Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today...
…Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
- Imagine, John Lennon
Last October 2006, Abe Olandres, featured on his blog, Bryanboy’s Jesus is our Fucking Homeboy. The viral nature of Bryanboy’s post, which is to a country of predominantly Orthodox Catholic brand as controversial, amplified, due to Abe’s influence on the Philippines Internet. The Philippines Blogosphere which is democratic in nature, came face to face with the ideology of the conservative Christian fundamentalists.
Jesus is Our Fucking Homeboy features two photos of gay men posing outdoors near a cross. Now, I don't find the title or the photos disrespectful at all. If anything it's somewhat boring. Yet It ignited the hypersensitive beliefs of Christian fundamentalists, quick as they are to condemn two gay men posing near a cross. The fundamentalists then launched a weak attempt (now gone) to attack the post using an online petition.
Within days, the Philippines blogosphere came up with continuous and concerted rebuttals at the online petition. Here are some of those who think the fundamentalists are overreacting:
Obet of Putanginamo: Of course there was overreaction from many people. Someone even had the brilliant idea to set-up an online petition. Those things always work (/sarcasm).
Mike
Abundo: Welcome to the Internet, Bible-thumpers.
Buwayahman of
Philippines4Men: Typical moralist babble.
Jepoy: Welcome to the REAL world. How was the taste of the red pill?
Seplana: I wasn’t offended by it because I know that the Jesus on the pictures is not the true Jesus in the Bible.
Alleba: The uproar and animosity towards Bryanboy is misplaced. There are too many problems hounding the world right now and this should be the least of
them.
Manuel L. Quezon III: Imbecilic online petitions.
baratillo@cubao: The Ghouls and Spooks who authored this petition, last time I looked there were eight who signed, seem to be (a) sipping too much witches’ brew, or (b)overdid the dancing naked bit before a full moon.
Ade: An online petition declaring him to be the Antichrist? Goddamn retarded.
The fuss caught the attention of Erwin Oliva, featuring it in his Inquirer column.
Abe Olandres and the Liberal Post
At the center of all this, is of course, Abe Olandres. Without him, the post would have stayed within the confines of the readers of the gay writer Bryanboy. As Abe Olandres mentioned in his blog, he might have influenced the outcome of the post – he catapulted the discussions to a
wider audience. I applaud Abe for his courage.
I have never met Abe Olandres in person, nevertheless I respect him. Considered by many to be the father of Philippines blogging, he was one of the architect in the first Philippines Blogging Summit. He has promoted blogging on this country like no other, speaking in and around the Philippines.
Given his status, Abe has exercised caution and prudence all throughout, fostering his reputation as the years roll by. Yet from time to time, Abe has the ability to surprise, posting such liberal write-ups as Jollibee Scandal: Mascots humping on YouTube, and linking to controversial blog posts such as those of Jesus is our Fucking Homeboy.
Perhaps as prudent as he is, Abe Olandres is also a progressive man. A science and technology major in college (Chemistry and Computer Engineering), Abe chronicles progress almost everyday in his technology blog. Perhaps the Science and Technology in him has from time to time reminds him the need for humans to move forward.
The Disbelief of the Wise
At the end of his post, Abe Olandres wrote “We’re on thin ice here.”
Perhaps, his caution is a reflection of the immense power of the Church on our country, of the logical fear on the consequences of declaring skepticism on superstitious beliefs. As Bertrand Russell once said:
The immense majority of intellectually eminent men disbelieve in Christian religion, but they conceal the fact in public, because they are afraid of losing their incomes.
And indeed Bertrand Russell’s assertion has never been more true than today:
- In a 1997 study, Beit-Hallahmi and Argyle concluded that out of 700 Nobel Prize winning scientists, only one beleive that there is a God.
- A 1998 study by Larson and Witham revealed that of those American scientists considered eminent enough by their peers to have been elected to the National Academy of Sciences, 93 percent do not believe in God.
- In a 2006 British study by Elisabeth Cornwell and Michael Stirrat on the Fellows of the Royal Society, 95 percent of its member do not believe in God.
Paul Bell in 2002 Mensa Magazine (Mensa is the society of individuals with a high IQ) stated:
Of 43 studies carried out since 1927 on the relationship between religious belief and one's intelligence and/or educational level, all but four found an inverse connection. That is, the higher one's intelligence or education level, the less one is likely to be religious or hold "beliefs" of any kind.
This mirror a line I once read:
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.
- Seneca the Younger, 4BC - 65AD
When Fundamentalists Strikes
When I wrote The Sexiest Filipina Bloggers, I received emails from Christian Fundamentalists to remove the post, as it promotes the false idea that women like sex. I don’t know what their priests or pastors taught them, but apparently they didn’t know that women can enjoy sex too. I laughed (malaswa ka, as one of the letters pointed out), marked the letters as spam, and moved on. Why would I waste time responding to such silly letters?
