Table of Contents
The Boob Heard Round The World
Father_Nathaniel@yahoo.com February 8, 2004
I am always astonished that fundies don't care about seeing people blown to bits, shot to pieces, stabbed, choked, and killed or maimed any number of ways on TV or in movies...but show any nudity or sex and they go BALLISTIC! There is something basically very screwed up...totally ass-backwards....with this line kind of "thinking". Such people are not quite sane.
Subject: Regarding 9-11
Date: 9/6/2004 9:27:12 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: kooldude007@countrystars.com
Reply To:
To: JCnot4me@aol.com
So, you want someone to touch this with a ten foot pole huh? Well, here I go. As you quoted "Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin." James 4:17 (KJV) Well, have you ever heard the phrase "the Lord works in mysterious ways"? If you have, you can take it into consideration when it comes to the 9-11 attacks. You see, on the morning of September 11, God knew what was going to happen, and he let it happen because he had a reason for it. Being God, he can see the future that we can't see. He can see the good that will come out of it. Just look at Iraq now. Once they were under the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, but now they are free from his hand because: terrorists from the middle east blew up the World Trade Center, we decided to get the terrorists behind the attacks, we went to war (i'll talk about that at another time), and we got Saddam out of power and liberated the Iraqi people. And from what I've heard, the Iraqi people are very grateful for what we've done for them. So you see, if the World Trade Center hadn't been attacked, Iraq still would have been under the rule of Saddam Hussein. So what seems bad at the time, can turn out to be a blessing in disguise. Look at all the good things that have come out of it so far, now imagine how much more good will come in the future. So just because it seems that it was the most horrible thing in the world at the time, a lot of good has already come out of it.
Mark Smith here} So what you're saying is... let us do evil that good may come??? Regardless, Biblegod is STILL a sinner, and THAT you didn't even touch. So what if some good may be salvaged- he's still a SINNER by the Bible's own definition. Why do you worship a god that sins??? You HAVE no answer to this because there IS no answer.
Regarding the Iraqi people being grateful, what rock have YOU been living under!!! Are you Bushites really THAT far out of touch with reality??? Hey: WATCH THE NEWS once in a while. The Iraqi's HATE America and Americans- heLLLLOOOO? Reality check! Pull your head out of your ass long enough to watch Iraqi's that hate us so much they are more than happy to DIE just for the chance of shooting our soldiers, who have been busy driving around like moving targets.
Subject: Regarding 9-11 (part 2)
Date: 9/6/2004 10:00:47 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: kooldude007@countrystars.com
Reply To:
To: JCnot4me@aol.com
As sick as it may sound, the 9-11 attacks happened for good to come from it. And like a lot of other things, some sacrifices must be made. The sacrifice for liberating Iraq was, unfortunately, over 3,000 innocent lives. And I'm not saying that I don't care, I just understand that sometimes, sacrifices must be made. But look at how Iraq is doing now, they are going to have their first Presidential election this year and it's all thanks to those people who lost their lives in the WTC. I see the victims of 9-11 as heroes. They were "the sacrifice" to eventually lead to freedom in Iraq. I hold every one of those 3,000+ victims of 9-11 in the highest regard for losing their lives to eventually liberate Iraq. I know that it was a terrible tragedy for all those people to have to lose their lives, and I felt their pain as best I could (I live in CA), but I also know that "all things work together for good to those who love God" (Romans 8:23). So even though 9-11 was a terrible tragedy, it led to a free Iraq. It's not sick to be proud of those who lost their lives for freedom, even if it's for another nation.
