This is borrowed from a comment made by Darrel to another post. It has been 2,000 years of any day now. Below are 17 reasons that the bible was wrong about the end of the world.
I know you like to pretend that the end is near, but as this list below shows, this is a child’s game of false prophecy Christians have been peddling for about 2,000 years. You guys really aren’t in a position to be talking about fulfilled prophecy:
The END was nigh:
1. Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. Matt. 16:28
2. But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God. Luke 9:27
3. But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none; 1 Cor. 7:29
4. Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand. Phil. 4:5
5. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven… Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds… 1 Thess. 4:15-16
6. God…Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son… Heb. 1:1-2
7. For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. Heb. 9:26
8. For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry. Heb. 10:37
9. Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord… stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh…behold, the judge standeth before the door. James 5:7-9
10. But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer. 1 Peter 4:7
11. Christ…was manifest in these last times for you,… 1 Peter 1:19-20
12. Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. 1 John 2:18
13. The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass;… Rev. 1:1
14. Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand. Rev. 1:3
15. Behold, I come quickly. Rev. 3:11
16. And he said unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand… He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. Rev. 22:10, 20.
17. But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come. Matt 10:23
McGill, R-Woodville, made the comments at a prayer breakfast in Fort Payne this week.
“doubling teacher pay could lead to less-qualified teachers.”
I guess teachers won’t vote for this guy.
He’s being criticized for implying that raising teacher salaries would even be ‘ungodly’.
He did not “imply” it.
He started off by talking about the pay raise state lawmakers got in 2007. McGill said that by paying legislators more, they’re less susceptible to taking bribes.
He can talk about giving himself a pay raise. An honest person will NOT take bribes. If you don’t like the pay rate – find another job. Please!
I used to work in retail and this guy sounds like one of the employees that we would catch stealing from the store. If only we paid them more they would not have taken all of the stuff. Maybe someone should investigate this guy. He just said if he is not paid enough he will be tempted to take bribes!
His comments then shifted to teachers’ pay.
“Teachers need to make the money that they need to make.”
“If you double what you’re paying education, you know what’s going to happen? I’ve heard the comment many times, ‘Well, the quality of education’s going to go up.’ That’s never proven to happen, guys.”
“It’s a Biblical principle. If you double a teacher’s pay scale, you’ll attract people who aren’t called to teach.
WOW! It’s a biblical principle? What is – low pay. I can just say that it is a biblical principle to pay elected officials like your self half as much. We want people that are called to lead. If you pay well you will get people that show up just for the money and then give themselves pay raises. Just like Mr. McGill.
“…you’re going to attract people who are not called, who don’t need to be teaching our children.”
If you did not know “called” means called by god!
In an interview with WHNT News 19, McGill defended himself saying, “Yes, I believe several statements were taken out of context. For those who were present, we haven’t had any complaints, the complaints that we’re getting are from the newspaper statements or from heresay,” said McGill.
You decide…. here is the audio…. (quality is poor but you can make it out)
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
When asked if he actually thought teachers who expected higher pay were unGodly McGill responded, “When you have a calling in your life, you’re willing to do something regardless if the pay is poor, regardless of whether the pay is very good, you’ll still provide the same performance and the same efforts to that job…
So… He says, pay teachers as little as possible – to make sure you get the good ones but, pay politicians extra – to make sure you get the ones that won’t take bribes.
While McGill in fact cited Christian values in saying teachers should be willing to do the job no matter the pay, there is apparently nothing in scripture that challenges the 67 percent pay increase Alabama legislators have benefited from since 2007, including McGill.
“Legislature’s pay needs to be from a balanced perspective, it doesn’t need to be too high, it doesn’t need to be too low, either one can cause corruption.”
The new health law is causing Catholic campuses to deny necessary aid to women.
“But Catholic organizations are resisting the rule, saying it would force them to violate their beliefs and finance behavior that betrays Catholic teachings.
Catholic intransigence to prescribing birth control pills is a treasonous violation of an individual’s freedom protected under the constitution. Under the guise of religious freedom fascist Catholics (theofascists) would impose their beliefs on other nonCatholics. As John Irvingbrilliantly writes
“When you legislate personal belief, you’re in violation of freedom of religion. The Catholic Church may espouse its opinion on abortion to the members of its congregation. But they are in violation of separation of church and state when they try to proselytize their abortion politics on people who are not Catholics.”
Freedom of religion does not allow you to diminish the freedom of others.
If your bible says to treat your slaves well that does not mean you can have slaves.
If your bible says men who rape women have to marry them that does not make it so.
If your biblical commentary says your rabbi must circumcise male children and kiss their penis that does not mean you should.