When I wrote Why I Love Women, the same thing happened. One of the fundamentalists told me that I will burn in hell for committing adultery. One letter which clearly was written by a Catholic told me that I committed a mortal sin. That surely my soul would be cast at the deepest corner of hell. Perhaps, I thought then, just for fun, I would reply to them. I asked them if they know how the notion of Christian hell came about, if they know of its history. I also asked the Catholic if he has ever read a Catholic Catechism, if that person knows the meaning of mortal sin.
It turns out, judging from their reply, that none of them have ever read the Bible. Nor do they know the history of Christianity. In other words they believe Christianity because they have been told so by their parents, their teachers, their Church. They never once examined, and questioned the belief which they ever so blindly followed. Obscure rituals such as rosaries, novenas, unverifiable miracles, banning people from reading the Bible as they are not “qualified” to supposedly interpret it, among others, are some of the questionable tactics of church leaders to keep its members in line.
The fear that the religious institution instilled on them, the propaganda of the church, was so pervasive that the fundamentalists believe that if a person ever doubted the existence of an unseen “ghost”, supposedly an untouchable Holy one, that person would be damned to a made-up fiction called hell, when you are supposedly dead. Oh, wait, no one supposedly dies, we are all supposedly immortals.
Right, tell that to a weeping mother of a dead 3 year old daughter. Convince her that her daughter is not really dead. Tell her that God killed her daughter’s physical body to place her in a made-up fiction called Heaven. Or better yet blame her, for it is her sins that caused her daughter’s cancer. Then convince her to donate her meager income to the church - as the church leader will deposit it in the bank of a made-up Heaven, TAX-FREE. Then convince the poverty-stricken mother to send her young son to a war in the name of the only true religion. After her son dies, convince the mother that God killed her son’s physical body for a place in a made-up fiction called Heaven. Or better yet blame her. Any person who is not gullible, will be able to see through the lunacy of this man-made asylum called irrational religion.
The Time Has Come to Declare my Disbelief
The time has come to say enough is enough. The time has come to declare my disbelief in a God who supposedly ordered a plane to crash into a building full of innocent bystanders in His name. The time has come to declare my disbelief in a God who supposedly ordered President Bush to waste 1.2 trillion dollars on a war that killed thousands upon thousands of innocent children & women, obliterating their homes in the process. The time has come to declare my disbelief in a God who supposedly prohibits the Vatican from allowing contraceptives in AIDS ridden Africa, killing millions in the process. The time has come for me to be sick at the sight of appalling poverty in the Philippines, wherein the sickening site of destitute people lying in the street became common, a portion of which could have been prevented if the Church didn’t blocked every attempt to institute abortion and contraceptives in our country. The time has come to open my eyes that religion is man made. The time has come for me to declare that I stopped beleiving in Santa Claus a long time ago.
Its time.
RELATED FILES
- Hitler: the man who used Evangelical Christians to Massacre Atheists
- Video: Proof that Bush with Ultra-Conservatives Manipulated World Events
Great post. It's good to see another closet-Atheist come out.
I'm a closet atheist myself. Everyone's subject to his or her own opinion, and I don't think you owe them fundamentalists an apology.
Wow, if only my ears could, they'd be clapping too.
So you found nothing wrong with the title and the photos.
But what was the thought for posing that way?
What was the thought for giving a title like that?
Isn't there a saying that "It's the thought that counts"?
hey.. i'm santa claus... really. promise. cross my heart. hope to... naah. :~)
Frequently seen is the defense that it is free speech, freedom of expression and the right to it.
Left in the background is whether it was “right” or correct.
This isn't just about religion or the lack of it.
This concerns discrimination and tolerance.
People who see that it was right for Bryanboy and the britishboys to do it should read the case of Dwayne SIMONTON in the case of Simonton v. Runyon, 232 F.3d 33 (2nd Cir. 2000)
He was a homosexual and he endured hardships for it in his workplace. Hardships of insults and discrimination for which he would be denied justice.
Most of the people on the side of the Bryanboy issue are said to be liberals.
But such people should also claim that it is but only “right” that Dwayne Simonton be denied justice and that a law that would enable people like Simonton to receive justice be forever prevented from seeing the light of day.
Laws against discrimination should never be enacted or at least be dismantled if already inplace if such should be the case.
For to be truly liberal about it; no rules should be enforced to prevent what insults or discrimination we want to cast on anyone and everyone.
If the british boys and Bryanboy are right, then why should Simonton’s co-workers not be right also?
If the british boys and Bryanboy's discrimination against those who respect the crucifix SHOULD be tolerated by those who respect such; doesn't it follow that Dwayne Simonton and those like him SHOULD tolerate his co-worker's acts as well?
Pagalingan na lang dapat sa ganda ng insulto tapos pasensyahan na lang!
Wordgasm would then be right as no one needs to apologize to anybody anymore!
anyways..... i believe in God because i believe in the Bible....
Wondeful post.
Although I am not exactly an atheist, I too abhor organized religion (and I'm glad my parents were 'progressive' and never forced me into anything).
One of my favorite readings in Philo class is John Paul Sarte's The Flies. It reflects the kind of religiosity present here in the Philippines...where people feel they are 'absolved' of any responsibility in life because there is a God to blame for everything (God caused this to happen, God will give me this if it is His will...etc.) I think this wrong kind of religiosity is what's driving many to 'atheism'.
