Adam and Ezekiel’s bones, yet they were not alive. Jesus was fully formed, yet upon giving up his breath was not alive. “Form” does not constitute “life.”

And that’s it. No mandate from Jesus’ lips as to when life starts, or souls are imparted. Even Paul makes no mention of when life starts. It is disconcerting that if this constituted murder, Paul was more concerned about what women said in a church, than explicitly prohibiting abortion based on the loss of life. (1 Tim. 2:12)

Well, not quite it. The Epistle of Barnabas written in the late First Century, or beginning of Second Century, B.C., states at 19:5 “….thou shalt not kill a child by abortion, neither shalt thou destroy it after it is born.” Wouldn’t that be a handy verse to have in the Bible? It would end the consternation presented above. It would shut the door on any of these questions. There it is, in black-and-white.

That one itty-bitty problem. The Epistle of Barnabas is not inspired. We all know 2 Tim. 3:16 that says all scripture that is God-breathed is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction. By virtue of the fact that the issue was seen, and was dealt with, but God consciously chose to not include it in the canon speaks volumes.

Regardless of the scientific findings, the moral quandary, the legal issues, or even the entire issue on abortion--When do Christians say God claims life begins?

The Sad State of Science...

The government recently released its 2006 Science & Engineering Indicators (SE). You can download the entire v2 as a PDF (2.7 MB). The SE serve many functions, but I wanted to highlight, in particular, its assessment of science literacy in America (and other countries), and consider its impact on our culture. The tables of interest are in chapter 7, "Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Understanding". They are available as Excel files (.xls) and PDF files:

• 7-10 (PDF) "Correct answers to specific science literacy questions, by country/region: Most recent year"
• 7-11 (PDF) "Correct answers to scientific terms and concept questions: Selected years, 1995–2004"
• 7-12 (PDF) "Correct answers to science literacy questions, by respondent characteristic: 2004"
• 7-13 (PDF) "Public understanding of nature of scientific inquiry, by respondent characteristic: 2004"

I haven't yet had time to review the data extensively, but suffice it to say, 2004 (most recent year) was the worst year since 1995 for general scientific literacy, across most categories, if not all. I am not surprised.

Can we ever expect a scientifically-illiterate society to acknowledge rationalism, humanism, and atheism as valuable worldviews/positions? What hope do atheists have for expecting religious dogma and superstition to diminish, and reason and freethought to catch on, in a society where a large majority of the population has no grasp on basic scientific principles and methods, to substantiate a naturalistic outlook? If people have no scientific basis to give them answers to some of the basic questions of natural history and philosophy, should we expect them to have anything other than faith? Here are some numbers to consider, reported as the % answered correctly (2006 SE, Table 7-10):

1. The center of the Earth is very hot. (True) 78
2. All radioactivity is man-made. (False) 73
3. It is the father’s gene that decides whether the baby is a boy or a girl. (True) 62
4. Lasers work by focusing sound waves. (False) 42
5. Electrons are smaller than atoms. (True) 45
6. Antibiotics kill viruses as well as bacteria. (False) 54
7. The universe began with a huge explosion. (True) 35
8. The continents have been moving their location for millions of years and will continue to move. (True) 77
9. Human beings are developed from earlier species of animals. (True) 44
10. Does the Earth go around the Sun, or does the Sun go around the Earth? (Earth around the Sun) 71
    

Now, compare these numbers to the 2002 SE report:

1. 70% of American adults do not understand the scientific process;
2. Double digit percentage gains in belief of haunted houses, ghosts, communication with the dead, and witches in the past decade;
   
3. U.S. depends heavily on foreign born scientists at all degree levels, as high as 45% in engineering;
4. Belief in pseudoscience is relatively widespread and growing;
5. 60% believe some people posses psychic powers or extrasensory perception (ESP);
6. 30% believe some reported objects in the sky are really space vehicles from other civilizations;
7. 30% read astrology charts at least occasionally in the newspaper;
8. 46% did not know how long it takes the Earth to orbit the sun (1 year);
9. 45% thought lasers work by focusing sound waves (they focus light);
10. 49% believe antibiotics kill viruses (they kill bacteria);
11. 66% don't believe the Big Bang theory widely accepted by scientists;
12. 48% believe humans lived at the same time as the dinosaurs;
13. 47% don't believe in evolution which is widely accepted by scientists;
14. 55% couldn't define DNA;
15. 78% couldn't define a molecule; (particularly sad to me, a chemist)
    
16. 32% believe in 'Lucky Numbers'.
    

So there's always plenty of superstition to fill in people's heads when knowledge and reason are absent. I don't see religion going away anytime soon, so long as general scientific illiteracy abounds and pervades.

Christians Ask The Stupidest Questions.

Christians that have commented on our Blog seem to ask the stupidest questions.

Recent ones come to mind:

Why do I value the pain of a child over an earthworm’s pain?
Why do I think rape and murder are wrong?
Why do I condemn Hitler?
Upon what basis do I condemn Hitler?
Why do I judge whether or not a miracle has occurred in the past largely based upon my own personal experiences of never having experienced a miracle in my life?
How can I say that ancient people were wildly superstitious to the core (with some notable exceptions) compared to our own day?
Why do I trust the results of modern science when future science may one day totally undercut what today’s science tells us?

I know these questions aren’t really stupid from their perspective. But they do seem stupid from mine. I’ve been answering them here for a while.

So rather than attempt to answer them here, instead, think with me for a minute.

Let’s say you were no longer fearful of doubting your faith. That is, you wanted to pursue many alternatives and hypotheses in your quest to know how we got here on earth when we did, and you didn’t fear God if you did this. Unlike how you now approach your faith, you wanted to truly investigate religious beliefs and you no longer feared that God would harm you for doing do. Can you do this? It might be a stretch for you, but try investigating your faith like you were investigating a crime scene where you spin many theories, unattached to any single one of them as much as possible, lest you miss a clue.

Anyway, let’s say you did this and you concluded none of the religious beliefs have much in the way of evidence. Many of them make mutually exclusive claims. But the adherents have sufficient reasons (at least to themselves) for why the others are all wrong. And you notice that many adherents are merely defending the beliefs of the culture in which they were born too. So you conclude they are all wrong.

You furthermore are confused between the two (western) options of One) believing that an eternally existing triune omnipotent, omniscience and omnipresent God has always existed (who, in the Calvinist way of thinking also decreed all of the human suffering we now experience to further glorify himself—is this selfishness, or what?) and Two) believing this universe just popped into existence out of nothing. You have no experience of something that has always existed, and you have no experience of something popping into existence out of nothing.

Let’s further say you finally conclude that if God exists he’s either impotent to help us (since there is no evidence he does anything to avert the many tragedies we experience everyday), or that he’s uncaring. So you say to yourself, there is no difference between a distant God and one that doesn’t exist, so you become an atheist.

I know this might be a stretch for many Christians to ponder, but try anyway. Let’s say you followed the same thinking pattern as every one of us at DC. Okay? Really consider this possibility. This is you.

Now, go answer your own stupid questions. ;-) But in doing so, remember this: just because you changed your mind about God doesn't mean anything else has changed in your life, except that you no longer go to church and your church friends may have mixed reactions to you. You will still have a mother who needs you. You still love your dog. You still must work for a living. You still like having a good reputation, and you don't want to spend the rest of your life in jail, or experince pain and suffering for bad choices you may be tempted to make, nor is suicide a reasonable alternative since people in this life are still counting on you, and you have the instinct to live. You still defend your friends, whom you still need, and you think causing others pain is wrong. You just look back and see no evidence of miracles in your Christian life, and that's all you have to judge your beliefs by, whether or not science changes in the future, too, which is wishing upon something that doesn't exist yet. All you have is the present to judge the past and the future by.

I could go on from here and describe how freeing this new perspective is in that there is not much room for guilt (especially since I no longer have any religious duties--tithing, evangelizing, prayer, Bible study, church attendance and duties--and I no longer need to feel guilty for what I think about either--just what I may do), even though I'm still the same good person I was, but that's for another time. Just answer your own questions, next time. Step in our shoes and then see them for what they are to us.

The Bible Itself Tells Us Ancient People Were Very Superstitious!

