Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?


Jesus Was a Liar

The four Gospels tell us a pack of lies about Jesus. If this man really lived then they accuse him of being a liar. The Church finds that truth very offensive. Yet one wonders how it could when it says Jesus is God and God stands by and lets people lie so he is lying himself by proxy!
Christians say that the four gospels show that Jesus, unique among men, never ever lied not even in the smallest thing. If that is true then he would have been crucified and loathed before he even started his ministry. A person cannot be totally honest without being brutally honest. A brutally honest man cannot gain the esteem of the populace. People may say they hate liars but what they hate more is people who refuse to tell them certain lies tailored to make them feel good about themselves and their lives. So it is not liars that bother people but the sort of lies that are told. Jesus had to have been a liar the same as the rest of us (including those of us who are fussy about being honest) if the gospels are telling the truth about his runaway popularity.
Now four short books, the gospels, that are not even concerned very much with proving Jesus' truthfulness cannot be put forward as evidence of the stupendous miracle of a man who lived to his thirties and who never ever told the least lie. You need a lot of evidence and investigation and combing through testimonies and so on to verify something like that. Yet this miracle is far more important than his big super miracle the resurrection. Christians say the resurrection of Jesus was part of our salvation and that we would still be in our sins if it hadn't happened. The resurrection of God made man or the Son of God would be the most important miracle of all time. But it means nothing if the man was not who he said he was and was not like God who cannot lie. There were people watched more closely than Jesus like Teresa Neumann who claimed to experience the miracle of not eating for years and was never caught out on any deception. Yet we know she was eating for she put on weight and needed to sit on a toilet like everybody else! So why should we believe Jesus never lied when he wasn't observed properly?
Jesus, if he existed and supposing the gospels arenít lying, said that he was the way, the truth and the life (John 14:6). He asked us to trust in him (John 7:18; 14:1). He called his teaching the gospel which it would not be if we could not trust him and be sure if it was good news. If he was a liar this claim was sheer self- aggrandizement and a sickening boast. A liar could not be the only way to God or the truth.

If Jesus was the perfect revelation of God and the Son of God like the Bible and the Church say he had to be incapable of lying for God could have arranged things so that his son would never have to lie.

If Jesus was God then he could not lie for God cannot lie (Numbers 23:19; Deuteronomy 18; John 17:17). On the authority of St Paul, who was the Christian whose writings were closest to the ministry of Jesus, we were informed that Jesusí God does not permit lying Ė even when it is clever lies designed to bring a soul to salvation that will never be found out (Romans 3:7). God is without parts so he is what he does so if he is truthfulness he cannot lie for then he would be part liar and part truth.

If the Son of God lied then he was evil for God was not with him but the Devil was. For a liar to say that those who oppose him would and should rot in Hell forever would be most vile.

If Jesus lied his close friends, the apostles especially, would have known it. They preached that he was all-truthful so they would have been liars. If the New Testament is derived from the apostlesí teaching as it says, it is not from God if these people were liars for we have to depend on it to give us evidence about Jesus and canít. It would then be sinful to believe that Jesus had a mission from God for it is the vice of credulity to believe in supernatural tales coming from an unreliable source.

Jesus said that people who lie in small things should not be trusted in greater and people who lie in big things should not be trusted in small. See Luke 16:10. (One wonders then how anybody could trust the gospels for they might simply have left out the lies Jesus told.) We must remember that the religious experts of the day regarded Jesus as a liar. Christianity asks us to take the word of a few poorly educated men that he was not in the face of witnesses of the highest calibre and who were trained in discernment.

It would be no excuse to say that if Jesus lied it was for a purpose for the gospels would have to tell us when he lied and why so that we could trust him the rest of the time. They did not so they are saying he lied for nothing but sheer malice if he lied.

If Jesus lied he was not God for God cannot contradict himself for he is perfect (Matthew 5:48) and all-powerful (Matthew 17:20). If he was the Son of God then he had to be better than all the prophets. If they never preached error while claiming to use their prophetic gift he had to be better: absolutely reliable. If Jesus ever stated a religious error was true then he was not the Son of God.

Errors slander those who see them for what they are. God could not let his Son err if he could not let him lie. Also, if Jesus could err he knew it so if we can find errors in his teaching it means he was a fraud for claiming to be an infallible prophet.

If Jesus lied then what right had he to say in the Sermon on the Mount that we should not need to swear for we should be so truthful meaning that we should never lie even for a good or extreme reason? This is the doctrine that makes wars and breaks up families. It would be extremely evil if he lied after teaching that.

