55.Are you aware that your God has threatened (four different times, in four different books of the Bible!) to make people cannibalize their own children as a form of punishment? See: (1) Leviticus 26:29; (2) Deuteronomy 28:53; (3) Jeremiah 19:9; (4) Ezekiel 5:10. II Kings 6:28-29 even tells a story in which someone actually did it (ate her own child)!Would you teach these verses to your children during a home Bible study?Are there other disgusting passages in the Bible (II Kings 9:10, II Kings 18:27) that you believe children should be protected from?What would you think of me if I read these disgusting passages to your child?Shouldn't the Bible be removed from the libraries of elementary schools?What sins or crimes do you believe would justify a sentence of "you must eat your own children?"

And by the way ... doesn't this punish the (innocent) children also?Where is the justice in making them die (and be eaten!) because somebody else has sinned?

In fact, the story of Job illustrates very clearly God's attitude toward children.Job has children; God allows Satan to kill them (as a way of testing Job's faith).At the end of the story (Job 42:13), God "restores" Job's children ... by letting him father some new ones.Got that?God allows Satan to take Job's property ... his sheep, camels, oxen, donkeys, and his children.Then God restores Job's property ... sheep, camels, oxen, donkeys, and his children.

This is great for Job, but what about the human children that God originally allowed to be killed along with the livestock?

Pardon me for not wanting to spend eternity with this twisted son of a bitch (or should I say ... Son of a Bitch?).

Like Father like Son - and if anyone thinks Jesus was a peaceful loving soul, then think again. For an act of adultery, Revelation 2:22-23, Jesus would kill innocent children for the adultery of others; hardly fair justice, love, or the concern for human beings.

Some apologists claim that "children" refers to the followers of a cult of Jezebel and not to children birthed from Jezebel. However, if this proved the case, the situation would appear even more horrific, for a cult of believers could number in the dozens, hundreds, thousands, or more. The deaths of these multitude of cult believers (which would include children within its membership) would only make the moralistic problem far more atrocious.

56.Do you believe the creation account in Genesis? ? Which one?Genesis 1:1ff or Genesis 2:4ff?Sometime, just for fun, try to reconcile these two different accounts of the same incident.

The Creation fable, the Adam and Eve fable, etc. are just that: fables, not records of historical events. They are just pre-scientific stories of how people came about, world creation, how come humans are intelligent and have dominion over the other animals, etc. It is also a metaphorical coming-of-age story which relates how kids become independent adults.

Ask a Scandinavian and he'll tell you that his cultural heritage says our ancestors were Ask and Embla, who were created out of a ash and elm tree by the Aesir gods. Is that any more believable than the Judeo-Christian Genesis creation story?

57.In Exodus 7:13, we read that God wanted Pharaoh to do something, but that God hardened Pharaoh's heart so that he wouldn't listen to God.What does this tell you about the character of your God?

Is it any wonder that the colloquial term "playing God" refers to something one shouldn't do?

Does it not seem the height of absurdity that the God of the Christians, who they say created everything:

"the universe, matter, energy, space and time, the heavens and the earth and all life therein", to whom they endow with omni-everything powers and the capacity to move through time and space at will"

would act in such an illogical fashion?

58.Jesus said that "Whoever is not with me is against me" (Luke 11.23); he also said "Whoever is not against us is for us" (Matthew 9:40).Which statement do you believe?

If you consider the context of those statements you can believe both. The first was said in response to Pharisees trying to discredit him by claiming he was from Satan, the second in response to his own disciples who complained that someone was driving out demons in his name. There is no inconsistency in Jesus' responses once the contexts are understood.

59.Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and Billy Graham's daughter all believe (and have stated publicly) that the attack on the Twin Towers (September 11, 2001) happened because (1) America had become sinful, and was permitting abortion, witchcraft, and lesbianism; (2) God got mad at America; and (3) God "removed his protection" from us.Do you believe this?Do you believe that God killed thousands of New Yorkers that I had never met in my life, just because I and my friends cast a few spells down here in Texas?Is this God worthy of your worship, or your contempt?

This post on the Atheist Empire forum give a far better answer than I could:

I currently reside in the UK. We have adultery, fornication, rape, pornography, abortion, theft, greed, murder, hypocrisy, and drunkenness. We also have cancer, AIDS, and a whole host of other problems.

No earthquakes, war, terrorism, hurricanes tornadoes or droughts though.

Also, in the UK the Jedi Knights outnumber fundamentalist christians by more than 2 to 1 [there are 390,127 Jedi but only about 150,000 fundamentalist christians]. The *average* person in the UK is an atheist. In fact, muslims outnumber fundamentalist christians by a much greater number [accounting for about 3% of the population].

As for the increase in cancer - do I *really* need to post a list of scientifically identified carcinogens and risk factors? Do I *really* need to post a list of scientifically identified genetic correlates and risk factors? Same for AIDS. "Mystified" is not a word I would use.

Thank you, from the bottom of my heart, for proving [as if any doubt remained] that you are an idiot. And no, I don' t think that's an unfair term to use.

Eoghan

60.Do you believe that Jack T. Chick is a Christian?HE thinks he's a Christian (and probably thinks you're NOT).Would you like to spend eternity with him in heaven?

Christianity is not a monoblock of commonality but consists of many different fractions, the main ones being the Orthodox Churches, the Roman Catholic Church, the Fundamentalist Churches, the Protestant Churches and various Fringe churches.

These can be further delineated by interpretive methods into conservative, mainline, liberal and reform, all starting with different assumptions and reaching totally different conclusions.

Because there are so many Christian denominations - 34,000+ according to Religious Tolerance.org - each with a different interpretation of the Bible, it's possible for any two groups, or individuals, to hold diametrically opposed views and still legitimately be classed as Christians.

Although many use the epithet 'true' or 'real' because they are certain that they, or their denomination, have the right interpretation and anyone who holds a different position can not possibly be a 'true' Christian, anyone who fits the definition above can be classed as a Christian.

Don't forget that in their Father's house are many mansions and, whilst you may not agree with the rantings and actions of such sickos as Mother Theresa and Hitler, there is no denying the fact that they were of the Christian faith and their interpretation of that faith allowed them to act the way they did.

61.I read in I Corinthians 5:11 that a Christian should not associate with another Christian who is greedy or who is a "slanderer."It is ordered, by your God, that you shouldn't even eat with such a person.Have you ever obeyed this commandment?Have you ever left the dinner table because a greedy Christian sat down to eat with you?Have you ever seen, or even heard of, anyone who actually obeyed this commandment?