May I suggest the book Conversations with God by Neale Donald Walsch though=)You don't have to believe it's God to appreciate it=)
Obet & Wordgasm,
Thanks. It's great to see that I am not alone in my disbelief.
Andrew,
Thanks man.
Justicialiga,
Most atheist are tolerant and dislike bigotry. Some become atheist for this very same reason.
As far as I'm know no group goes to war for their not beleiving God. Religion intolerance, on the other hand are evident by religious fundamentalists wars fought in the name of "true" religion.
Jepoy a.k.a. Santa,
I am both naughty and nice, what shall be my reward when your reindeer descends? No chimney though. =)
Selaplana,
Thanks for the comment man. However, I disagree with your logic. Believing doesn't make something true.
Sorsi,
Thanks for your recommendation Sorsi. Naku, maghahanap na naman ako ng libro nito. By the way, do you know that Sartre is an atheist?
Well-written, well-explained, and all the well- that you can possibly think of.
I didn't know about the Bryanboy issue but...
Exactly my sentiments.
Got here through Ate Rose's website.
uy thankyou sa pagdaan,.
as shari said.. very well written
im not an atheist .. well after thinking a lot.. i think i might gonna be.. haha..
ang daming religion. ano nga ba ang pinagkaiba nila at kine claim nilang mas don ka dapat sumimba sa kanila at umanib dahil alam nilang ligtas sila?
paniniwala? sapilitang pag-anib sa mga religion
how can it be belief if it's forced upon one ?
i dont even know if heaven really do exist.. no one knows.. wala pa naman talagang nakakaprove..
life after death? me nag prove na rin ba nito? wala kahit isang religion..wala , sinasabi nila, pero wala naman silang prueba..
kudos!
hi michael :)
just one question, how do you define atheism? as i see it kasi, it's the non-belief in a higher supernatural being. but as i read your post, i felt that you were only expressing disbelief (and anger perhaps?) to the Christian God. not other religion's gods like Islam's Allah or Buddhism's Buddha.
or are you asserting your atheism because you (and the philippine blogosphere) came "face to face with the ideology of the conservative Christian fundamentalists"? i just felt that naparami yung examples mo regarding the "faults" of the Christian God, kaya it felt, for me, like it was just an expression of anger towards God, and not an assertion of atheism.
Shari & Rose,
While reading your responses, I couldn't help but be happy.
Hi Shelley,
How do I define atheism? I define it the same as you: a disbelief in a supernatural deity.
If you read further down you would see that I made reference to the September 11 attacks, which was perpetrated by Muslim extremist, so clearly my atheism is not exclusive to Christianity.
As for your question about anger, I cannot be angry at something that doesn't exist. Which means I can't be angry at a fictional God. What I can show to you however, is the collective negative effect of non-thinking ideologies.
Thanks Shelley, I hope that answer your question. =)
yes, i noticed that you did cite the september 11 attack, pero it's like 1 out of how many examples. siguro i just felt that you gave too many examples regarding Christianity, and it felt, to me ha, that you were just stating your disbelief regarding one religion's god, and not all gods.
i have no beef against your beliefs ha michael, this is more of an opinion on how you wrote it ;)
Hi Shelley,
I have written about the neoconservative influence on both the Muslims Extremists and Christian Fanatics. Here is the link.
=)
You believe that intelligent people do not believe in God.
Meanwhile, you have a dislike for religious fundamentalists and fanatics.
Basically, these are the reasons you said why you do not believe in God. You saw ice on your glass and you shout iceberg!
Sorry, I found your reasoning illogical.
Sef,
Ehem. Believing in something that can't be proven is logical?
Everyone is entitled to his/her own opinion. There are people that no matter how far you go in explaining to them (even if it takes forever) would still hang on to their conviction till the end. Faith begins where reason ends. You maybe right in all your observations. I cannot blame you for clinging on to atheism due to all the loopholes in all religions except one. There is one religion that can answer all your doubts and questions. There is one religion that will shatter all your beliefs. There is one religion that is based on a sound foundation. You may scrutinize it, slice it, bring all your questions and have it answered. But as I have said, no matter what explanations you may hear from the one true religion, you may not believe it because you may throw in all your reasoning and all your logical defense. You may reason out, look at it left and right, dig it, go to the bottom of it but still you won't believe because reasoning dictates you not to believe. As I have said, faith only starts where reason ends, faith only begins when all irrationality, lies, ambiguity, bigotry and nonsense ends.
Interesting thoughts.
I wrote about this topic too, and approached history from a historical and social perspective. Read The logic of God in history".
Erratum: approached history = god
Anonymous,
Unquestioning faith is dangerous. It breeds fundamentalists. It was the weapon of Hitler during his authoritarian rule.
btw, i also found your youtube find of the banana argument, which is obviously will not suffice to debunk your belief in ahteism.
but pls review your own words:
you wrote:
Selaplana,
Thanks for the comment man. However, I disagree with your logic. Believing doesn't make something true.
and you also wrote:
i am now a believer. really.
http://basangpanaginip.blogspot.com/2007/02/video-proof-that-god-exist.html
i just hope you don't eat your own words, the way you eat your bananas
the clear thing here is:
1) you're an atheist
2) you believe in atheism
3) you contradicts yourself by saying, 'believing doesn't makes something TRUE', and that doesn't excludes you and your concept of atheism as something NOT TRUE.
sinag,
Oh, you mean this, and this?
