ENTRECARD NEEDS A CATEGORY "ATHEISM" THAT IS COMPLETELY SEPARATE FROM THE RELIGION AND SPIRITUALITY CATEGORY

I published an open letter to Graham Langdon yesterday, which I ended with the suggestion that atheist blogs be move out of the religion and spirituality category. I wrote:

Lastly, the RagingRev blog should definitely not be listed in the Religion and Spirituality category by Entrecard. It should be listed in a separate category call non-religious, non-spiritual or words to that effect: Atheism. That blog is not religious or spiritual. It is the exact opposite. I was planning that as my first forum-statement but was cutoff by Satan [the forums were restricted shortly before], so I've stated it here to be heard.

In reaction, the atheist, Matt Oxley, left a comment on that post as follows:

Seeing as how my blog (the ragingrev one) is highly focused on religious subject matter and debunking religion or having religious debates, I don't see any reason to move it into it's own category. It simply wouldn't make sense and it would harm my current audience...people like you are the ones i want to read it...not just Atheists.

Furthermore, I have never laid personal attack on you but I have to wonder why there is no category for "zealot" on Entrecard...you may feel more at home there.

see...that doesn't feel too good does it?

My reply:

Well Matt,

The idea of having a category called "Atheism" offends you, you say. How does my calling for an atheist category appear analogous to your calling for a category for zealotry? The logic isn't there.

Your feelings are hurt because the Christian says you don't fall within the set defined as religious or spiritual? There are pagans in the set. They're spiritual. If there were subcategories for Christians and another for pagans, that wouldn't be disorganized. An atheist in with the religious and the spiritual though shows a lack of good organization. There are some gray areas, but atheism is not gray here.

This situation is analogous to atheist science teachers saying that there is no place in science classrooms for teaching the watchmaker concept of the origins of the material universe: Intelligent Design. Well, there is a place, but its limited and a class of its own called the Philosophy of Science. That though doesn't take up the whole category of what is currently termed science in the mundane. The same applies here. Your blog is not centered on religion and spirituality but against it, just as the atheist science teachers are dead set against centering any part of their courses on teaching any alternative to testing. Do you see that, or not? I know it isn't lost on the other readers here.

No one seeing the category "Atheist" would miss the idea that atheists blogs would be found there and that those blogs would be anti-religion and anti-spirituality.

You don't need to be in the Religion and Spirituality category to have people who are not atheists see your site. I visit plenty of sites that are decidedly anti-Christ. I'm not the only one who does.

Your position comes out here though. "Me thinks thou protesteth too much" even though your comment is not that long. Understand?

You want people to stumble onto your blog who would otherwise choose not to visit. Your 125x125 image is deceptive with your employment of the cross. Your use of the term "Rev" in your name is likewise deceptive. You are not a Reverend. When coupled with being listed in religion and spirituality, your image is designed so that the unsuspecting will click initially expecting to find a Christian site perhaps of a zealous Christian, hence "raging" in the name. It's all clearly deliberately deceptive.

Also important though concerns the numbers, in terms of popularity within the category. There are many religious and spiritual sites within the category. There are not many atheist sites. The atheist audience on Entrecard is not diluted across many sites with the category when dropping, etc. Such is not the cased with the other blogs in the category. That gives you an advantage for being nearly the only atheist site, at least the only one pushing nearly as hard as you are, working the system even from within.

No one would be harmed in the mundane or otherwise by a category "Atheist." In fact, you would be at the top of that category in terms of popularity. Everyone dropping on you now would still be directed to your site. People who want to avoid atheist sites though could. Atheists wanting to avoid religious and spiritual sites could too. My point was not to achieve that. I have regular back and forth with atheists on my blog. My point is being clearer for all the users and not to be benefiting you at the expense of most others, which is the current situation.

Of course you want non-atheists to read your blog. So what? Just because you want there not to be a category for atheism doesn't mean there shouldn't be such a category.

As for your more than insinuating that I, what are your choices of words, laid a personal attack on you, if you take my suggestion for an atheist category as a personal attack, you need to do quite a bit more growing up.

As for your attempt to hurt me, I know who the Zealots were and are. I'm not one of them. You claim to have been a Christian minister at one point. Don't you know who the Zealots were and what Jesus had to say to them and why? Well, no, you never really knew, did you?

Look, Matt, I don't have to be "nice" to you. I don't have to "like" you. I don't have to avoid saying that atheism and atheists are inherently evil, lost for a time in case of some, but nevertheless, still an evil condition or state of being, that is dead of the Holy Spirit.

If you don't like it, it doesn't mean I have to coddle you in your atheism.

You're an enemy of Christ, Matt. You're working for the satanic spirit. You're up to no good. It's obvious. I don't know the specifics of what happened to you that caused you to fall as you have. I'm sure it was bad. I've never heard of anyone falling on account of good things happening to that one.

You've commented on this blog before. I've replied. You never returned to answer even to give information you promised to supply. Now you're here sniveling. That's right.

So, Matthew ("The gift of the Lord"), what exactly do you have against Jesus that he doesn't countenance homosexuality or what?

There's something you're doing or want to do that Jesus says is wrong. What is it?