I suspect that very few Christians obey, or have even heard of it.

This is because they are not real Christians, just cultural Christians who have absorbed their faith osmotically while growing up. With their pride and arrogance, borrowed wisdom and false promises, they may claim to be real Christians but have little or no interest or concern about its history, teachings or the meanings of its practices.

62.God has ordered repeatedly (in the NEW Testament) that wives should submit themselves to their husbands (Ephesians 5:22; I Peter 3:1; Colossians 3:18).These commandments are much, much clearer than anything the Bible may say about abortion (and I contend that the Bible says nothing about abortion). ?

Going strictly by the Bible, it is obvious that a wife disobeying a direct order from her husband is a much more serious sin than aborting a fetus. ?

If you are a wife, do you obey this Scriptural commandment? ? If you don't, why do you call yourself a Christian? ?

If you are a Christian husband, do you demand that your wife obey the Lord in this area?If not, why not?Don't you have the guts to demand that your wife live according to the Word of God?Don't you have the guts to exercise authority that was given to you by the creator of the entire universe? ?

Which are you more concerned about: (a) God's commandment or (b) being politically correct?Would you complain if your wife disobeyed the Bible in other areas of her life, for instance, if she committed adultery or murder?

Do you belong to a church where this commandment is regularly disobeyed by the women of the church? ?

Can you explain to me why Christian men protest in public (and commit criminal acts of harrassment) over abortion, but don't protest about disobedient wives?Could it be that modern-day Christians only pretend to live according to the Bible, ignoring the more "difficult" commandments?

I counted nine questions in the above and I think that you've answered them yourself with the final one:

" Could it be that modern-day Christians only pretend to live according to the Bible, ignoring the more "difficult" commandments?"

63.In March 2004, Mel Gibson released a movie about Jesus.All of the actors in the movie speak their lines in either (1) Aramaic or (2) Latin.Neither of these two languages is actually spoken (as the lingua franca) in any country anywhere on earth.Do you think Mel Gibson was stupid for shooting a movie about Jesus in two languages that nobody on earth actually uses in ordinary speech?Do you realize that, for the first time in history, a movie has been made that MUST include subtitles absolutely everywhere it is shown, anywhere on earth?Do you believe that Mel Gibson was on some kind of ego trip, just "showing off," wanting to make a movie that was painfully "authentic" without regard for any practical considerations?

Any discussion of Gibson’s film should pay attention to three important facts:
1. The key statements and representations about Jewish responsibility for Jesus’ death that we find in the New Testament passion narratives have no historical foundation, but are rooted in Christian propaganda.
2. Most of the details of the passion narratives derive from later “theological” interpretations and bear no relation to historical truth.
3. Jesus had no idea of dying for the sins of the world.

A fragment from the oldest surviving copy of the New Testament, dating to the Third century, gives the more mundane 616 as the mark of the Antichrist.

Ellen Aitken, a professor of early Christian history at McGill University, said the discovery appears to spell the end of 666 as the devil's prime number.

"This is a very nice piece to find," Dr. Aitken said. "Scholars have argued for a long time over this, and it now seems that 616 was the original number of the beast."

64.I John 5:16-17 talks about a "sin unto death" that one should not pray about.What sin is that?And please back up your answer with Scripture.

From Pulpit Commentary: "Sin unto death" would obviously be sin we see that the guilty brother continues in; does not repent of! John says, "I do not say that you should pray about that." Why? Because God will not give life to one who continues in sin. "The prayer of one human being can never cancel another's free-will. If God's will does not override man's will, neither can a fellow-man's prayer. When a human will has been firmly and persistently set in opposition to the Divine will, our intercession will be of no avail. And this seems to be the meaning of "sin unto death; "willful and obstinate rejection of God's grace and persistence in unrepented sin."

There, isn't that much clearer?

65.Which of the big-time evangelists do you trust, and which do you think are phonies?Robert Tilton?Billy Graham? Peter Popoff? Benny Hinn? Marilyn Hickey?John Agee? John Ankerberg?

None of them. In fact, I can't remember the last time I heard a television preacher who
(1) talked about God but
(2) did NOT ask me for money.

66.In the gospel according to Matthew, which was written around 65 CE, we are promised that the second coming of Jesus will be very soon (Matthew 24:34;); in fact, Christians in the First Century C.E. thought he would return during their own lifetimes (II Thessalonians 2:1-2).Well, about 19 centuries have come and gone ... do you still believe that Jesus is actually going to return?When?In another 19 centuries, perhaps?Do you believe that it could be "any day now?"If your answer is "yes," do you believe that the revelation of the "man of sin" has already occurred (II Thessalonians 2:3)—which is a prerequisite for the second coming? ? Who do you believe the "man of sin" to be?When and where (and how) was he revealed?

And speaking of the Rapture ... have you left your Rapture letter for the benefit of those of us who will be Left Behind?

By the time the authors of Matthew and Luke wrote their own gospels, not first-hand accounts but heavily plagiarized from Mark, including the passage predicting that the world would soon end

Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

it had become abundantly clear that the world was carrying on as usual and had definitely not ended, and that Christians would be in for a very long wait.

So, something was required to keep the faithful happy while they were waiting for his delayed return and to stop his followers from drifting away. After all, why believe in someone who can't even fulfill his own prophecy? Membership must have been dwindling so something had to be found to act as a good selling point for the faith.

Picture the scene ~ a conversation between two priests, Hezron and Matthat:

"We've got to face facts, we backed the wrong one. He's not coming back, is he?"

"No he's not. I always thought that one was unreliable, what with cursing a fig tree and encouraging his friends to steal a horse. What are we going to do now, pack this in and get proper jobs?"

"WHAT! You must be joking! Listen Matthat, my grandad didn't do all that work on Leviticus, making sure that the priests got the pick of the crop and the best of everything, for us to throw it all away just because its not true . This is the plan: we'll declare him to be "the messiah", "the anointed one", "the Christ" or whatever, that everyone has been waiting for.

You have a word with Matthew. He's got a copy of Marks' book. Tell him to add in a genealogy "proving" that Jesus is related to that randy David. He's a good lad with plenty of imagination. I'll do the same with Luke."

"What a great idea, Hezron! It won't even matter if they don't match. There'll always be someone who'll believe what we tell them, dispite the contradictions and inconsistencies."

"Now you're catching on, Matthat! That should keep them happy for a while. After that we'll start crediting Jesus with being a god. Why should the pagans have all the good myths? Give him a virgin birth, a few miracles, a crucifixion and resurrection, maybe even a fulfilled prophecy."