(hey i hope you won't delete this comment again)
-----
woah, arguments of an atheist, huh. ^_^
You firmly BELIEVE THAT THERE IS NO GOD, right?
you also replied to Selaplana that: "Believing doesn't makes something true."
If your conviction states that YOU BELIEVE THAT THERE IS NO GOD, don't you see that you're contradicting yourself?
If your plain logic and learned philosophy is your only basis of believing ATHEISM, I suggest don't think that you've known all Christians. Do not stereo-type them as plain-believers without reasoning and questioning (bow & amen attitude), coz if that's your case as an atheist, that would be a shame!
Let me just modify your reply to Seplana who said he believes in God coz he believes in the Bible:
"BELIEVING DOESN'T MAKES SOMETHING TRUE. AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE BELIEVING THAT THERE IS NO GOD, IS ALSO A FALSE BELIEF."
And here's my piece of advice:
don't close your mind & heart to understanding. eventhough majority of the scientists & nobel prize winners believe
in atheism, it doesn't solve all your questions of injustice that you see. atheism doesn't feed those dying africans
in hunger, nor it promotes morality to society.
and i'd rather support the charitable campaigns of those christians you are belittling, than to join your *damn*
theoretical concepts.
sinag,
You are free to express your view at my blog, but please refrain from personally attacking someone for his views.
Michael said...
sinag,
You are free to express your view at my blog, but please refrain from personally attacking someone for his views.
>> hmm, i don't know you personally dude, how can i attack you 'personally'? did i talked about your personal life, your secrets, your family ...? or did i just gave you a comment regarding your personal belief on atheism, which you posted for others to react?
i suppose you firmly believe in atheism, and i just tested how 'firm' is that. you make fun of others who believe in GOD, yet you do not anticipate opposing views which may debunk your belief.
pls. don't think & feel that i'm personally attacking your atheistic belief. i just hope you're mature enough not to close your mind to others' opinions, even if it's from theists like Christians.
and i guess you're a rational thinker, and you may have higher potentials of intellect compared to me (i'm only a h.s. grad). but i just can't agree with the concept of atheism. b'coz accept it or not, the TRUTH is no limited to what our physical senses can comprehend. and those concepts beyond that limitation (just like the existence of GOD) which most scientist cannot accept but is still believed by most religions are not something to be ignored but to be considered.
remember that science also know the fact that 'nothing happens without a cause'. if the beginning of the universe is from a big bagng theory or an accidental explosion, it can't justify the reality that all these thing we see in this earth, beyond the skies, under the waters, and even the creatures in microbiology are all made exactly the way it's meant to do. very well organized and in its best place and order.
so what's my point? find it for yourself. because for me, all these i've cited cannot be a product of mere accident. there must be something that governs all these. i repeat, 'nothing happens without a cause'. that something that cause all these, is what i believe to be a the greatest architect and absolute power, which i also call, GOD.
Sinag,
Thanks for clearing your views. No insult taken man, I was just laying the ground rules. Isn't love and not hate one of the foundation of Christianity?
The Theory of Evolution actually is for me and many others explain how we came to be. Many more theory of science governs us - the theory of gravity and the theory of spherical earth for example.
By the way charity isn't always good - look at what happened when money of the common people falls into the hands of a swindler.
you wrote:
The Theory of Evolution actually is for me and many others explain how we came to be. Many more theory of science governs us - the theory of gravity and the theory of spherical earth for example.
i wrote:
what do you mean by that? man's evolution accdg. to darwin? do you know that theory is defined as: a tentative theory about the natural world; a concept that is NOT YET VERIFIED but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena? is that ok to you to be govern on theories which are not yet generally verified/accepted as FACT?
hmm, atheists, like you, sometimes make me wonder :-)
i meant, *to be governed by theories*
btw, that jesus christ in houston is obviously another fake one. and i share the same view as you do about ministers of that kind.
pls. don't conclude quickly that all you see are real. there are many fakesters and masters of illusion, you know. so, if you see them feeding their greed under the name of religion and charity, don't be easily fooled by that.
if a lot of fakesters are what you only see, don't you think "there might be" a real thing amongst them? there are so many possibilities to consider my friend, besides, you haven't seen or met other THEISTS in the philippines alone, right? :-)
I am so glad that although none of you want to believe in God, that does not change His believing in YOU. It also does not stop Him from loving you, which he does...deeply and constantly. I know what it is to be hurt by religion, but God did not create religion...man did. God created a relationship, for us to know Him and for Him to love us, and He loves you...just as you are.
c'mon guys. what we have here is a fundamental Atheist in Michael and a fundamental Christian in Sinag and as both are fundamentalists in their own way, it is not difficult to see the faulty logic on either side.
