5255 responses tohttp://www.jesusallaboutlife.com/2009/02/06/jesus-its-not-about-free-speech/Jesus%3A+It%27s+Not+All+About+Free+Speech%21+2009-02-06+15%3A12%3A42The+Sniper to “Jesus: It’s Not All About Free Speech!”

1. 

   Anonymous February 6th, 2009 at 16:05

   Can’t they just try to PRAY the site out of existence?

   Oh, that’s right: no invisible friend, so they have to do their own smiting.

2. 

   Anonymouse February 6th, 2009 at 16:37

   “I have contacted our lawyers….”

   Why didn’t they just ask ‘God’ for a miracle?

   Dear Oh Mighty One,

   Please miracle our ass out of this situation. I know I haven’t been to church recently. But I promise. I really do, that’ll go this weekend. Please oh please oh lord! Don’t let them make a mockery out of me – I mean you. Yes you. Not me. You … Even though you don’t exist.

3. 

   weez February 6th, 2009 at 21:51

   Quote:
   

   “Dear godbotherers, as our site (not ’sight’- get a dictionary, mkay) is hosted in the United States and thus operates under the legal framework thereof, might I direct you to the US Supreme Court’s 1988 decision in Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell (No. 86-1278), in which satire was unanimously adjudicated to be a protected form of speech.

   Moreover, certain materials from your site have been employed on the basis of ‘fair use’ under US copyright law. Your claim of copyright infringement is thus null and void in the circumstance of ‘fair use.’

   If your lawyers (provided you actually have retained any) have in fact advised you that you have a claim against our site regarding copyright infringement, you are cordially invited to a) get better legal advice and b) demand a refund of any monies paid to your incompetent legal advisers.

   In other words, you are respectfully requested to suck it.“

4. 

   Protium February 6th, 2009 at 22:50

   good work chaps.

5. 

   jeebusisallinyourmind February 7th, 2009 at 00:04

   They just cant take a joke can they :p

6. 

   JesusWasSchizo February 7th, 2009 at 14:23

   The poor little diddums! Can’t Jeebus, er, Mr Jesus H Christ stand up for himself? Or get his bully of a father to step in and do some good old smiting? Why waste all that hard-earned tithing money/tax-free donations on lawyers?

7. 

   Jake February 19th, 2009 at 23:48

   1st amendment is number one for a reason.

   God is omniscient, so he knew you were going to make this website before our galaxy formed, right? If it was in Gods plan, why do religious kooks want to change it?

8. 

   black February 19th, 2009 at 23:57

   Jake, you must understand that God moves in Mysterious Ways™.

   With the right lighting you can hardly see the preacher’s arm underneath.

9. 

   Gee Suss February 20th, 2009 at 00:05

   Jake, there is no 1st ‘amendment’ in Australia.

   Let’s look at the omniscient theme ..

   If a god knows everything, the beginning and the end, even before he chose to create it, he knew everything that was going to happen, right down to you sneezing or something ..

   How have we got choice?

   Yea sure, to us it _appears_ as choice, but to this omniscient being, it created an ‘engine’, that goes thru the motions from beginning to end, just as ‘it designed’.

   Effectively it just made a machine to setup people to burn in hell for eternity.

10. 

    Nathan September 21st, 2009 at 02:29

    Surely Jesus is to thank for your site? I mean they’re claiming parrots and giant chairs are the work of Jesus: why not a parody website.

11. 

    black September 21st, 2009 at 03:02

    As we of little faith understand it, Nathan, the business works so that only good occurrences are credited to Jeebus, while bad things (never mind that the same magical thinking should credit Jeebus with the power and good will to prevent them) are either the work of the Devil, a sort of Unjeebus, or (and you must admire the genius in this) a prompt from Jeebus to [tithe/pray/kick crap out of infidels/sleep with pastor: select one or more] harder.

    Now get ready for Danny Nalliah to dangle volcano threats over the heads of the deluded. LINK – it’s a must for him. You heard it here first.

12. 

    Crocodile September 21st, 2009 at 17:58

    They sure know how to spell. Although I must admit that I don’t know many sight administrators called “Nearly free speech” at the moment.

    Also the fact that they don’t understand shit about copyright infringement clearly is part of the cherry-picking trait in religious people where they pick and choose what they want to follow from their religious book.

    It’s sad that they try that with the law as well.

13. 

    Skelliot September 30th, 2009 at 15:42

    Ummm also, Sight…site? How can you get that wrong.

14. 

    HappySinger October 1st, 2009 at 18:24

    Lulz. @jesusaal try to close down their critics with legal threats. Also, they can’t spell. #jaal http://is.gd/3PVBy

    This comment was originally posted on Twitter

15. 

    Ian October 1st, 2009 at 18:54

    This is hilarious! Which is just as well because that guarantees its status as satire.

16. 

    John S Wilkins October 1st, 2009 at 19:00

    In Australia, fair use is protected by copyright law, as the poster noted. There would be no actionable content in the use of the name. They’re flying a kite. Tell ‘em to go screw themselves.

17. 

    Matty October 1st, 2009 at 19:29

    I think they are just talking about the web address and not the content. You may want to look into that. If the address was http://www.jesusallaboutlies.com then it would be a completely different matter.
    The content falls under the parody and criticism umbrella but I’m not sure the address does.
    I’m not trying to be critical and I’ll happily be corrected. It is just a thought I had.