Why do you want to do it?

Where did you learn it?

Who did it to you?

Is it harmful in anyway to anyone?

Are you honest even with yourself?

I know you aren't. I don't say it to hurt you, but you ought to have a good very long, purgative cry, perhaps 40 days, and not blame God or Jesus or me.

You fell. So, get up. Don't imagine you've debunked anything. You haven't debunked God, Matt. You've been exposed and rebuked for cause. That's what's happened.

What were you expecting, popularity with the Christians. Keep going in the direction you're heading and you'll land in the proverbial Lake of Fire, and no Christian is going to pull you out at the last minute. They will rather be simultaneously sadden by your error but joyous at being delivered from evil temptation that you are supplying with a vengeance.

Truth, Matt, how does it feel? Does it feel good? It should. The righteous love it.

Tom Usher

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
    • Pastor Tom,

      tolerance is a part of acceptance and acceptance is a part of God's divine lesson of Love.

      Spirituality and Non Spirituality are the thesis and antithesis of eachother.

      without one, the other doesn't exist.

      Raging Rev is just a blog that expresses his beliefs; which although markedly different that yours as a Christian, and mine as a Yoruba and Jew don't mean his views aren't valid to someone.

      tolerance is the greater lesson here and maybe if we all looked at eachothers writings as an expression of our faith, by God maybe we'd all see the God in eachother; instead of the Divisions that seperate us.

      Tom, simply put - his decision to not follow Jesus is his. Yours to Follow Jesus is Yours. mine to Believe that My Ancestors are Gods to Me and Rule and Help My Life is my belief; and each is as valid as the other.

      let us not seperate one from the other if we are to live together. spirituality and religion are not the same thing and if the seperation were to occur, you may find yourself in a much smaller category than you think.

      lots of folks are Spiritual but Not All are Christians. I was Baptisted a Christian as a child and grew to accept it as a part of my belief system which includes all of my heritage. none of it is greater than anyother. all are equal, as all are GOD.

      Peace and Blessings,

      May the Ancestors Guide and Protect you always,

      ~RE

    • Tom,

      The idea of an Atheism category does not offend me in the least...clearly I am an Atheist blogger and I use my blog to adamantly promote that point of view...The problem comes when you single my blog out, which is clearly religious in nature (and the #1 or #2 blog in the category, has been for many months) to be moved to another place that might harm the traffic that gets to it. My blog is written from the perspective of a former Christian and minister...there is no gray area there at all...it is clearly and definitely a religious blog because it covers a myriad of religious subjects...there is no way around that.

      My feelings are not hurt, however...I just think it is a silly proposition. I mean...think about it...there are less than 10 blogs on Entrecard ABOUT Atheism...clearly that is not efficient for me or the rest of the overworked and under appreciated mods to try to convince Graham that it is necessary to create a separate category for that...It is silly..and i would think that you protest too much about things that don't matter in the long run...you should have better things to do with your time

      Why you think Atheist science teachers, or any science teachers at all should teach pseudo-science like ID to children is beyond me, if you want to program your children to believe that by all means do...I think it is wrong and intellectually irresponsible, but I can't stop you. Just don't expect my kids to have to hear it in the same classroom as your kids....My blog is centered on the destruction of religion...kinda...but really my goal is discussion and discourse...religion will eventually destroy itself..it doesn't need my help.

      I am more than willing to have people unwillingly go to my site...I want them to come by any means...I don't think that is a deception in the least, either way as soon as they come in a realize what they are reading they can easily close the window...someone might think that you are Real, Liberal, Christian, or even a Church if they looked at your widget and your blog...I doubt a few of those descriptions for various reasons.

      My status in the ministry is irrelevant also, I was ordained at a young age into the Christian ministry and after that point my name became known as RevOxley...throughout the internet...im not changing that now because it is important that I keep those two identities close together...there is no intention to deceive there.

      I don't think you personally have attacked me prior to this post...but you certainly have shown me your true colors (you already had once, which is why I never bothered responding to your reply to my other comments on your blog)...you wanted to attack me, i just made it easier...i know how you think, though that may surprise you.

      When i called you a zealot I was being playful...giving you an opportunity to retort in the way that you truly wanted to...you simply filled the role that I expected you to fill...You have the right to call me evil, be it inherited or chosen on my part, and you don't have to coddle to my Atheism at all.

      My fall and the things that led up to it are not at all what you might expect...but you can feel free to ask me about that any time... or you could take the time to read my blog, which is greatly focused on that. You have merely made many bad assumptions as to what that was....which is typical of your ilk.

      I am, most definitely and without shame an Enemy of Christ...I am Anti-Christ and Anti-God...only because I love people and want to see them set free from the bonds of religion.

      What do i have against Jesus? The mythology of him

      What do i want to do that Jesus says is wrong? to live

      Why? Because I feel that it is my right

      Where did i learn it? the desire to live is part of our evolved nature.

      Who did it to me? I am not a victim of anything anymore at all...no one can be blamed for my lack of faith other than gods inability to provide that faith to me.

      Is it harmful to anyone? No, nothing I do now harms anyone in any way whatsoever.

      I am completely honest with myself , now more than ever.