The way I see it, the reason non-theists criticize theists harshly, is because theists really suck at policing their own. Too much self-denial takes away all the witnesses, so theists can get away with performing the very sins they preach against. This is what non-theists see too clearly.
Are there intelligent, responsible theists? Of course! But they are not in any position to keep in check the overwhelming irrationality and irresponsibility of the rest. Can one really deny the painfully chronic history of organized religion giving merit to murderous irrationality and irresponsibility?
Are there dumb, irresponsible non-theists? Of course! Scientists may be smart, but it's surely not hard to find a very smart person who has little common-sense (practical intelligence) or empathy (emotional intelligence).
Science is not immune to the same kind of narcissism that plagues organized religion, but science has the scientific method to keep that narcissism hopefully in check. Organized religion doesn't have a scientific method, but there are practical, humane principles in every religion that serve to hopefully keep narcissism in check. More often that not, it's narcisstic politics that disrupt these checks and balances within both the science and religious community.
Allan,
I am not a fundamentalist.
For tolerance of each others belief:
Dedicated to Pinoy Bloggers
It is one thing to believe in God, and another to believe people to claim to be on the behalf of God. The latter is rarely correct, and the former is, by definition, unprovable. So this leaves you believing in what you see, and how you interpret it. I may be a Catholic, but I do not believe in Papal infallibility.
I had no idea that you just exposed your Atheism just this year. This is rather late, but congratulations! Good thing we had Bryanboy to help you out of the closet. :p
I have been on a number of blogs saying about the same thing. With a great deal of frustration. This time I am going to take whole different aproach to what I have been writing. This time I have some questions for you to think about.
First, Would God talk to someone that is now living? Second, Lets say God told this person a number of things that could change the world as we know it. Would you want to know what God said? Third, If God told this person the date of Judgment. Would you want to know when that was? Fourth, If God told him/her they are on his Left side, Who would that be?( I really don't know the answer to that question either.) Fifth, If Jesus said that someone changed the words in the bible would you believe that?
Sixth, If Jesus said his parents are Joseph and Mary, and that his parents are just like everyone else's is that believeable? Seven, If God talked to someone that is living right now and he told that person the meaning of Revelation. And that Revelation is really going to come true, would you believe that? Eight, If this person could prove that God talked to them, would you be interested in seeing the proof? Nine, If God talked to you would anyone believe you? Posted by: Melanie Stephan (Answers to 1 to 8 are all true)
It is apparent from your writing that you advocate fornication and even whoremongering. Allow me to define those terms for you. Fornication is sexual intercourse between two persons not married to each other. Does that agree with you? Whoremongering is lechery or the inordinate indulgence in sexual activity with promiscuous or immoral women.
One conclusion that can be drawn from this assessment of your writing is that you also do not have any interest in protecting the sanctity of marriage. If that’s not true, what does marriage mean to you? If you do value marriage whatsoever, would you be characterized as a polygamist? Polygamy is a type of marriage in which a spouse of either sex may have more than one mate at the same time. Or perhaps you more selfishly prefer the concept of polygny – the state or practice of having more than one wife or female mate at a time. Maybe you can explain what marriage does mean to you, and how you would characterize the adulterous relationships to a wife.
Since it is quite obvious that you lack moral decency, allow me to explain why there are others that are attempting to interfere with your debauchery despite your protests that it is all consentual. We are concerned about your victims and you also.
You will dishonor and bring shame to your parents. A foolish son is a grief to his father and bitterness to her that bare him. You will be a calamity to your father, and the heaviness of your mother. Therefore repent and be wise. Listen to instruction and hear my words.
When your actions result in the abortion of a baby or an human embryo by the action of abortifacient birth control pills, you are guilty of killing a person. You will give an account of this.
When you commit fornication with a woman who is not your wife, you are stealing the sanctity of that woman’s marriage (future or present). You are stealing from the man his wife, and from the woman her gift to her husband. You are guilty of adultery.
There are severe consequences for these things, but before I tell you about them, does any of this mean anything to you? It matters because if you are the least bit convicted, then it is proof that God has written his law on your heart, and your conscience is also bearing witness. I want to tell you that God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble. You have two choices now: You can continue to justify yourself or you can repent. If you continue to try to justify yourself, you are proud, arrogant, knowing nothing and God will resist you to the bitter end, because everyone who is proud of heart is an abomination to the Lord. If you humble yourself and repent, you may hear some good news.
Honestly, if God were to judge you righteously, would you be found innocent? Jesus asks, “How shall ye escape the condemnation of hell?” According to God’s word:
“The fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.”
The Bible refers to the fate of the unsaved with such fearful words as the following:
• “Shame and everlasting contempt” Daniel 12:2
• “Everlasting punishment” Matthew 25:46
• “Weeping and gnashing of teeth” Matthew 24:51
• “Fire unquenchable” Luke 3:17
• “Indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish” Romans 2:8,9
• “Everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord” 2 Thessalonians 1:9
• “Eternal fire...the blackness of darkness for ever” Jude 7,13
Revelation 14:10,11 tells us the final, eternal destiny of the sinner: “He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone...the smoke of their torment ascended up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day or night."