Mark Smith here} Yeah, "look at how Iraq is doing now". It's a TOTAL WRECK now- in fact, I am changing its name from Iraq to A-Wreck. The whole country is out of control, missles and bombs are going off everywhere, police stations are being blown up, entire cities are controlled by anti-American forces (i.e. Iraqi's) and have been since before summer began. Kidnappings, car bombings, no electricity, no running clean water, people living in fear locked inside their houses- oh yeah, A-Wreck is just a fine and peachy place to visit now. And oh, did I mention the BEHEADINGS??? Tell you what- since YOU believe we've made it such a nice place, why don't YOU go over there and just bask in the gratitude of the Awrecki people while they saw your head off with a kitchen knife???
You are so far out of touch with reality you don't even know- and I though you're being out of touch was just in matters religious- holy shit, it's EVERYTHING.
|
||||||||||
Hello again Mark,
I was cruising through your website again, it is rather interesting and attention-getting, and decided to take you up on your oft-repeated offer to debunk you.
So, let's start here, shall we?
God Bless America!
(But Please, Not As You "Blessed America" on
September 11th!)
throw their lives and the lives of each of the passengers, crew and people in the towers and Pentagon away in such a manner?
Please, Mark, only a "hyper3-Calvinist"* would make such a claim. You're an atheist, remember? There is, according to you and your
fellow a-theists, no God and therefore He cannot be blamed for such an act. It is only the men and their deluded minds to blame.
Mark Smith here} There is no Biblegod outside the covers of that book, therefore no, Biblegod did NOT make these people do anything. However, for those people that actually still DO believe in Biblegod, the following would be a fact: Biblegod did not STOP these people from doing their evil deed. Biblegod had a chance to do good, and did it not, therefore, according to James, Biblegod sinned. As I wrote in my editorial:
Therefore to him that knoweth to do good,
and doeth it not,
to him it is sin.
(James 4:17 KJV)
I put THAT piece of scripture in, tied it into 9-11, and no one- including you- wants to touch it with a ten foot pole. I notice you don't say squat about it anywhere in your email to me. You say nothing because you have nothing to say- your make-believe god is condemned by his own book, and there's nothing you can say to get him off the hook.
Unfortunatley, if you ask Arthur C. Clarke, he'll tell you that they were insane because of their adherence to any religion. As any semi-informed
person or regular watcher of Law & Order can tell you, insane people are not responsible for their actions and unable to be
held so. Again, be reminded that as an a-theist, there is no God and now, consequently, no one to blame. Unless, of course, you have a standard
of judgement for right and wrong that can co-exist without any god, whatsoever, and be perfectly binding upon one and all. Anything else is just so
much relativistic crap that we shall, as men of education and some intellect, give no further mention to it.
Mark Smith here} As I've already written in my web page on Morality, I'm still waiting for ANY Christian to give me one, just one moral rule of prohibited human behavior that is wrong in ALL ages, in ALL circumstances. I'm only asking for one example of one of the "absolute" morals you guys brag about all the time. Fact is, you don't have any. Christian morality is no more absolute than Atheist morality. It is ALL situational.
With so many of my fellow Americans
slapping "God Bless America" decals all over everything, it
makes me stop and wonder. I wonder about the poor quality of "Blessing
America" Biblegod did on September 11th, 2001, as he sat on his holy
hemorrhoids and did nothing to "bless" America. Seeing
how he did such a piss-poor job at "blessing" us then, what makes
these God Blessers think he'd do any better in the future?
- If, you as an a-theist make
the claim that "Biblegod" did such a poor job on September 11th, what
should He have done? And why? What obligation had He to do anything whatsoever?
What is the basis of your answer, without resorting to what He owes you or
anyone else? If that is your only recourse, why does He owe you? What have you
done that the Creator of the Universe should give a good sniff over? He is the
omnipotent One. He is the omniscient One; you are not Jim Carrey and this is not
a movie.
Mark Smith here} Why did you miss my point 100%? My question was, WHY were so many Christians asking their Biblegod to "bless America" when Biblegod fucked up so badly in the first place???? Why don't you try dealing with my points rather than trying to build a straw man to knock down??? Answer the damn questions I've already raised, rather than running away from them.