      My expectations were nothing outside of intelligent conversation, something I have been glad to have gotten...I don't expect or want Christians to try to save me..if your God created the Lake of Fire then he can try his damndest to put me in it....him and his army.

      The Truth doesn't know you

      Matt

      • The idea of an Atheism category does not offend me in the least…clearly I am an Atheist blogger and I use my blog to adamantly promote that point of view…The problem comes when you single my blog out, which is clearly religious in nature (and the #1 or #2 blog in the category, has been for many months) to be moved to another place that might harm the traffic that gets to it.

        This statement of yours flies in the face of your using the name calling "Zealot" to attempt to make me feel hurt. You did that by way of saying you were hurt. You said in so many words, "That hurts." Then you attempted to hurt back, even though you're now claiming you weren't hurt, and said, and I paraphrase, "How do like it when someone hurts you?" No, you come here denying that that's exactly what happened and you want others to believe that it never happened even though it's all written right here. This is why no one can ultimately trust the atheist-mind. That is not to say that everyone who professes Christianity is trustworthy. They are not. Some are though.

        "might harm" is wrong. You are harm! You are not the dove of peace. You are the enemy of the dove of peace.

        You are trying to twist my point about gray areas. There is nothing gray about atheism not being religion in the sense that that term is used by Entrecard. Using your illogic, this blog could just as easily be in the Science category because I discuss science on this blog and often. Covering the topic doesn't make this a science blog by Entrecard standards. You cover the topic of religion. That doesn't make your blog religious or spiritual. What is your religion if your blog is religious? What spirit do you believe if you are spiritual? I'm speaking here in the terms as they are commonly understood and used. Every honest person can see it.

        …there are less than 10 blogs on Entrecard ABOUT Atheism…clearly that is not efficient for me or the rest of the overworked and under appreciated mods to try to convince Graham that it is necessary to create a separate category for that…It is silly..and i would think that you protest too much about things that don't matter in the long run…you should have better things to do with your time

        What does there being only 10 atheism blogs have to do with it? How many religion blogs were listed on day one of Entrecard? How many atheist blogs are there out there on the Internet that Graham would love to have listed? Your point is shortsighted as is atheism itself. Graham is dull if he listens to you and takes your advice.

        Of course Satan doesn't want me raising these issues. Of course Satan wants to try to plant the seeds of weeds in the people's minds that Jesus doesn't matter and is a waste of time. Well, you don't signify in the Real, New Heaven, Matt. Your name is not in the Book of Life. You hate the Holy Spirit. Who can't see that?

        "Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation: " (Mark 3:28-29)

        You are "in danger of eternal damnation." Anyone who follows you is also. That's Jesus's teaching, and he is right. You are not. You can't hold a candle to Jesus who is the light. You're a fool for trying to hold up darkness as light. You stand against the greatest teachings of all time. You stand against the real and final solution. You don't know the language. You twist the meanings. You redefine to license iniquity.

        You have admitted that you've fallen and like it. You are dangerous. I warn people against you. You are an enemy of the Christian Commons Project. Your spirit is the reason the world is in the mess that it is in. Your spirit is the reason things will get worse. It is away from your spirit that salvation lies. You are not salvation. You are damnation. You have made yourself this and brag about it.

        I am stating the obvious. People though have been tricked by the likes of you into not seeing even the obvious. You are up to no good.

        Why you think Atheist science teachers, or any science teachers at all should teach pseudo-science like ID to children is beyond me,...

        Read it again, Matt. I did not say that. You are reckless. You are not careful. You are careless and dangerous. The children are not safe with you. You are the bad shepherd.

        ...if you want to program your children to believe that by all means do…I think it is wrong and intellectually irresponsible, but I can't stop you. Just don't expect my kids to have to hear it in the same classroom as your kids….My blog is centered on the destruction of religion…kinda…but really my goal is discussion and discourse…religion will eventually destroy itself..it doesn't need my help.

        All formal education is indoctrination, Matt. Science courses are no exception. It's all programming/conditioning. Where do you come off suggesting otherwise?

        If "religion will eventually destroy itself..it doesn't need [your] help," then why are you here commenting?

        You are not going to destroy God and Jesus, Matt. It's laughable in the good way of laughing.

        I am more than willing to have people unwillingly go to my site…I want them to come by any means…I don't think that is a deception in the least....

        Look, I already laid out how you are deceptive. Your image, your blog name, your categorization is all deception.

        A porn site can mask itself. People don't need that stuff even flashed before their eyes. "...easily close the window...." Well, I say let's tell the people that your site is an atheist site via a category named such. Then, it's up to them, but at least the sheep's clothing is off the ravening wolf.

        Look at that people. He has no problem with people being tricked by any means into visiting his site. He has no problem tricking you! Now, do you trust him? Is he popular with you?

        …someone might think that you are Real, Liberal, Christian, or even a Church if they looked at your widget and your blog…I doubt a few of those descriptions for various reasons.

        Well, for one who doesn't know Jesus or God, who cares what you think about any of that. You don't know what any of those terms mean. You hate Jesus because you don't know Jesus. Satan doesn't get to define those terms, Matt. They are already defined. They are fixed.