“…the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;” 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9
Does any of that concern you? It should concern you. It concerns me for you. I want to tell you that this is not the end God wants for you. He says,
“As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked.” Ezekiel 33:11
“The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” 2 Peter 3:9
If you can truly come to the Lord with a poor and contrite spirit, he will look upon you and show you mercy because:
God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Romans 5:8
For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Romans 6:23
He [was] wounded for our transgressions, [he was] bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace [was] upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. Isaiah 53:5-6
He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. Isaiah 53:8
For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. 2 Corinthians 5:21
Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses. Acts 13:38-39
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. John 5:24
Ben Maulis,
Are you advocating the revival of the puritans of the 17th Century?
I am only asking, because the world has move on a long time ago. You can't live in the past.
I just read what Michael and Ben Maulis had to write after my comment. Ben I believe was correct and had some very good quotes from the bible. Michael seems to think that Ben is stuck in the past. I think Ben is very much in the present. God is not dead and he is talking to people that are living today. I don't think anyone read what I wrote nor did they answer any of the questions that I asked. I would like it if someone answered one question and that question is: If God talked to you, would anyone believe you? The reason that I am asking this is because God has talked to someone and NO one, I mean no one believes it. Thanks, Melanie Stephan
melanie,
if you can, using scientific methods, prove that God talks to someone, I would believe it.
Without empirical proof & evidence, I would conclude the statement to be delusional.
an example: if somebody committed suicide - he shouted on the edge of a rooftop that God told him to jump - I would conclude that person to be mentally ill.
another example: if somebody tries to kill his son (ala Abraham), because a voice tells him so, I would call the police. That person would be charge with attempted murder.
Yes, religion has so much control on many things in the world today to the point that it become frightening.
I think it was Sam Harris who said that religious creed breeds intolerance. Makes sense because all religions think that they're the only RIGHT path to Heaven. And to say that religions tolerate the existence of one another is to be a hypocrite.
I'm not very much for organized religion. Just look at what it has done to our world today. Perhaps, I am more for spirituality rather than organized religion. For many people, "spirit" pertain to that of something that came from a God. But for me, the soul or the spirit resides in our brain. What is truly spiritual (spiritual not in the religious sense of the word) will never be contradictory to what is rational. People who think otherwise are delusional.
Hi, Michael. I do have proof. It is very long. My book explaining my dreams from God is in the Library of Congress. I don't know when God wants people to believe or see what he told me. For some reason I think it will be sometime after I die. I know for a fact at some period of time some people will believe what I wrote was from God. God had this planning before I was born. I can prove that too. In the book I wrote about how God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost told me the meaning of First is Last and Last is First as it is writen in Revelation. It means that Birth is Last. In a box the size of a mailbox I have objects that prove what is writen is factual. Melanie Stephan, One more thing. People called Jesus delusional. And to prove their point they nailed him to a cross. See if he was Lord in Heaven he could have saved himself so they thought.
One thing that I don't understand is why Jesus had to suffer on the Cross so that we could be saved. Now God is the greatest Scientist ever. He created the World. Having his son suffer to save us from death seems off to me. God and his creations should be above this kind of nonsense. It would seem to me that there is no place in the Kingdom of God for such nonsense. I think I just answered my question. Posted by, Melanie Stephan
I read what many of you wrote. I think what has turned you away is that there are a number of Crazy Christains out there. I don't go to Church and I don't read the bible. I would have thought that God would have talked to the Pope before he would dropped in on me. But he didn't talk to anyone in the Church. God picked me. I am not going to make up anything or twist what God told me. God told me the meaning of First is Last . It means that Birth is Last. Now God said nothing about Gays or Contraception when he talked to me. These are not issues with him. They maybe issues with other people in the Church but they are not issues with God. Jesus talked about the Rich not being important and other meaningless things that people do. He talked about the Romans and Revenge. The Romans must have been far crueler than I thought. Jesus also talked about the presidents. He talked about the greatest Presidents. He had more to say than that too. I will leave you with this much. Yours Truly, Melanie Stephan
The Time has come...
While I was thrilled and applauded your blog, I couldnt help but react to your words. I felt saddened that you in all your wisdom and intellect could condemn God for human frailties. I used to be an anarchist and atheist too my friend. I can only hope & pray that you find the joy of finding and experiencing God's love too. Intelligence is not to be confused with wisdom, my friend. May God bless you on your journey!
"Seek and ye shall find"
5 ways of Proving God's Existence by St. Thomas Aquinas:
In his Summa theologiae (Ia, q. 2, a. 3), Aquinas offers five "ways" of proving the existence of God. Since these ways are mere sketches, they are best understood within the context of his entire philosophical system. What follows below, therefore, is a mere summary of each way. Note well that he offers far more metaphysical explanations for the existence of God in De Ente et Essentia and elsewhere. [1]
The First Way
(Prime Mover) "It is clear that there are in this world things which are moved. Now, every object which is moved receives that movement from another. If the motor is itself moved, there must be another motor moving it, and after that yet another, and so on. But it is impossible to go on indefinitely, for then there would be no first motor at all, and consequently no movement" ("Contra Gentiles," ii. 33). This proof, like much of Thomas Aquinas's thought, is taken from Aristotle, whose "unmoved mover" forms the first recorded example of the cosmological argument for God's existence.