The Jesus Seminar has estimated that the Gospel of Matthew was written about 85 CE.

67.Are you aware that there are many pre-Christian myths about a god-man who comes to earth, is born of a virgin, sacrifices himself, and is resurrected?That some of those pre-Christian myths include stories about the miraculous feeding of multitudes, the healing of sick people, and walking on water? ?

Do you have an explanation for how these stories, which existed before Jesus was ever born, could be so similar to the Gospel accounts?

Jesus Christ comes from the same template as other mythical deities like Mithras, Attis, Asclepius, and many other similar figures.

Even if Jesus really did exist as some sort of historical figure beneath the many legends and inauthentic sayings later attributed to him by others, the historian's reconstruction remains a fiction, the hypothesis that Jesus existed can never be verified. and the personal savior of pious subjectivity is a case of projection, an imaginary play-mate, when it is not merely a piece of shorthand referring to devotional prayer and bible reading.

"Jesus" has become a banner standing for a number of debateable and extraneous questions, and Christians refuse to deal with those questions. Many Christians say you are against Jesus or Christ when you oppose their political views, their theological opinions, their interpretations of the bible.

68.Do you believe that a person who is 99.999% morally perfect, and commits only a few minor sins in his lifetime (no murder, rape, theft, adultery, or violence) deserves to suffer in hell for all eternity, just because he fails to "accept Jesus" (a term that's interpreted 8,000 ways by 6,000 different Christian groups)?If it were up to you—if you had the power to make the decision—would YOU sentence Mr. 99.999% to an afterlife of perpetual suffering?If your answer is "yes," why do you think this is fair?Do you realize that your God would send such a person to hell, forever?Are you perhaps more merciful and compassionate than your own God?

What if the only sin he ever committed in his whole life was planting a field with two different kinds of seed (Leviticus 19:19)?When he dies ... hell, or no hell?

Fundie mode on

UNDERSTAND THAT YOU CANNOT SAVE YOURSELF
As a lost Hell bound sinner you are incapable of saving yourself and you need a Saviour.

The Bible teaches that: "NOT BY WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS WHICH WE HAVE DONE, but according to his mercy HE SAVED US."(Titus 3:5)"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that NOT OF YOURSELVES: it is the gift of God: NOT OF WORKS, lest any man should boast."Eph. 2:8-9

Did you truly understand that you could do nothing to save yourself?Referring back to Matthew 7:21-23, imagine yourself standing before Christ on that dreadful day of judgment.Imagine that he is on the verge of casting you into Hell.In an act of fearful desperation, what would you say? ? What actions or deeds would you trust, and mention, in an effort to justify yourself and save your soul from Hell?Be honest with yourself.Would you say something along the following lines?

Perhaps you can add a few things to the ones mentioned. ?

But, remember, they all represent something you are trusting in to save you.To which Jesus will say: "I NEVER KNEW YOU: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."Matthew 7:23

Fundie mode off

69.Which do you believe is more psychologically harmful to a child: being sexually fondled by an adult, or being threatened with eternal, unending torture in a burning, fiery hell?

You can only feel sorrow for what so many must be going through right now and every day of thier lifes, believing in such a monstrous god that would torture even one person let alone the billions that they know will never believe in their religious dogmas.

What a living nightmare it must be for any compassionate, caring person to seriously believe in such a horribly cruel and vicious monster of a deity committing atrocities of torture that would turn the stomachs of all decent human beings. It must be very difficult for Christians to really think about what they believe and still acknowledge the value and worth of each and every individual person.

Have you ever read the Old Testament? There is no mention of hell there. The fact is that hell and the devil were invented by Christians and are part of the "carrot and stick" technique used by Christians to recruit more sheep and help control those that are already part of the "flock".

70.Do you believe that witches are Satan-worshippers? ? If so, why?Do you assume for some reason that modern-day witches are lying when they say they don't believe in Satan? ? Would you actually be disappointed if witches didn't believe in Satan, thus ruining your preconceived notions about them?

As most of my preconceived notions about witches and Wicca involve dancing naked in the moonlight - something I heartily approve - I asked Alicorn for a guest article :-

"Most of the confusion of what Wicca is about comes from the movie industry. It never ceases to amaze me how many young people come to the different sites looking for spells that they've seen on tv and in the movies. They expect when they get a spell book, that they should immediately be able to cast spells of flying, transportation, and vanquishing monsters and demons. And when they find to thier surprise that none of these special effects happen, they come seeking us out to find where they went wrong. Most of the time, they leave disappointed and angry when we inform them that these things don't happen. No sparks, no super human strength, and no monster fights outside of daily life's ups and downs."

"You may view Wicca as a group of people who dress in black, worship idols, chant in arcane languages, and dance around a bonfire under the full moon. And in a few cases, you may be right. But you can also find people of any religion wearing black cloth, you will find idols in side any established church you go to, Latin is an acceptable language in the Catholic Church, and very few religions have yet to outlaw outdoor and public dancing and celebrations of religious holidays. The only difference between those beliefs and Wicca is that Wicca has been around much longer. Also, between those beliefs and Wicca is that Wicca has been around much longer. Also, most of our religious holidays are also observed by many other religious beliefs, but they have changed the names of these holidays."

71.In I Samuel 16:14, we read that "an evil spirit from the Lord" troubled King Saul.Why do you worship a God who sends evil spirits to trouble people?How would you like it if he sent one of his evil spirits to trouble YOU?

"When a religion has fallen and been succeeded by another, the more zealous advocates of the new belief sometimes find themselves in a curious state of embarrassment. So it is with regard to the heathen system and the Christian code. Among the numerous oracles given to the world in former days, some have chanced to find a remarkable accomplishment; and the pious but ill-judging Christian, unable to ascribe them to deities in whom men no longer believes, is driven to create for them a different origin. 'God,' says Rollin, 'in order to punish the blindness of the heathen, sometimes permits evil spirits to give responses conformable to the truth.' (Rollin, Histoire Ancienne, I, 887.)

The only evil spirit which had an agency in the oracular responses of antiquity was that spirit of craft imposture which finds so congenial a home among an artful and cunning priesthood."
Anthon, Classical Dictionary, 4th ed., p. 929; Art. Orv alum.

72.If your own child disobeyed you, would you lock him in an oven, set the temperature to 550, and turn it on?Is it possible that you have better moral sense than the God of the Bible?