Whatever heinous and ludicrous abuse you wish to impose within your group may fall within tolerance. But when you universalize your religious tenets to everyone your totalitarianism hits a constitutional wall.
If you choose to provide a public service then you agree to abide by the laws and mores of the public. Your religion may require nudity but you cannot be nude in a public store or space nor require it of your patrons. You can create a private club and then insist your patrons be nude but no more.
Our laws are clear on freedom. Flouting religious tolerance to enable your abuse is an obvious ploy to elevate the status of Christianity over everyone and is rightly called theofascism. Christianity is but one religion. No matter how you may think you are the chosen people, no matter what covenant you have taken with a hell fire god, you cannot torture the rest of us freely. Only the constitution has jurisdiction over all people, period.
The papal insubordination and whining over their inability to impose private and particular beliefs on all is treasonous. They flagrantly wish to overthrow our government and create their own. They are traitors to this country and should be treated as such.
I am tired of witnessing this blatant usurpation of American congress and constitution. If you wish a monarchy of theology, return to your Vatican island, where it is already entrenched. The Italians may allow your fascism but it is not American. Your Catholic indulgence-avoiding, priest-abused Protestants fled to this country because the old world was not pure enough and then as a tyrannizing minority you hit the wall of the Bill of Rights the founding fathers wisely included, so you could not exert your puritanical terrorism on all people.
When you tread on American soil you agree to abide by US laws and constitution. Whether Christian or Muslim or any ilk.
There is no law that allows any of us to impose our religion on others. We are not free to murder, maim, exclude, or harm others for any religious reasons.
You may indeed bring your sick and perverse ideas to the market for consideration but they cannot be made law until they have followed democratic process clearly outlined in the constitution and its bills.
Indeed, even your inculcated members may not abridge certain rights of other individual members. Just because someone is born into, belongs to, or agrees to hurtful and idiotic religious practices does not mean they have lost their rights as US citizens.
You cannot raise children in closets. You cannot castrate your members. You cannot witness child abuse without reporting it.
No one regardless, without exception, has the right to impose their deepest, sincerest, most soulful religion onto others by force.
You can speak and march your vitriolic vile whether it is Nazi hatred or Christian castigation to hell but you cannot make others follow you in the public square or the private sphere. It must be voluntary and it must be clear that it is not torture or harmful inculcation. You are not allowed to cripple your children so they cannot participate in society. No matter if your God swears damnation for you and all people unless you do.
If your religion requires you to be a soldier of god, to wield arms against heretics, apostates, and mere unbelievers then you are a foreign enemy on home territory and guilty of war and terrorism against the US. You are no different than another country that has crossed borders, in the dark of night or the light of day, to attack us.
When you force your religion on others you do indeed terrorize the citizens and as such should be punished to the full extent of the law. That your god made you do it is no excuse whatsoever.
Tolerance is not enforced passivity on the behalf of others so you may make them yours. You should be ashamed by your bad behavior. You should be sent home tail between your legs.
Every time you refuse to prescribe a birth control pill, every time you refuse a woman an abortion, every time you insist others behave like you or go to hell or not receive salvation and force them to comply by your actions you should be sent home or if the damage is great sent to jail.
If by refusing to prescribe abortion pills a woman dies, say from an ovarian cyst, preventable by hormone treatment, the doctor should be liable for both the medical treatment and that woman’s grief.
If a woman is refused the day-after pill in a public pharmacy and she has a child, the pharmacist should be made responsible for the care of that child throughout its life.
Yes, you say you want to enforce consequences then live by that sword you so easily thrash about without due and kind consideration.
How horrible the world would be if we all based our public good in personal belief. How ridiculous religion looks when we acknowledge that every person has a religion of one called their philosophy, their world view, and then insist that all others need bow before it. It is more horrible when like-minded fanatics band together and impose their wicked ways on the rest of us under the excuse and guise of religion.
Shame, shame, that theofascists would terrorize me and my fellow citizens and then try and get away with it whining religious tolerance.
My post on Golshifte Faharani is the first time I experienced nonChristian hate since living in Utah where my Mormon friend’s wife said she dreamed of me and the number 666 and wasn’t sure she could be my friend anymore (I was the first atheist she had met)–I retracted my horns, changed clothes, dulled my teeth, and smiled sweetly that I was really a nice guy and how could an atheist be the devil anyway? We got over that. It’s true once I think of it I have been told I would be damned before but maybe I am so used to knowing it by being around so many Christians that it has lost its effect. Now, it’s coming from fundamentalist Muslims.