The Second Way
"We discern in all sensible things a certain chain of efficient causes. We find, however, nothing which is its own efficient cause, for that cause would then be anterior to itself. On the other side, it is impossible to ascend from cause to cause indefinitely in the series of efficient causes....There must therefore exist one self-sufficient, efficient cause, and that is God" ("Contra Gent." i. 22).
The Third Way
"Find in nature things which may be and may not be, since there are some who are born and others who die; they consequently can exist or not exist. But it is impossible that such things should live for ever, for there is nothing which may be as well as not be at one time. Thus if all beings need not have existed, there must have been a time in which nothing existed. But, in that case, nothing would exist now; for that which does not exist can not receive life but from one who exists; . . . there must therefore be in nature a necessarily existent being."
The Fourth Way
Any category has its degrees, such as good and better, warm and warmer. Each also has one thing that's the ultimate of that measure, like good and "best", warm and "hottest". And whatever is the most of that category is the source of that category, as fire (or, in modern terms, energy itself) is the source of heat, and God must therefore be the source of goodness.
The Fifth Way
Everything, sentient or otherwise, progresses in an orderly way. Planets move in their orbits, light breaks from and combines into its spectrum, et cetera. Reality has a natural order, which could not have come from nothing, yet which precedes mere humans. [2]
This is essentially the teleological argument for God's existence. Some believe that the Fifth Way is equivalent to what is now called Intelligent Design. However, this is not an accurate presentation of Aquinas' thought, and is subject to the Cosmogonical Fallacy [3].
**source: Wikipedia
How can there be no God? If there was no God, how can you explain the order in the universe?
There is no god.
Penn Jillette couldn't said better.
Bertrand Russell said
"...the existence of God, though not impossible, is very improbable."
Glad to have fellow Pinoys taking the blasphemy challenge.
For those who don't believe in the existence of GOD: Can anyone please explain why such order in the universe exists? It's so impossible that everything exists on random chances.There must be an Intelligent Being behind this.
Eh. Those aren't new or revolutionary thoughts.
My major problem with other atheists/agnostics/etc like me is the inclination to insult those who believe in God while saying they're "open-minded" in the same breath.
I'm not at all saying you're one of those people, but it's a slippery slope. Often people resort to atheism as a sort of reactionary measure, almost to spite someone who is devoutly religious, and... frankly that's immature. Those tactics devalue any points they try to make. To further insult an entire group based on the actions of a minority of loud, rude, religious fundamentalists and taking steps to bring up the issue of their average IQ seems like one of these measures.
What if less intelligent people are indeed the type to be religious? What would be the next step, forced "education"? The best lesson we can learn from religious fundamentalists here is that oppression is the wrong way to teach or win someone's mind.
Religion provides many things for the common person-- a common code of moral conduct with interest to propagation of the species, a community/social support system, a reason for existence, and most importantly hope and comfort. There are simply certain types of people who are better off believing in a god, and I can't find a reason why I'd have a right to take that away from someone who would not hurt me for believing something different. Atheism does not provide all of these things in such a neat package.
Nobody has proven concretely that a deity exists, but nobody has proven concretely that a deity DOESN'T exist, and I think both sides need to remember that. We need to get along, regardless. Most other Atheists I know have yet to prove their "superior" knowledge of such existentialist matters, and such "superior" tolerance by regarding the religious with sensitivity and respect-- the same sensitivity and respect that many religious fundamentalists have not given us.
me isang magandang linya mula sa isang karakter sa pelikulang confessional ni jerrold tarog ang nagsusuma total dito, "the more you understand religion, the more you lose it."
Di ako nagaapprove sa mga atheist at christian (o kung anong denomination pa) fundamentalist na ginagamit ang mga "philosopical persuasions" nila para pang boost ng kanilang mga estipidong ego. ang yayabang. natuto lang ng kung anong (akala nila bago o tamang) paniniwala, kala mo kung sino na. pweh!
ang tingin ko lang, nageexist ang dios kung nageexist sya. walang amount ng paniniwala o di paniniwala (na magmumula sa mga tao) ang makakapag-diminish sa existence o non-existence ng isang entity.
kaya mabuti pa ikukol na lang yang mga enerhiyang yan sa mas makabulohang at kapa ka pa - kipa- pweh-kapakinabang na bagay.
I'm not boasting or anything. But that's simple logic. There can't be order in this universe without a Supernatural being that makes it possible. I don't care what religion you belong to, but really, that's simple logic. That argument, in itself, is one proof, that there is a God, no matter who your God is.. And what do you think is the purpose of your life here on earh, if it will simply pass away? You exist here on earth, to prepare for that everlasting life. I don't care if you don't believe me, but that's what I believe in. But you know, try to search for God, I'm sure you'll never regret, and walking with God, makes this stressful, probalematic, even chaotic life on earth worth living, and you'll start to see how beautiful God's plans have ahead of us. PEACE!
whatever you believe in, keep it to yourself. It makes the world a better place
YOU SUCK.
