Facebook & the delusions of a Christian


Edited to add punctuation and clarity:


"I just wanted to say that I heard people say "I don't drink, smoke or use bad language & God loves them" It's not you. It's Jesus. Christ is the reason for you getting into heaven. You can be good enough or do good enough. It's the cross, It's the blood of Christ!!!!!!!!"


What does my great-uncle, who does all of those things listed in his post, mean by this? It's not that god loves you that you get into heaven but it is because Jesus was sacrificed that we may obtain this eternal salvation? And what is this talk about "you can't be good enough or do good enough?" What kind of way is this to think? It gives me the image that Yahweh is just sitting on his big throne in heaven snubbing his nose at his own creation. To say that you can never be good enough to please someone, or in this case deity, is just a fucking sad way to live. It is the mental world view of an ignorant slave.


And what about all this talk of the cross and blood? I guess my uncle is unaware that the cross what not used a Christian symbol until Constantine and the lovely crusades. These didn't spread the "love" of Jesus but the BLOOD of thousands innocent people.


The thoughts of Christians posted on Facebook allow me to see the delusion of Christianity and its followers. It's really sad that I fell for these antics as a teenager. It's even more sad to see adults who still do.




Note: If Jesus is the reason we are getting into heaven, then what about all the people who came before Jesus died?

Views: 52

Comment by anti_supernaturalist on May 15, 2011 at 1:47pm

Hello, if you want to dig into xian dogma and xian self-defense (apologetics), search on phrases like 'justification through faith alone', 'Pauline doctrine of atonement', 'Martin Luther on works versus faith'. xianity as Nietzsche claimed is "the practice of nihilism" -- as a death cult, only failed cultures like the Aztecs rank alongside it. However, there is a "lighter" side to xian blood atonement sickness. The ancient Romans mocked and gleefully misinterpreted early xian practice --

** there’s always an unsatisfying cannibal feast near you **

Xianity offers a mock cannibal meal every day. One of no nutritional value — the consecrated bread (host) of the RC mass gets "supernaturally" endowed by priestly hocus-pocus to become a god’s flesh (transubstantiation). [The phrase 'hocus-pocus' is itself a parody of a phrase from the Latin mass -- as the bells tinkle at the elevation of the host, the priest says "here is the body of Christ."]

Late in the 1st century CE when xians met in small, underground groups to share their meagre food, they used bread and wine as sacramental vehicles.

Rumors soon arose that pointed at xians as incestuous (kiss of peace), promiscuous (men and women hiding in dark places), and cannibalistic. As confirmed in his still existing letter exchange with Emperor Hadrian, Pliny the Younger as Roman provincial governor dealt with xian cult practices first hand including sending “obstinate” believers to execution — this in 110 CE.

Xians writing in self-defense began in late 2nd - early 3rd century CE with Minucius Felix who repeats a rumor about ritual murder of an infant and cannibalistic feasting as part of initiation rites:

"Now the story about the initiation of young novices…is well known. An infant covered over with meal, that it may deceive the unwary, is placed before him who is to be stained with their rites. This infant is slain by the young pupil, who has been urged on as if to harmless blows on the surface of the meal, with dark and secret wounds. …[T]hey lick up its blood; eagerly they divide its limbs. By this victim they are pledged together; with this consciousness of wickedness they are covenanted to mutual silence."*

For a sober and unintentionally amusing modern apology (defense) of early xian practices see Christianity Today: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ch/1998/issue57/57h012.html?start=2

the anti_supernaturalist

*Minucius Felix, Octavius, R. E. Wallis, trans. in The Ante-Nicene Fathers.
Buffalo, N. Y.: The Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1887, Vol. 4, pp. 177-178.
*available at: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/christian-cannibals.html

Comment by Scarlette Blues on May 15, 2011 at 3:39pm

Thank you so much for your response. I will look into this a little bit more over the next few days. However, I did take a look at the Christianity Today website and it was quite entertaining. 


"The charge of cannibalism could also have arisen from a false understanding of the Christian Scripture and liturgy. The very words of the Eucharist,"Take and eat, this is my body broken for you," could be misread in a literal, cannibalistic sense by a reader ignorant of the metaphor."


I don't think the accusers would have been able to read the Bible in order for this 'misinterpretation' to occur. Weren't most people illiterate in those days? If the reader was capable of reading the Hebrew Bible, the person were certainly be capable of recognizing a metaphor.

Comment by Michael Guillory on June 4, 2011 at 4:40am
It kind of sounds like an argument my ex-roommate, a Catholic, that getting drunk is frowned upon in the bible. He said, "We're human, we make mistakes and that's why we can ask forgiveness. It doesn't matter as long you believe in God." It's basically a way to justify any "bad" behavior.


You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2019   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service