Many Christians claim that ancient people were not that superstitious compared to our own age. They do this in order to help bolster the purportedly historical claims of their faith. The longest chapter in my book takes the Bible at face value and asks what it says about the beliefs of ancient people. That is, if the Bible is true, and it says ancient people were superstitious, then they were, period.

What I found was that Biblical people were superstitious to the core. Now someone might argue that there were literate and skeptical people in the ancient world, and there most certainly were. But the people who were reached by the message of Christianity, the masses for the most part, can be overwhelmingly described as superstitious.

Here's just one example of many many I could offer:

Acts 19:23-41: The Riot in Ephesus.

23 “About that time there arose a great disturbance about the Way. 24 A silversmith named Demetrius, who made silver shrines of Artemis, brought in no little business for the craftsmen. 25 He called them together, along with the workmen in related trades, and said: “Men, you know we receive a good income from this business. 26 And you see and hear how this fellow Paul has convinced and led astray large numbers of people here in Ephesus and in practically the whole province of Asia. He says that man-made gods are no gods at all. 27 There is danger not only that our trade will lose its good name, but also that the temple of the great goddess Artemis will be discredited, and the goddess herself, who is worshiped throughout the province of Asia and the world, will be robbed of her divine majesty.”

While it's probably an exaggeration to say that this goddess "is worshiped throughout the province of Asia and the world," certainly most all people in and around Ephesus did. There were undoubtedly many people throughout the known world who did also.

Who is Artemis, anyway? From Microsoft Encarta: “Artemis, in Greek mythology, is one of the principal goddesses, counterpart of the Roman goddess Diana. She was the daughter of the god Zeus and Leto and the twin sister of the god Apollo. She was chief hunter to the gods and goddess of hunting and of wild animals, especially bears. Artemis was also the goddess of childbirth, of nature, and of the harvest. As the moon goddess, she was sometimes identified with the goddesses Selene and Hecate.”

“Although traditionally the friend and protector of youth, especially young women, Artemis prevented the Greeks from sailing to Troy during the Trojan War until they sacrificed a maiden to her. According to some accounts, just before the sacrifice, she rescued the victim, Iphigenia. Like Apollo, Artemis was armed with a bow and arrows, which she often used to punish mortals who angered her. In other legends, she is praised for giving young women who died in childbirth a swift and painless death.”

Now Christian...tell me this, do you think there is any evidence for the existence of Artemis? Any? Then why did these ancient people believe in Artemis? Because it was a good story, it explained some things, and they were polytheistic people. No evidence. Just a good story to help them through life.....right?

28 “When they heard this, they were furious and began shouting: “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!” 29 Soon the whole city was in an uproar. The people seized Gaius and Aristarchus, Paul’s traveling companions from Macedonia, and rushed as one man into the theater. 30 Paul wanted to appear before the crowd, but the disciples would not let him. 31 Even some of the officials of the province, friends of Paul, sent him a message begging him not to venture into the theater.”

Even though the text attributes financial motive to Demetrius, the overwhelming reaction is that the initial crowd overwhelmingly believed in Artemis.

32 “The assembly was in confusion: Some were shouting one thing, some another. Most of the people did not even know why they were there. 33 The Jews pushed Alexander to the front, and some of the crowd shouted instructions to him. He motioned for silence in order to make a defense before the people. 34 But when they realized he was a Jew, they all shouted in unison for about two hours: ‘Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!’”

Even if some of these Ephesians hadn't known why they were there, they did know what they believed--with fanaticism! Two hours! Artemis! Artemis! Artemis! It would seem as if they were in a pep rally or something. Did they try to reason with Paul? No! They shouted. It kinda reminds me of Militant Muslims with their guns in the air and shooting off round after round. Fanaticism. Mythology.

35 “The city clerk quieted the crowd and said: “Men of Ephesus, doesn’t all the world know that the city of Ephesus is the guardian of the temple of the great Artemis and of her image, which fell from heaven? 36 Therefore, since these facts are undeniable, you ought to be quiet and not do anything rash. 37 You have brought these men here, though they have neither robbed temples nor blasphemed our goddess. 38 If, then, Demetrius and his fellow craftsmen have a grievance against anybody, the courts are open and there are proconsuls. They can press charges. 39 If there is anything further you want to bring up, it must be settled in a legal assembly. 40 As it is, we are in danger of being charged with rioting because of today’s events. In that case we would not be able to account for this commotion, since there is no reason for it.” 41 After he had said this, he dismissed the assembly.”

Here's a pragmatic clerk in the midst of fanaticism. But can you imagine any town clerk in America dealing with the same problem...and admitting the things he did: "these facts are undeniable." That's the difference between them and us today, I think. These people were definitely overwhelmingly superstitious, and had no evidence for the existence of Artemis, except religious experiences which can be interpreted according to their own beliefs. These people would believe any good story if told sincerely, wouldn't they? And so, the competition between religious truth claims would be in who had the best story, wouldn't it, even if old beliefs die hard, like in Ephesus.

But the Christian gospel story had to win, because it couldn't be topped--about a God who died for the world's sins! And Paul established a church there.

My question is whether there is any evidence for the Christian story too. It didn't require any in the ancient past, but it does now. And if that's the case, then why should I believe in any of these religious stories of the past...any of them. I have more rigorous scientific and philosophical standards, as do all educated modern people today.

There is no Jehovah-Rophi, no Covenant

In Exodus 15:25-6, we are given a snapshot of the "covenant" idea of God -- one that involves God being the "all in all" for God's chosen/elect:

25 Then Moses cried out to the LORD, and the LORD showed him a piece of wood. He threw it into the water, and the water became sweet. There the LORD made a decree and a law for them, and there he tested them. 26 He said, "If you listen carefully to the voice of the LORD your God and do what is right in his eyes, if you pay attention to his commands and keep all his decrees, I will not bring on you any of the diseases I brought on the Egyptians, for I am the LORD, who heals you."

Jehovah-Rophi, the God who heals. But does God heal? Today?

Well, let's start with the easy stuff -- some recorded instances of healing that Jesus [supposedly] performed:

1. Leper 1 (Matt 8:2-4, Mark 1:40-5, Luke 5:12-5 [ignore the contradiction in when the healing occurred -- before going into the house or after])
   
2. Paralytic (Matt 9:2-8, Mark 2:3-12, Luke 5:18-26)
3. Peter's Mother (Matt 8:14-7, Mark 1:29-31)
4. Nobleman's son (John 4:46-53)
5. Withered hand (Matt 12:9-13, Mark 3:1-6, Luke 6:6-11)
6. Malchus's severed ear (Luke 22:47-51)
7. Hemorrhage (Matt 9:20-2, Mark 5:25-34, Luke 8:43-8)

Now, many other supposed healings are recorded in the gospels, but these suffice to show as examples where a "teaching" was attached to the miracle. Griffith Thomas writes,

It is noteworthy that one of the words frequently used of these miracles in the Gospels is the ordinary term, works (erga). They were the natural and necessary outcome of His life, the expression in act of what He Himself was... (Christianity Is Christ, p. 50, 1965)

What does this really mean? Well, the idea that Christ ushers in the "new covenant", in a phrase. And so, we really ought to establish just what God promised in the covenant. If you numerically count the promises made in the Abrahamic covenant, as this fellow has done, you will find 60, give or take a couple, depending on how you compound the sentences. The Biblical basis for the covenant is:

Genesis 12:1-3; 13:14-17; 15:1-21; 17:1-27 -- promises to Abrham
Genesis 17:10, 11, 23-27 -- covenant made with circumcision
Genesis 22:16-18 -- covenant summarized, oath sworn by God
Genesis 26:1-5 -- reconfirmed to Isaac
Genesis 28:13-15; 35:9-12 -- reconfirmed to Jacob

I am not a theologian, and thus I will not attempt to expound at length as to the intricacies of the old and new testaments [covenants]. I will simply make a point, which I open for criticism, but I do not fear being shown wrong:

• The Hebrews understood their covenant to be a holistic one -- God's promises of blessing were for their livestock, families, bodies, minds, hearts, behaviors...etc. Thus, they understood disease and sickness from the perspective that God could and would heal it, so long as they were in covenant with God. They did not believe that their healing would come in an afterlife only.

Many instances in the OT, the Jews' individual or collective faithfulness to God is juxtaposed against the fulfillment of God's covenant, insofar as healing, or as striking the unfaithful with plagues. Never is it implied that some "neutral, 3rd-party diseases" existed, nor that "neutral, 3rd-party health" existed.