First let’s get to Farahani’s image which has been reposted with the admonition that it is her body, she has a right to it:
Though a myopic view of Islam, Judeo-Christianity also has a twisted, nonbiblical view of nudity (there is no biblical admonition against public nudity) this is a popular expression of her rights.
In an interview in Bikyamasr she states what she wanted from her symbolic gesture about nudity and sex; the video is shown below later.
“This video clip is a symbolic gesture to remove the common taboos that exist in various societies and does not aim to promote nudity or sex,” a Facebook statement from her said. “By taking part in these photo shoots the people taking part wish to demonstrate their redemption from these taboos by the way they act and talk.
“The objective is to liberate their soul and bodies at the same time. As long as an individual has no power over her or his body and their soul does not have the command of the way they wish to think, then they do not have a true freedom.
“Although I do not think looking at the nude photo of another human may have an attraction, but it is certainly far more enjoyable than looking at the fully covered and burqa and hejab wearing body of a woman who has been wrapped and imprisoned by her man. So much for not looking at women as sex symbols as the fundamentalists want us to believe!” she added.
What’s interesting here is her assertion that looking at naked people isn’t always about lust and sex. Sometimes it’s just nudity. When one has lived in the tropics, or any hot environment, for awhile, it becomes clear that clothes are not always useful and many people don’t wear them. The Bedouin idea of flowing robes as shade is particular to that culture, and world tribe after world tribe has had no compulsion towards dressing for good reason and are still able to keep their dicks in their pants.
The sad idea that any woman with a few clothes is dressing like a whore and if she is dressing as a whore she is a whore and is to be treated as if she were a free whore is immoral and has no religious basis anywhere!
“Surely God enjoins justice, kindness and the doing of good, to kith and kin; and He forbids all that is shameful, indecent, evil, rebellious and oppressive.” InnaAllah Yamuru bil adel, wal ehsane, wa itae zil qurba; wa yanha anil fuhshae, wal munkari walbaghi; yaizukhum lallakum tazakkaroon. (Quran 16:90)
The words fuhsha, munkar, baghi never refer directly to public nudity at all, in any way. No translation would refer to them as nudity.
“According to the Al-Mawrid Arabic-English dictionary of Munir Baalbaki, Fuhash is obscenity, vulgarity, indecency, shamelessness and something that is dirty, filthy and foul. Al-Mawrid’s English-Arabic dictionary translates pornographic as Fahish. The Hans Wehr Dictionary Of Modern Written Arabic adds monstrosity, abomination, vile deed and fornication to its meaning as well.
But the etymology of pornography is prostitution, from 1850, and not its well known modern use of media-based, sex voyeurism. Someone had to add the meaning to the word. It’s not originally there.
“Scholars of the Quran have included every vice which is intrinsically of a highly reprehensible character into this category whether it be fornication, nudity, public foreplay as depicted in films and photos, pornography, hurling abuses and curse words, promiscuous mixing, or dresses designed to expose the body.
How on earth can scholars claim that public nudity comes from these terms? It is obviously a base interpretation to promote their own agenda happening centuries after the Koran. It would be like saying Maimonides the Rabbinical scholar is the divine writer of the Pentateuch or that the Nicene Creed are the divine words of god!
“Al-Munkar as gross, abominable, detestable, atrocious, outrageous, flagrant.
But what this means explicitly is left blank. It could be anything a group of people dislike. It is never stated explicitly that public nudity is an abomination! If the Koran can explicitly state not to eat the meat of animals that have died of their own causes do you think it would have skipped mentioning public nudity if it were such an abomination?
“Al-Baghi means wrong, injustice, outrage, and transgression.
What the hell does this mean specifically? Injustice, wrong, and outrage are generalities and would apply to anything. Again, it is in no way a mention of public nudity. That some choose to think it means the objectification of women is a transgression of their rights how much more so if women say their right is to choose to do with their bodies what they will and the transgression is men defining what is right for them and abusively so.
“Iran’s anger at the image is not just because of Farahani’s nudity – she has also made it known that her decision to pose is in protest against restrictive Islamic codes.
Good lord she’s wearing pants! Do you see those ankles?
Any reasonable person looking at how women are treated by fundamental Islamists can see the injustice is not about the men but about the women being oppressed by hideous laws cloistering women and then legitimizing rape and other harm once they think them immoral.
“Verily those who love that indecency should spread among the believers deserve a painful chastisement in the world and in the Hereafter. Allah knows, but you do not know.” Quran 24:19
How the hell is this a reason to beat and rape and kill women who do not follow human interpretations of the Koran? Even if you follow the Koran it makes no sense. My ancestors believed in slavery. I do not. It is moral that I do not. I don’t care one iota that it was tradition or supported by the bible.