Jesus keeps saying ďTruly I say to youĒ and things along that line in the gospel of John despite having said that anything that goes beyond yes or no is evil. He kept saying this for stuff he had already said and said it for trivial stuff. He said it unnecessarily. His words were certainly a kind of oath. And a vain oath at that! He gave his teaching against oaths right in the Sermon on the Mount. The Church replies that we are taking Jesus too literally. His point in the Sermon was that we should be so truthful that we should never need to say more than yes or no or swear for we and others know we can be relied on totally. But this would still mean that Jesus did wrong with his truly truly stuff. They will say then he had to emphasise that he was being truthful for he was speaking to people who may have thought him to be a liar. As if that would help! Jesus did swear in the Gospel of John for he said that God could bear witness that what he was saying was true. That is all an oath is in essence. More interestingly, what is the point of swearing before people who think you are a liar anyway Ė is it not a sign that you definitely are lying? Anyway, the Sermon on the Mount Jesus rejects Johnís Jesus as a fraud and a heretic and a fiction.

Jesus told more lies and made more errors than enough as we will prove later.


Jesus Christ would have been buried under a mountain of suits for slander if he lived today.

To tell a lie, to err even, is to slander the person who has the truth. It is accusing them of lying or of not being smart enough. Jesus slandered people with his errors and lies.

An action that is intended to fool is as much a lie as a spoken one. Jesus was publicly baptised in the Jordan by John for the repentance of sins and let it be revealed publicly (John 1). If he was free from sin, this was deceiving the witnesses and slandering himself by letting himself be taken for a sinner. If Jesus had to be baptised he could have had it done in private. If he had announced to all that he had no sin they would have laughed at him and he would have had no mission. The baptism would count as evidence against him.
The Church says Jesus got baptised as an example. That is a lie for nothing in the gospel says why he was baptised. He was indeed deceiving.

Jesus criticised the apostles for not understanding his parables (Mark 4:10, 13). Jesus told the parable of the seed. Some seed is thrown on bad ground and does not grow, some grows well and some of that is choked by other plants. It is plain that even a person who was unable to stand with drink would know what this means. What else could the seed be but the word of God? It could be thought to be the grace of God but that made no difference for the Jews held that grace is only given out to those who have the word of God which they surmised was themselves. Jesus was falsely accusing the apostles of being stupid. And then he proved his own inability to tell the truth when he said that the purpose of the parables was to hide doctrine so that the true meaning could be given to the worthy. As if he would want to hide something like the meaning of the seed!
Jesus was really saying that he has the right to ride roughshod over those who needed his guidance the most when he maligned and rejected them.

Catholics interpret Jesus when he said you are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church in Matthew 16 as saying that Peter was the head of the Church. Jesus a few minutes later called Peter Satan and Satan is the most evil being in the universe. Either Peter was the devil incarnate or Jesus was slandering him. If Jesus promoted the Devil incarnate to a high rank in his group as the New Testament says then he was no better. Peter had simply said he didn't want Jesus to suffer on a cross and Jesus very severely called him an obstacle in his path. A rock and an obstacle. Jesus could still build his Church on a rock that was also an obstacle. It is not true that Peter would have to be a pope and infallible to be the rock.
Jesus was once asked by the Jews if it were right to divorce one's wife for any reason whatsoever. He asked them what the commandment said and they said that Moses said that divorce was permitted. Jesus said that the scriptures forbade this for a man is to leave his parents and cleave to his wife and that what God has united no man must put asunder. He said that Moses only wrote the commandment because of the hardness of heart of the people. Now, even if they were stubborn, Moses had no cause to authorise no-fault divorce. He could have allowed a restricted form of divorce. And there is no record that Moses was forced and bullied by the people to write the commandment. They would need to be prepared to cause an uprising over this issue if you want to absolve Moses of the blame for making the law. And the law makes it clear that the people were afraid of Moses and that he took no nonsense when they rebelled. Jesus was simply a liar.

In Matthew 8, Jesus says that nobody in Israel had as much faith as the Roman centurion. That is impossible to believe when Jesus had allegedly cured thousands of Israelites before. He was lying then when he told the Samaritan woman that salvation is from the Jews.

Jesus said that nobody was good only God. If nobody was good only God then the person who believes that they have no free will and cannot sin or believes themselves to be sinless is a fraud. We can learn by experience that this was false testimony against the whole human race.

Jesus condemned wilful doubt and the lack of faith as sinful and stated that they would prevent salvation (John 8:23). He was being bigoted for being human he knew that there could be no sin in doubt or in changing belief. Doubt is only thinking with reason that your belief may be wrong. If you wonít doubt then you are refusing to see what the truth may be. Jesus was opposed to truth. If you are confident in your belief and if you really believe you will not be afraid to doubt. To condemn the changing of belief is itself bigoted and a slur against the human race. It is these simply because what is sincere cannot be sinful even if it can be evil. For example, to sincerely believe that fire will not burn you is evil and harmful but is not deliberate evil. The ban on doubt makes Christianity's whole religious and theological edifice suspect.