Now, based upon this premise, the words of Griffith Thomas may become more clear -- if Jesus was to usher in a new covenant, with "better promises", what would we expect? We would expect for God to continue the blessings of Abraham, and to either extend them in scope of number, and/or in scope of persons they are offered to. From some of the claims of Jesus, by which Jesus promises the disciples new powers to cast out demons and heal the sick, and from the NT ministry of Paul et al, it is clear the blessings were increased, and offered to the Gentiles as never before. Furthermore, most Christians believe a part of Jesus' ministry had to have the indelible mark of the Messiah, from prophecies like Isa 32:3-4, 35:5-6, in which miracles and healings were promised as a sign.

Thus the healings of Jesus ought not have only represented individual discrete acts of benevolence [or at least, they shouldn't, since God is no respecter of persons], but signs and fulfillment of the era of the new covenant. Considering that the Bible claims that long after Jesus died, rose, and went back to heaven, the disciples were doing miracles of healing, there is no logical reason to suppose that this covenant was intended only for a short while. Why, then, are the miracles and healings absent in the so-called Body of Christ? Why is there so much sickness and disease in those within the supposed covenant?

The new covenant was made with perfect blood, offered by a perfect priest, according to the writer of Hebrews, and so its effect is greater. When God's people err, God no longer strikes them down with plagues. Conversely, there is a greater expectation of health and longevity, given that God's people now trust in the "better promises" of the new covenant. The blood of Jesus supposedly functions as a "sin filter", through which God sees the "new creature" (2 Cor 5:17) whose body and mind are being renewed with the indwelling of God's presence. Indeed, this supposed cohabitation of the body with the Holy Spirit, before the NT impossible, is the singular greatest reason to expect a holistic health -- mind, body, and spirit.

But...is God still Jehovah-Rophi?

The miracles are harmonious with the character and consciousness of Jesus; they are not external confirmations but internal constituents of the revelations of the Heavenly Father's love, mercy, and grace, given in Him, the beloved Son of God, and the compassionate Brother of men... (A.E. Garvie, Is Jesus God?, 4th ed., p. 51-2, 1966)

Indeed, the question must be posed as: has God, or God's character, or God's covenant, changed since the days of Paul, Peter, and James, when miracles of healing were still recorded? Furthermore, there is a greater expectation of healing through the covenant of Jesus than through the covenant of Abraham:

Isa 53:4-6 (NIV) 4 Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted.5 But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. 6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

1 Pet 2:23-25 (NIV) 23When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly. 24He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed. 25For you were like sheep going astray, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.

Since the Bible clearly relates sin to physical death and physical illness throughout, and since the popular derivation of this teaching has resulted in numerous equivocations of sin with disease, Christians, doing their best to remain faithful to the covenant, and trusting in the blood of Christ for their righteousness, have a vexing problem: the prevalence of disease, and the lack of miracles and healings to alleviate it. After all, if there sins are "washed away" with the blood of Jesus, if they have been made righteous...where is the evidence thereof? If the Bible makes it clear that the effects of sin are done away with by the Cross, why do they linger on?

Does it require the physical presence of Christ, or one of the Apostles, to perform these miracles and healings? The Bible testifies to the contrary:

Matt 18:19-20 (NIV) 19"Again, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. 20For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them."

James 5:13-16 (NIV) 13Is any one of you in trouble? He should pray. Is anyone happy? Let him sing songs of praise. 14Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. 15And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven. 16Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective.

So, Christian [Evangelical/Fundamentalist, especially], is your Book wrong, or are you really saved? How many pastors have spent countless hours trying to defend God's promises in the face of evidence contrariwise? How many faithful, devout, obedient Christians have spent months or years trusting in God for a healing, repenting [blaming themselves], being anointed with oil, coming together with fellow believers to pray, in faith, believing Matt 18? How many died? How many slowly rotted away from cancer? [see also Matt 7:7, 17:20, 18:19, 21:21, Mark 11:24, John 14:12-14, James 5:15-16...and the list at the bottom]

As Aaron poignantly pointed out, all the words and doctrine mean little to those who are unsteeped in theology -- but the evidence and power of God in your lives mean everything. If you claim that you are in some sort of covenant with God, and you're keeping up your end, and you got a blood transfusion at a hospital that had Hepatitis C, HIV, whatever, 20 years ago, what are those watching to think? Paul supposedly got bitten by a poisonous snake, and it inspired faith in those around him. Had Paul fallen down and died, as you most surely will, there would be no inspiration of faith, no "power" to back up the words (c.f. 1 Cor 2, 1 Thess 1). Was God's faithfulness to Paul greater than to you? Do you maintain that God is no respecter of persons (2 Chron 19:7, Job 34:19, Acts 10:34-5, Rom 2:11-2, Gal 5:6, 1 Pet 1:17, 2 Pet 3:9)? Why then are so many left unhealed? So many who faithfully pray and cry out to God to fulfill the covenant oath? Semi-joking, why does God hate amputees?

I will close with a compilation of Scripture, put together from various sources, that I edited and rearranged, for you to consider. It is a long list, but it is quite essential for you to face the failed promises of your God before attempting to pretend that a plain reading doesn't render the failure of God's covenant:

• Exodus 15:26 "I will put none of these diseases upon thee...for I am the LORD that healeth thee."
• Deut 7:12-15 "12 If you pay attention to these laws and are careful to follow them, then the LORD your God will keep his covenant of love with you, as he swore to your forefathers. 13 He will love you and bless you and increase your numbers. He will bless the fruit of your womb, the crops of your land—your grain, new wine and oil—the calves of your herds and the lambs of your flocks in the land that he swore to your forefathers to give you. 14 You will be blessed more than any other people; none of your men or women will be childless, nor any of your livestock without young. 15 The LORD will keep you free from every disease. He will not inflict on you the horrible diseases you knew in Egypt, but he will inflict them on all who hate you." [emphasis mine]
  
• Deut 32:39 "39 See now that I myself am He! There is no god besides me. I put to death and I bring to life, I have wounded and I will heal, and no one can deliver out of my hand."
• Psalms 25:20 "O keep my soul, and deliver me: let me not be ashamed; for I put my trust in thee."
• Psalms 34:10 "...they that seek the LORD shall not want any good thing."
• Psalms 42:11 "Hope thou in God: for I shall yet praise him, who is the health of my countenance, and my God."
• Psalms 46:1 "God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble."
• Psalms 55:22 "Cast thy burden upon the LORD, and he shall sustain thee: he shall never suffer the righteous to be moved."
• Psalms 91:3 "Surely he shall deliver thee from the snare of the fowler, and from the noisome pestilence."
• Psalms 103:3 "Who forgiveth all thine iniquities; who healeth all thy diseases;"
• Psalms 107:20 "He sent his word, and healed them, and delivered them from their destructions."
• Psalms 119:93 "I will never forget thy precepts: for with them thou hast quickened me."
• Proverbs 3:7-8 "Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil. It shall be health to thy navel, and marrow to thy bones."
• Proverbs 4:20-22 "My son, attend to my words; incline thine ear unto my sayings. Let them not depart from thine eyes; keep them in the midst of thine heart. For they are life unto those that find them, and health to all their flesh."
• Isaiah 53:4 "Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows:"
• Isaiah 53:5 "With his stripes we are healed."
• Isaiah 40:29 "He giveth power to the faint; and to them that have no might he increaseth strength."
• Isaiah 40:31 "They that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength."
• Isaiah 50:7 "For the Lord GOD will help me; therefore shall I not be confounded: therefore have I set my face like a flint, and I know that I shall not be ashamed."
• Jeremiah 17:14 "Heal me, O LORD, and I shall be healed; save me, and I shall be saved: for thou art my praise."
• Jeremiah 30:17 "I will restore health unto thee, and I will heal thee of thy wounds."
• Jeremiah 33:6 "Behold, I will bring it health and cure, and I will cure them, and will reveal unto them the abundance of peace and truth.
• Matthew 7:7 "Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you."
• Matthew 7:17 "So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit."
• Matthew 8:17 "Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses."
• Matthew 15:13 "Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up."
• Matthew 17:20 "And He said to them, "Because of the littleness of your faith; for truly I say to you, if you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you."
• Matthew 18:18-21 "8 Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven. 19 Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven. 20 For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst."
• Matthew 21:21 "And Jesus answered and said to them, "Truly I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what was done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, 'Be taken up and cast into the sea,' it will happen."
• Mark 5:23 "23and implored Him earnestly, saying, 'My little daughter is at the point of death; please come and lay Your hands on her, so that she will get well and live.'"
• Mark 6:5 "5And He could do no miracle there except that He laid His hands on a few sick people and healed them."
• Mark 11:24 "24 Therefore I say to you, all things for which you pray and ask, believe that you have received them, and they will be granted you."
• Mark 16:18 "18 they [disciples of Jesus] will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover."
• Luke 10:19-20 "19 Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing will injure you. 20"Nevertheless do not rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are recorded in heaven.""
• John 8:36 "If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed."
• John 14:12-14 "12 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do, he will do also; and greater works than these he will do; because I go to the Father. 13 Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it."
• Romans 8:2 "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death."
• Romans 8:11 "He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you."
• Romans 8:26 "The Spirit also helpeth our infirmities."
• Romans 8:32 "He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?"
• 2 Cor 1:9-10 "9 Indeed, in our hearts we felt the sentence of death. But this happened that we might not rely on ourselves but on God, who raises the dead. 10 He has delivered us from such a deadly peril, and he will deliver us. On him we have set our hope that he will continue to deliver us,"
• 2 Cor 1:18-22 "8 But as surely as God is faithful, our message to you is not "Yes" and "No." 19 For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by me and Silas and Timothy, was not "Yes" and "No," but in him it has always been "Yes." 20 For no matter how many promises God has made, they are "Yes" in Christ. And so through him the "Amen" is spoken by us to the glory of God. 21 Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed us, 22 set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come." [emphasis mine]
  