18. 

    Gee Suss October 1st, 2009 at 20:39

    Hi Matty,

    There’s nothing they can do, indeed, if they would like to take us to court over it, or approach ICANN with a claim, go ahead, bring it on!

    PS: it is always great to think, and I applaud those that actually do cheers for the contact and comments.

    PPS: we also own http://jesusallaboutlies.com if you hadn’t noticed.

19. 

    CoranStow October 1st, 2009 at 21:22

    RT @HappySinger: Lulz. @jesusaal try to close down their critics with legal threats. Also, they can’t spell. #jaal http://is.gd/3PVBy

    This comment was originally posted on Twitter

20. 

    Matty October 1st, 2009 at 21:38

    The only instance I can think of is the whitehouse.gov versus whitehouse.com thing. Which inspired the creation of the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticybersquatting_Consumer_Protection_Act) in the USA where you domain is registered (previous post). Then if JAAL has registered their name as a trademark (which they probably have) you may have a problem.

21. 

    Kaili October 9th, 2009 at 14:22

    Hey All,
    I’m a christian. I find your site (not sight) interesting. I think it’s great to have a somewhat respectful forum to read and learn. If there is an afterlife (obviously I believe that), then it’s eternally important I consider where I (we) stand. Considering there are very few options – there either is or there isn’t an afterlife – to not think through and be convicted that what you believe is right is pretty dicey.
    I think that with faith there will always be things we can’t explain or can’t explain to your satisfaction. And I accept that. Not as a dig to the intelligence of anyone. (As a terrible analogy) I have been to Thailand. I could show you the amazing things I’ve seen through photos. I could tell you of the sights and sounds. But you still haven’t had the experience of going to Thailand. There are things I could say to the friends that came with me that you wouldn’t understand – simply because you’ve not been there. (Some of you may have been to Thailand – you get the idea). Without experiencing God personally, your understanding will always be different to that of a Christian. Also, taking sole verses at face-value without reading more of the passage or the context in which it was written will generally always give a distorted picture of what it’s actually saying – as with any piece of literature.
    Lastly, I would say if God wanted robots, he would have made them. Yes, we have free will. And yes, he knows exactly what we’re going to do. That doesn’t mean he forces us to. If you read what the Bible says, it speaks of love. The reason Jesus came was to show us he wasn’t that far removed from us – he’d now “gone to Thailand” or experienced Earth for himself. He came to also bridge the gap between the men and God. I know Christians are hypocrites. The church is full of them. Some go to church to tick the box that week. Some hit their wives (or husbands), get drunk, sleep around, kill and then go to church as if it’s all ok.
    Believe what you want to believe – it’s your right. Sure, judge Christians on the way they behave as often it’s disgraceful. Just be aware that often when you think it’s disgraceful, God does too.
    That T-shirt you have on your website “God Hates Fags” is disgusting. I saw a documentary on an American Family who holds up posters like that every week. That’s not love. I hope one day their hearts read the words they scream to homosexuals every day.
    I know Christians are the representatives but some of us will only carry their cross so far. Some don’t even pick it up at all.

22. 

    Gee Suss October 9th, 2009 at 15:57

    What you are referring too start with, regarding ‘the afterlife’ is just conjecture. The name for this is ‘Pascals Wager’. There are many critiques of this argument, from the fact that your belief is just one of thousands of concepts of god and salvation and thus your betting your whole life there is not only a god, but the version you define as a god is the right one (including the multitude of different salvations under christianity) etc etc etc .. anyway, look it up, I’d just be repeating the many criticisms of this weak argument.

    So your god gives some people a better chance than others at avoiding eternal damnation?

    The simple fact is you have no evidence whatsoever, all your statements are just blind ones over this jesus construct even existing. Considering there is no evidence at all outside the collected fables of the bible, I see no reason, no logic in accepting it as truth, let alone the divine words of a god. The god your defining as ‘omni-max’ is a total paradox.

    If god is able to do anything, and knows everything, even before we choose to do it, he knew which way a fly would move before he created existence, knew the beginning and the end and everything that happens along the way as he as always existed before creation, we would not have choice, but fate. He would have known exactly everything that was to occur every step of the way, created evil, and condemned for eternity multitudes. To us we would think we had a choice, but all this was well known before the dice was cast. Effectively the whole of existence is a machine that god put in motion, knowing, and creating, exactly everything that occurs.

    Can you do something that this god did not predict? no? then you have no choice, you are fated to his construct.

    Even beside the fact with an omnisicient supernatural entity ‘choice’/free will is a paradox, what ‘choice’ do we have, if we are offered in one hand something extremely enticing, and in the other eternal damnation? Is that not bribery of sorts, coupled with a massive threat to force coercion?

    How is that ‘choice’?

    You might think the christians holding ‘god hates fags’ is disgusting, I do too. This is exactly what your bible teaches, in practice. So long as people support the bible, support religious faith, you are supporting these people and bigotry as well. Passively yes, but you create the garden, and everyone else reaps what you sow.

23. 

    Graham October 9th, 2009 at 18:50

    @Gee Suss have you examined the evidence for Jesus existence? It’s widely held amongst historians that there is more evidence for his existence than Julius Caesar. Also there is an ancient document written in the time of Jesus by a Jewish historian named Josephus, who was not a Christian and did not profess any affiliation with Jesus, but he records him in his writing.