Jesus said that the Baptiser was the prophet Elijah and restored everything and the people did what they pleased with him as scripture promised they would (Mark 9). John denied he was Elijah (John 1:21) and did no miracles as the Gospels admit unlike Elijah who did which is proof enough that Jesus made John out to be Elijah against his will to take advantage of his following and influence. Jesus stole John's sheep. Christians say that John was Elijah in the sense that he was like him but not his reincarnation. But in the prophecy Jesus has in mind about Elijahís return there is no hint of symbolism or that it does not mean the real Elijah. The Gospels never deny that John was the literal Elijah and Jesus would have been guilty of twisting prophecies had he held that they were not literal. A prophecy can be twisted to mean anything you want if you start taking bits of prophecy non-literally. Jesus is accusing John of lying about not being the Old Testament prophet. And John did not restore much. And it is not true that the people treated John as they pleased which is an innuendo for hurting and killing him. His sad end was not their fault. The Gospels say the people loved and came to John. Scripture never predicted a bad end for the returned Elijah but would have expected him to be glorious on the earth and invincible for a chariot of fire had taken him up to Heaven and you would expect him to be more wonderful and more lucky when he comes back. Jesus lied.

Jesus said that his moral rules must be obeyed by all. Some of these seem unreasonable to us. Jesus would have said that since the fall of Adam and Eve we are not smart enough to grasp all that God has revealed. Anybody can invoke the stupidity that is in all of us to get us to accept any moral code no matter how depraved it is. Jesus met lots of people who did this. He knew that by saying all should agree with his mysterious morality that he was telling them that they had no right to copy him and devise their own. He slandered them.
It is fine to show humanity how stupid it is and can be. But to trace that stupidity to some spiritual flaw such as original sin inherited from Adam and Eve is not helpful and downright dangerous.

Jesus said that a human being must have rights. But when he said that even the deliberate desire to sin is as bad as committing the evil deed (Matthew 5:28) everybody must deserve whatever suffering they get. To offend God who detests evil infinitely is to offer him an unlimited and cruel insult. Even forgiveness makes no difference to what you deserve. Knowledgeable Christians who are outraged at what they call human rights abuses are only hypocrites and should find something other than rights to base their indignation on.

Like Jesus, they are falsely accusing the abusive person and their concern for the victims is false for they want to make them as nasty as themselves.

The word Devil means slanderer. Jesus was of that breed. If the love of God and people go together as he said then he slandered God. He said that whatever you do to others you do to him so it is the same with God. He lied when he said that he only says what the Father told him to say.

The Gospel of John which is used by Catholics to "prove" various important doctrines like the bread and wine becoming Jesus in the Mass and his equality with God has a Jesus who tells lies which are often so serious that they show that those who followed him and formed his religion were capable of believing and accepting any absurdity.

Jesus said that God was good. God is not good if he exists for we have no free will. Thus he is to blame for the evil we do.

Jesus said that if you are for God you will believe what Jesus teaches (John 8:47). Millions have turned to God and have not recognised him. Jesus was a false prophet. Jesus plainly asserted that if a man really wishes to do the will of God that man will see if Jesus is speaking under the influence of God or for himself (John 7:17). That is nonsense and accuses those who know his words and not believing in them or him of being a cheat.

In John 7, Jesus stressed that he tells the truth all the time. But at the very start of the chapter Jesus tells his brothers that he is not going to the feast in Jerusalem and then goes to the feast secretly. Some Bibles add the word yet to make it seem that Jesus wasnít telling them a lie. This makes him say that he was not going to the feast yet. The Authorised Revised Version Catholic Edition Bible agrees that the word yet is an addition and leaves it out. The context is that the brothers want Jesus to go to the feast and do miracles there to make everybody believe and he says he will not go to the feast for the time for the miracles that verify who he is has not come yet. This makes it obvious that the word yet is an interpolation. Jesus did lie to his brothers. He had no need to lie to them at all. He could just have walked away and not answered.

Jesus said God did miracles when they were needed to back up the truth (John 15:24). Yet he accepted the many pointless miracles of the Old Testament though it fails to give any evidence for them. Little miracles are senseless for one well-authenticated big one would do. And if they are done for some purpose you cannot even guess at why say they are evidence for anything at all?

Jesus told the Jews that they could not convict him of sin and yet they would not believe him so he expected them to believe just because of that (John 8:45-47). But that would only prove that Jesus was sincere and there is a world of difference between being sincere and right.

Jesus said that we must believe in him because we believe in God (John 12:44) so belief in God logically implies belief in Jesusí claims. This is yet another lie because God canít make himself known except through people and things and events so we should be believing in God because of Jesus and people like him. At least he is denying that he did miracles for signs mean that God is believed in because of the miracle-worker.