        My status in the ministry is irrelevant also, I was ordained at a young age into the Christian ministry and after that point my name became known as RevOxley…throughout the internet…im not changing that now because it is important that I keep those two identities close together…there is no intention to deceive there.

        You just got through saying that you have no problem with deception by "any means" "more than willing to have people unwillingly go to my site." Now you expect people to believe that there is no deception. How dumb are they in your view? You think they are sheep without brains. The shepherd has brains and kills the ravening wolf. In this case, it's done using truth to expose the wolf, to take away the sheep's clothing. Then the wolf starves for lack of sheep (souls) to devour.

        You call yourself "reverend." Now your asking others to just accept your continued use, which is misuse. No one is under any obligation to go along with that just because you want them to. Your branding is false advertising. It's bait and switch — wolf in sheep's clothing — blatantly so, once anyone visits your site. Nevertheless, it's all the more reason to stick you into a category named "Atheism."

        I don't think you personally have attacked me prior to this post…

        Then why did come and comment in a way clearly suggestive of exactly the opposite of what you are now saying? You are a twister, anti-Christ. Everyone needs to see it. You are not straight.

        ...but you certainly have shown me your true colors (you already had once, which is why I never bothered responding to your reply to my other comments on your blog)…you wanted to attack me, i just made it easier…i know how you think, though that may surprise you.

        You feel attacked because your position is weak. Jesus called them serpents. He didn't kick them in the head. If I call you what you are, which openly you profess to be, you call it attacking you. That's serpentine. You know how I think? You know nothing.

        When i called you a zealot I was being playful…giving you an opportunity to retort in the way that you truly wanted to…you simply filled the role that I expected you to fill…You have the right to call me evil, be it inherited or chosen on my part, and you don't have to coddle to my Atheism at all.

        "Playful," you expect people to re-read this thread and to believe that that was your thinking and motive? Did I fill the role you expected? I called you evil. People who hate Jesus are evil. They don't know Jesus but they condemn him to the cross. They are ignorantly (relatively speaking or not) evil.

        Who drew whom out? Who exposed whom? Who has exposed to the fold the ravening wolf in their midst? You can't hide, Satan. If you want compassion, show it. Be merciful. Turn, repent, and atone.

        My fall and the things that led up to it are not at all what you might expect…but you can feel free to ask me about that any time… or you could take the time to read my blog, which is greatly focused on that. You have merely made many bad assumptions as to what that was….which is typical of your ilk.

        I have made no bad assumptions.

        I am, most definitely and without shame an Enemy of Christ…I am Anti-Christ and Anti-God…only because I love people and want to see them set free from the bonds of religion.

        You hate Jesus, but you love people you say. You've come here to set the people free from Jesus? Following Jesus is evil in your eyes? What teaching of his is evil? Be specific. Tell us all one thing that he says should be done that should not be done and why? Be specific. Tell us how Jesus is harmful. Be prepared to defend your position, or go way and don't darken my or anyone else's door again, Satan.

        What do i want to do that Jesus says is wrong? to live

        You love people by way of saying that you think Jesus doesn't love more perfectly than do you. You want to live by way of saying that you think Jesus doesn't offer life.

        If everyone were to follow the teachings in Jesus's Sermon on the Mount, you would have us believe we'd all have no love and be dead. Anyone who believes you, Matt, is dead of truth and utterly stupid.

        ...nothing I do now harms anyone in any way whatsoever.

        You lead people away from the path of righteousness. You proselytize for homosexuality. Homosexuality is harmful to body, mind, and soul. It comes out from the dark side, as have you.

        ...I don't expect or want Christians to try to save me..if your God created the Lake of Fire then he can try his damndest to put me in it….him and his army.

        You've been offered the teachings of Jesus and openly rejected them and proclaimed yourself his enemy. I'm not trying to save you anymore than is Jesus. The spiritually blind lead and follow into the ditch. He warned, and so do I. You don't hear but others do. Those who hear are of the fold. You are not of the fold. You are of the other, the dark one. You are anti-Christ, as you say. You are the opposite of love, peace, and truth. You are the trickster. You are the serpent in the proverbial garden. You have ulterior motives, a hidden agenda, to devour and ruin. You are fractured and pretend to yourself that you are not. You offer nothing that is not ultimately a lie. Your whole worldview is based upon hypocrisy.

        It is you who is making his Lake of Fire. You are your Satan.

        To all who have ears, let them hear.

        Tom

    • I think that your attack on the Raging Rev is ridiculous. Listen, you wake up every morning trying to convince children to believe in demons, a Chief Demon Satan, a tri-part false trilogy that is illogical and immoral consisting of an old man in the sky, who incarnated himself as a human through a virgin, then killed himself, and now sits next to himself in the sky. Give me a break. You know you are a liar. You know. You know, and I know. Look me in the eye with out blinking. Liar. Confess your unbelief, and your use of your religion to further your own self-interest then talk about spirituality. Buncha liars the lot of you. Humanity will be better off when you all fade away into history along with the followers of the Aztec and Mayan Gods who had a demand for blood almost as great as Christianity. What are you picking on the raging Rev for?

