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?

 


WHY I DON'T LIKE PRIESTS
 
I donít like priests because:

They say that divorce is bad and then they allow it when a member of a non-Christian or non-baptised couple converts to Christianity.

They tell you that sin is a disorder and hateful but deny that this means that sinners are disordered and hateful which makes no sense. We know it makes no sense for we all feel that if anybody deliberately hurts us that the person is evil in so far as he or she harms us. To hate evil then is to hate a person and only persons can be evil. To say John did a despicable thing is as much to say that John is despicable.

They tell you that hate is not the opposite of love Ė not caring what a person is enduring is the opposite of love. Not caring is worse than hating for people have to care about you a bit to hate. So the Church admits that but still it advocates this evil and makes it holy and an essential part of its faith. The people in Heaven enjoy Heaven despite the everlasting suffering of those in Hell because they donít care on the grounds that the damned have only themselves to blame. Christians enjoy themselves now despite believing that there are people in Hell and that their own friends could be among them. Itís an evil faith that hates sin so much that it thinks sin should be punished forever if the person dies. That is worrying about the sin more than the person.

They say bigotry is a sin while their faith is based on it for they use it to control peopleís lives in the way they want and call for suffering for God and believing in bizarre and even contradictory or paradoxical doctrines such as a man coming back from the dead and being fully God and fully man at the one time to name a few. Yet they condemn others who do the same when itís a different faith they come up with.

They tell you that God raised Jesus from the dead to prove that Jesusí doctrines and revelations were true. They say that the other explanations of what might have happened which exclude a supernatural resurrection are harder to believe than in the resurrection. This is nonsense for you should only believe that natural law has been altered or suspended as a last resort. An implausible natural explanation is better than an unnatural one. They are quick to agree when its another religionís miracle claims that come up but not when its their own.

They tell you that the Virgin Mary appeared at Lourdes in 1858 and that because such visions are not part of divine revelation but only draw attention to it they have no right to command what is harmful even though Mary urged drinking from a spring in an infectious dump! The Church says that it is only human opinion that it was Mary and nobody is bound to agree for the only thing that we are bound to agree with is what God says in the Bible and the Church tradition. This is another reason why the apparition is dangerous. Medjugorje which had the children being abducted by communists and Fatima in which something similar happened then must be in the same boat.

They tell you that revelation that must be accepted as revealed by God stopped with the death of the last apostle of Christ. But its obviously a double standard when they teach that you must believe in the Bible miracles despite the weak evidence and you may reject the apparitions of Mary at Lourdes if you see problems when the latter have better verified miracles for they present the evidence of doctors to verify them. Mary at Lourdes supported Church doctrine so in doing that she shot herself in the foot for it is incoherent and wrong.

They tell you that contraception is a sin for a child should be seen as something to be wanted and something that is precious and which God will not send unless he should. And then they allow people to try and avoid conception by using natural family planning or abstinence.

They tell you that no matter how extreme the circumstances euthanasia is wrong so human life must be more important than quality of life. And if thatís so they canít consistently allow morphine for dying patients for that will kill them. Just because you are dying anyway doesnít mean its not murder to kill you. If life comes first the morphine is wrong.

They represent religion. Everybody should do what works for them and experiment with spirituality instead of listening to their rules. If people did that there would be no religious wars. Religion causes many wars.

They teach that the pornographic adoration of a man suffering on the cross for us is good but then they forbid holding that sexual parts that give life should be reverenced religiously. At least Witchcraft is right that the sexual parts are the most sacred parts of the body for they give life.

They baptise your children with a view to indoctrinating them. That is stealing your children. Its child abuse. Children should be taught about decency and integrity and nothing else. What good does it do a child to teach them that a book like the Bible is the word of God? A baby becomes a child of God by being baptised. It follows that whether the Church admits it or not, that its teaching is saying that unbaptised babies are defective and not children of God but little bastards. The Church thinks of children conceived outside of marriage as bastards. If you are a bastard because your father wasnít married to your mother then how much more are you a bastard if you donít have God for your father? He doesnít even want you until baptism magically changes his mind! It follows then that it is a pity unbaptised babies have to exist at all.