Jesus told the Jews that he wanted no glory for himself (John 8:50) while we read elsewhere he accepted worship and became glorious on the mount of the Transfiguration.
He told them he said nothing in secret not long after saying that he said plenty cloaked in veiled and confusing language nearly all the time (John 16).
Jesus told the Jews to believe that his works came from God even if they could put no belief in him (John 10:38). But to believe that while denying that Jesus was from God would be to call God a liar. At least he was showing that it was sensible to believe that miracles have nothing to do with showing somebody is from God.

Jesus said the Holy Spirit would not come if he refused to go away (John 16:7). This contradicts the many places that said that this didnít stop him from coming. Luke says Elizabeth was full of the Spirit. And then there is Samson in the Old Testament book of Judges. The world hasnít got any more peaceful since the coming of this Comforter as he called the Holy Spirit. Some Comforter! The Christian religion has led to more evil than any other force ever known.

Jesus told a man he healed that he ought to repent in case something worse will happen to him (John 5:14). This is telling the man to serve God out of self-interest which is really just trying to use God.

Jesus told the Samaritan woman that there was no salvation or experience of God outside Judaism meaning that sincerity could not save (John 4:22). John later told the Jews that they knew the Father as little as they knew him (John 8:19). He had purely intellectual knowledge in mind. He does not mean spiritual knowledge, the knowledge that God is in you and approves of you for he says the Jews knew him a little and he says they were evil in Godís eyes meaning that they were closed to Godís spiritual working in their hearts and were closing him out. The Jews are not being accused of atheism. You can know a person you donít believe in. You can know what God would be and reject his existence. He is saying that they know hardly anything about God Ė a complete denial that the Old Testament revealed God. Like a lot of false prophets, Jesus was not quite sure what he wanted to teach at times.

He told the Jews that when he is lifted up BY THEM that is on the cross they will understand that he is the Messiah and is infallible like God (John 8:28). That is total rubbish. A crucifixion would not cause such a discovery. And the Jews did not lift Jesus up on the cross. Nor did they recognise him as the Messiah when he was lifted up. Nobody did then. The early Church was predominately Gentile or non-Jew.

Jesus also said that the Devil is incapable of being truthful (8:44-46). But even Satan would tell the truth for the sake of a greater evil. The Church will say that he means that the Devil cannot be heeded when he makes promises not that the Devil never tells the truth. But saying, ďThe Devil always liesĒ, is not the same as saying, ďThe Devilís promises are always liesĒ. The context is all about lies not just insincere promises. NaÔve believers often have made the same mistake as Jesus. It is improbable that it was a mistake in his case for he had to study theology and morality to be a more convincing fraud. Jesus attracted people amenable to rubbish by talking rubbish. The lie Jesus told here is definitely the same game as dictators get up to. They accuse everybody else of telling lies while they claim they alone are honest in order to turn the people against everybody else so that the people will belong to them.

Jesus wanted to help the apostles to make his joy full (John 17:13). This was selfish. The gospel admits that he did not care for sacrifice though it was the essence of his message.

Jesus said that his glory must come from his Father for self-praise is no praise (John 8:54). But when he claimed to reveal the Father he was praising himself! Also, how can we know if it is the Father who is making Jesus glorious? He said we canít see him. Self-praise is praise when it fits the facts.
Christians offer us a Jesus who is untrustworthy to be our God. It is a religion of deceit. The deceit must stop. People are dedicating their lives and money to error.
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Veritas. Dublin, 1995
Christ and Violence, Ronald J Sider, Herald Press, Scottdale, Ontario, 1979
Miracles in Dispute, Ernst and Marie-Luise Keller, SCM Press Ltd, London, 1969
Moral Philosophy, Joseph Rickaby SJ, Stoneyhurst Philosophy Series, Longmans, Green and Co, London, 1912
Objections to Christian Belief, DM Mackinnon, HA Williams, AR Vidler and JS Bezzant, Constable, London, 1963
Putting Away Childish Things, Uta Ranke-Heinemann, HarperCollins, San Francisco, 1994
Reason and Belief, Bland Blanschard, George Allen & Unwin Ltd, London, 1974
Robert Schuller, Satellite Saint or High Flying Heretic, Cecil Andrews, Take Heed Publications, Belfast
The Hard Sayings of Jesus, FF Bruce Hodder & Stoughton, London, 1983
The Resurrection Factor, Josh McDowell, Alpha Scripture Press Foundation, Bucks, 1993
The Truth of Christianity, WH Turton, Wells Gardner, Darton & Co Ltd, London, 1905
Why I am Not a Christian, Bertrand Russell, Touchstone Books, Simon and Schuster, New York, undated