      • You, Ron, are extremely careless. You are worst than Matt in that regard. You don't know how to define demons. You exist don't you? There are demons. Hitler had no spirit to you. You though, don't understand spirit. The chief demon Satan is whoever takes on that role. Are you running for the position? You aren't smart enough. Get thee behind me, Satan's child.

        ...an old man in the sky, who incarnated himself as a human through a virgin, then killed himself, and now sits next to himself in the sky. Give me a break. You know you are a liar. You know. You know, and I know. Look me in the eye with out blinking. Liar. Confess your unbelief, and your use of your religion to further your own self-interest then talk about spirituality. Buncha liars the lot of you. Humanity will be better off when you all fade away into history along with the followers of the Aztec and Mayan Gods who had a demand for blood almost as great as Christianity. What are you picking on the raging Rev for?

        The semantics of all of this is completely lost on you. You can't begin to speak the language. You haven't the faintest idea of what you're talking about. You put things out there and claim I believe them as you've characterized and then call me a liar. That's dimwitted, Ron!

        You judge my work to be self-interest while you don't know what that self is. Also, hypocrite, you are here in your selfish interest. Anyone who can't see that is cutoff enough from the real reality so that he or she believes there is no God.

        You put the literalist to shame.

        "Old man in the sky," show me anywhere where I've said I believe in an old man in the sky using the completely mundane and non-spiritual connotations you've used and intend here. You can't do it because you made it up. It isn't there. You can't find it. You just made up garbage about me. Yet, you call me the liar. Go look in the mirror, fool! I say it with ample cause right here that you supplied. You are a proven liar. I just proved it. Now, you prove that I'm anything you just accused me of being. You can't. You stink the place up. Go get clean. Go get right with God.

        You've lost, Ron. You lost before you started.

        Before you talk about Christianity, learn what it is. Christianity has never had a demand for blood. You're talking about non-Christians. Stop lying about Christianity. Stop lying about Jesus. Stop lying about me. Liar.

    • Sure Tom, If I point you out as a liar, than most certainly your argument would be to compare me to Hitler as the greatest evil. This is what most who realize they have no argument do when confronted with a superior line of reasoning. They simply try to appeal to an emotional level. Therefore, I have to be Hitler. Sure. Regarding you definition of demons - just proves my point. You are a liar. Shame on you. Keep believing or you will be out of a job. Right? Oh and lastly Tom, I'm not Satan. I don't believe in that stuff, or the bogy man, or Santa claus, or the Easter bunny.

      • Ron, you're being extremely thick. You were out.

        Compare you to Hitler? You think I'm equating you? You're flattering yourself. You're minion who needs to work on your basic vocabulary and reading comprehension. That's not sarcasm. We all have room for improvement.

        Your blog name is appropriate for you: "Improvisational oblivion." Fix that, or you'll remain dead.

        You're here writing of things about which you know nothing. You're completely ignorant on the subject matter.

        You don't understand the terms, and you've shown that you don't read with care. You don't even have the conscience of those who dropped their stones and walked away.

        You asked why I'm picking on someone who's still persecuting Jesus, our greatest brother who ever lived, the one who bravely suffered and died standing up to the powers that be for the sakes of the common people, including you, so everyone might come to know the truth that is the best way to be toward others (unselfish and harmless), contrary to the teachings of those worldly powers who murdered Him for it? Who's picking on whom? Go away. Come back when you've found a softening heart and some soul. Then we can speak honestly toward one another of brains, strength, and courage. Seek.

        You don't believe? Watch what happens just for you. Watch for the signs.

        God Bless Them Who Curse You. Bless you, Ron,

        Tom

        • What are you going to do now, Ron, come back whining that you don't want or need my blessing?

    • Following Jesus is evil in your eyes? What teaching of his is evil? Be specific. Tell us all one thing that he says should be done that should not be done and why? Be specific. Tell us how Jesus is harmful.

      I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ.

      Spewing hate, making accusations, threatening Lakes of Fire, is that really the way to show your god's love? Insults and harsh words, out of supposed concern for our supposed souls. You don't do this for us, you do this to make yourself feel superior.

      • Oh, Gandhi read the Gospels. Have you? He was comparing the violent, occupying, enslaving, British Empire against the Christ spirit — it's exact opposite. Do you have any idea of where you just left your comment? Are you more the anti-imperialist than am I? Are you more anti-militaristic? Are you more anti-capitalistic, anti-greed, what?

        Isn't there anyone who takes the time to figure out where he or she is before shooting off his or her mouth?

        What did Matt do, send an email alert to be rescued by all the knee-jerk, hypnotized, unthinking atheists?

        The Lake of Fire is the consequence. It's cause and effect. You reap what you sow. What goes around, comes around. This is not magic. This is reality. You are making the future. You are making your future. Wake up.

        "If any come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26)

        Who said that? Gandhi knew. He liked the one who said it. He thought he understood the point of that verse.

        By the way, you hate me. So does Ron, who wrote the huge lie about Christians as follows: "Humanity will be better off when you all fade away into history along with the followers of the Aztec and Mayan Gods who had a demand for blood almost as great as Christianity."