[Of course, as you have considered
your answers to these questions, answer then this one for me if you would be so
kind: why are you answering questions about the nature and character of a person
you "don't believe in" as if you really did, but you just didn't like
Him?]
Mark Smith here}
Because there are deluded people like YOU that really DO believe this cosmic
Easter bunny really exists, and as long as you guys manage to mess things up for
the rest of us, your delusions must be dealt with. Tell me this: if a deluded
madman believed a giant cosmic frog told him to kill you, wouldn't you be trying
to convince him to drop said belief???
Let's say you're the guy in the
neighborhood with the pool. Last Saturday, you asked your neighbor Joe Hovah to
be the lifeguard for all the neighborhood kids as they swam, so you could run to
the store for a six pack. When you got back, ambulances were leaving your house.
It turns out that four kids had drowned while you were gone. It also turns out
that Joe Hovah had witnessed the whole thing, and just let it happen. He sat
there, watched the kids struggle to stay above water, watched each kid go under,
and didn't even get out of his seat. He even filmed the whole thing with his
camcorder while it was happening, so he could enjoy watching it again and again.
- Let' s not and say we didn't
build a straw man argument. Nobody ever set the nations up and
then handed them off to God to "look after". Logical fallacy.
Mark Smith here} Fallacy my ass. The argument hits the Christian nail dead nuts on the head, and that is why you try to just slough it off with a cute quip. The analogy is almost a perfect match, and reveals the uselessness of your gods. Instead of calling it a "logical fallacy" why don't you do something unique: SHOW me how it is such??? (Gee, there's a concept! Actually getting Christians to back up their accusations with more than hot air!!!)
- What responsibility does God have
for the actions of men, purposed to do evil in their hearts? Perhaps, you should
also give serious consideration to the simple fact that the foreign policies of
the United States of America are not the wonderful "warm and fuzzies"
the leadership of this country in toto would have us believe. Perhaps, in
the interest of reaping huge and vast profits at the expense of thequality of
life experinced by so many foreigners in their own lands, that they felt
they had no other recourse but this. Perhaps, the US simply took one on the chin
from the little fellow it had been pushing around for some time. I do not say
that this is the case or that those events were warranted, I merely say that
this is a possibility that you have failed to address in your "rush to
judgment." If you wish your argument to have any merit, you must
address that issue or be found owning a weak position. Otherwise, you enter the
realm of "The Problem of Evil." Will you then shake your fist a
a God you claim not to believe in and say that He is responsible for the evil in
the world?
Mark Smith here} No, I won't shake my fist at fantasies. But I will hold up for public exposure the fact that you guys worship a do-nothing god, a god who wouldn't even get off his lazy ass and cause the pilot of the hijacked plane to sneeze at the last minute and miss the building. That's all it would have taken- a mere sneeze, and Biblegod couldn't even take the time away from counting hairs to do that. Some god you guys got!!!
If you were to ever
again ask Joe Hovah to be lifeguard for the kids in the pool, you'd be
considered a fool who doesn't learn from his mistakes. Yet this is exactly
the same mistake Christians of America are making with their Biblegod. They are
asking this do-nothing god to do what he was too lazy or stupid to do on
September 11th; that it, "bless America". For on September 11th,
Biblegod knew the right thing to do, the good thing, and he did it not.
- Again, what is it God was
supposed to do? A bolt of lightning through the plane, so precise that only the
terrorist/hijackers were taken out? Meteorites, perhaps, ala Joshua? Why? What
has this nation done to deserve such supernatural protection? Is it the way He
is honored throughout the land, the depth of the people's mediation upon the
Cross and the Resurrection, the "In God We Trust" on every dollar
bill? What?