Why ground disobedient children? Simply have them ripped to bloody shreds by bears.

2Kings 2:23-24 [NIV]:
"Elisha left Jericho to go to Bethel and on the way some boys came out of a town and made fun of him. "Get out of here, Baldy!" they shouted. Elisha turned around, glared at them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the boys to pieces."

73.Do you believe that some of the commandments in the Old Testament don't apply to Christians?Which ones?Does the OT commandment against adultery apply to modern-day Christians? ? What about the commandment not to wear clothing woven of two different kinds of material (Leviticus 19:19)?Why does one OT commandment apply and not the other?How do you decide which Old Testament commandments are still valid?

Unfortunately, Christians can't have it both ways. If they're released from the law, then they're released from the Ten Commandments, too. But, if they obey the Ten Commandments because it's in the Bible, then they should be obeying the dietary laws, because those are in the Bible, too.

This obvious contradiction helps explain some fundamental misunderstandings many Christians have of their own faith, and the true ramifications of the faith to which they pay lip service.

Here are some common Christian arguments to explain this "contradiction" and the problems with them:

1. "We don't have to follow the dietary laws because they were given to the Jews."
Response: Well, the Ten Commandments were given specifically to the Jews as well, so if it's an argument to discard any law, it's an argument to discard all the laws.

2. "God's laws don't necessarily apply to this day and age."
Response: The problem with this argument is that God never specified a time frame of obedience in the Bible. How do we know when the "day and age" of a particular law is over? Is morality really so fluid?

3. "Picking and choosing which laws we obey is not a matter of changing morality, but a matter of practicality. Some laws were moral. Others were practical."
Response: The problem again is that God didn't specify this in the Bible. He just said to do it.

4. "Christ is my sacrifice for all time. That releases me from the law."
Response: That would be a license to sin all you want until you die.

74.Around the time Jesus was born, Herod ordered the murder of innocent children (Matthew 2:16); in the time of Moses, God killed the firsborn of every household (Exodus 11:4-5) ? —innocent children.How is God morally superior to King Herod?

Herod was sometimes a murderous king, but did he really order thisWe only have those few lines in Matthew?s gospel as evidence of the ?slaughter of the innocents?. The gospel of St Luke confirms that Jesus was born in the time of Herod but doesn?t mention the mass killing of the baby boys. Josephus, from whom we know so much about Herod and who delights in cataloguing the king?s darker deeds, never mentions the slaughter at all.

75.In I Corinthians 15:29, we read about being baptized for the dead.What does this mean, please?

From what I've researched, this is nothing more than a poor translation from the Greek into the English. The passages relate to some at Corinth who believed there was no resurrection from the dead.

Paul says he saw the resurrected Christ in vision and all things are to be put under control of Jesus and Christ will subdue his enemies and put everything under His Father, God.

Paul states in verse 29, after everything is in control by God, "Why else would people be baptized, just to be dead?", i.e. no resurrection. . Then Paul says " . . . if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized, for the dead?" (or just be dead?)

Paul is simply stating that there is no reason to be baptized if you are not to be resurrected. Verse 29 is just a bad English in the King James translation.

76.Matthew 7:1 orders Christians not to pass judgment. ? I Corinthians 2:15 says that a spiritual man passes judgment on everything.Which is it?A Christian being judgmental ? —is that good or bad?

?Love your enemies and turn the other cheek.? is another sentiment which sounds admirable but is so often ignored by Christians.

Christians are very judgemental - and we've got the corpses to prove it, the cultures wiped off the face of the earth, families and communities torn apart. Christians have historically killed more people than any other religion, though Islam is catching up - convert or die is pretty judgemental.

Then again, their Jesus said he came to bring the sword and not peace.

77.In 1994, Christian singer Michael English, then 32, won six "Dove Awards" for his music.He later gave them back, saying it was because of "mistakes" he had made.In fact, he had been carrying on an adulterous relationship with one Marabeth Jordan, another "Gospel singer" who was also married (they hooked up while they were on a tour together, raising money for a home for unwed mothers. It was during this tour that Mr. English impregnated Ms. Jordan).Question: Do you have any Michael English recordings in your possession?Do you plan to keep them, or destroy them?If one of his songs were playing on the radio (how about "Mary Did You Know?"), would you turn it off? ? Would you allow your children to listen to his music?

Fundie mode on

Music is very important in the spiritual life of a child of God. And the wrong music can spiritually destroy the child of God.

I ask you to prayerfully obey, 1 Thess. 5:21-23, "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Abstain from all appearance of evil. And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."

Fundie mode off (Actually, I've never heard of Michael English, Marabeth Jordan or the Dove Awards)

Just bear in mind that the volume of one's public piety is the worst possible indicator of the power of one's private faith.

78.Jesus said that a sparrow can't fall to the ground unless it's God's will (Matthew 10:29).How do you explain catastrophes such as the destruction of the Twin Towers, or the 2004 earthquake in Bam, Iran, which caused the deaths of 31,000 people?Obviously, these things happened because God wanted them to happen.How do you think God decides where (and when) these horrible events will occur?What did these 31,000 Iranians, some of them infants less than a week old, do to deserve a violent death?

Why doesn't God send an earthquake to San Francisco to kill all the queers?Or cause an earthquake at a prison, so that violent criminals will die?Why doesn't God put these natural disasters to some good use, instead of making them appear to be random (exactly the way they would occur if he didn't exist)?

Here's a poem for you:

God's will

It was that phrase, amongst others, plus the mind-set behind it that helped me, many years ago, to first question, then reavaluate and finally abandon my Christian faith.

From Tess ~ The Happy Humanist

An airplane faltered, then fell from the sky;
Eighty-nine died. A collective sigh.
"It's God's will"

A terrible flood, but all were saved
by rescuers strong, fearless and brave.
"It's God's will"

A child was starved, beaten, then died.
They buried her deep, and adults cried.
"It's God's will".

A little one found ~ he wasn't quite dead.
The people thanked heaven, and then of course said,
"It's God's will".

Millions can suffer in earth's darkest holes,
Yet millions keep saying that God's in control.
The greatest good, or the greatest ill,
"Why don't you know? It's all God's will".

"God's will" is a phrase they mindlessly use,
So no matter what happens, God can't lose!
Absurd contradictions their intellects kill.

We atheists work with a human will.
Sifted through reason, the finest of screens,
This is what God talk really means:
All of us born to a world cold and stark;
Most remain "children crying in the dark"

79.If a person is "saved," can he later become "unsaved," that is, lose his salvation?