Women come out and say they choose punishment or they choose cloistering because they too feel they are a jewel that should be kept secret except when exposed to their husbands. You know why women choose to cover themselves in fundamental Islam. Because if they don’t they get outcast, beaten, or worse; all wrongly justified by sadistic interpreters of the text. Just to survive women have to show they are stronger believers than they men.
Farahani talks about how women have to have a double identity, to lie from the beginning, to be a good actor and lie perfectly, when they live in Iran. She sounds much like Ayan Hirsi Ali in the Caged Virgin and other books:
“What immediately comes to any decent Iranian’s mind is asking her, how dare you? How dare you put your people down, only to promote yourself and open doors for yourself.
She was already Iran’s most successful actress ever. She didn’t need a trick. Is it more important to be loyal to oppression than to be truthful and against oppression? Would you welcome your abusive father with open arms or call for help?
Another commentator at this site notes:
“When a woman is born in a Muslim society like Iran afetr age of 5 or so, will live in two different world with double personalities (where she has to pretened of being some one else). She has to be one way outside the house and another inside her home. This is typical of a Muslim society and if you are some what a modern society like Iran (where modernity is in a constant conradiction with religion and backwardness) you will see the differnce even more. I am not a female but please for one minute put yourselves in shoes of Iranian women and see how they have lived in last 1400 years specially in last 30 years.
In an interveiw in 2009 with Al Jazeera she notes how well aware she is of her moral responsibilities to her country:
“Now that Farahani’s career is moving to the West, she realises that the eyes of all Iranians are on her and that this means she must be careful about the roles she chooses.
“If I fail they will fail and if I am successful it is their success too.”
“Mahdavi explains: “When you have the status of a star in a country the whole population is following you. Some actors can do what they like, they can take the role of the terrorist or they can take their clothes off in front of the camera but as Golshifteh achieved stardom she has more responsibilities.”
“I respect my people, I was seen as the daughter of the nation,” Farahani adds.
“If I want it or not I am representing Iran. But my responsibilities are to the people not to the government.”
Yet coments at even moderate sites are very mixed:
“im an iranian girl! and im not agree with her idea! it is true that we are forced to have hejab but in our culture from thoushands year(befor islam) till now no woman accepts to appears in public with no clothes like what she didwith no clothes and i think what she did is worse than what this damn government in doing with us! none of the people of iran like her picture and idea but few
And
“I can’t understand that an Iranian girl, that is surrounded by the monuments of 3000 years of Iranian history, follows the decadent West. I am sure that one day the Iranian people will enjoy freedom and peace, but not by imitating the rotten principles of Europe.
And
“This chic is out of her mind. I am not Muslim, but my brother a non-Muslim who fell in love with a Muslim girl and she wears Hijab by choice and happens to be a doctor. This kind of farcical journalism is dangerous.
Balanced against this?
“The comments show that many Iranians are willing victims of their absurd theocratic rulers. Religion really does rot the mind it seems when taking off your clothes is somehow seen as worse than the actions of a violence backed tyrannous government. Pathetic.
The Cesar awards, the French equivalent of the Academy Awards, posted a video of a number of actors disrobing in solidarity to female freedom.
Farahani has a Facebook page which in two weeks has grown from 4,000 likes to 516,000 likes. Hopefully millions will join her in her freedom and acknowledge that nudity is neither a sin nor an abomination. The Islamic world used to be the heart of civilization, we owe them algebra and the preservation of Greek texts after Christians burned pagan libraries, let’s hope they can find their way again!
When I left christianity it was very easy. I thank my parents for not making it as hard as it is for many. If you are a young adult and have doubts about religion – talk to someone. If you can, if it is safe – tell your family.
“But when he wears a uniform, he owes that team the respect of making his faith more private expression, less public spectacle.
Lest you think we exaggerate the intensity of his proselytizing:
“When at the University of Florida, he was well-known for painting different numbers of Biblical scriptures into his eye black. You would see the number “3:16″ under his eyes, for instance, in reference to that chapter and verse of the Bible. In the end, the NCAA outlawed players displaying such public signs of personal faith.
Holy Constantine! What next? Jerseys with fish on them? No, worse, his constant discussion with god.
“When Tebow sits with the quarterback coach on the bench, when he approaches the guys in the huddle, when he runs to a wide receiver after a big play, he does say the right “football stuff.” “Come on guys, this is THE 3rd down we need. We need it NOW.” But before any syllable he utters, every single time, it is first “God is good.” “God is great.” “My God is an awesome God.” “It’s God’s will.” As he roams the sideline, mouthing, you think he’s talking to the defense on the field, urging them on. No, he’s singing, “God is my saviour. God is almighty.”