Mark Smith here} What was your fictional god supposed to do? How about what the Book of James said: "To him who knows TO DO GOOD, and does it not, to him it is sin." Would it have been too much to expect of a god to do good, to actually follow his own damn rules??? Why are you so blind to this? Oh, I forgot: love is blind, and you're in love with Biblegod. I get it now- your gods can do no wrong, no matter WHAT they do or don't do. Your gods could come down and piss and shit in your mouth, and rather than stand up for yourself, you'd wimp out and say "Thank you sir may I have another sir!!!".
- What would have been the right thing to do and what is your authority for such a demand? You say that "For on September 11th, Biblegod knew the right thing to do, the good thing, and he did it not." but you do not say what the "right" thing is to have been done.
Mark Smith here} Oh, I'm sorry- I forgot how MORALLY BANKRUPT you Christians are. You really have no clue as to what the right thing would have been that day, do you??? Sad, so sad, that what is common sense for the VAST majority of normal people, you Christian geeks are totally blind to. Let me see.... maybe the right thing would have been to PREVENT 3,000 PEOPLE FROM BEING SQUISHED TO DEATH LIKE BUGS UNDER TONS OF CEMENT FLOORING- how's that for starters???
You also make mention of the "good" thing. What is your basis for such a judgement of "good" and "bad"? Next thing you know, you'll be telling me what is "right" and what is "wrong", jamming your "religion" down my throat! Your basic assumption, your presupposition,
Mark Smith here} Aha!!!! At last the Christian geek shows his true colors!!!! I wonder why it took him so long to come out and expose his real beliefs??? He's a dyed in the wool, southern snake handling presupper, yessiree bob!!! Anything Van Till or Bahnson said or farted, yessir, that's pure true gospel. Yup, we Christians invented morality and have a patent on it, and no one else is allowed to use it without our permission.
is that you personally, Mark Smith of Orange County, CA, know all with such an apprehension that what was allowed to happen wasn't good and there was something else to be done You fail to address the fact that one plane failed to make its journey simply because those onboard stood up to the hijackers and, surrendering their own lives, prevented more death and destruction. You fail to mention that in its response to the September 11th Attacks, the USA has proceeded to kick some serious @$$ in regards to terrorists and their sponsors worldwide. Or don't you think that removal of the Taliban and sending that fine specimen, Osama, on the Run was valuable to our very security and way of life?
Mark Smith here} Oh yes, let your warped sense of values flow forth for all to see! Tell us all how it was a GOOD thing for 3,000 Americans to die that day! And while you're at it, you morally perverted cold-hearted religious fanatic, go ahead and tell us what a good thing it was for Hitler to kill 6 million Jews ("It allowed Israel to be born!!!"). You have the same deadness of feelings the inquisitors had when they tortured people "for their own good". Sick, so very very sick, and totally and arrogantly blind to the sickness.
Do you honestly think that there will be any serious effort to
attack us now, knowing that this country doesn't take to kindly to being sucker
punched. Remember a little thing called Pearl Harbor? Had you breathed air in
1941 would you have then asked "Where was God blessing this country on the
morning of December 7th?" Because this nation has been the leader of the
free world ever since opening up a serious pair of cans in Europe and the
Pacific. Do not make the mistake of believing that freedom is free, nor hold the
belief that once inluxury and safety, always in luxury and safety. [This would
be an excellent time to remind you about Veteran's Day coming up. Don't forget
to thank a vet, especially combat vets, for the awesome service they have
rendered to this nation and its people.] You have already made the error of
judging a matter without it having run even a large portion of its course and
this is not very well suited to argumentation, only demagoguery and
emotionalism.
[Of course, as you have thought
through your answers to these questions, answer then this one for me if you
would be so kind: why are you answering questions about the nature and character
of a person you "don't believe in" as if you really did, but you just
didn't like Him?]
- Consider this verse, it has helped me to be silent when I would have otherwise flapped my gums without discretion:
Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: and he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding. Pro 17:28 KJV
It is important for us to know when to judge a matter and when to hold our tongues and wait. Jumping the gun usually only produces embarrassment. Believe me, I know.