They teach that baptism heals original sin which causes us to like sin so much. Logically baptised people are superior to unbaptised and should be more trustworthy. This is nonsense and a deliberate lie and has fomented racism. The sacraments, rites that have occult power to turn you into a better and holier and more godly person, have no unique power so the priests are just quacks for the soul. Most of the baptised fall into a state of spiritual separation from the Church by ďseriousĒ sin such as scepticism towards certain doctrines of the Church and so on. So even experience doesnít support their nonsense, their deliberate lie, that anybody that is baptised is born again, turned into a new person who unlike before is mostly inclined to serve God and the Church.

They say that grace is what you need from God to be saved. And they claim that God does the absurd and unnecessary miracle of turning bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus Christ through the hands of the priest so that Jesus can be spiritual food and drink. But it is grace that is the food in a symbolic sense. And you donít need Jesusí body or blood for that. The rite was invented just to create mystery and fear of the power of the priest and to attract the people and to make an excuse for getting them to go to Church often to be brainwashed and an excuse for making those banned from communion feel guilty. Itís a bait.

They say that there is no merit in any good work you do while you are estranged from God by serious sin. This is because you are telling God, ďI want good on my terms not yoursĒ so the good works are the most dangerous sins of all for they look good but are fully evil in the motivation. Venial sin which does not estrange you from God for it is not serious enough says the same thing and yet the priests deny that every good work done by a venial sinner is a sin.

They say they can forgive sins. But they are not God. Nobody can forgive sins for God. It is like saying you can love a wife for her husband! Also the command of Jesus that you go and make up with everybody you have hurt and are not at peace with before you go near God or offer Mass or any sacrifice (Matthew 5:23-26) is ignored by the Church. If I beat you up, I will go and tell the priest about it and he will give me God's forgiveness. And I will feel better about what I have done and if you are waiting for your apology you will never get it. And I will still feel good for I feel God through the priest accepts me. A religion that relieves guilt and corrupts justice by getting you to apologise to the wrong person is revolting. The priest sees himself as God's channel. He has to channel God's mercy and pardon to you. But the priest decides that God should or maybe should have mercy. That is the bottom line. Whether there is a God or not, the priest is deciding that you should get away with your sins. We have seen earlier than man's talk about God is really talk about what man decides God should be. Man decides which claimed revelation from God he will accept. Man wanting to believe in the revelation is what matters - it is not really an issue if God has really given the revelation. For man to tell man that he wishes and hopes he gets off the hook for child abuse and murder and to do it as the representative of God is outrageous. It is horrible for the same reason as it would be if you told your friend who abused a child that you hope he gets off and it does not matter any more. People see it as horrible because it condones the evil and the Church can only dodge this accusation if there is a God who gives it the power to forgive sins. If there is not, then the Church is no better than you. If the evidence for God is not good enough or if the priest does not worry enough about evidence then the risk is inexcusable. Catholics will say, "But it is not your job or the priest's to punish." That is not the point. We are not talking about anybody having to punish - we are talking about a bad person deserving punishment and being told he no longer does.

They believe that those who die unrepentant of serious sin will suffer forever in Hell for it. You need proof and not just proof but absolute proof to be able to say things like that and they havenít got proof. What could be more serious than saying anybody deserves eternal punishment? It canít be even thought without some kind of vindictiveness. The Bible says that serious sinners go to everlasting torment and human nature being what it is often canít help hating the guts of those who are seen as leading others into such sin. Catholicism underhandedly incites to hatred.