    What you’ve said about Christianity being just one of so many ‘religions’ (a word which I don’t like and neither did Jesus – he wasn’t into religious or pious people) is true, so how and why would I or Kaili (who I don’t know personally btw) choose this one? I don’t know about Kaili but for me it is the only one that makes sense of the world. As far as I’m aware, Christianity is the only worldview (a better word than religion) which says that bad people can go to heaven without having to ‘make the grade’ with some form of deeds.

    Why does this make more sense than a worldview that says you can get to heaven (or nirvana or whatever) by being a good person? Because how good is good? If it’s just better than the person next to you, it’s not that great to be honest. If it’s so low that everyone is fine, then where is justice when there is so much evil in the world? But if it’s perfect, then no one is getting there, which leaves us with a problem.

    What Jesus said is that yes – no one is good enough to go to heaven, but guess what, I’ll pay for your place in heaven myself, personally. So what does that mean? It means heaven will be full of bad people who’ve been forgiven, only because they accepted the lifeline that God threw out by sending Jesus into the world, and chose to follow him. Not having achieved some sort of level of goodness or anything, just having accepted the offer and followed.

    That’s why looking around at any number of wacko’s who call themselves Christian and deciding that ‘if that’s what the God of the Bible’s on about I’ll be right without him’ is not a good way to go… Make an informed decision about God by going straight to the source – the Bible. Mark is the shortest gospel in the Bible and should only take an hour or two to get through if that. Have a read – then you’ll have heard straight from the horses mouth.

    Just quickly on the topic of choice – there is one to make. If it’s to accept the offer from Jesus and want a relationship with God, the Bible says that’s what it will be forever. But by the same token if it’s to walk your own path without God, that’s what it’s going to be forever too. That may not sound too bad, except that life on this earth is not currently devoid of God so there’s no way of knowing what it would be like. Regardless of whether you’re a Christian, Muslim, Hindu or Atheist, life on earth is still filled with all sorts of gifts like relationships, beauty, food, love, the list goes on. To my mind, the worst concept of hell is a place where God is not there.

24. 

    Kaili October 9th, 2009 at 22:24

    When I addressed the idea of an afterlife, I was not merely taking Christianity into account but rather all faith systems which believe that there is a form of life after death. Either there is or there isn’t.
    I understand what you’re saying in terms of fate, but I totally disagree. If God wanted Robots he’d have made them. God knows the path we will choose, knows who we will meet, what we will do. But he doesn’t make those choices for us. He knows how the story actually plays out. That doesn’t mean we’re all actors in his master play. For instance when you’re watching a movie, you may know the whole story, may know how it will begin and end. That doesn’t mean you have any control over the way it plays out. (I realise this doesn’t totally work as I believe God does have control). I heard it said in a different way. A friend (a mother) used her kids as an example. She can place many different kinds of food in front of her kids and tell them to pick whichever they want (chocolate, sweets, lollies, etc). But she knows that they will always pick the chocolate. She hasn’t made them, forced them or controlled them in any way.
    I wouldn’t say that’s coercion. We can’t live forever on Earth – and who would want to! So (I believe) we then move onto an afterlife of sorts. If the Bible is true, it tells us our options. Yes, there are only two options, but it’s our choice to make. Furthermore, it’s not like a reality TV show which, at the end says “What you didn’t know was… we were watching you the whole time and you just didn’t match up!” It lays out the rules.
    I see the world acting and speaking this idea of God hating everything so much, like sex, homosexuals. But that isn’t what the Bible teaches. In the Old Testament there was some of your “eye for an eye” stuff but that was replaced with “turn the other cheek”. Jesus put down all the pompous idiots who wanted to pick and choose and be so legalistic about Jewish law.
    I think Christians should be critiqued. I think it’s heinous that there are places around the world where in churches things like rape, especially by church leaders is covered up. It’s so wrong. Some churches seem to think it’s for them to take care of. If it’s illegal, it should be reported! Not dealt with and covered up.
    I think there’s a lot that could be changed within churches, but I think you’d find the people that are doing those things may wear the name tag of “Christian” but they’re nothing like the real thing.

    When you say “This is exactly what your bible teaches, in practice,” what do you mean?

25. 

    Gee Suss October 9th, 2009 at 23:50

    Graham, I wrote a nice little response to your Josephus ‘evidence’ here

    Go on, are you just lying for your Jesus? show us some of this evidence you are stating as truth exists. Blind faith is all your showing.

    But, as you go on to say, that’s all you need! How convenient.

    As far as I’m aware, Christianity is the only worldview (a better word than religion) which says that bad people can go to heaven without having to ‘make the grade’ with some form of deeds.

    How down right arrogant and self interested is your salvation. Any normal person would see how this is you bringing up an argument to justify your faith because it is too easy. Sorry, but I am totally offended by your stance and self-centered arrogance, and I bet you don’t even understand why. I am positive there are other christians that would feel the same way.

    So are you saying, I could do good deeds all my life, take care of my family, love and respect humanity, but if I don’t believe in your jesus I am going to an eternity in damnation?

    So Hitler that had faith in the fact there was a jesus, is going to heaven?

    What about all the people before your so called jesus turned up on the planet? What about the millions of people born into other faiths?

    Your god is going to let a childs ’soul’ burn in the everlasting torment of hell, because they were born into a buddhist family?

    How .. arrogant is your salvation.