The answer is no:
Romans 11:29 indicates that a gift from God (which salvation is, per Ephesians 2:8) is irrevocable.And Romans 8:1 says that there is no condemnation for Christians.

The answer is yes:
Hebrews 6:4-8 says that there can be a "falling away" that results in a loss of salvation—it's referred to as "being cursed" and "burned."

So which do you believe?Is it possible, or impossible, to lose one's salvation?

Many seem to cling to an aberrant extension of Calvinism; they believe that before the creation of the universe, all men were indeed predestined to be either among God’s elect or were unregenerate outcasts.

They've introduced a perversion to Calvinism — its technical name is “supralapsarianism.” It means essentially that the man called from before the foundation of the world to be one of the elect of God’s people, can do no wrong.

Of course, the position is philosophically illogical and impossible. Nevertheless, it satisfies those who have a tendency to refuse all logic against Scripture

80.Matthew 5:48 says that I should be perfect, just as God is perfect; Ephesians 5:1 says that I should imitate God.How should I go about doing this?Perhaps by killing an infant who is the product of adultery (II Samuel 12:15-16)?Even if the child's father begs for mercy?Perhaps I should stand by and do nothing while six million innocent Jews die in gas chambers? ? Perhaps I should impregnate a virgin I've never been married to (Luke 1:31)?Perhaps I should contact all the people I claim to love and threaten them with eternal fiery torture?Maybe I should watch a tsunami start, out in the middle of the ocean, and sit on my ass and do nothing for two solid hours as it approaches land ... where 150,000 unsuspecting people are about to die ... and not warn anybody?

And speaking of impregnating a virgin I'm not married to ... that "affair" between Mary and God sounds like fornication to me, and according to the Deuteronomic laws, both Mary and God must be stoned to death (Deuteronomy 22:23-24).Can God make a rock so big that He Himself can be stoned to death by it?

Which reminds me ... the Bible says that Jesus never sinned (Hebrews 4:15).My question is: What if he had sinned ... gone into a whorehouse for ten minutes and gotten his cane varnished, for instance?Since he's God (John 10:30; Colossians 2:9), isn't it true that anything he does is, by definition, NOT a sin? ? Like when Big God kills a bunch of innocent people?That's not a sin, is it?So if Jesus (aka God) stabbed a guy to death for no reason, it's not a sin, since he's God, and God has the right to take a person's life for no reason (the way he does thousands of times every day), right?Isn't it theologically impossible for Jesus to sin?

If you murder or steal you are breaking the law but, no, you are not sinning. The concept of 'sin' is a religious construct and, to paraphrase the Catholic Encyclopedia, is defined as:

"things we do that fall short of God's standard of perfection and holiness. We sin by disobeying God's commands. We sin by ignoring God. We sin by doing things contrary to the nature and character of God; an offense against God by any thought, word, deed or omission."

Do you see the problem with the biblical concept of sin?

You have to prove conclusively that the god of the Christian Bible exists. Can you do that? Can you make the angels sing and Ingersoll weep?

Without concrete proof of His existence how can we possibly know if anything is contrary to the nature and character of God?

Then you have to define and prove conclusively that God actually has a standard of perfection and holiness. Anyone care to give that one a try?

Try to construct Gods standard of perfection and holiness from your bible without filtering His actions through theologically rose-tinted glasses and you're in for a shock of epic proportions.

81.In John 14:12, Jesus says that his followers (Christians) will do greater works than he did—that is, greater things than (1) healing lepers, (2) walking on water, (3) feeding five thousand people with a few loaves and fishes, etc.Suppose I tell you that Jesus lied.Can you show me even one Christian, anywhere on earth, who is fulfilling this "doing greater works" prediction?

And if you say "Benny Hinn" I'll bitch-slap you.

Top Ten Reasons Why Beer Is Better Than Jesus

10. No one will kill you for not drinking beer.
9. Beer doesn't tell you how to have sex.
8. Beer has never caused a major war.
7. They don't force beer on minors who can't think for themselves.
6. When you have beer, you don't knock on people's doors trying to give it away.
5. Nobody's ever been burned at the stake, hanged, or tortured to death over his brand of beer.
4. You don't have to wait 2,000+ years for a second beer.
3. There are laws saying that beer labels can't lie to you.
2. You can prove you have a beer.
1. If you have devoted your life to beer, there are groups to help you stop.

82.Are you aware that there are many Christian documents that were written during the First Century C.E. (such as the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel of Thomas, The Shepherd, the Didace) that aren't part of the Bible?Are you aware that the decisions as to which writings would be included in the Christian Bible were made over 1600 years ago?Tell me everything you know about (1) those book-choosing/book-rejecting people in the Fourth Century C.E. and (2) the decision-making processes that they used, and explain to me why you trust them so much (can you name even one of them?).Aren't you terribly worried that some of what's in your Bible doesn't belong there, or that there's something left out that is very important?Aren't you taking a huge leap of faith ... not with regard to your God, but with regard to the Fourth-Century folks who cobbled together the Bible?

You have to remember that many have had their critical thinking skills incapacitated by having faith in unbelievable, incredible, preposterous claims and assertions. Those claims and assertions are untenable and unproven and, in all liklihood, unprovable. If they can have faith in the inerrancy of the literal Bible, then they have to be self-deluded to the point of a loss of sanity: dementia, psychosis, paranoia, schizophrenia, delusions, hallucinations, dementia, madness, manic disorder, deranged, lunacy, or mania.

Come to think of it, all of those psychological disorders seem like Christendom promoted virtues...

83.Leviticus 18:22 says that homosexuality is an abomination (a really, really bad sin).Question: If God decided tomorrow that heterosexuality is a sin, would you stop being a heterosexual?Could you stop being a heterosexual just because God commanded you to stop?

Lutheran Bishop Olson - "Of course homosexuality is not a sin. God could not care less about humanly devised categories that label and demean those who do not somehow fit into the norm of those in control. God made all of us and did not make all of us alike. Diversity is beautiful in creation. How we live our lives in either affirming or destructive ways is God's concern, but not being either homosexually oriented or heterosexually oriented is neither a divine plus or minus.

The New Testament is full of verses that speak of the work of Jesus Christ in creating a new unity beyond our divisions. Paul writes, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:27,28). The Gospel is vastly more inclusive than we often imagine or have been taught."