Well, I hope you enjoy this and I do appreciate you taking the
time to read my response to your editorial.
Mark S. Williams
Mark Smith here} I hope that
someday Mark Williams can re-read what he wrote here, and his cold inhumane
thoughts impact him like the proverbial ton of bricks. Sometimes it really takes
getting out of a philosophy before you can clearly see how sick and perverted it
was.
Scott Piland 6-17-03 RE Peter The Liar
|
||||||||||
Hey Mark,
Here is the critique of one of your many articles. Did you get the one I
did on the "Cretans Are Always Liars" critique? I did send one, but maybe
you didn't get it. Anyway, have a good day.
Respectfully, Your Friend,
Scott Piland
Peter Lied About The Gospel! (Mark Smith)
This gem has been sitting out in plain site for 2,000 years- the admission
that Peter, as well as Barnabas and others, lied about the gospel. The
Apostle Paul writes that
"...when I saw that they (Peter and others) were not straightforward about
the truth of the gospel..." (Galatians 2:14 RSV)
Think about that for a minute. The Apostle Paul is accusing the Apostle
Peter, in writing, of not being "straightforward about the truth of the
gospel". The "inspired" Peter, who "authored" two books in the New
Testament, who was a major founder of Christianity, and who was even the
first Pope if you're Catholic, this same "inspired" New Testament author was
accused by yet another "inspired" New Testament author (writing under
"inspiration" no doubt) of lying about the gospel- of lying about the very
core and foundation that Christianity is built upon.
Peter is one of the major pillars of Christianity, one of the original
founders, maybe even the major founder. Given the fact that he turns out to
have been a LIAR when it comes to the gospel, how can anyone put their trust
in a religion founded by such a liar? Or how can anyone claim the New
Testament is perfect, without errors, when in public one of its authors
accused another of its authors of perverting its message???
Peter lied about and distorted the major message that Christianity has to
offer the world: the gospel. Unless and until modern Christians can invent a
time machine to go back and see exactly WHICH parts of the gospel were
infected, the entire gospel message (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) is not
trustworthy, and is certainly not worth dying for, much less wasting one's
life for.
---Mark Smith August 11, 2002
11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his
face, because he
stood condemned.
12 For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he
used to eat with
the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself
aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision.
13 The rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, with
the result that even
Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy.
14 But when I saw that they were not straightforward
about the truth of the
gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of all, "If you, being a Jew, live
like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the
Gentiles to live like Jews?
15 "We are Jews by nature and not sinners from
among the Gentiles;
16 nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by
the works of the Law
but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so
that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law;
since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.
First of all Mark, I just wanted to include the context (immediate) of the
the passage that you are referring to. No, this is not “knee jerking”
(Cretans Are
Always Liars!, Mark Smith) that you speak of, it is a simple logical appeal
to what you would do if you were going to intelligently and accurately
interpret any piece of literature, most assuredly since the historical
context is 1950 years in the past. You are correct in quoting from the
RSV,
here are four other versions which may help you to interpret this and draw
an accurate conclusion from it:
KJV
Galatians 2:14 But when I saw that they walked not
uprightly
according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If
thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the
Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
NIV Galatians 2:14 When I saw that they were not
acting in line with the
truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, "You are a Jew,
yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you
force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?
NAU Galatians 2:14 But when I saw that they were
not straightforward about
the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of all, "If you,
being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that
you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?
BNT Galatians 2:14 avllV o[te ei=don o[ti ouvk
ovrqopodou/sin pro.j th.n
avlh,qeian tou/ euvaggeli,ou( ei=pon tw/| Khfa/| e;mprosqen pa,ntwn\ eiv su.
VIoudai/oj u`pa,rcwn evqnikw/j kai. ouvci. VIoudai?kw/j zh/|j( pw/j ta.
e;qnh avnagka,zeij ivoudai<zeinO
What I will say in agreement, was that Peter was at fault.