People talk about human rights all the time. Some gays are mad about religions not allowing them their rights. What are rights? How is anyone entitled to anything? Who gives out rights? People talk about morality. As far as I'm concerned, morality comes from religion. Atheist are hypocrites. They want rights, like the right to trash God, but then they also want others to be moral and good people. If God doesn't exist, then there is no good reason to be GOOD. Who wants to be good for the sake of being good? That's lame. If I were an atheist, I would be all about me. Why not? And who is to say what a good or bad person is without the guidelines or say, religion? Why is hurting someone bad if it makes you happy? Who is anyone to judge what is wrong or right? We are all equal right? So, who made someone else's judgment of morality better than my own? Atheists like to toss out a lot of judgment against believers when in reality atheist are using the grounds of believers to stand upon.
Atheists love to say that it's childish to believe that there is a God looking over his creation.
They also say things like look what religion has done to the world and use the actions of mankind to deny a creator. Atheists all seem to have the same reasons for not believing in God:
1. No proof
2. Too many different religions, no way to see which one is right.
3. Cruelty in the world - how could a merciful God let all this tragic stuff happen, blah blah.
4. No reason to believe.
There are more, but they are redundant in essence. The first claim that there is no proof is the most ridiculous. Lets define God as the Ultimate Creator. Now, lets define the world as creation. If the world is here, doesn't it add up that something created it? Atheist would run around a room filled with fire denying the source of ignition if they had it their way. That's like being in a light filled room and denying electricity because you don't see it or understand how it's happening. Hmmmm. The atheist says, "There's a light." The believer says, "Then there is a creator of light." The atheist says, "No there isn't." Which one is using reason?
The excuse that no religion is right because there are too many religions and therefore there is not a God is also pretty lame. Which religion is right or wrong has nothing to do with whether or not there is a God. Atheist babies, "I don't know which religion is right. They can't all be right. I'm just going to deny God exist and save myself the trouble of having to figure out which one makes the most sense." Yeah, that's a great plan, for losers who don't want to use their brains.
What about those idiots who use man's cruelty as a reason to deny God? I mean come on. If some jerk blows up a building, why is it God's fault? Oh, because atheists expect God to control man's actions instead of giving him free will. Atheists believe that if God existed he would just control the actions of all humans only allowing them to do good things. He wouldn't allow people like Hitler or Osama to do those awful things. First off, how do atheists even know what God would do if he existed, especially if they don't believe in any religion? How does one propose to make claims about how something they don't believe in would be if it existed? That's like saying, "I don't believe in Santa, but I know if did exist, he wouldn't be fat." How would you know? Even if all religions were wrong, it still wouldn't mean there is not a creator. And even if God was a mean merciless being, it wouldn't make him exist any less. Put it this way, just because atheists don't like the things that God allows to happen, doesn't mean that they make sense when they use blame as a reason not to believe in him.
And, the final excuse, there's no reason to believe...well, that goes back up to the first excuse. If there is creation, it is logical to believe that there is a creator. If there is no reason to be logical, then I guess atheists don't have a reason to believe in God. Atheists love to assume why believers believe in God. They love to say that believers are naive and only believe in God to make themselves feel better. Or, believers only believe because they want their lives to have meaning. Atheist don't know crap about why believers believe in God, and that's why they're still atheists.
Attention all atheists!
I don't believe in God so that I can feel better. Believing in God does not make me feel better.
Believing in God makes me believe that I will be accountable for my bad actions. If I didn't believe in God, I would probably feel better and carefree, like an atheist.
I don't believe in God so that my life will have purpose. Purpose is overrated. I could easily do without it.
I don't believe in God because I am afraid of my existence ending at death. Why do I care if my existence stops at death. Death by itself sucks. Why would I want to believe that afterwards, I could spend eternity in flames?
I believe in God because I can use my common sense and look at the world around me and see that obviously if no one on the face of this planet created the world, something else did. Whatever it is that created the world and maintains it, is my God and my creator, and that's just plain logic.
Atheists will say that believers are going off blind faith. I say that it takes more faith to believe that the world is a random occurrence that just appeared out of no where than to believe that there is a creator. It takes blind faith to believe that after death there is nothing else, even though all of us came from non-existence into existence. Why is it hard to believe that we could continue in a different form? I guess if someone told a fetus that it was going to transform and enter a whole new world, that fetus would be pretty stupid for believing it could happen.
What is God? My logic says ... God is the ultimate cause! so I think it all depends on how you define God...I simply can't believe that we come into existence without the premise of cause and effect....I don't believe in religion either...but I respect every opinion...what I believe 'bout God is that it is the ultimate cause of all creation
For the love of god (no pun intended), mike, lock the comments!! These fundie nutsacks won't get it!!
arrogance o arrogance...
when will you leave the poor ass monkey alone
the atheist won't get it
the religious fanatic won't get it
hell is other people
arrogance o arrogance
why won't you let us poor chaps be
-blues monkey dead fish water