They teach you that you must believe everything that is part of the faith they represent for you canít pick and choose for either you believe God speaks through the leadership of the Church or he doesnít especially when God can command things that look bad but which lead to more good in some way that we cannot understand for we only have a limited view. This nonsense gives them incredible power over lives. Itís dangerous. And it proves how the religion isnít being true to itself if it not authoritarian. Todayís priests are afraid to dictate. Deuteronomy 18 has God saying a prophet of God who does miracles and who is always right about what he predicts in the future but who reports that God made a revelation to him that isnít right then that prophet is to be rejected outright and totally. The standard is not high but perfect so to question one doctrine is to question all. All the doctrines go together.

They say the Bible is the word of God though it has God commanding Jesus to make a human sacrifice of himself to God for sins and for adulterers, homosexuals and apostates to be put to death by stoning. So they would wish that edifying books would disappear if there was a choice between them and the Bible disappearing! There can be nothing better than the word of God but how could it be good to have children reading and adoring an evil twisted bigoted old book?

They never mention the Catholic doctrine that the Jewish Law was not done away with by Christ. What he did away with was the penalty of not keeping the Law perfectly for that is impossible anyway but you can keep it if you want. St Paul in the book of Acts kept the Law long after he converted to Christ. So this means the Church should control the state and allow the application of the Jewish Law including the capital punishment by stoning of adulterers and homosexuals and so forth. Religions with dangerous scriptures should not be given any political power.

They never tell you that though Church decrees are infallible when intended to be and when the decrees are speaking to the whole Church that many of these decrees command the murder of heretics and those who contradict the faith of the Church Ė see the declarations of the infallible ecumenical councils such as Lateran 3 and 4. It is not Islam that has the most statements encouraging holy war and religious murder. It is Roman Catholicism. Islam can be made into a religion of peace if it would just listen to the Koran only and remember that its God is said to be the Merciful Ė Roman Catholicism cannot without denying itself. Its God wants heretics dead in case they corrupt others.

They say God allows suffering to happen so that we may show compassion to one another Ė obviously to deny this is to deny there is an Almighty and all-loving God. To suggest that God stands by and allows terrible suffering for that reason is totally callous. Does a good mother stand by and let her baby scream in agony so that the doctor can exercise compassion? Could compassion be genuine when you assume that God allows suffering so that you may exercise it? That is saying that even if you are wrong you want to believe you are right and that people should suffer so that you may be compassionate. Thatís ďcompassionĒ not compassion. No decent person watches her or his child die screaming in agony after years of suffering and suggests an all-good God has a reason for it. If you can assume that about a being whose existence you can't verify as well as the existence of your father, then why not assume your father had a good purpose for sexually abusing you that justifies it? If your father was ill when he did this, you are still saying he deserves a reward for he only thought he was doing right. Christianity and God belief is a sick combination.

They condemn divination but prayer for guidance and belief in the guiding presence of the Holy Spirit is divination. Guidance is no good unless you feel that God is telling you to watch out for some people. Divination and such prayer is evil because it is the desire to delve into the secrets of others. The people who feel they get guidance from some psychic sense do it the same way as those who feel that god is guiding them.

They agree with Jeremiah 17:9 where it is warned that the human heart is full of deceit. They teach that we still suffer the effects of original sin which makes us prefer to have our own religion than follow God's way. Jesus himself considered the self-deceit of the Pharisees and scribes so powerful that he didnít bother trying to convert them to a better way. He called them blind. It follows that religion and faith are really probably man-made and that to follow religion at all is to follow men. Even if Catholicism is correct, it could still be following men and not God to follow it. We could be taking men's word for it and not God's that the faith is true. So the odds are stacked against you that you are following God not men. It follows too that you could think you are doing good for God or others whereas the real reason is to avoid damnation in Hell or to get into Heaven. Let us assume that an act can be motivated by more or less altruism. An atheist then would have more chance of being altruistic or would perform a better degree of altruism than a believer. The atheist sees altruism as sacrificing some time in his life for others and he will never get much or anything back for it for death is the end. Even if atheists were not as good as religionists, it would be a reflection on the kind of people that are becoming atheists not their atheism.