He was to blame
as Paul states in verse 11 with the word kategnwsme,noj or kataginosko which
means simply to find fault with. Yes Peter was human and he
failed. Have
you ever failed at anything Mark? Have you ever missed the mark according
to the standards that YOU set for yourself, or society sets for you? Even
though you believe you are not subject to “BibleGod’s” morality and
ethics,
(which it is your right in this country), have you fell short of that?
Mark Smith here} You know the answer to that as well as I do. I don't pretend to be perfect like many Christians do. There is a major difference though, between the situation of Peter and myself- I'm not a man that Christians claim is inspired by BibleGod. I'm not penning essays that will one day become part of your New Testament (I can only dream!). Don't you see the problem? One "inspired" Apostle accusing another "inspired" Apostle of lying. Hey! If it was a Mormon Apostle accusing another Mormon Apostle of the same thing, you'd have no problem seeing the problem, would you? But since it is YOUR sacred cow that got gored, can't see it too good, eh? Try this: picture Paul in one ear, Peter in your other, and both are telling you a different story and BOTH claim to be inspired by your BibleGod. NOW do you see the problem???
Peter was not perfect, but was still used of God, or
“BibleGod” as you
refer to Him. Peter was a Jew as you are well aware. In the 1st
Century,
when you were a Jew, you were set apart from all the surrounding nations in
the area (Gentiles). I am not aware of the exact age of Peter, but being a
full grown man and having been brought up in the 1st Century Jewish
tradition, including not eating with Gentiles which was is documented
historically, it seems that one ought not be amazed that Peter stumbled in
this area. There are no perfect people. We are limited beings
without the
benefit of immutability, omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence. Take
a
look at this passage from Acts 10:22-29:
21 Peter went down to the men and said, "Behold, I am the one you are
looking for; what is the reason for which you have come?"
22 They said, "Cornelius, a centurion, a righteous and God-fearing man well
spoken of by the entire nation of the Jews, was divinely directed by a holy
angel to send for you to come to his house and hear a message from you."
23 So he invited them in and gave them lodging. And on the next day he got
up and went away with them, and some of the brethren from Joppa accompanied
him.
24 On the following day he entered Caesarea. Now Cornelius was waiting for
them and had called together his relatives and close friends.
25 When Peter entered, Cornelius met him, and fell at his feet and worshiped
him.
26 But Peter raised him up, saying, "Stand up; I too am just a man."
27 As he talked with him, he entered and found many people assembled.
28 And he said to them, "You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a man
who is a Jew to associate with a foreigner or to visit him; and yet God has
shown me that I should not call any man unholy or unclean.
29 "That is why I came without even raising any objection when I was sent
for. So I ask for what reason you have sent for me."
Here Peter acknowledges that God has shown him that he should separate from
the Gentiles. He learned this from the vision he saw in Acts 10:9-19.
Could it be that this is something that Peter struggled with.
Mark Smith here} I think you made a typo here- you meant to write the opposite. However, you aren't writing scripture then, are you? Peter was- he is supposed to be the brains behind the Gospel of Mark, and he's claimed to be the author of 1st and 2nd Peter. However, I really don't get your point in quoting all the above- his racism is not by itself the issue. The issue is he LIED about the Gospel.
16 "And I remembered the word of the Lord, how He used
to say, 'John
baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.'
17 "Therefore if God gave to them the same gift as He gave to us also after
believing in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God's
way?"
18 When they heard this, they quieted down and glorified God, saying, "Well
then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to
life."
Make whatever assertions you like. This passage is of Acts 11:16-19 when
Peter is in Jerusalem describing the vision cited above and what he has
learned from God in that lesson. Is Peter not allowed to make a
mistake? According to the gospel as found in the Bible, that is why Christ
died. Because we do make mistakes.