    And yes I have read your bible, what do you think of Mark 9:1? pretty much a failed prediction there eh! same with Mark 13:30. What about Jesus last words? 15:34 “My god, my god, why have you forsaken me?” but Luke 23:46 has it as, “Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit!” John 19:30, on the other hand has it as “It is finished.” .. but I digress … back to Mark, and the very interesting points about those that believe :

    What signs accompany those who believe? 5 things.

    1. Cast out demons
    2. Speak in new tongues
    3. Pick up snakes
    4. Drink any deadly thing — and it will not harm them
    5. Lay hands on the sick and they will recover

    Jesus says, “Go into all the world and proclaim the good news to the whole creation.”

    “The one who believes and is baptized will be saved; but the one who does not believe will be condemned.”
    Jesus continues : “those who believe … go to heaven” also “And these signs will accompany those who believe…”

    You believe? Let’s see you drink some bleach, or do you lack faith?

    With regard the concept of free will, this is something else I have brought up in many topic replies on the site, search for free will. The concept of an omni-max god and free will is a paradox.

26. 

    Gee Suss October 10th, 2009 at 00:12

    Kailli.

    If your god made everything, he could create it anyway he wished, all laws and situations and happenings, being omniscient, not only did he just know about, he CREATED by definition.

    Your analogies don’t work, and are flawed logic. Can you deviate from god’s will? the kids in your analogy could, but your not an omniscient being. That’s where the paradox lies, and you are having trouble grasping it (coincidentally, there are christians called calvanists well aware of this paradox, and argue for ‘determinism’ or fate, as it is an extremely strong paradox)

    if God knows the future, that means that the future is predictable and immutable. This, in turn, means that our actions are predetermined. We may have pondered long and hard over which action to take, but the very act of pondering is as predictable as the execution of a complex computer program. You cannot deviate from what god predicted, before he chose to create things the way he did, which made all things come to pass, exactly as he CREATED them.

    Note that this reasoning also applies to God: if God is omniscient, then he knows what he will do, and must inevitably do what he already knows he will do.

    If God knows what will happen, and does something else, he’s not omniscient. If he knows and can’t change it, he’s not omnipotent.

27. 

    Gee Suss October 10th, 2009 at 04:36

    “I see the world acting and speaking this idea of God hating everything so much, like sex, homosexuals. But that isn’t what the Bible teaches. In the Old Testament there was some of your “eye for an eye” stuff but that was replaced with “turn the other cheek”. Jesus put down all the pompous idiots who wanted to pick and choose and be so legalistic about Jewish law.”

    John 14:15 “If you love Me, keep My commandments.”

    Matthew 5:17-19 “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven”

    1 John 3:4 sin is transgression of the law

    This whole concept of the ‘new covenant’ is just convenience. It allows you to cherry pick from the Old Testament. ‘Yep we’ll take the ten commandments, but the listing of rules from gods mouth in leviticus doesn’t count, except for the homophobic stuff … oh bugger it .. whatever fits my bigotry ..”

    Whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committs adultery
    Matthew 5:32, 19:9 & Luke 16:18

    And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by men. Truly, I say to you they have received their reward. But when you pray, go into your room (or closet.) and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret…
    Matthew 6:5-6 RSV

    …but any woman who prays or prophecies with her head unveiled dishonors her head… For if a woman will not veil herself, then we should cut off her hair: but if it be disgraceful for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her wear a veil… Judge for yourself; is it proper for a woman to pray to God with head uncovered?
    1 Corinthians 11:5-13 RSV

    Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
    l Corinthians 11:14

    Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak
    1 Corinthians 14:34

    The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God
    Deuteronomy 22:5

    But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
    Matthew 6:7

    …that women should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in seemly apparel, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly attire
    Timothy 2:9

    Let not yours be the outward adorning of braiding of hair, decoration of gold, and wearing of fine clothing
    1 Peter 3 :3

    If any man come to me, and not hate his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sister, yet, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple
    Luke 14:26

    And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven
    Matthew 23:9

    You should kill rebellious children
    Deuteronomy 21:18-21

    You should kill adulterers and rape victims
    Deuteronomy 22:23-24

    Anyone who blaphemes should die.
    Leviticus 24:16

    Christians who convert to another religion should be put to death
    Deuteronomy 13:5-10

    Jesus says divorced women should not remarry
    Mark 10:11

    Women cannot teach men
    2 Timothy 11-12

    Women may not speak in church
    1 Cor 14:33-36

    And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the tree, is the Lord’s…And concerning the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, even of whatsoever passeth under the rod, the tenth shall be holy unto the Lord
    Leviticus 27:30-32

    Eating pork is forbidden
    Deuteronomy 14:8

    Money cannot be lent at interest to your brother, only to foreigners
    Deuteronomy 23: 19-20

    A man must marry and have relations with his dead brothers wife
    Deuteronomy 25:5-6

    A raped, unengaged virgin must marry her rapist and they can never divorce
    Deuteronomy 22:28-29

28. 

    Stevo October 12th, 2009 at 00:33

    What you do here is an offence, not only to me but to Pudding.

    For every person who speaks out on this site against the authority of the one true Pudding, there will be forgiveness.