        Ghandhi, of course, left room for violence in the end. Jesus did not. Hence Christianity does not. How about you? Are you a total pacifist, or will you finally kill people to get your way or to protect your fleshly life?

        God's love is to warn people away from iniquity that kills not only the flesh but the soul. Jesus died on the cross to do that. Are you an atheist in the face of that? Are you with Matt, an enemy of Christ? Are you here fighting against me and that for which I stand? I don't see anything in your comment negatively criticizing any of the hate and accusations (false) of those who came here to attack.

        You have a lot of nerve to say that I write to feel superior. You don't know me at all. You have no idea about my life. You don't know why I believe what I do, what I know, what I've experienced. You don't know how I feel about people who are starving, and being murdered and tortured and lied to and deceived and tricked into all sorts of iniquitous and harmful and fatal behaviors. Yet, you have the audacity to come here judging me in my own house. Oh, but Ron says that I'm not supposed to appeal to emotion.

        Emotion is everything. Everything is feeling. There is no reasoning without feelings.

        To think all of this is on account of my saying that there ought to be a category for atheists on Entrecard. What a sin?

        How does it feel to lose? Your whole team can't win against one person telling the truth.

        I'm right about Matt. He proselytizes for homosexuality. Jesus said it's sin when he said fornication is sin. Fornication is sex out of wedlock, and Jesus didn't hold that homosexuals were married. He said the Sodomites in Sodom would have repented had they seen the signs Jesus preformed. It is clear that the longer into history we go the more spirituality dies meaning the more the Earth becomes Hell. However, the spirit lives regardless because there is more than just this planet and just these people now. It will return in force but not as you imagine.

        Jesus said to be as harmless as a dove. Homo-sex is not harmless. It is harmful and a choice always. Anyone who engages in it, who falls to it, is choosing to cause harm. That's a fact. I don't coerce them, I don't beat them, but I don't lie for them. Matt does. You don't like what I do? Too bad.

        "Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves." (Matthew 10:16)

        Matt's a wolf. So are many of you.

        "Serpents, generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?" (Matthew 23:33)

        That's Jesus talking about you. Do you still like him? I do. He came to separate, which means he came to deliver the righteous out of the hands of, among others, atheists.

        Insults and harsh words? You don't like them? You want Satan to feel comfortable and pleasant while he bombs people to death including innocent children if he isn't stripping them of the their food via predator capitalism or selling them as sex slaves. You don't think Christians do all of that do you? Atheists do it all. Not all atheists, but not one Christian.

        Do you see the difference that separates us? Open your eyes.

        God Bless Everyone With The Whole Truth,

        Tom Usher

    • Alrighty, I used my last name just so I could jump into this love fest. My original comment, sans last name, was something to the effect that atheist blogs belong in the religion and spirituality category because the stance of atheism is a direct reaction to religion and spirituality, and some atheists lead would they would deem spiritual lives. Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be where this discussion has gone. I don't wish to contribute to the ad hominems for either side, so I will step back out.

      • Hi Mike,

        Thank you for the back-and-forth email and for seeing your way clear to using your last name. I'm glad my suggestion that you add "aka MonolithTMA" worked for you in your desire for continued continuity with those who follow you and know you as such.

        It's not too hot in the kitchen is it? I don't mean that as a putdown. It's a sincere question.

        You are saying by "ad hominems" that personal considerations are illogical. I hold the exact opposite view. Jesus is what he was and is, personally, as a person, what he said and did. It's never been illogical to judge a tree by its fruit. Of course, some souls don't know how it plays out in the end. I don't hold with the Aristotelian, mundane view of logic. Aristotle has been more than highly overrated. Frankly, he was a....mistake.

        "...some atheists lead would they would deem spiritual lives." That is right; however, on balance, does it outweigh that the main voice of atheism is anti-metaphysical? Who labels himself or herself "atheist" first and foremost who is spiritual? Atheism is without God. The Satanists who disbelieve there is a God of Jesus are spiritual and atheists then from the Christian's view. This is all a matter of semantics and proper prioritizing/categorizing.

        The person with the most direct problem concerning my suggestion in his view is Matt.

        What you are saying is that there should not be a category of non-spiritual atheists even though Matt uses the cross and reverend in his blog's title with self-admitted comfort that many will be literally tricked into visiting?

        Well, you are prioritizing and categorizing to an end that you have in mind. I don't share your view, your vision, your goal, your destination.

        This is a debate for the hearts and minds of people. Matt is anti-Christ, anti-God, no matter how those are defined, spirit, the one and only or the duality of good and evil.

        So, if you all don't want a main category for Atheism, which is used in many places, so it's not as if it's unheard of, by any stretch, then why haven't any of you suggested sub-categorization within the broader category of Religion and Spirituality?

        Religion and Spirituality: Atheism: Spiritual Atheism
        Religion and Spirituality: Atheism: Non-spiritual Atheism

        Listen, how many blogs are there in the world? How many new ones are there added everyday? Technorati said recently that it is indexing some 17 million. We can be assured that Google has more. Now, how many Spiritual Atheism blogs are there, and how many does Entrecard want? The same question applies to Non-spiritual Atheism blogs.

