Hardcopies ready! Thankyou to all who helped.

[peshitta_enthusiast]

Wow, lots of questions, here goes!

""For example, you seem to say there is no God.""

Not true, I don?t say that at all, and that?s not what atheism is. I?m very open to the idea of some sort of god, just haven?t seen convincing evidence that it isn?t Zeus or Shiva or Allah etc. So my position is not a negative one, it is one that is intellectually honest. I?m open to all of them, but won?t believe either of them without evidence.

Just about all else you said can apply to Allah and other gods as well as Yahweh (creator of the universe, internal revelation, emotion, people dying for their faith etc).

As for my statement that there is no evidence for Jesus, that statement holds. Though it is controversial as so many believe in his existence, the only "evidence" is written texts from decades and centuries after, much of which are edited, fraudulent, and promoted by people who have every motive to lie. And again, with this sort of "evidence" you could "prove" any religion true.

""Answer me one question though""

I?d love to answer but it really is irrelevant to whether a religious claim is true or not. Buddhism was voted on by people of many different religions (including Catholicism) as the world?s best religion. That doesn?t make Buddhism true. Islam may be at present one of the most violent religions (the OT religion is just as violent, if not, more so). That doesn?t make it false.

And your own answer to the question is ambiguous; if you refer to literalist christianoty , much crime has been done in the name of the literal Jesus. As for Gnostic Christianity? That seems like a far more peaceful and uniting religion.

I do agree though that Christianity can be a wonderful religion. I have the honesty to say though that brotherly love, unity and peace can be believed in without needing to believe in a literal Jesus or a literal Yahweh (who often preached hate, segregation and war). Hence my position as a Christian atheist. Many of the earliest Christians were.

"There is nothing to gain from marcion"

History says otherwise. He was a Marcionite of course, who had many similarities to the Gnostics ? and Gnosticism was massive. He produced the FIRST NT canon. This canon included what was essentially a "stripped down" version of Luke and ten Pauline epistles. The curious thing is, there is no evidence for the existence of these books BEFORE Marcion?s canon. The more I look at it, the more it looks like our traditional NT canon (which isn?t universally accepted by all Christians even today) was half written by a "heretical" Christian.

It may be a shock, but it was indeed Marcion who produced the FIRST NT canon, and thus the "original" NT. A horrendous thought for those that hate "heretics", but one that is corroborated by history.

Marcion also shows what many early Christians thought of Judaism and the OT. That it is evil and should be kept separate from the wonderful (and rather Eastern) messages of Jesus. Keep in mind it weren?t the Gnostic Christians who tortured and killed orthodox/catholic Christians en masse and burned their texts. It was the other way around. You could say these "heretical" Christians were more Christian, more Christ-like, than the "real" Christians.

""The Tao te Ching, which i have read at least 3 times myself, you say, contains more wisodm than the Bible, but almost every thought in it is contained in the Bible ""

Perhaps you are right. It's just hard to find in between the "kill your relatives who leave the faith" and the "kill all the baby boys but keep the young virgin girls for yourself" biblical verses. Not only is the dao de jing full of practical wisdom, it also lacks such atrocities.

At the end of the day, it really all comes down to evidence for me. If there was evidence, I would accept Jesus and Yahweh. But there is ZERO evidence for their existence, and PLENTY against it.

Zero evidence for: all we have of Jesus are religious writings written decades and centuries after the supposed events. Nothing from during his time or a few years after. You can?t always trust what?s in the papers today, let alone what was thought decades after the events! Also, modern Jewish archaeology, with every motive to try and prove the bible true, has produced virtually no support for the biblical stories, and plenty of evidence against it (such as the twisted exodus story potentially based on a totally different event centuries earlier, and the Canaanites being Israelites, not conquered by them as the bible says).

Plenty of evidence against: Semitic hierarchy of gods, biblical verses showing Yahweh is not the chief god, but only the god of Israel, evidence that some sort of mythical Jesus was around decades before and even decades after the supposed events with details of a "literal Jesus" coming 100+ years later!

""Maybe next year, you'll tell us that iGOD was a mistake indeed""

I honestly find that doubtful; I urge you to read the book. You probably shouldn?t comment too much about it when you haven?t read it. I explain the facts (that generally lean against religious beliefs) and I demonstrate the lack of evidence for religion. I show my openness to ALL gods/religions but won?t accept any without evidence. And of course atheism is not an ideology, it doesn?t show you what the person believes, so can't be "wrong". It is simply the lack of belief in a personal god.

"Have peace my brother, but I would suggest not to waste bandwith about atheism on this forum."

I was asked why I no longer believe. And I answered. I have no intention of forcing my "nasty atheistic views" on anyone or offending anyone either. If anyone does want to know more on the things I have said here, do take a look at my book iGod which has links also to many scholarly works that go into more detail, and feel free to discuss with me by email anytime as well. I would gladly share what I have learned with anyone who is interested.

Shlama!