• 2 Corinthians 2:14 "Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ."
• 2 Thessalonians 3:3 "But the Lord is faithful, who shall stablish you, and keep you from evil."
• 2 Timothy 1:7 "For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind."
• Hebrews 13:8 "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever."
• James 5:16 "Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much."
• 1 Peter 2:24 "By whose stripes ye were healed."
• 1 John 3:8 "For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil."
• 3 John 1:2 "Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth."
  

In closing, I would simply ask what a believer, devout, doing their best to follow the commandments of the Jesus and Lord that they love, is supposed to make of God's failure to heal them? That God is trying to teach them something? That the devil is messing with God's promises? Perhaps a believer thinks these things, in order to retain some semblance of sanity and trust and faith in a good God of covenant. However, the clear and unequivocal statements above must be dealt with. Is the covenant simply true: "If X, then Y", where X = you are obedient, you are a Christian, you are in covenant, you trust in the blood of Christ, etc., and Y = God will keep you from disease, God has given you victory over sin and death, by Jesus' stripes, you are healed, etc.? Is it clear and simple and true?

Has your God separated your sins from you as far as east is from west? Has God cast them into the sea of forgetfulness? This should be reflected in how you live your life, the state of your mind...and that of your body. Are you "covered" with the blood? Are you redeemed? Are you made new? Are you made whole? Do you have evidence of a covenant between yourself and your Maker, wherein you are different, better, healthier than before, or than those without the covenant?

Ought reconciling the promises of God and the clear teaching of the Scriptures require a 4-year degree in theology? Do the Scriptures teach that the covenant is unreliable, its effects capricious, its possessors unsubstantiated? Should God's covenant and subsequent promises be so ambiguous and flippant? Does the lack of consistency speak to us of God's truth and faithfulness, or are we somehow to blame for not understanding the original languages of the Bible and having a Th.D. so that this all makes some semblance of sense?

The answer to all is clear and simple -- "No."

Remembering Mandy

January 1, 2004 was the worst day of my life. Never has a day come close to equaling it in sheer horror and regret. I would give my very life to take back the pain I caused and felt on that dark, loathsome day.

Many regretful things can happen in a person's life. If I cared to, I know I could rack up a list of no less than 100 days in my life I would love to re-live, and that's just contemplating the matter off-hand, without any serious consideration gone into it. These are days to be re-lived of the normal order, riddled with juvenile antics and foolish mistakes, to divorces and life-altering heartbreaks, but the event I am about to describe was much worse. It wasn't something of a petty nature, like being embarrassed from getting a "wedgy" in school in front of your friends. It wasn't being beaten up by a bully in front of a girl you thought was cute in the 7th grade, and it wasn't getting dumped by your sweetheart as a freshman in college just when you thought you'd found the love of your life. It wasn't even akin to going through the emotional pain of losing faith in God, a bad enough pain in it's own right, just ask anyone who's gone through it. This was something different. On that day, I took a life. I put my dog, Mandy, to her grave.

Mandy was a mutt, a German Shepherd/Golden Retriever mix. She was almost five years old when she died. She was loving and loyal, though a lot of trouble as she continually dug out of the backyard. She was a barker and drove us nuts at times, but we still loved her. Like her father before her, Mandy had severe hip dysplasia which made it difficult for her to walk, so when she got excited, instead of running, she would sort of gallop around the yard in a wild, horse-like manner. She was cute to watch. She developed many other health problems though, miscellaneous in nature, and virtually impossible to treat. There came a time when this affected her behavior to the point where she was rambunctious and out of control. As she grew, she was in greater pain from her hips growing more and more crooked. We couldn't afford to have the surgery to replace them, and their was no guarantee it would be successful anyway. So after a long period of thinking over the matter, we decided it was best to have her put down.

So what's the big deal, Joe? Sick beloved pets get put down all the time. It's a painful part of life, but one that we all get over, right? Here's where things went woefully wrong. Being busy in the sales business those years, I was set on getting this out of the way before I had to be at work the next day. Foolish me. I thought it would be so easy, so over and done with! The Humane Society in our area wasn't open anyway, so I would just finish her myself with a pistol. There was no way I could prepare myself for what was to happen, not in a thousand years.

So out I go in the early morning hours of the brand new year. I arrive at a cousin's ranch with Mandy in the back of the truck. I won't go into the graphic details. That would be unnecessary. Let me just say, the bullets did not exactly do what they were supposed to do in bringing about a quick death. Everything that could have gone wrong that night did. Mandy suffered so as to make anyone watching pass out in disgust. I am surprised I didn't. I can still hear her groans, and see her twitching in anguish, while profusely panting. The agony and unparalleled shock that filled her eyes was probably the worst part of it all. I distinctly remember trying to comfort her, and at the same time, trying to hurry and get it over with. Her eyes glanced up at mine with a question from her I only wished I could have answered, "Why, master, why?"

Finally, her last spasm came and went, and she died. I can remember staring non-responsively at her now motionless body before digging her grave.

The goriest horror movie had nothing on this occasion. I was literally covered in blood as was my truck. I remember the horrible sight of torn flesh and the smell, that awful, unmistakable smell of blood spilt. It stayed in my nostrils for two months it seemed. Sometimes I think I still catch a whiff of it. If only I could be so lucky as to forget that event, but I know I never will.

This broke me psychologically. I was shocked beyond words while it was happening. It was as though my mind was outside of myself, watching things happen. I couldn't believe it was going on. I drove back home in a state of delirium from what had transpired, hating myself for thoughtlessly and carelessly causing this because I was too damn busy to do things the assuredly humane way. I now had an intimate acquaintance with death like never before. I slept for two straight days upon arriving back at the house. I couldn't eat for about a week. Nightmares and tears were a regular part of my life for the next few weeks.

As life went on, this came back to haunt me from time to time. On several occasions, when I found myself back at my cousin's ranch, I was taken suddenly in tears, this on more than one occasion. I wandered over to Mandy's grave and found myself talking in the air to her, as though I believed she was still around me and listening as I told her I'm sorry and wished she could have understood. There were those initial moments of absolute desperation, when, holding out my hand, I found myself hoping that maybe, just maybe, Mandy would come through the veil of the netherworld and touch my hand with her spirit paw. Of course, that never happened. I knew better than that anyway, but grief messes with your head.