    But for every person who is lost, for every person who lives their life separated from their dessert because of this site, you will suffer a year of early bedtimes. you will not have even the money to run this website in the end.

    you are not simply dealing with an organisation or legal commitee, but something much greater.

    please shut down the site, and save yourself the struggle…

    (This was edited to make more sense. Stevo was initally mistaken for another nuisance commenter, and for that I apologise. Black)

29. 

    black October 12th, 2009 at 00:44

    @Stevo (of Pudding fame):

    Perhaps http://www.denytheholyspirit.com is more in your line?

30. 

    Gee Suss October 12th, 2009 at 00:52

    A bibba da mumbo dumbo jumbo BOO!

    bibbiddy bobbedy bangeby DOO!

    Efectively your saying by talking to people about how stupid christianity is, and critiquing the advertising campaign … people will move away from christianity?

    Really, what your saying is educating them on the stupidity of it, the fact the logic does not make sense and that it is a hypocritical construct and pyramid scheme .. is a bad thing as people realise what it is all about and turn away from it?

    LOL ok

31. 

    Gee Suss October 12th, 2009 at 00:54

    @Stevo

    still waiting for that lightning strike!!

    Meanwhile, just got another cheque from the international atheist conspiracy. Wow, profit!!

    keep your posts coming, it translates into more funding for us.

    thanks

32. 

    weez October 12th, 2009 at 08:51

    So, let me get this straight….

    you will not have even the money to run this website in the end.

    Is Matty threatening something legalish here?

    Or is he just darning us all to heck?

    How hilarious.

    Until we find out, could you please pass the pudding? Everybody likes pudding.

33. 

    Stevo. October 12th, 2009 at 09:59

    Seems odd for a site powered by a concept such as ‘Reason’ and created by annonymous ‘Concerned Individuals’ to be accusing an annonymous poster of cowardice.

    and then on a page where you claim that Christianity doesn’t want free speech, you start changing people’s posts.

    Yes, that person you dubbed ‘Matty’ is me, and I did in fact give a valid email address – select_adjust_recall@hotmail.com (just to be more explicit, in case you missed it the last time).

    I’m actually quite surprised you would go to these lows of insults, post-changing, etc.

    anyway i hope you passed on the original post to whoever the hidden person paying for and running the site is – it was a serious warning.

34. 

    black October 12th, 2009 at 10:22

    Ah, stevo: we get no loons for a day or two, then two from addresses close within the same IP block.

    Mistakes were possibly made.

    Do you plan to be all Christlike on us with bombs or something else, Stevo? Perhaps pudding?

35. 

    Stevo. October 12th, 2009 at 10:41

    i still suggest you shut the site down… you’re dealing with something much bigger than you can imagine…..

    legal committees can do enough, but the God i have seen has so much more power….

    what you are doing is potentially tearing people from God, like tearing a child from its parent…. if you’ve ever seen a parent in that state, you probably can gather the anger and sadness that God has.

    needless to say i don’t think He will take this lightly…..

36. 

    black October 12th, 2009 at 10:49

    @stevo: Pudding, god, wibble. You’ve said your piece.

    If you have “seen” the god you claim to have seen, then your dose may need adjustment. If you have not, you just lied.

    We are also messing with people’s karma, advocating pasta-abstention in the very (noodly) face of the FSM, and saying “Ni!”.

    If “HE” starts sending you messages involving bombs, guns, lead pipes or jumping out of the hedge naked, waving a handful of Jack Chick comix, we strongly advise you to see a doctor.

    Bye.

37. 

    Stevo. October 12th, 2009 at 11:00

    lol, i didn’t lie… oh well, its between you and God now. you have been warned..

38. 

    Gee Suss October 12th, 2009 at 11:07

    Stevo,

    Why does your god give a shit about us, but stands back when millions of children die of starvation?

    You’ve seen god? I suggest you see a doctor .. really.

    “But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.” (Matthew 5:22)

    “Judge not, that ye be not judged” (Matthew 7:1)

    “Judge not, and ye shall not be judged, condemn not and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven” (Luke 6:37)

    “But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil; but whosoever shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn to him the other also” (Matthew 5:39)

    see, us atheists can teach you something about your own supposed beliefs, but then again, you can interpret the bible in any way you like can’t you?

39. 

    black October 12th, 2009 at 11:15

    I will watch out for puddings, Stevo. Puddings exist.

    Matter ended.

40. 

    Graham October 12th, 2009 at 16:59

    @Gee Suss, I haven’t got time to reply to all of what you wrote back to me, but on the topic of being saved, I didn’t say all you had to do was “have faith in the fact there was a jesus”. I said you had to accept the offer, and follow. Big difference. Follow means humble yourself, turn, and start living your life to glorify Jesus. Don’t be confused about the mechanism though – outward actions can not *get* you into heaven. But they are evidence that you are actually trusting in Jesus.

    It might seem unfair that our deeds don’t count towards whether we are forgiven or not, but where is the line to be drawn? Who is the gold standard for measuring if we’re in or out? But the point is not how many good or bad things you’ve done because let’s face it, we’ve all done some good and some bad.

    It’s about how we’ve treated our creator. We’ve all turned away from him and he’s entitled to do with us what he pleases – he is the creator after all. If he chose to just let everyone off the hook, that wouldn’t be just. If he chose to condemn everyone, it would be just (being the creator and all) but not merciful. The astonishing thing is that he chose to be both just *and* merciful by sending Jesus to die for us.

    It is just because the consequences of our wrongdoing have still been paid for, and by the one who has been wronged – God (if it were anyone else, it wouldn’t be just).