        What is wrong with categories? Why is everyone so dead set against them? If they are so bad, why are there any? Let's get rid of them all. Let's have one. That would be akin to say the "Popular" ordering on Entrecard. Of course, one may order on other criteria.

        Anyway, the fear of further categorization is wrong. If you all want to be one, you'll have to join Christ as he defines himself.

        By the way, here's your original comment:

        The irony here is that it is often Christians who claim atheism is a religion. Some book stores also put atheism books in the religion section.

        As RE pointed out, atheism is merely a reaction to religion and wouldn't even be a position of religion didn't exist. If Matt is truly an enemy of Christ then it doesn't get any more spiritual than that.

        Of course, you are arguing the fine points, which I am doing as well. There is no irony for me because I know what is meant by atheism as religion. In fact, I posted about it today. It is still a matter of prioritizing. It's an art, isn't it? Well, the scientists certainly classify. So, you all are arguing against my classification of Matt. Interesting. Most of the naysayers, including Matt are afraid of it. Some are here to say anything negative just because I believe in Jesus and they hate Jesus above all things, whether they know it or not.

    • Why don't we break it down further - in the romance category lets have a section for gays, lesbians, bis, transvetites - In the writing and literature lets break it down to what type of writing - In the entertainment category we would have to seperate the strippers from the musicals and God forbid if I should have to read about gays and lesbians in the parenting section -

      I think it is ridiculous of you to try and create a seperate category for Aethism - to me the category could be broken down in to Jews, Muslims, Christians, etc - they all hate each other and think that they are each the only way to God.

      Being spiritual does not mean being religious. Religion can be a component, yes, but that's not all there is to it. Spirituality does have connotations of belief in a higher power, but just because you don't believe in any gods doesn't mean you can't have faith in something larger than yourself.

      You don't need to worry about Satan working through people like the raging rev, your attitude toward people who don't think the way you do or believe what you do makes it clear to me who "Satan" has a hold of.

      You just sound like another crazy christian who doesn't know when to zip-it.

      I had never seen your website until now and they way you talk to people you don't even know will stop me from coming back.

      Do you realized how many new readers the Rev will get because the little scene you have created?

      Sheila

      • Why don't we break it down further - in the romance category lets have a section for gays, lesbians, bis, transvetites

        You see this as a point? You see this as analogous?

        You're here complaining because you give the world the middle finger while you want it to feed you. Yes, I've been to your site. I've been to the bottom. I've seen the photo on its side with the female giving everyone the finger. Is that you? Sure it is. It your spirit on display, and you're so proud of it.

        How long will you let it sit there now, miss "F___ you, and F___ the world." Your way is salvation is it? You're so nice, right? You treat people really well, right? You're not offensive. You don't mean anyone any harm at all? You actually deserve your popularity. You've earned it: The lowest common denominator.

        I think it is ridiculous of you to try and create a seperate category for Aethism - to me the category could be broken down in to Jews, Muslims, Christians, etc - they all hate each other and think that they are each the only way to God.

        So, no additional main subcategory for atheism but.... This is called hypocrisy and transparently so. If it works to further iniquity, "okay"; if not, then "no." That's you. That's your position here.

        Being spiritual does not mean being religious. Religion can be a component, yes, but that's not all there is to it. Spirituality does have connotations of belief in a higher power, but just because you don't believe in any gods doesn't mean you can't have faith in something larger than yourself.

        You're in over your head. More to the point, you're here to defend atheism and to attack Christianity from behind cherry picked issues.

        What's the higher power?

        You don't need to worry about Satan working through people like the raging rev, your attitude toward people who don't think the way you do or believe what you do makes it clear to me who "Satan" has a hold of.

        My attitude is straight from the Gospels; so if you hold this view about me, you hold it about Jesus too. If you believe that Satan had a hold of Jesus or still does, you'd be one of those chanting for crucifixion or at the very least silent. Would you have us believe that you would throw your body in the way if they came to crucify me now?

        You just sound like another crazy christian who doesn't know when to zip-it.

        What are you doing here other than running YOUR mouth? Why didn't you zip it rather then come here and spew? It doesn't stick though, by the way.

        I had never seen your website until now and they way you talk to people you don't even know will stop me from coming back.

        Well, unlike you, I'm not in it for money. I don't worship mammon.

        Do you realized how many new readers the Rev will get because the little scene you have created?

        Ah, the readers he will get will be better informed about his deception. Do you realize how many people are reading what you've posted here and are concluding that you are also up to no good?

        Sheila, you are the most capitalist person/blog owner on the whole of Entrecard. That makes you the most overtly greedy one. Oh, you may give some away, but for you, it's me, me, me, more, more, more, mine, mine, mine. If you don't come here again, hyper-capitalist, so what? Is that my loss or yours?

        By the way, what possessed you to make this your first visit? Did a little dirty bird let you know that there might be some carrion in the making at which your flock might later pick?

        Look, Sheila, my vision that is The Christian Commons is vastly better for the whole of humanity than is the garbage you're pumping out over on your selfish and greedy website worshipping the dollar.

        Regardless, Bless You, Sheila, With The Whole Truth,

        Tom Usher

    • Tom,

      "You don't believe? Watch what happens just for you. Watch for the signs."