That event changed me forever. But I don't need sympathy, nor encouragement. I am a stoic person, a realist. I deal with what life sends my way. Indeed, I have no other alternative. I've counseled many in grief and know to apply to myself what I preached to others, that no matter how bad one may feel, life will still go on. My life has gone on like I knew it would. Each new day comes and goes all the same. Sometimes I think back on the sadness of that night, and the whole memory of the experience engulfs me like a stormy cloud of doom for a time until I can shake it from me. At other times, and for the most part, I put it behind me and go on with my life, chalking it up to just another unfortunate thing of the past.

I came to terms with the fact that I was the cause of Mandy's suffering. I also came to terms with the fact that I will never see Mandy again. I have only her memories left, and no matter how bad I would love to believe that I will someday see my loved ones again, I have no reason to assume I will. Just because I want, like anything, to believe something, just because a certain ideal would bring me fabulous inner-warmth and great comfort, and just because the alternative is grim and disheartening, does not give me just cause to subscribe to irrationality, such as the idea of "life after death." The grave is the end for us all, yet instead of getting depressed about it, I have made the decision to not only expect it, but even appreciate it.

I'll admit that I am setting myself up as a positive example here of allowing reason to hold sway over reckless emotion and sentimentality, but this is not the goal of my article. The point of my article is to make clear to the readers and commentators of this blog that atheists, like anyone else, have emotions and face great pain. We are not "soulless" in the figurative sense of the word, nor are we "emotionless", or "hard-hearted", as some have quippingly suggested. We are just people, fundamentally not unlike the most exuberant theist. We all face daily the hardships of life and try to get through them. This article may not have directly to do with debunking Christianity, but it should serve to remind critical readers that when you argue with us, you are not dealing with soarely and exclusively left-brained, First Officer Spocks, who lack the capacity to feel. We are every bit as human as you and your church crowd, only with a different set of beliefs and different value systems.

(JH)

Because the Bible Tells Me So

How can we know the truth?

Christians of most, if not all, denominations and subcultures would answer in one accord... THE BIBLE!

If all eternal and spiritual truth finds its home in only one book, then anything outside of this book, no matter how seemingly reasonable, must be subject to scrutiny and not be seen as a sure ‘word from God.’ This post seeks to find what this infallible source has to say for itself about itself.

The Canon of the New Testament had not been settled until The Period of Fixation (AD 367-405) where, “in his "Epistola Festalis" (A.D. 367) the illustrious Bishop of Alexandria ranks all of Origen's New Testament Antilegomena, which are identical with the deuteros, boldly inside the Canon, without noticing any of the scruples about them. Thenceforward they were formally and firmly fixed in the Alexandrian Canon.” The Catholic Church recognized that the validity of these decisions regarding the canonization of the New Testament rested on also proving that those that making the decisions had made infallible ones. The most solid way to insure this proof was to claim that those making the decisions themselves were indeed infallible.

For good graces of discussion, let’s assume that the God who penned the words through other fallible men also had the ability to make sure it would get published whether or not the men compiling ‘his’ works were infallible or not.

Biblical infallibility is truly the chief cornerstone of the Christian faith. For quite obvious reasons, this was not the case among the early church for perhaps several generations after the day of Pentecost. This cornerstone is more paramount than even the Resurrection of Jesus, for without the thrust of authority of infallibility or inerrancy, the need for faith in the unseen increases while the grounds of conscious reasoning decreases. In other words, without an outside and objective benchmark for what is true, all bases for the Christian faith would be on pure experience and human opinion alone. If we can’t be sure of the records being literal historicity and the actual ‘Word of God’ spoken through man, than what is left in a Christian’s mind for their faith to stand on apart from their own experiences? Christian authority certainly is dead apart from the authority of the scriptures. Christians, as divided in doctrinal stances as they appear to be, would barely have a shred of commonality apart from the bible. It may even be reasonable to say that Christianity as we know it would not even exist apart from the Christian bible having been compiled and asserted to be the ‘Word of God.’

It is very important to see that most, if not all, Christians today would stand to the end on the belief that no truth (especially spiritual or divine) can be known outside of the bible. I repeat the Christian claim for emphasis…

‘There is no authority for truth outside of the bible!’

Seeing, then, that the bible is the only true authority on truth that is proposed to be in the world today, there is only one source to seek an answer to the question of the Christian bible being the ‘Infallible Word of God’… the bible itself. Its declarations are certainly the only source that can be trusted. Any answer outside of this ultimate authority cannot be trusted. We cannot trust our human reasoning, testimonies of any man or woman, our own experiences, or any other organized authority of any kind. The bible is the source of reliable spiritual and divine truth.

The verses to follow are all from the New Testament for one simple reason. We are discussing Christianity and proving that the Old Testament is the ‘Word of God’ apart from proving the same for the New Testament does nothing to support Christianity.

In the following, I am only going to highlight the verses that speak of the nature or authority of the scriptures themselves. To simply quote a ‘fulfilled’ Old Testament scripture or mentioning of another declared scripture speaks not to the nature or authority about scripture itself, but simply states what the scriptures have said. The verses that follow were the only ones I could find that had anything to do with ‘scriptures’ or ‘word’ and that may aid us in discovering the truth of how we can be certain that the New Testament is the ‘Word of God.’

Let’s see what the bible has to say for itself…
But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; And that from a child thou hast known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.(2 Timothy 3:14-17)

This is the most definitive verse used to waive the banner of inerrancy. At the time that this was written, however, the New Testament did not exist and it could be strongly argued that Paul was referring only to the Old Testament scriptures. To claim that this verse speaks of the entire 66 book bible that we have today would be taking this verse grossly out of context and reasonable application. One must first decide by faith that the Christian New Testament that we have today is considered to be scripture inspired by God before one can apply the declaration of this verse to it. This verse does not state that the New Testament we hold today is the inerrant or inspired word of God.

To say that scripture is ‘god-breathed’ or ‘inspired’ by God may be quite different than scripture being the ‘Word of God.’ An author named Tom is inspired by another author named Jim. The words of Tom are not inherently the words of Jim, however Jim was the source of inspiration. Adam is ‘God-breathed’ in Genesis. Does this mean that everything that Adam did, God was doing, or was it Adam, or was it both? Many preachers and writers do work under the anointing or inspiration of God. Does this mean that their very words are the words of God Himself or are they simply inspired? If they are the very words of God Himself, then we must heed the words of anyone ‘under inspiration’ as if they were spoken by God Himself. (That would become quite interesting.)

This Greek word meaning ‘god-breathed’ or ‘inspired’ is a tricky one because it is the only time it is ever used in the New Testament. However, regardless of how we interpret the word ‘inspired’, this verse does not state that the New Testament we hold today is the inerrant or inspired word of God.

To continue…
For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. (Hebrews 4:12)

But the word of God grew and multiplied. (Acts 12:24)

And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God. (Acts 13:44)

And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God: (Ephesians 6:17)

For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe. (1 Thessalonians 2:13)

Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever. (1 Peter 1:23)

Though all of these verses above speak of the characteristics of the ‘word of God,’ none of them point to the New Testament being the Word of God. It would seem a stronger and more realistic argument that the ‘word of God’ is something that cannot be written down, but is an un-seeable or unspeakable force or power that stirs in life and change within an individual. This has little to do with the words on a page that are to be adhered to or words on a page that we are judged by. Though these may be seen as beautiful renditions inspired by the ‘word of God,’ no where in these verses do they claim to be the words of God themselves. They actually speak to the idea that this ‘word of God’ either is referencing the Old Testament or has nothing to do with a book at all.

Remember, also, that one must first decide by faith that these verses are the words of God before one can apply the declaration and descriptions of these verses to it. We’re still searching for where the bible, today’s only sure source of knowing God’s truth, gives us the assurance that we’re on the right path to stand by the claim of infallibility.

Another verse…
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. (Revelation 22:18-19)

To apply this verse out of a book written by John to the whole of the New Testament would be taking this grossly out of context. He is surly speaking of ‘the words of the prophecy of this book.’ He is not referencing the 66 book bible we have today, but the book that he had just written. Apart from the decision to place this book at the end, for obvious reasons, we cannot assume that this verse has anything with the other 65 books of the bible.

There isn’t much, if anything, left of Christianity apart from the words in the New Testament, but according to 1 Cor. 4:20, should Christians focus so much on the written words?