84.Romans 1:20 says that God's invisible qualities can be figured out by looking at what he created.What invisible qualities of your God have you divined from studying his creation (we're NOT talking about anything you read in the Bible)?And how did you arrive at your conclusions?What part of creation tells you that it makes sense that God would murder his only-begotten son because other people (not his son) disobeyed him?

85.Have you ever studied church history—the Inquisition, the witch burnings, the Crusades, the selling of indulgences, the Popes who fathered illegitimate children?How do you feel about these things?Do they make you ashamed to belong to such an ugly tradition?Why isn't church history ever taught in church? ? (The Protestants, of course, would have to admit that for many centuries, the Catholic church was the only boat afloat.)

One thing that I find amazing is how those who practice and preach religion can have such a blind spot when it comes to their own holy books and their religion's history.

Biblically based religions are double-sided because if you're inclined towards love, goodness and mercy, you will find plenty of scriptures to encourage you to follow that sort of life, but if you're inclined to vengance, force and violence, you can find biblical justification for those beliefs too.

The atrocities committed by Moses, Joshua, David, Gideon and others who are held in high esteem, were surely equivalent to the barbarities committed by the Nazis, Milosevic and so many others who seek to justify their malevolent atrocities by using their god or their religion as an excuse.

86.Romans 2:13 says that those who obey the law will be declared righteous.Galatians 2:21 says that if righteousness could be gained through the law, then Christ died for nothing. ? Which do you believe?Did Christ die for nothing?

If Jesus actually existed and if He was nailed to a stake then, yes, He did die for nothing.

Throughout the Old Testament there's no reference to "original sin" or the "curse and Fall," or of eternal damnation on account of that or of anything else.

Can anyone tell me why that is?

Moses, the supposed writer of Genesis, never includes the "curse of Adam" in the catalogue of curses and threats he was so found of hurling. Nor does any other OT priest or prophet even hint at Adam's curse, the Fall, or eternal damnation in hell fire.

Why do you think that is?

Hell and its fire are totally non-existent in the entire Hebrew listings of penalties and punishments.

Neither JC, or any of the four writers of the so-called gospels, utters a word about Adam, the talking snake, the curse, the Fall, or of "redemption" by Jesus Christ for any sin of Adam.

Does anyone else find that odd.

87.Are you aware that the New Testament gives us no reason to think that the believers in the early church ever referred to themselves as Christians?The word "Christian" is used only three times in the New Testament (Acts 11:26, Acts 26:28, I Peter 4:16), and the context strongly indicates that "Christian" was an insult.Why do you think people today who believe in Jesus call themselves Christians?

The original followers of Jesus were not called Christians, they were called Nazarenes and/or Ebionites and were led by “James the Just,” the oldest brother of Jesus.

They lifted a whole lot of their beliefs - baptism, repentance, a new covenant, a messianic, apocalyptic believing leader, etc. from the messianic Essenism movement which appeared over 150 years before the supposed birth of Jesus.

The term "Christian" was first used in Acts Chapter 11 to describe the disciples of Paul.

Because the early Christians considered that the Nazarenes - i.e."true Christians" - held heretical beliefs, they held no qualms about manifesting their Christian love towards them by persecutions, banishment and slaughter.

88.In Proverbs 26:4, God orders you not to answer a fool according to his folly.In the very next verse, Proverbs 26:5, God orders you to do the exact opposite—that is, he orders you to answer a fool according to his folly.Let's say you have decided to live your life according to God's Holy Word, and you are confronted with a fool (and you've decided to answer him).What do you do?

You have to let the verses speak for themselves. The facts here are that one verse says "answer not a fool according to his folly" and the next says "answer a fool according to his folly." You can't do both. True, it does say that by answering a fool you sink down to his level, but then it tells you to do so to stop him from being arrogant. But again, you can't answer him and not answer him without contradiction.

89.The Bible that you carry and study and memorize consists of 66 "books."Why aren't more Bible "books" being written today?If I told you that a certain writing from, say, 1997, should be considered Scripture, on a par with Colossians and II Thessalonians, on what basis would you dispute me?How do you know I'm wrong?

Come to think of it, how do you know that it was appropriate to include II John in the Bible?How do you know it was right to exclude the Gospel of Peter?

The "New Testament Authors" were not writing the Bible. They were writing their own opinion pieces. Others collected those books and epistles as the Bible, proclaimed them inerrent, inspired by God, infallible, sacred, holy, inviolable, hallowed, blessed, et cetera. The earliest "Bible" was a syllabus of other books and epistles to refer to. Eventually, those separate books and epistles were put together into what we call "the Bible", or any particular version of, today.

The early Catholic Church decided which books are in the Bible after it's formation in 325 CE. The books were added based on political power of the now-state-endorsed-cults. Those Christian cults that were ostracized from the new Catholic Church continued to be persecuted, but now Christian persecution meant persecutions of Christians by Christians, backed by the power of the Roman government, based on doctrinal conflict.

The earlier Christian cults had no uniform scripture. Many cults held to one gospel, or book, or oral tradition, or set of epistles. They developed very different and incompatible ideas of what a "Christian" was, and what was important.

Thus the vast doctrinal differences between the Catholic Church, the Coptic Church and the Assyrian Church. All of which were formed fairly independently in the primordial period of Christiandom. The Roman Catholic Church and the Greek Orthodox Church schism came about much later.

90.Genesis 2:17 tells us that God ordered humans not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.Why would God not trust humans with such knowledge, but rather give it to ... a piece of fruit?The Bible records that Eve ate the fruit because she wanted to gain wisdom (Genesis 3:6); God commands us to obtain wisdom (Proverbs 4:5).Which do you believe ... that God wants us to gain wisdom, or doesn't want us to gain wisdom?

Keep in mind that the story of Genesis is not a historical event. It is fiction. The "original sin" is a metaphor of the Bible's doctrine of humans falling from grace and "original sin" is supposed to explain the dismal conditions of life in the Judaic agrarian society, and an theological explanation to explain why death is part of the human condition.

91.Suppose a woman told you that her husband was gracious and loving because he promised not to kill her if she served him for the rest of her life.You'd think she was a brainwashed slave, and that he was a sicko.Yet your God offers YOU this exact same choice.The question is: Why do you believe that a choice between (a) loving your god and (b) eternal torture is a legitimate choice offered by a loving deity?

From DEADLY DOCTRINE Edited by Newton Joseph,Ph.D.

Christian indoctrination is not simply a problem affecting individuals or single families; the noxious effects of its teaching over nearly two millennia pervades society at large, even those who are not Christians, and in ways that seriously undermine human welfare and the quality of life (read Vietnam Why Did We Go? and the Vatican's Holocaust by Avro Manhattan).