    But it is merciful as well, since all he is asking is that we accept the offer – trust in Jesus and follow him.

    As for people born pre-Jesus etc, what I understand is that God has revealed himself through creation to all, and yet he is still not thanked or glorified. As for babies, I honestly can’t say that I know of a definitive answer to that question from the Bible, but I know God’s character and I trust him. I have three kids of my own and one is just 14mo so it’s not a question that I’ve never contemplated.

    But to me the question has nothing to do with justice – because justice would mean none of us are forgiven. The question is about mercy, and since I’m not the creator I’m going to have to leave that up to him.

    Listen before you reply, these are just my convictions – the things that I honestly believe to be true. I can’t force you or anyone to believe them and I’m not trying to make out that I’m any better than you or anyone else – hopefully what I’ve said makes it pretty clear that this is *definitely* not the case. I’m just contributing to the discussion from my own perspective. I fully respect your right to believe whatever want – controlling other people is not my business.

    BTW, have you come from a Christian upbringing? I’m just curious because you’ve read more of the Bible than most people who aren’t Christian.

41. 

    Gee Suss October 12th, 2009 at 21:22

    @graham

    You whole belief has no basis for me. I have read the bible, I have read the Qu’ran, many other mythologies of the middle east and other continents, and I find them ALL lacking.

    So you telling me the attributes of your god means bullshit really.

    There are 38,000+ christian sects (According to Christianity Today), and your just one telling me your version is the right one.

    Your god was not merciful, don’t give me that hogwash. I have read the bible, and sick of trying to prove it to people.

    You have no logical proof that a god could possibly exist, let alone the fact that jesus was a divine being, nor even any solid evidence he ever existed.

    All you have really are fables from the bronze age and stone age jewish faiths, and the ‘visions’ of Paul.

    You have put all your faith in man.

    I was born into a country where christianity was the major religion yes, my family were ‘loose’ christians, like a lot of them that just say they are christian but don’t care as it’s not really relevant, it just stops them having to think about their mortality.

42. 

    Graham October 13th, 2009 at 01:35

    My logical proof in a creator is creation (or the universe if you prefer). Personally I think it’s much harder to believe that the universe came into being in all it’s beauty and complexity by random chance from nothing. That’s a leap of faith that I can’t make. That’s what’s illogical to me.

    

    On another note, if you don’t believe in a creator, or any higher intrinsic authority than yourself (or anyone else on the planet), do you believe in right and wrong? If so, how can something that has come about by complete chance have any such thing as morality embedded within it?

    Once again – don’t take my responses as an attack, these are just the questions that come to my mind when I contemplate what the world would be like if it didn’t have a creator.

43. 

    Gee Suss October 13th, 2009 at 02:53

    umm, pointing at something, saying it’s ‘creation’ and saying a fairy created it is not proof.

    OK I will explain these things, but you might find it worth your effort to do a google search on topics before asking stuff. I don’t have the time to basically rehash basic logic and philosophical thought when you could just type it into google for a multitude of answers.

    Who is saying ‘random chance’ from ‘nothing’?

    Indeed, you go so far to state that the universe has not always existed, it could very well have, you have no evidence either way. Science at least is honest that we do not know yet.

    Science does not say the universe was born with the big bang either, most all theory atm is regarding singularities and bubble universes etc, where it has always existed, only changed form. (The big bang wasn’t a bang. it was a sudden expansion of space and time btw.)

    However science is also open to the fact that something could come from nothing as well.

    (delta q)*(delta p) >= h/(pi*4)

    It is a quantum-mechanical uncertainty relation, but to cut the explanation short, it basically states that anything can come out of a singularity, being maximally chaotic, they are complete entropy.

    ‘anything can come out of a naked singularity—in the case of the big bang the universe came out. Its creation represents the instantaneous suspension of physical laws, the sudden, abrupt flash of lawlessness that allowed something to come out of nothing.’
    P. Davies, The Edge of Infinity (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1981), p. 161.

    If this god created space and time, how could it perform a causal event such as can be explained via science as above from a singularity?

    A causal event relies on time. Time relies on one things relation to another.

    No time = no causation = no act of creation

    The concept of a god is one totally of paradox. It is the only one claiming something came from nothing.

    In fact, to me, your being quite illogical to take a leap and say there must be a supernatural entity outside of all we can now, outside of reality, that did it.

    On the question of morality, I will start thusly, as I think your whole question begs a total misunderstanding of reality.

    Who is saying what comes from complete chance? Not me. Your saying that, and I have a sneaking suspicion (well actually I am quite sure) it comes from one of the effects I have talked about with religion, and directly related to evolution.

    You’ve been told that by religious peers, without investigating what in fact evolution is yourself.

    Am I right? Do I have to start teaching you what evolution means? Has religion really effected you so much that you have just ignored the foundational ideas of something that defines many of the major sciences today?

    I’ll wait on that one, let you have a look around before you show yourself to be just that. I really don’t have time to teach you primary school stuff, honestly.

    If there was a conclusive disproof of the existence of God, would you have reason to care for your family, friends, community and other humans? Would that just disappear?

    Morals are because we are evolutionary social animals.

    I look at your ’scripture’ and I see rules for taking slaves, for treating women, the list goes on, and you have the gall to infer that your book is what gives you a sense of what is right and wrong?

    can an atheist be an honest person, a kind person, a loyal person? Yes of course! Masses of people are atheists, they aren’t the ones flying planes into buildings or blowing up abortion clinics. But atheists just like believers can be evil. The difference is, religious people do evil things, and believe they are doing good, moreso than any atheist.