For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power. (1 Corinthians 4:20)

This states it quite clearly. The kingdom of God is not in words. The kingdom of God is not found in the words in a book, but, at most, in what the words point to… the power behind the words. So, perhaps ‘the world’ should give Christians a break and not get so hung up about the bible and what it says. Maybe we should be disregarding what Christians say and start paying more attention to the power that they display because they’re living according to the kingdom principles of God. Do Christians provide the answers, solutions, and way to a powerful life that is impossible to be displayed in any other belief system or subculture? Do they display the power that would be expected from the people of the Almighty God?

In Closing
All of the modern Christian tradition rests on the claim that the 66 books of the bible we have today are the inerrant ‘Word of God’ and that anything spoken outside of this Bible is subject to fault and error in the light of the bible’s glorious truth. No where in the 66 books is it ever declared that the Old or New Testament that we have today is the very Word of God. It would actually point that the Word of God is something other than words in a book. Since the modern Christian’s claim that their bible is the only sure way of knowing God’s perspective and will cannot even be found in the only sure source of knowing truth, then it would stand to reason that the assertion that the bible is the very ‘Word of God’ to man is simply that… an assertion that can neither be proven nor shown to be the truth by the only book that is claimed to be the only ‘Word of God’ to man.

To believe that all mankind will be judged by the words written in the bible is a belief that may be argued and supported by much reasoning and rationale. If one wants to believe by faith that it is the only inspired, actual, and literal Word of God to all mankind, than one is free to choose this belief and may even find forms of blessing for so doing. However, one cannot argue with a shred of logic or reason that the 66 book called the Christian bible declares itself to be so.

The belief of infallibility may be derived from various trains of thought. Christians, as I once was, can build grand structures of reasoning from many angles and perspectives to ‘prove’ that the book is the ‘Word of God’ as I once did, but in the end we cannot say it is because ‘the bible tells me so.’

I do realize how absurd it would for be for anyone to expect that every verse ever written in the bible is preceded by ‘Thus saith the Lord’ and even if it did, if we were to ask how we can know for sure it comes down to what they say it always comes down to. It’s a matter of ‘faith.’ The faith that is beyond the reasoning mind is the realm that Christianity values and stands firm on. If, then, it always will come down to a matter only to be understood in the faith realm apart from rational reasoning, then it would be most authentic to keep it that way. If it is not by reasoning, but by faith alone, than a Christian Apologist may be an oxymoron. According to the 'by faith' assertion, perhaps the reasoning mind only it's place for those who are coming or have come Out of Christianity.

It seems reasonable to this ex-Christian that the most effective path to winning anyone to the Christian world view is through the tools available within the Christian belief system. Many Christians would agree that faith is the most powerful thing that a Christian has. The Christian world view can only stand on faith without evidence of reason. If this faith is only by the power of God, then it would seem that the use of the reasoning mind is ultimately unreliable for a Christian to give an answer for the hope that is within them and therefore cannot really be expressed in any words. The use of words and communication requires the use of the reasoning mind. Entering into an argument of reasoning is futile and their most sure victory to win the hearts of the world is to use this faith that conquers all reasoning and believe us all into salvation.

Probability of Cognitive Dissonance = 1/0

When I started a student freethought group at UF, I asked our faculty advisor, Prof. of Philosophy Gene Witmer, whose books I should get if I really wanted to read the strongest arguments that theism had to offer. His suggestion?

Richard Swinburne, Oxford philosophy professor, prolific author of serious works of theistic apologetics (e.g., The Existence of God, Is There a God?, Providence and the Problem of Evil)...who has apparently lost his marbles.

He claims in The Resurrection of God Incarnate to have mathematically calculated the likelihood of Jesus' resurrection, using Bayesian probability, at 97%. His logic [lack thereof]?

1. The probably of God's existence is one in two. That is, God either exists or doesn't.
2. The probability that God became incarnate, that is embodied in human form, is also one in two.
3. The evidence for God's existence is an argument for the resurrection.
4. The chance of Christ's resurrection not being reported by the gospels has a probability of one in 10.
5. Considering all these factors together, there is a one in 1,000 chance that the resurrection is not true.

oy vey!

Mark Chu-Carroll has an analysis, if one is even deserved for this kind of madness, which can be summarized thusly:

By a similar argument, I can say that probability of pink winged monkeys flying out of my butt is one in two: that is, either they will fly out of my butt, or they won't. The probability that those monkeys will fly to the home of this Oxford professor and pelt it with their feces is one in two. If pink winged monkeys fly out of my butt, that's an argument for the likelyhood of a fecal attack on his home by flying pink monkeys.

Do I really need to continue this? I don't think so; I'd better go stock up on monkey food in my bathroom.

On another note of sadness, five Mexican children were killed as they prayed at a cross by lightning. Why should we believe there was a God on the other end of those prayers, again? Oh wait, I remember now, everything God does is good, including allowing five children, ages 9-16, to be killed by lightning while offering up prayers and thanksgiving to God. What was I thinking? I'd better go pray for forgiveness...at a plastic cross, of course.

How the Bible Led Me Out of Christianity

What would cause someone to abandon the very thing that saved their life? How could someone who would’ve given everything up for what they believed… give up what they believed in order to gain nothing? My name is Aaron M. Rossetti and this is my conversion and deconversion story.

Introduction
Most of the revelations, perspectives, or philosophies that I’ve had along the journey are not totally original but they very much were to me at the time. Throughout my adventure, I realized certain things on my own and it was only after seeing that I discovered others seeing the same picture. Debunking Christianity is no exception. John and his colleagues within this community have confirmed so many viewpoints and hunches and have solidified my glorious unbelief. I so often thought that I was alone. I want to express my gratitude to everyone that has taken a risk to be a part of this group and share their story.

I certainly am not as well-read as some in this forum of intellects and have no prestigious degrees to dazzle anyone with. My story is simply my story. The path of both my conversion and deconversion was as much experiential as it was intellectual.

*Please keep in mind that some of the ideas presented here are spoken from the perspective that was held at that their corresponding stage of mentioning and are not necessarily the current perspectives of the author. :-) *

The Beginning
Being raised as a Lutheran in suburban America was a great way to grow up. My mom and dad loved me and poured a ton of love and great things into my life. I’m thankful for the chapel services, memory verses, and message of grace that was taught to me growing up. My Christian upbringing would lend a helping hand to the drama to follow in my teen years.

I was always an intense drama and threw myself into everything wholeheartedly… well… that I really felt like doing anyway.

Before Christianity
By age 15, I began the momentum of my flirtation with the drug world. ‘Pot never killed anyone. Ok. Inhale it through this mountain dew bottle, huh? Whatever.’ I didn’t get high the first or second time. Somehow this only made me more curious as to what they were all laughing at and it built up a little determination to really figure it out.

So it started small, as most things seem to, but the once a month or so turned into once a week, then day, then at lunch at school and at work too. Then…I got bored so it was time for the next frontier.

I would go on to do a couple hundred hits of LSD over the next several years. Unless you walked in those shoes, you can’t come close to imagine the insanity that never ceased. Standing numb there laughing in the campfire amidst the smell of your leg hairs burning , being terrifyingly convinced that you were dead and no one could see you, seeing crazy hallucinations, driving like an animal only to spin out into the other lane around the 15mph curve ‘cause you were doing 90, and on and on and on.

All of this excess was bound to lead to emptiness, desperation, and defeat.

Out of the World
There were no angels singing halleluiah, no one else with me, and really no peace that first night that I prayed since I was a child. ‘God, I know I haven’t talked to you for years, but I need you to get me out of this.’ Nothing changed the next morning or even the next month for that matter, but my desire to get out had surfaced.

Over the next year or so would prove to be some of the hardest, but sweetest months of cyclical failures mixed with glorious restorations. No program, church, book, mentor, or friend was there to lead me out of the mess I’d made. It was me and God working it out on our own. That voice of truth within me would eventually come to be known as the only thing of reality in my experience.