Christianity's aggressive pronatalist policies have encouraged large families despite parent's ability to cope either emotionally or financially. With this the Christian church has formulated rigid sexual roles, forbidding all practices not leading directly to conception. By actually promoting sexual ignorance and irresponsibility, Christianity has allowed the proliferation of such social ills as rape, child molestation and pornography.

92.A part of you might be hoping there's a passage in the Bible that says children don't go to hell.Keep reading; you won't find it.If Biblegod wanted you to know this, wouldn't he have mentioned it somewhere in the Bible?

Do you believe that a six-year-old who dies "without Christ" will be tortured in hell forever?If you believe that he CAN get to heaven "without Christ," WHY do you believe this?It's not in your Bible.

40% of all pregnancies end in spontanious abortions i.e.miscarriages. If the fetus is a human life because it has been given a "soul" and abortion is a "crime against humanity", why aren't the anti-abortionists demanding that these 'humans' be located and properly buried with Christian rites?

Also, if the unbaptized are damned and go to hell and nearly half of human pregnancies do not make it to term, that makes God the biggest abortionist and is thereby committing countless "crimes against humanity".

Now, if God knows everything and everything happens according to His will then His will is that countless babies are created just to be punished for eternity. If one believes that abortion is tantamount to murder, therefore, it would seem to follow that God is by far the biggest mass-murderer in history.

93.Are you aware that your God has screwed up at least ten times (according to his own book ... the one he wrote) so badly that he repented?See Genesis 6:7, Exodus 32.14, Judges 2:18, I Samuel 15:35, II Samuel 24:16, I Chronicles 21:15, Psalm 106:45, Jeremiah 26:19, Amos 7:3, Amos 7:6 (you'll want to use the KJV to see the word "repent" or a variation thereof). ? Why does an omniscient God change his mind so much?

And speaking of omniscience/omnipotence ... if (a) God wants everything to be righteous and perfect and (b) God is truly omnipotent yet (c) everything is not righteous and perfect, at this very moment, even as we speak ... then there must be some other thing that God wants even more than for everything to be righteous and perfect.Any ideas on what that other thing might be?

And still speaking of omnipotence ... are you aware that the Bible itself records an incident when there was something that God COULD NOT DO?See Judges 1:19 (Biblegod can't overcome iron chariots).

I would not like to be in God's shoes when His 10,000 year review comes around:

God's area manager: " Yahveh! Get in here! You've some 'splainin' to do! How come you've managed to commit all the Seven Deadly Sins and what's this I hear about you meddling in evolution?

You know company policy on evolution is: amoeba - creationist - ape - human - theist - atheist - star child...."

94.Do you believe that the Ten Commandments should be displayed in public schools?If so, why?Why do you consider it to be important?Do you understand why people see a conflict between the First Amendment and the practice of displaying the Ten Commandments in tax-supported buildings?What if a second-grader read the Ten Commandments (on the monument in front of his school) and then asked his teacher to explain "adultery" to him?That's certainly a Biblical topic.How would you want your daughter's first-grade teacher to explain the sin of fucking somebody else's wife?

Do you think there's a big problem in our grade schools these days with kids committing adultery and carving idols during school hours?

And by the way ... did you know that the Biblically-prescribed punishment for disobedience of each of the first seven commandments is death?Would you support the death penalty for violation of these commandments?If not, why not?Are you smarter than God?Would you agree that if we post the Ten Commandments on the courthouse lawn, we should also include a statement that God demands that any violators be killed?Would that be a good "moral lesson" for your children?Wouldn't you agree that ideological consistency requires that, if we acknowledge the legitimacy and power of the Ten Commandments in our society, we must also make known the punishments that God demands?

And if your answer is "no," why are you proud of one part of the Word of God, but ashamed of another part?

Suppose there's a county in California where the majority religion is Islam.Would there be anything wrong with them erecting a monument on the courthouse lawn that reads, "There is only one God, and Allah is his name, and Mohammed is his only prophet"?

Of course, they'd set it up in some prominent place, where everybody would have to look at it.

Which "Ten Commandments" are the Ten Commandments - the ones listed at Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5, or the ones listed at Exodus 34? Only the list at Exodus 34 is explicitly called the "Ten Commandments" in the biblical text.

I count 29 commandments in the decalogue.
1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
2. Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image.
3. Thou shalt not make any manner of likeness of any thing that is in heaven above.
4. Thou shalt not make any manner of likeness of any thing that is in the earth beneath.
5. Thou shalt not make any manner of likeness of any thing that is in the water under the earth.
6. Thou shalt not bow down unto any likeness.
7. Thou shalt not serve any likeness.
8. Thou shalt not take the name of the lord thy god in vain.
9. Thou shalt remember the sabbath day and keep it holy.
10. Thou shalt not work on the sabbath.
11. Thou shalt not let your son do work on the sabbath.
12. Thou shalt not let your daughter do work on the sabbath.
13. Thou shalt not let your manservant do work on the sabbath.
14. Thou shalt not let your maidservant do work on the sabbath.
15. Thou shalt not let your cattle do work on the sabbath.
16. Thou shalt not let your stranger within your gates do work on the sabbath.
17. Thou shalt honor thy father.
18. Thou shalt honor thy mother.
19. Thou shalt not murder.
20. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
21. Thou shalt not kidnap.
22. Thou shalt not bear false witness.
23. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house.
24. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife.
25. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's manservant.
26. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's maidservant.
27. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's ox.
28. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's ass.
29. Thou shalt not covet anything that is thy neighbor's.

Some of them have merit in keeping a community together by setting ground rules for social interaction. Some of them are theocratic. Remember, Judaism back then was a theocratic form of government, and its theocracy is comingled with its theology.

95.Exodus 20:17 (commandment #10 of the Ten Commandments) gives a list of property that belongs to your neighbor, which you're ordered not to covet.The list includes your neighbor's house, his servants, his ox, his donkey ... and his wife. ? If you are a married man, do you consider your wife to be your property?If your answer is "yes," does your wife know about your attitude?Are you aware that many women are deeply offended that your God includes them in a property list along with domesticated animals and servants ("servants" being humans that are owned as slaves, with God's blessing)?Doesn't this betray God's crummy attitude toward women in general?Some Christians want to display the Ten Commandments in public schools.Do you think it's a good idea for a modern-day third-grader to grow up thinking that one's wife is property?