    I’ve posted it before, http://www.jesusallaboutlife.com/2009/02/08/the-race-is-on-jaal-vs-maccas-ding-ding/

    of maybe this other piece from the comments there :

    Joseph Kony, one of the most powerful Christian leaders in the world.

    You may have never heard of his militia, the Lord’s Resistance Army, but they have murdered more people than al Qaeda, Hezbollah, and Hamas combined.

    The International Criminal Court indicted Kony on 33 charges – 12 counts of crimes against humanity and 21 counts of war crimes. He helped start a war in Northern Uganda that has lasted over 22 years, claimed tens of thousands of lives, and displaced over two million people, accounting for 90% of the population of northern Uganda. He has abducted over 20,000 children to serve as soldiers or sex slaves, keeping anywhere from 27 to 50 little girls as his own “wives” and forcing many of his “recruits” to slay their own parents as initiation.

    And he’s done it all with the help of a deadly blend of Christianity and mysticism. His “council” not only includes the Holy Spirit, but a host of dead spirits that speak to him from the great beyond. His original, mostly unsuccessful military fought in cross-shaped formations and used holy water in battle, but the Lord’s Resistance Army has grown into a much more formidable threat, fighting to overthrow the current government and establish a new one based on the Ten Commandments. (Sound familiar?)

    The government of Southern Sudan has hosted two years worth of talks between the Ugandan government and the LRA, and just when they seemed ready to reach an agreement in April of 2008, Kony failed to appear to sign the peace treaty, citing fears of arrest or assassination. On Christmas Eve, the LRA slaughtered 189 people and kidnapped 20 children during a celebration sponsored by a Catholic church in Faradje, Democratic Republic of Congo.

    So really, yes I do get offended when someone just assumed because you don’t believe in fairies, you have no concept of right and wrong. That places that socialistic quality that even apes and other social creatures share, into the hands of some supernatural entity outside the realms of time and space, which they claim to have a personal relationship with.

    absolute hypocrits, sorry, but this is just plain ignorance, and this is exactly what frustrates me with people of faith. They are blind.

44. 

    Graham October 13th, 2009 at 11:40

    Please don’t think for a minute that I want to argue that simply by claiming to be Christian or belonging to another God-believing worldview you must automatically have your morality sorted out. As I’ve said all along, we are *all* in the same boat – Christian, Muslim, Atheist, Hindu, whatever. My belief is that we are all capable of great immorality.

    Regarding evolution, I’m no evolutionary expert but I did study it a bit at uni. I’m not convinced that we came from ape-like creatures etc, however I’m not going to stake my life on that belief. I do think that it’s too big a stretch to jump from obvious evidence of micro evolution to then extrapolate that macro evolution must be plausible (but I’m not insinuating you have made this leap – just sayin’).

    As for right and wrong, you may disagree with the morality of the Bible (though I do think you need to take genre into account if you’re critiquing the Bible – narrative and directive writings have totally different intentions), but I’m just saying that my basis for morality is what God has both spoken (through the Bible) and implanted on our consciences (which is less than perfect due to the fall, but still there nonetheless).

    What I still don’t understand is how an absolute morality can exist in a universe that has no higher authority than man or animal. I just don’t understand how that could possibly be. If I think it’s okay to murder, why is someone else’s take (or even the majority’s take) more right than mine?

45. 

    Gee Suss October 13th, 2009 at 12:36

    I never said anyone is devoid of immorality, but I do think that religion can have good people, do evil things. Without it, we simply have good and evil people.

    With regard evolution, we have a common ancestor with the apes, as we do with all life. Why not argue about other beings on the tree of life? Apes are just split at a closer common ancestor than much other life on the planet.

    You accept micro-evolution do you? Mutation, recombination and all processes operating within species?

    ‘Microevolution’ describes subpopulations of species becoming isolated and diverging, and this directly results in speciation (when they can no longer breed with others in that species) .. that’s macroevolution. To argue that microevolution occurs, is to argue for what directly causes macroevolution to occur.

    here’s a reference of evidence of speciation occuring, that you are denying http://www.holysmoke.org/cretins/speci.htm yet you can accept micro-evolution?

    What is the ‘barrier’ on micro-evolution that stops macro-evolution?

    Now you speak of absolute morality. Can you define that please?

    For instance. It is wrong to kill. (your bible even says this, thou shalt not kill) .. is it alright to kill in defence of a child? is it alright to kill in war? is this an ‘absolute?
    Stealing. What about if your starving? At what ‘point’ does one shift into an absolute? Do you think these absolute points defined in scripture?

    You will have to define what you mean by moral absolutes.

46. 

    Graham October 13th, 2009 at 13:09

    My understanding of macroevolution is more macro than that – when one animal effectively becomes a totally different one over time, in that it has a whole new structure and barely resembles the animal it came from. By this definition I can’t see how microevolution is any basis for accepting macroevolution. It’s a hypothesis that has no concrete proof.

    Re absolute morality. I simply mean what is to say that if I believe one thing is morally acceptable that no one else agrees with, how can anyone say I’m wrong. What authority does anyone have to dispute my morality?

47. 