I want to know how his team mates stand it. If I mumbled philosophy crap all of the time my mates would whack me even if I were a star. There are some things that are just too much. Diana continues:
“I say take it into the locker room. What if, at the end of every session of Congress, the Christians gathered and knelt and prayed together, right there on the Congress floor? As was true at the University of Florida, doesn’t this constant Christian promotion, in a Broncos uniform, trump the other common bonds of the team? Doesn’t Tebow separate himself from his non-Christian teammates?
Well, actually that’s what some want congress to do. Have a congressional prayer at the end of every session, just like the first beginning.
They cite the very first congressional prayer as proof of a Christian nation.
September 7th, 1774
Carpenters Hall, Philadelphia
O Lord, our Heavenly Father, High and mighty King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, who dost from Thy throne behold all the dwellers on earth and reignest with power supreme and uncontrolled over all the Kingdoms, Empires and Governments:
Look down in mercy we beseech Thee, on these American States, who have fled to Thee from the rod of oppression, and thrown themselves on Thy gracious protection, desiring henceforth to be dependent only on Thee, they have appealed for the righteousness of their cause; to Thee do they now look up for that countenance and support which Thou alone canst give; take them, therefore, Heavenly Father, under Thy nurturing care; give them wisdom in Council and valor in the field; defeat the malicious designs of our cruel adversaries; convince them of the unrighteousness of their cause; and if they persist in their sanguinary purpose, O, Let the voice of Thy own enerring justice, sounding in their hearts, constrain them to drop the weapons of war from their unnerved hands in the day of battle!
Be Thou present, O God of wisdom and direct the councils of this honorable assembly; enable them to settle things on the best and surest foundation. That the scene of blood may be speedily closed; the order, harmony and peace may be effectively restored, and truth and justice, religion and piety prevail and florish among Thy people. Preserve the health of their bodies and vigor of their minds; shower down on them, and the millions they here represent, such temporal blessings as Thou seeth expedient for them in this world, and crown them with everlasting glory in the world to come. All this we ask in the name and through the merits of JESUS CHRIST, THY SON, OUR SAVIOR.
While this is used as proof of a Christian nation, it is not. There was no constitution and no First Amendment. There is no doubt that many of the colonists were religious but adherence to church varied tremendously over time. Anglicanism was the law of Virginia while Maryland insisted on tolerance. Many colonists left Europe because it was too heretical. They don’t call them Puritans for nothing. Early Baptists pleaded leniency based on religious tolerance (boy did they change) as did my ancestor Henry Watkins who was fined for not being Anglican. The colonies were a mish mosh of belief.
There was intense debate on whether there should be a state religion and Patrick Henry was a big proponent of it; Henry wanted it to be law that everyone belong to some denomination and to pay taxes to it. There was also intense debate on states rights, slavery, federal treasury, and many other issues we now take for granted exempt for those few who would rebottle history from the start.
The founding fathers in their infinite wisdom and political acumen won the battle and ensured religious pluralism by forging laws against state religion.
Fundamentalists want to act like the constitution was divinely inspired and everyone was together. Contrary, the political arena was fractious and difficult.
By fundamentalist standards we are as much a Christian nation as we are a slave nation where we may whip and chain people, a misogynist nation where women can’t vote, and an elitist nation where we impose literacy requirements for voting. Do we really want to go back to all that?
The Warrens’ extreme religious practices are also the cause of the children’s malnourishment, according to court records.
“The Warrens are of very strict religious beliefs that limit their dietary requirements,” reads the agreed facts entered into evidence on April 16, 2009. There are “a number of foods that they do not eat for a number of reasons, and that has obviously been factored into (the necessities of life) charges.”
The exact details of their diet are not given, but Da Fonte told the Star they consumed no dairy, and all junk food was prohibited.
According to Toronto police officers who entered their apartment, the Warrens’ refrigerator and cupboards were stocked with beans, sugar, flour and juice.
They had plenty of food but, the kid died of malnourishment.
On Jan. 15, a mob tore through the barricades and stormed the Warren house.
But as soon as they found what they were looking for, the crowd scrambled out, sick and panicked.
“Organs are liquefied, blackened and dissolved,” a preliminary post-mortem report would read. “Dead maggots present … Age: around 2yrs.”
This is a video taken by the people that stormed the house and called the police.
Fee-Only Investment Advice for Skeptic, Atheists, Agnostics and Freethinkers. A minimum of 10% of all revenue will be used to support the atheist / skeptic movement.
Post by Phil Ferguson