Into Christianity
I began reading the book of Proverbs in the summertime for 10min a day before work and not because I was told to, but because I just wanted to. The little ‘nuggets of truth and wisdom’ were encapsulating. Needless to say as things progressed I eventually would become (in my mind) a Christian force to be reckoned with. I delved into the study of the validity of the bible and other logical reasons to believe. RC Sproul, Josh McDowell, and others would hold some of the most glorious arguments for Christ that I’d ever heard. The summer mission projects were an avenue to hundreds of conversations with all kinds about the gospel message of Jesus Christ. I felt unstoppable on my mission for Christ as I lead bible studies, preached door to door, and discipled other men in their walks with God. I used to scoff at the street preachers shouting from park benches… now I was one. Preaching the good news of faith in Jesus being the only way to God to thousands of people can really solidify the faith of a Christian. I prayed the sinner’s prayer with more people than I can remember and it was never a religious conviction. I knew what God had done in my life and my absolute love for Him and my desire to share this awesome truth compelled me at the most sincere heart level. I loved Jesus with everything I was. He saved my life from all the death and despair that bounded me.

I desired full time ministry and felt a call to eventually go. Music had become one of my greatest loves. Writing songs, playing guitar, singing and leading worship provided refreshment every time I played. Things just opened up for me naturally in this area and I was blessed to have recorded three CDs and sold about 1500 or so of them. It wasn’t Christian music as I saw it, but an intimate portrait of my relationship with God. Quitting my full time job three weeks after returning from our honeymoon probably didn’t excite my father-in-law, but I had to do what was in my heart. I guess I would advise anyone that was going to go into full time music ministry to have at least one or two gigs lined up before you up and quit your job (unless of course, you have a huge stash.) Needless to say, my wife had this terrible habit of sleeping indoors and eating at least three times each day. I went back to work.

Hitting a Wall
The next several years spent pursuing material success were driven by a ‘vision from God’ and fueled by positive thinking books and tapes. The ‘positive thinking’ scene and church aided this ‘future millionaire for God’ that was motivated by a passion to advance the kingdom of God. However, I only lasted several years running the 16-18 hour work days that were power packed with everything I could do to ‘make it work.’ But, I only ended up at another dead end that would lead to another year in professional counseling to be added to the three years or so that I went through in years past where I worked through the emotional issues connected with all the drugs, violence, and self-abuse.

Freedom was not in pleasure pursuits. I tried that.
Freedom was not in pursuing success. (even if ‘under the anointing’) I tried that.

By now I knew that truth makes a person free, so I continued on in my quest. Destroyed inside, yes, but my desperation would lead to that which I never permanently found in the world or my faith. Both are temporary and both fail, even if someone never experiences it until death. Even most Christians would agree that they both end in death. (Faith isn’t necessary or possible on planet heaven.) If you see, there’s no need for faith. My death came before the death of the physical body.

So this desperation brought on by the collapse of all my dreams and desires had one pursuit… one question…

Who Am I?
Where to find the answer to this all consuming question of mine was obvious... The Bible.

Over the next several years I pressed into my faith with an all consuming focus and laser eye that I didn’t know was capable within a man. I had a key to the apostolic church that we attended and I used it every morning to unlock the door so I could have a sacred place to pray and work it out with God. The prayers were accompanied by short and long fasts that seemed to really tune in the transmissions from God. My studying the bible 30-40 hours a week would be the road to the pure and ultimate freedom I sought, but…

It didn’t come in the form any of my Christian peers would expect.

The season of discovering my identity in Christ was by far the most revolutionizing study that I believe can be done if a Christian seeks growth in their walk. In my brokenness, I decided to stand and believe the words that pointed me to who I am. Most Christians spend more time explaining the bible than they do believe it (by my experiential observation anyway).

Most every verse dealing with this new creation (not upgraded model) person that I was… was written in the present tense. There was no waiting for planet heaven someday. I realized that the promises were for now. I actually started to see Jesus for who the New Testament writers saw him to be and I actually swallowed the verses that said that…

-I’m a new creature.
-I am a Son of God.
-I am a brother of Christ.
-I have a divine nature.
-Jesus had a God…even after the resurrection.
-Jesus was begotten. (i.e. had a beginning)
-There is only one throne that the Father, Jesus, and me all sit on.
-I am a god.
-I am a king.
-I am a lord.
-If ‘I’ died and his life is lived through me, than I’m Christ.

This is where the great divide happened in my journey out of Christianity. I discovered that I was not only ‘not separated’ from God, but I was ‘not separate’ from God. Unification, ‘Thee in me and I in Thee.’ But… most of the Christian community can’t seem to loose the idea that they are ‘only’ a ‘sinner saved by grace.’ It was pretty clear to this bible believing born again man.

Out of Christianity
I asked every question all over again and the confidence I had gained from the love of the Spirit fearlessly propelled me to look into everything I felt lead to. The same voice that lead me out of the ashes of death and despair was faithful and I trusted and knew that voice to be more sure than every thing, thought, or even idea. The most basic assumptions were called into question. My motto and ‘The truth will stand through every challenge presented to it.’ Though my Christian companions would agree with this motto intellectually, most (if any) put this claim to the rigorous tests I had presented. Maybe the full time and trained ordained ministers that I was associated with had asked and could answer the 180+ questions that I had listed in my questionnaire about the most simple and basic tenants of Christian interpretation of scripture, but there astounded reaction to my submission didn’t give me that impression.

Sure, I got some intellectual explanations as to why this and why that, but no matter what the answer, I seemed to have at least three scriptures that would contradict the explanation. The reason for so many denominations was beginning to become clear.

It’s really pretty easy. Whenever someone gets trapped by the contradicting verses in the bible, all they have to do take the verse that fits their world view literally and then explain the other’s ‘deeper meaning’ or ‘what it’s really means.’ This can become quite a magnificently creative process. They use the ‘original language’ or ‘other versions’ of the bible or any other ‘logical’ reasoning that is first filtered through their faith. Rarely is the response, ‘Hey, good question, maybe my doctrinal stance is incorrect.’

The other way out of apparent contradictions, arguments, and oddities is to classify those verses that are of a physical nature and those of a 'spiritual' nature. The physical beings seen flying around the Old Testament, called angels, have now turned into these nebulous and 'spiritual' beings that visit the faithful to give them strength. The kingdom of God that was to come before some of those with Jesus tasted death is simply a spiritual realm either within the heart of a believer or in another world beyond the reaches of modern science. 'This cup is my blood.' The Roman Catholic Church believes, literally, these words in that when they partake of the sacrament, the blessed wine turns into the literal blood of Jesus Christ, while most Protestants see the 'spiritual' meaning of what Jesus was speaking about. The bible doesn't come out and proclaim which is physical and earthly and which is spiritual and symbolic. This is for the reader to determine.

So... revelations are given by God 'Himself', churches split, prayers are prayed for the lost, arguments ensue, and the invitation of love goes out to all the world bidding them to come into their glorious truth.

See, religious (and other) world views are like a foundational floor that is held up by many stations that carry the load of the intellectual structure or doctrine. If someone sees and investigates a crack in one of the stations, the first column may collapse. It isn’t unheard of for doctrinal positions change by the taking down and rebuilding of columns. It seems that if you continue to drill down and down and even further down in seeking to discover the core that every column crumbles in the round-robin game that the seeker finds themselves playing.

Key Question in the Search for Truth: Can All of What I Believe to be True Fit Together and Never Contradict Itself?

For example:Regarding Identity… ‘I am a sinner’ and ‘I am a new creature that is united and one with Christ’ and ‘Christ is holy and has no sin.’ Let’s do some simple algebra…

‘I’=A, ‘Christ’=B, and ‘Sinner’=C.

Due to the fact that “…he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.”(1 Corinthians 6:17) and the countless other verses showing union as in ‘one,’ then A=B. Therefore, if B does not equal C, then A cannot equal C either. It is therefore impossible for an authentic Christian to be a… C-Sinner.

So, if you’re ‘united with Christ’, it is impossible for you to be a sinner saved by grace, unless of course you’re very confused about who you are as a Christian. The only other option is that if A=C and A=B, then B=C… and I don’t think you’ll find too many Christians who will proclaim Christ to be a Sinner. (As a side for you Christians… can you look into your heart where Christ is seated and into the heavenly places where you are seated with him and please tell me where you end and God begins?)

Anyway… this is only a nano-hint as to the simple and reasonable applications of what would seem to be a reasonable mindset in any other respectable field of discovery. As this kind of recognition continued, all of the columns began to crumble… one doctrine after another. This process can take quite a toll emotionally, but just on the other side of the destruction was the freedom that I was after.

