A non-Christian who thinks she knows all about Christianity but knows nothing

It's been my day to be attacked. I'd let you all in on a secret, but I'm not allowed to yet.

Tom Usher August 5 at 6:35pm

Hi Sara,

Concerning http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=100744959982840, I don't know what that group means by "strike all over the world." There are many ways to read that.

It could mean violently rise up, which I will not do. It could mean strike, as in not work, which I will not do, as my employer will have had nothing to do with any attack on Venezuela and the money I earn goes into the cause of peace. There are other ways of interpreting it as well.

What I will do is continue with what I already do regarding all the violence in the world and that is to tell people that human-on-human violence has never been the solution and never will be. Vengeance is God's alone.



Sara Swati August 6 at 12:31am

God have nothing to do with your wordly calculations OR WITH ANY CALCULATIONS , GOD IS CONCERNED WITH ACTION , WITH RIGHT ACTION , in fact you are misinterpreting all scriptures, scripture ordain people to defend themselves , this is a must and a duty ORDAINED BY ALL RELIGIONS that one is to defend oneself and one's honor by all means and has to fight for this if it is necessary ; it is in Christianity, Islam and Hinduism that action is superior to inaction and right action is superior to both, and when war is waged by the enemies of man who wants to establish the rule of greed on earth it is a duty to answer the call for self defense , because passivity is hateful to God and peace is to be reached through effort and right action, your interpretation of the scripture is distorted and even sinful because you are swaying people from their duty which is a great sin , people should be encouraged to carry on their duty if it is in comformity with divine instruction , read the Bhagavat Gita and stop serving the establishment by turning religion into a tool for the people in power by teaching passivity toi the victim , this is shameful.

Tom Usher August 6 at 1:12am


Really, you have zero knowledge about Christianity.

You've been told a great deal of hogwash about it.

The Gospel of John for instance goes back to Jesus's perhaps closest disciple, John, as testified by Polycarp and Irenaeus.

Christianity does not ordain self-defense. Whoever told you that is mistaken or a liar or both.

In addition, Christianity doesn't hold the Hindu scriptures or Buddhist scriptures or Islamic scriptures as being sacred to Christians. Those writings certainly don't agree with each other in any case.

In addition, your use of the term "passivity" is inaccurate here. It does not apply. My job is to change hearts and minds of those of greed as possible. My job is not to wage violent wars against them in which such wars the innocent invariably die. You cannot guarantee to me that you in your war will take no innocent lives, and you know it.

The Bhagavad Gita is a story of overcoming violence (ego) by the way. Have you truly studied it? It doesn't sound like it.

Islamic traditions are thought to come from the Diatessaron that was a harmony of the Gospels but also later the Gospel of Barnabas, which is a complete fraud as it now stands.

God, in the Torah says vengeance is God, not yours. Who do you think you are?

The group you suggested is a violent, Marxist revolutionary group. You support that? I do not.

You sound blood thirsty. Non-violence has done more for peace than have all or any wars. You doubt that? Think.

Peace is the only path to peace. Evil brings forth evil.

Sara Swati August 6 at 1:58am

you certainly have understood nothing of the Bhagavat Gita which is itself a chapter of the Saga of the war , the war called MAHABHARATA between the Pandavas and the Kauravas . the Gita itself my dear friend is being related by Sri Krisna to his Disciple Arjuna on the battle field itself, on the ground battle of Kurukshetra where Arjuna the most skilled among fighters was reluctant to engage in the war waged on him, and his brothers by his cousins and where Sri Krisna urges his student to take on the duty of a fighter and defend his own rights and that of his brothers . This is the story of the Gita , act but to not get attached to the fruits of action, therefore my dear friend you correct your information . Christ himelf says I have not come to bring peace but war, this is to say that the Gospel has been tampered with and the places where CHRIST ADDRESSES his disciples have been mixed with the chapters in which he addresses common people and Christ did not address both in the same way , this turning the other cheek business was greatly misinterpreted and used by pagan westeners to subdue other population in the name of religion , you are free to believe whatever you believe but you address all diffusing wrong information, the people fighting for their rights are not terrorists nor are they waging violence , the one waging violence are the ones that occupy military other countries , you cannot treat all equally ,resisting evil by alll means is a must , it is evil not to resisty evil , life is not inherent to the flesh ,but lifeis behind everything and behind death as well,at least as a Christian that you pretend to be you should know this , life above all is a sacrifice. one more thing , i am not a communist nor you are a real Christian.