And speaking of God's attitude toward women ... did you know that he created Eve as an afterthought?Take a look at Genesis 2:18-22 (which may be one of my all-time favorite Bible passages):God first decides that man (Adam) should not be alone.God decides that Adam needs a "suitable helper."So what God does next is to parade all the animals and birds before Adam, "But for Adam no suitable helper was found." (Genesis 2:20b).THAT'S when God decides to create woman!

One pictures the Infinite Mind of Creation pondering, "Hmmm, let's see ... dog? ... ox? ... whooping crane? ... Latrodectus mactans?? No, no, none of them seems quite right.What Adam needs is something with tits and a nice tight ... hey!All the OTHER creatures are represented by TWO sexes!Give me a minute ... I'm getting an idea here ...?"

Ridiculous laws, inspired by Satan and designed to destroy family harmony, make it illegal for men to carry out their God given right to batter and bruise their wives, nor can he force her to give him his God given right to pleasure.

He can't even indulge his duty of ravishing young girls during plunder and pillage. As for selling his daughters into slavery ~ forget it.

Although God wants men to engage in sex before marriage, after all Soloman had 300 concubines, it's a sin for women to do so.

96.Do you believe that "God Hates Fags?"

It would be so easy to point to Fred Phelps and say "this type of hatred is caused by Christianity". The truth is, though, that Phelps was a very disturbed individual and it wouldn't have mattered if he was a Hindu, a Baptist, a Jew, a Catholic or a Jain, he still would have found someone, or something to hate.

If you want to read about his life, influences and motivations, have a look at Addicted to Hate: The Fred Phelps Story.

Take note: Addicted to Hate: The Fred Phelps Story is one of the few pages on this site that I've rated as adult only

97.A real sacrifice is when you give up something you can't get back.Jesus laid down his life for us, but he received it back again ... as he knew he would (see John 10:17). ? So what's the big deal about Jesus' sacrifice?The really scary thing about death is the permanence of it.Wouldn't it be more appropriate to say that Jesus had a really bad weekend for our sins?

From a careful analysis of the central crucifixion-resurrection tenet of Christianity, we realize that the resurrection either occurred (which negates the death sacrifice), or did not occur (which negates the divinity of Jesus); that the whole innocent blood-sacrifice requirement for atonement of sin is arbitrary, unjust and unnecessarily brutal; and that, if the Trinity and Creation tenets are also taken into account, God must have sacrificed Himself to Himself to correct a mistake he made Himself -- which only makes sense as a gesture of penitence toward mankind.

It's JC's followers that make the sacrifice: often their entire lives for some? phantom that was more then likely cobbled together from the backs of biblical cereal boxes. They sacrifice more than their intellects, dedication and time, Dylan tells me, they sacrifice their ideals and morals for the church?s.

98.Romans 11:26 says that all Israel will be saved.How can this be, since they don't accept Jesus?

99.Mark 16:9-20 appears in some Bibles (such as the KJV) but not in others.Do you believe that this passage is in fact "inspired Scripture?"Why or why not?When you engage in textual criticism to determine which "doubtful" passages should be included (such as the Pericope Adulterae, John 7:53-8:11), what specific criteria do you use?

From Forgery In Christianity by Joseph Wheless

THE INDICTMENT

I charge, and purpose to prove, from unimpeachable texts and historical records, and by authoritative clerical confessions, beyond the possibility of denial, evasion, or refutation:

1. That the Bible, in its every Book, and in the strictest legal and moral sense, is a huge forgery.

2. That every Book of the New Testament is a forgery of the Christian Church; and every significant passage in those Books, on which the fabric of the Church and its principal Dogmas are founded, is a further and conscious later forgery, wrought with definite fraudulent intent.

3. Especially, and specifically, that the "famous Petrine text" -- "Upon this Rock I will build my church" -- the cornerstone of the gigantic fabric of imposture, -- and the other, "Go, teach all nations," -- were never uttered by the Jew Jesus, but are palpable and easily proven late Church forgeries.

4. That the Christian Church, from its inception in the first little Jewish-Christian religious societies until it reached the apex of its temporal glory and moral degradation, was a vast and tireless Forgery-mill.

5. That the Church was founded upon, and through the Dark Ages of Faith has battened on -- (yet languishes decadently upon) -- monumental and petty forgeries and pious frauds, possible only because of its own shameless mendacity and through the crass ignorance and superstition of the sodden masses of its deluded votaries, purposely kept in that base condition for purposes of ecclesiastical graft and aggrandizement through conscious and most unconscionable imposture.

6. That every conceivable form of religious lie, fraud and imposture has ever been the work of Priests; and through all the history of the Christian Church, as through all human history, has been -- and, so far as they have not been shamed out of it by skeptical ridicule and exposure, yet is, the age-long stock in trade and sole means of existence of the priests and ministers of all the religions.

7. That the clerical mind, which "reasons in chains," is, from its vicious and vacuous "education," and the special selfish interests of the priestly class, incapable either of the perception or the utterance of truth, in matters where the interests of priestcraft are concerned.

100.Do you believe that the American pledge of allegiance to the flag should include the words "one nation under God?" ? Are you aware that the original version of the pledge (which had been around for more than a half a century before the McCarthyites, in the 1950's, demanded the insertion of a reference to a deity) did NOT contain the expression "under God" ... that American school children recited The Pledge for more than 50 years without making any reference at all to a deity (and America seemed to get along just fine)?Would you object if the pledge contained the expression "one nation under Allah" or "one nation under Isis?"Are you aware that America has no "official god?"

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, (SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES AVAILABLE), INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL

"The phrase 'under God' clearly violates the First Amendment's separation of church and state," said McDonald's CEO Jack Greenberg. "However, there is nothing in the Constitution that separates chicken and state, which is why we're proposing, 'One nation, six chicken McNuggets and a medium Coke, all for $1.99.'"

A handful of Americans, however, has insisted the United States can get along just fine without a primary sponsor. Their suggestion that the Pledge phrase be regularly updated to reflect the national condition, however, has so far attracted little interest, as a CNN/Gallup poll found only 10 percent of respondents would feel comfortable reciting "One nation, under indictment."

Europeans, meanwhile, seemed to be confused by the entire episode. "I don't understand. I always thought it was 'One nation, we are God,'" said British Prime Minister Tony Blair. "Oh my, I've been worshipping them for nothing."

God, in various forms, currently supports most nations, with the exception of officially atheist China and Vietnam, and the Netherlands, which hasn't been told yet but is in for a nasty shock tomorrow.