    Gee Suss October 13th, 2009 at 14:41

    Well your understanding is wrong. Macroevolution is change that occurs above the level of species. Yes for sure, given the vast amounts of time, this results in radically different looking life.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_evolution

    It’s not a hypothesis, Evolution is fact, the Theory of Evolution is how it occurs.

    If you are disputing that micro-evolution can result in speciation, please provide evidence for what stops it from doing so. I have given a number of examples of speciation. That’s a pretty darn good bit of evidence, amongst a huge amount more.

    The whole ‘macro-micro’ thing is all part of evolution. Your just stating evolution stops at speciation. Where is your evidence for this.

    Morality, what are you talking about? What you are explaining is exactly what happens. You claim one morality, another christian claims another. What authority does either have to say each others morals are right or wrong? perspective of course, and the situation. Our morals are built on us being socially evolved animals, they are not defined by your scripture, nor protected by it. Morals existed before your god came to earth, and will exist after it has left.

48. 

    Graham October 13th, 2009 at 17:32

    Exactly what happens? No, not really. Yes we all have variations in what we believe to be right and wrong, but if I go out and rob a bank, I’m pretty sure the police will arrest me. So somewhere along the way, someone’s decision about right and wrong in relation to theft has become more important than mine. Why?

49. 

    Gee Suss October 13th, 2009 at 17:52

    What? Because we as social beings organise together for the common good and mutual aid. We work together as social beings. Our morals are not absolute decided by some supernatural entity, they are a process of our social evolutionary selfs.

    Why do monkeys work together in social groups? Same thing.

    what’s this dog doing?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgjyhKN_35g

    What are you saying your not making sense. Get to your point. More importantly, prove that your god exists, let alone divinely dictates moral absolutes.

50. 

    Graham October 15th, 2009 at 12:37

    My point is that if I believe I have the right to take other people’s money without their permission, why is that ‘wrong’? You’re saying it’s because we’re social beings – suddenly you have the authority to tell me I’m wrong because of your worldview is better than mine? If my belief is that I don’t want to be involved in the social good of my species, but instead do whatever I like, you’re saying that that belief is wrong (or at least inferior) to yours and many others like you, so it’s fine to put me in prison and remove my independence, simply because your moral values are more correct than mine. What’s not absolute about deciding to incarcerate someone?

51. 

    Gee Suss October 15th, 2009 at 13:12

    Is what is moral commanded by God because it is moral, or is it moral because it is commanded by God?

    You like many, don’t understand what moral absolutes are yet try and use it in terminology discussing morals and ethics.

    Moral absolutes means things are absolutely ‘right’, or absolutely ‘wrong’.

    Right and wrong is a perspective, it is not an absolute. We have a level of ethics and morality because we are social animals, we have empathy.

    What’s so hard for you to understand? Why do you think we have laws and structures etc within secular social situations?

    Buddhism, humanitarianism, christian atheists (look it up), morality and social cohesion within all animals has existed before religion, without religion, and after religion is gone.

    Whats this dog doing?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgjyhKN_35g

    Why are the other elephants helping save the baby?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cd-LtWtNvDw

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/5373379/Animals-can-tell-right-from-wrong.html

    I can’t believe you are having such a hard time dealing with the concepts of right and wrong, and that you only get them from your book.

    Are you saying without your god, if it was proved there was no god tomorrow for aguments sake .. you would go out raping, murdering, stealing etc etc?

    sad

52. 

    @sonny1408 October 21st, 2009 at 02:23

    The dude who sent you that email requesting you shut down was totally trolling lol. The fact that he mis-spelt 'site', among other things, suggests to me it's either an angry Christian pretending to be official, or another atheist having a laugh. Either way, the Jesus All About Life guys knew these kind of sites would be set up and I'm sure they're not opposed to open dialogue!

53. 

    Robin May 25th, 2010 at 17:34

    Weez, like most of the omniscients, likes to quote law. You'll find dear laddie, if there was actionable material published on this site; it is under the purvue of the jurisdiction in which it is broadcast. Not where it is transmitted. While it may have occured that way in the US; you'll find it an interesting exercise here.
    Whilst Weez may take some delight in quoting Hustler v Falwell; it doesn't equate to copyright infringement of libel or slander being non-actionable in another juridiction. Yes, satire may be a form of free speech but one has to wonder at the motivations and integrity (dare I use the word here) of the individuals pressing the point.
    However, the selfrighteous and the arrogant actually believe, by hiding behing 'satire' that they are beyond common decency. And I don't mean the prissy, cringing type of decency that the slaggers here baulk at.
    Finally, what will you all say when the Creator comes back again? Will you deny him then?

54. 

    Gee Suss May 25th, 2010 at 19:15

    Do you also believe in leprechauns?

    I love how you call me "selfrighteous and the arrogant" by "hiding behing 'satire' ", while using all that very same invective yourself, … hypocrite :p

    "Critical Review and parody site of the JAAL campaign" is quite prominently in the header. You are all pissed because you see folk confronting your claims that your ilk should have status, rights and privileges above other Australians. Of course you are going to call the waaaa-mbulance over it. Poor old sod.

    Your beliefs are perverse, not logical and lead to violent actions in the name of your god, something that is by far a logical impossiblility.

    You are offensive and your beliefs have no right to stand on top of others just because you claim your sky fairy exists.

    If you don't want to be laughed at, don't have such laughable beliefs. :p

55. 

    web surfer June 24th, 2010 at 00:02

    I couldn't have put it better myself,