It wasn’t long until I stopped even calling myself a Christian. As I saw it, the Father that I knew would never eternally torment someone for unbelief as is prophesied to occur by most Christians. This confidence of knowing ‘my Father’ and my absolute union with his divine nature that I had received (put the rocks down, Christian, and read your bible… 2 Peter 1:4) gave me the confidence to challenge every single interpretation and assumption made by everyone around me.

When exactly the gospel message turned from ‘you are forgiven’ to ‘you have the opportunity to be forgiven,’ I’m not really sure. A little nugget that helped me get closer to what I was looking for was the revelation that we need to ask, ‘From whose perspective, God’s or man’s?’ How could Jesus take away the sin of the world, but yet put it back on someone that doesn’t believe? Was it eradicated or not?

Parked in front of Krispy Kreme Donuts, tears of repentance flowed down my cheeks. Listening to Acts 10 on mp3, it hit me….

And the vision told him, “What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.” This man Cornelius who worshiped Peter upon his arrival was seen by God as cleansed… BEFORE he ever even heard the gospel message and believed one stinkin’ part of it. The scales fell from my eyes and I saw that God considered everyone cleansed. Period. If that was God’s perspective, I was going to see the same thing. That was when I started to realize that I wasn’t given an ‘extra’ grace of some election that has no choice but to produce the fruit of separation that contaminates the majority of Christian minds today. I realized that we all were one family. (Back ‘er down Christian, I hear the arguments. ‘But what is salvation then if not forgiveness?’)

The only way it could be reconciled with me at the time was that God has the true perspective and we as man have our experience. In order to experience this forgiveness, repentance was necessary. Then the question comes up about the judgment of eternal damnation. Well I would’ve said, ‘You show me a judge that forces someone into solitary confinement in a maximum prison for life after someone paid his fine in full because he didn’t believe it was or needed to be paid and I’ll show you the picture of the modern Christian’s God.’

‘Though they are evil’, they’d free the prisoner and throw that judge in jail for pulling a rotten stunt like that.

I entered a realm where I began to see with ‘the single eye’ that Christ said would fill everything with light. My eye was beginning to see the oneness of all things. I was beginning to see that if it all came out of God, then it was all the substance of God Itself. (by the way… if God is omnipresent which means ‘everywhere,’ how can anyone be separated from God by being put in hell?)

After reading enough scripture, I began to suspect that the claims of inerrancy couldn’t be true. This was all confirmed for me when I did everything I could to reconcile the different resurrection accounts in the 4 gospels. So, if I may digress… here’s a challenge to all the Christians pounding the drum of inerrancy. ..

First, take each gospel and label every event with a letter (i.e. ‘Mary goes to tomb’=A, etc.) Then put all four of them together and watch as the ‘miraculous and divine harmony’ appears before you. Finally, once you’ve got them all together, make a list of everything that would have to be true for your sequence to work. If this all seems a bit daunting or if the response to the inability to do this is ‘hey, it’s just different people’s perspectives of the same event and if we had all the missing details it would make sense. God just values our simple faith even without all the facts,’ then all I have to say is… ‘No, it’s not JUST different people’s perspectives; it is supposed to be the INERRANT WORD OF GOD. And if the resurrection is so paramount within God’s world view and he loved us and wanted us to know the truth and God would know that this simple analysis would be done by simple and logical people, than why did He use words (it’s not MAN’S WORD remember) that would make no sense. If He did, but we have to take 10 years of Greek and study Jewish and Roman history for 20 years to understand all the nuances, then I ask…. Who then can ever know the truth? I guess we could just trust the ‘educated man.’ This advice really sounds like it would come from Jesus, huh? No. The message of Christianity is supposed to be simple… so maybe I was just too complex to figure it out. I guess all the Christians can send a FWD email out to all their Christian brothers and sisters to pray for me everyday until this and the other couple of hundred major contradictions can come into clear view or can just stop to make any difference. Or… just advise me to close my eyes and hit the ‘just have faith, God is a mystery’ button.

OK… back to the story.

I’ll never forget the morning of the day it came crashing down. I woke up around 3:30 in the morning and continued my struggle to reconcile the accounts for an additional 4 hours. By 7:30, I jumped into my car on the peak of mad insanity as I watched it crumble and I wailed with anguished tears… ‘WHAT HAPPENED!?!?!’ I drove off and I wept and asked Him… ‘Did you rise from the dead or not?’ The response in my heart was shocking… ‘I NEVER DIED.’

The voice that was leading me for all those years was certainly not a resurrected god/man who was begotten 2000+ years ago. It was some other mystery that I thought was a god somewhere out in the cosmos that had the ability to talk to everyone simultaneously with everyone individually. He was on another mystery planet picking out curtains for my new house that we built leading people to Jesus.

I took my discoveries and train of thought regarding the resurrection accounts to an ordained minister who basically responded with a, ‘Man, I don’t really know. I wish I had more time to look into it, but I’m pretty busy.’ Honestly, I totally appreciate his honest and frank comment. ‘I don’t really know’ is more often than not the best answer.

The circular reasoning and myriad of contradictions were overwhelming to me when I tried to really put it all together. Every man had a perspective and interpretation and I could understand all of the frames that they were looking through, but I couldn’t get ever get a solid hold on anything. It was slipping away into the nothing that it really is.

As questions persisted with those around me, it was never too far into it that their inability to give a sound and congruent explanation that didn’t contradict with something that they’d said five minutes beforehand; they stepped back, and punted with ‘it’s about faith.’ I had no choice but to interpret this as ‘the mystery of truths presented in the bible just need to be believed and not understood.’ I will never be able to accept such an answer from any person or any book that claims to have ‘the truth’ and ‘the answer.’ If I can’t even understand the simplest claims of Christianity through arduous and diligent study, how can I believe that it’s real?

There are a couple of books more, but I must wrap this thing up. How did I come to be an atheist? There are many reasons, but the crux of how it crystallized with me was simple.

Back Into the World, but Free
Once the union of all things settled in… this God personality disappeared. If this so called omnipresent and all powerful God was infinite, then a personality separate and apart from anything is impossible. If infinity is everywhere, then it ceases to exist and therefore everything can be contained within this environment of infinity of no thing.To give you a visual… if everything was white then white would cease to exist for white can only be known because it is not something else. If it was always day, there wouldn’t be any daytime. It is only night that give us the ability to have a day. If this God is infinite, then there is no distinction and without distinction there can be no definition and without definition the Christian God is dead for the Christian can never say one thing about God’s distinct character and what ‘He’ is or is not like. Infinity excludes nothing… even the ‘unbeliever.’

With infinity we have the environment for everything, an infinite individual separated and apart from the infinity is impossible.

The concept of the Christian God, let alone a God at all, is simply impossible to me. And if the answer that ‘He’ is beyond our understanding and logic, then even if ‘He’ does exist, it is clear that I can never know ‘Him’ and I am forever lost.

What About Christianity?
Christians await anxiously the day when their god named Jesus returns to take their luckily elected souls to eternal bliss and simultaneously judge and banish 99% of all mankind that has ever lived (many of whom will be their family and people they work with) to a realm of eternal torment and suffering. If you have any memories in heaven of your life on earth, then heaven is impossible. Could you live in eternal bliss with the memory of your spouse, children, or grandma frying in hell? Who knows? Maybe you’ll just forget everything and this life was predetermined from the foundation of the world only for the purpose of creating billions of souls… for most to fry and the vast minority to be in eternal bliss. Honestly… I’d rather fry in hell then seek after the molding of my heart after the heart of this god who, being unlimited, could’ve designed it any way that ‘he’ wanted to.

I can’t believe that most, if many, Christians really realize the whole impact of what the say that they believe because I think most, if not all, have the best intensions and a good heart. If they realized what they were saying, their true heart would reject it all together. As a child, it’s harmless and perhaps beneficial to believe that Santa Clause is real, but there comes a time to grow up and see reality. The Christian belief system gave me something to hang on to and if I didn’t believe it, it wouldn’t have worked. My True heart devoured the imaginations of Christianity. Truly… death was swallowed up by Life. If what they are preaching truly sinks in and they still continue in their faith, they are to be most pitied. ‘Forgive them Father; they know not what they do.’

I can’t explain all the mysteries of life. I simply know that convincing me to believe in a ‘God’ again would be like trying to convince Stephen Hawking that our galaxy is the only one that exists. Impossible… he may not understand all of what the Universe is, but he does know what it is not- limited to.