Tom Usher August 6 at 6:36am


You are a literalist. If violent fighting is right, then you should be violently fighting everyday until all evil has been slaughtered in the flesh – killing people everyday. This is not the message of purer Hinduism. Don't you know about pacifist Hindus? You are misunderstanding "action." Action is fighting spiritually.

I know what Christ said. I have read it countless times. You are a literalist. You do not understand the revelation of Jesus Christ. You do not understand the semantics involved. You are using terms in their most letter form that is most divorced from the spirit of the law – the Word.

His message divides the anointed from the rest. It separates the goats from the sheep. He warned his disciples that following him would get them killed by the evil ones – the killers. Which of his disciples went out killing people? None! Don't be stupid about it.

Try reading it rather than just echoing a bunch of spinning and twisting by those who didn't and don't want to have to live up to the highest standard, the bravest standard, the standard that cowards duck because they can't stand there taking it as Jesus did for the sake of getting the spirit-saving message handed down even to this day. You have missed his whole point. The parables remain a completely foreign language to you even when translated into your native tongue.

Turning the other cheek was not used to subdue. That's false propaganda. It was rather ignored by those who engaged in violent wars. The popes were sure to keep the lower classes completely ignorant about where Rome's actions were wholly inconsistent with the message of Jesus, which you don't understand at all. The popes kept the people illiterate. The pope kept the writings in Latin and didn't teach it to the common people.

You are spewing Islamic-like nonsense about Christianity. Mohammed was nearly devoid of any understanding about Jesus's message. It didn't suit Mohammed's worldly ambitions.

Some people fighting for their rights do engage in terrorism. All people who fight violently are waging violence. How you can say otherwise is incredible. It is farcical on its face. There are no connotations of violence that have ever been conjured up before to mean what you are attempting to assert here. It's ridiculous.

Your writing is extremely difficult to follow since you are using commas likely where you should be using periods.

"But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." (Matthew 5:39)

Have you even ever read the Sermon on the Mount? It flows perfectly. Each thought within it is completely consistent with all the rest. There is no aspect that stands out as not belonging to the one spirit from where it comes out.

Resisting evil with evil is itself. In the Old Testament, God repents of evil. Did you know that? Destroying whole peoples is considered evil even by the God of the Old Testament. Falling to the temptation is that concerning which God repents when the people too repent. Is that something you comprehend? It doesn't appear so.

One resists evil by not stooping to evil but rather rising above it overcoming the temptation to fall to employing it. You don't see that. You're blind to it. Your standard is to be stuck in that cycle of evil. My standard is to call all souls out from it. Those who refuse remain and are separated from those who do not refuse but rather go to God in spirit now and forever regardless of what happens to the flesh at the hands of those who can kill the flesh but not the soul.

You are offensive using the term "pretend" concerning my belief. It takes a real Christian to know when someone else who speaks and writes things close to what I say and write is not. You are not a Christian. You hold with un-Christian "scripture." No Christian does that.

Sara, you have a chip on your shoulder. As I said, I think you are blood thirsty. You lust after killing people. You call for people to kill others, but you are not engaged in it yourself right now. You don't do what you tell others to do. You just talk. If you really believed what you are saying, you would have been a martyr long ago. Between the two of us, it is you who is the fake — a dangerous person calling for the blood of others rather than being a blessed peacemaker.

As I said, you don't know anything about Christianity. You are completely ignorant about it. You haven't a trace of it within you. Perhaps after some souls searching to see just how violent and hostile and lusting and selfish and harmful you are, and have been, that will change. It would be good. Right now, you are part of the divided house that will not stand.


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.