      Oh Gosh Tom...the signs..you feel them don't you ...see them....any day now...

      I'm not ignorant Tom. Jesus if he existed. Was murdered. Thrown in a mass grave. Most likely burned. If there was value in his words that would be how his Spirit lived on.

      I see you are a 5013c nice little set up you have there. You and all the rest of em. Like I say Tom. You dont fool me. You ask em to plant seeds often do you? I bet you do.

      So let me talk about signs with you. One day when you are much older, you will be as the followers of Paul. Still waiting. There will be no signs Tom. You can get mad at me all day long and say I am dumb, and dead and going to hell or anything you want to do. It will not change the fact that I have supreme confidence in what I am saying. I know I am telling the truth. You spread lies. You know it. You can't let it out of yourself because your mind can't handle breaking down walls that you have spent your whole life building up. You would have nothing then but yourself. That is where it all begins Tom. If you have a problem with signs you should probably stop reading those stupid Tim Lahaye novels that spread fear into your sheep. Tom, I am sure in all respects you are a good man except for the fact that you participate in spreading ignorance and probably make a decent living doing so.

      • Oh, Ron Again,

        You are tailor made to embarrass your fellow atheists. If I were of you, I'd tell you to stop. You say you're not ignorant? You're the most ignorant atheist to come here so far. This is the last for you because I don't want to waste people's time or my own.

        if he existed. Was murdered. Thrown in a mass grave.

        You don't know whether or not he existed, but he didn't exist, but then again, if he existed.... You know though that he was murdered. You have something right but it's only luck. You know though that he was thrown in a mass grave. How do know that since you don't know anything else except that when randomly spraying, you happen to hit on that they murdered him? Well, actually, it's not random. You were simply provided with God already knowing. You're a sign to yourself. Can you see it? Go look in the mirror and think about how twisted you are in your talk. Don't kill yourself. Just be sorry for others who are subjected to you and work on it.

        Still don't believe in signs?

        If there was value in his words that would be how his Spirit lived on.

        Spirit? So, you believe in spirit. How do know there's spirit but know there is no God? You left room for there being God though, but you're certain: Supremely confident.

        His spirit lived on, so according to you, there was/is value in his words. Now go into your self-doubt mode and don't take it out on the children. Start with asking your conscience, "What's lacking that I, Ron, made a fool of myself?" It won't do any harm at all. It will begin your healing. We all have to go through it.

        I see you are a 5013c nice little set up you have there.

        That's 501(c)(3), not 3c. Anyway, you don't like tax deductions? The bankers don't get enough for you. You like the Pentagon. It needs more tax dollars to pay for predator drones killing babies. Is that right up your alley? Maybe you hate baby killing. Well, then why do you want them to have the taxes? The children of God owe no taxes. There are just thieves coercing them and collecting. Wake up! Truth!

        You and all the rest of em. Like I say Tom. You dont fool me. You ask em to plant seeds often do you? I bet you do.

        You're against planting seeds? I'm for planting seeds to grow organic crops for those who will give and share all together and for the poor and hungry. You have a problem though because you're ignorant, mean-spirited, and don't think before you write things about others. I should make allowances for you that you didn't read the site first? A worthy one would have checked out this site before commenting again, especially in light of what went back and forth between us. You didn't bother with that though.

        People such as you, Ron, are the problem, not the solution.

        So let me talk about signs with you. One day when you are much older, you will be as the followers of Paul.

        No, I won't. I'm not Pauline.

        I have supreme confidence in what I am saying. I know I am telling the truth.

        You do and don't know God exists but you're supremely confident.

        If you have a problem with signs you should probably stop reading those stupid Tim Lahaye novels that spread fear into your sheep.

        Where are your atheist friends with the hook to pull you off stage?

        You think I'm closer to Tim LaHaye than are you? Tim LaHaye hates my guts, Ron. He hates me more than you do, and he hates me more than he hates you. Wake Up!

        Tom, I am sure in all respects you are a good man except for the fact that you participate in spreading ignorance and probably make a decent living doing so.

        What is this? I could not possibly be a "good man" and be what you've alleged here. Ron, I make zero from donations. Okay? "Wow, did I have him wrong." Do you know how to say that to yourself and to others, or are you always right and never apologize?

        Why should I have to knock down your awful lies, Ron? Why are you the way you are, Ron? What's wrong with you? Why did they drag Jesus to Pontius Pilate? Why didn't Jesus defend himself?

        Ron, go away.

        Ron, your friends need to tell you that the old garbage you're trotting out here isn't working and isn't going to work.

        Peace to All, Even Ron,

        Tom

      • Ron,

        I am not a disciple of John Nelson Darby, Cyrus Scofield, or Paul. Not everyone calling himself or herself Christian is one of their disciples. Jesus is not their disciple. You write here as if he is.

        Now you've learned something here.

        Your problem is that what you don't believe can't be. Taking that attitude is as believing you know everything there is to know in the Cosmos and beyond. That's arrogant.

        No intelligent human being has ever taken the position the way you present yourself, not even Jesus; and this on top of your conflating at-will agnosticism and atheism on the mundane.

        Have you read the Bible?

        Tom