Mark Smith here} Yes he IS allowed to make a mistake and the mistake we're concerned with right now is that he LIED ABOUT THE GOSPEL. What we're concerned with now is the distinct probability that THERE ARE LIES WITHIN THE NEW TESTAMENT PUT THERE BY ONE OF YOUR INSPIRED APOSTLES. Hello???? Anyone there??? Does anyone understand the implications of this???? Peter was a liar, a liar, a liar, a liar, and a liar. That covers all the documented examples we have of him BEING A LIAR within the New Testament. Doesn't the FACT that YOUR religion rests in part on the written testimony of a FIVE TIMES DOCUMENTED LIAR, doesn't that throw a monkey-wrench into your confidence in the New Testament documents??? If it doesn't, your a friggin blind idiot.
Think about that for a minute. The Apostle Paul is accusing the Apostle
Peter, in writing, of not being "straightforward about the truth of the
gospel". The "inspired" Peter, who "authored" two books in the New
Testament, who was a major founder of Christianity, and who was even the
first Pope if you're Catholic, this same "inspired" New Testament author was
accused by yet another "inspired" New Testament author (writing under
"inspiration" no doubt) of lying about the gospel- of lying about the very
core and foundation that Christianity is built upon.
(Mark Smith)
Presently I desire to make a distinction within this paragraph that you have
written. Although I do agree with you that Peter made a mistake, I want to
make a distinction as to the type of sin. Although sin is literally
“missing the mark” according to the New Testament (hamartia), and sin is
still sin to God, I want to clarify. There are sins that we commit with
action. There are also sins of omission. You do not clarify that
Peter was
in a private setting eating with Gentiles and Jews and failed according to
Paul. The text does not say that Peter was in the temple proclaiming from
the pinnacle “Gentiles are unclean! Gentiles are unclean! Don’t
hang
around with them! You don’t see that at all. You see one isolated
incident
that was recorded twice.
Mark Smith here} No, Paul didn't accuse Peter of lying with his mouth. Paul accused Peter of lying with his LIFE, which is much worse than verbalizing a mere fib. Peter was living, not just speaking, a lie. This goes to the very core of Peter's being. He was being a hypocrite in the worse way. He was telling a lie with his very being. Not all lies have to be spoken or even written- they can be lived as well.
This is quite notable in and of itself. You
have
Paul talking about it and you have Peter telling the leaders of the church
about it. If Peter hadn’t learned something, you would have wondered why
he
told the church. In short, Paul
sinned.
Mark Smith here} HUH???? What the hell did Paul do except to publicly expose the lies and hypocrisy of a fellow Apostle??? Who is worse- the man that LIES, or the man that catches the man in a lie??? You Christians don't like airing your dirty laundry in public because you have this false image to maintain. You would think that Christians would be the first ones to expose a liar- but here you are, just like the Catholic bishops in the current sex scandals, trying to shut up the one honest man in order to save the reputation of a dishonest man. No, Paul did not "sin". Get your moral compass re-calibrated, Christian.
In addition, your short
article is
misleading to your average reader who does not read Scripture or is not
familiar with the passage. If you read the passage you quoted by itself
without using Scripture to interpret Scripture, I could see how you came to
your conclusion. I respectfully say that your assertions are misguided.
Mark Smith here} Oh, you must mean the average CHRISTIAN who is basically a complete dumbass when it comes to Bible knowledge. I'm not the one to blame for that. It's not my fault than many Atheists know the Bible better than the average Joe Sixpack Christian. And no, the article is NOT misleading- it only shines the light on an area you Christians would rather keep in darkness. I've written about nothing in my essay that's not already right there under the Christian's noses- if only they'd get the ambition to actually READ their damn Bible, instead of just shoving it down other people's throats.
In addition did you receive my e-mail regarding the
“Cretans Are Always
Liars”. I sent the critique to you but never got any reply. Thanks
for
your time.
Respectfully, Your Friend,
Scott Piland