Show Mobile Navigation

Top 10 Horrifying Moments in the Bible

Flamehorse . . . Comments

The Bible is full of tales of adventure, war, nations being built and destroyed and so much more. It is a veritable source of fascinating stories and historical recollections. But, along with the good comes the bad – it is also full of horrifying moments that put the goriest modern horror films to shame. This list looks at ten such tales.


The Torment of Job
Job, chapters 1, 2, and 38-42

Satanjobboils Blake

The entire Book of Job is one of the most uncomfortable lessons the Bible teaches, namely that God is in charge, what he says goes, and there is absolutely nothing any one of us can do about it, that we have precisely zero right to question him, zero authority, zero power to stop him.

In this case, God takes it away on a bet with Satan (“Satan” is Hebrew for “Accuser,” similar to prosecuting attorney), who walks into Heaven one day with the other angels. This is after the war in Heaven. It is God who baits Satan into a bet God knows he will win, that Job is the finest, godliest man on Earth and will never curse God. Satan argues that Job lives the sweet life, so God allows Satan to take away all Job’s treasured possessions, even his children. His flocks and property are stolen by surrounding enemies, and his children are all crushed to death by a wind that collapses their house.

Job refuses to curse God. So God rubs it in Satan’s face, knowing full well that Satan will simply raise the stakes. Then God allows him to torture Job’s body all over with boils and sores, but not to kill him. This is all in the first 2 chapters. Most of the rest of the Book is a lengthy rant by Job, interrupted by arguments from his friends against judging God. Job never once curses God, but demands an explanation from God and asks over and over, “Why has he done this to me?!”

From chapters 38 to 42, God finally shows up and answers Job out of a storm, “Who is this who darkens my counsel with words that have no knowledge? Gird up your loins like a man. Now I will question you, and you will answer me. Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Answer me, if you even understand how.”

God explains to Job in a long diatribe that God created everything in existence, including Job, and does not have to abide by the rules, since he created the rules. His primary point is that Job, with his feeble, finite mind, cannot possibly comprehend the first thing about what is right or good or true, under God, that God alone comprehends righteousness, goodness, and truth, and that man must do as God commands. In the end, since Job never actually cursed God, God rewards his faith and obedience by giving him twice as much of everything as he had before, and blessing him and his wife with 3 daughters and 7 sons, the same number as before.

But God never gives Job (or us) an explanation for why he would allow bad things to happen to good people. The only reasonable answer is quite scary: the only reason you woke alive this morning and are still breathing is because of God’s beneficent mercy, a mercy he can take away at a whim.


The Hand Writing on the Wall
Daniel 5

Belshazzar, Rembrandt, Pub Dom

1 King Belshazzar gave a great banquet for a thousand of his nobles and drank wine with them. 2 While Belshazzar was drinking his wine, he gave orders to bring in the gold and silver goblets that Nebuchadnezzar his father had taken from the temple in Jerusalem, so that the king and his nobles, his wives and his concubines might drink from them. 3 So they brought in the gold goblets that had been taken from the temple of God in Jerusalem, and the king and his nobles, his wives and his concubines drank from them. 4 As they drank the wine, they praised the gods of gold and silver, of bronze, iron, wood and stone. 5 Suddenly the fingers of a human hand appeared and wrote on the plaster of the wall, near the lamp stand in the royal palace. The king watched the hand as it wrote. 6 His face turned pale and he was so frightened that his legs became weak and his knees were knocking.

Belshazzar was king of Babylon until 539 BC, when the Persians conquered Babylon and killed him. The Bible explains that this was God’s punishment against Belshazzar for his wanton blasphemy, especially his drinking from the goblets that his father had stolen from the Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem. Thus, God ruins his festivities when his fingers appear out of thin air and in perfect silence begin drawing Aramaic words on the wall. Only Belshazzar can see the fingers, and he is instantly horrified. Party’s over.

He calls his wise men, who cannot read the language because God has written it in Aramaic. The king’s wife recalls that this language is spoken by Daniel, whom the king summons. An annoyed Daniel refuses all the king’s gifts and translates and interprets the writing for him: “Mene, Mene, Tekel, Parsin;” “Numbered. Numbered. Weighed. Divided.”

Thus, Belshazzar’s days are numbered (the origin of this phrase), he has been weighed and found wanting; and his kingdom will be divided among the Medes and Persians. The king rewards Daniel with clothing, jewelry, and authority, and that very night Belshazzar is killed in his sleep by Persians invading Babylon, and Darius the Mede crowns himself king.

This entry was the inspiration for this list, in terms of the pure horror, as good as any movie or ghost story, involving a disembodied hand, the hand of God no less, appearing out of nowhere and bringing God’s terrifying justice.


The Massacre of the Innocents
Matthew 2:16-18


16 When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. 17 Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled:
18 “A voice is heard in Ramah,
weeping and great mourning,
Rachel weeping for her children
and refusing to be comforted,
because they are no more.”

This story only appears in Matthew. It is not known from any other works extant to the time, no other Gospels, or Josephus or Tacitus. Assuming it actually took place, it is unconscionably atrocious. Herod (who gave himself the epithet “Great”) did not even hesitate to commit genocide, and that of infants, in order to protect his power. He doesn’t just do it because he’s angry, or hates competition, but also because he’s a coward, afraid to lose his throne.

God gets him back, according to the Bible, for such unfathomably despicable murder. Described in Acts, and corroborated by Josephus, Herod appears to have contracted Fournier’s gangrene throughout the groin area, combined with scabies, which putrefied his genitals and swelled his scrotum until worms burst from it.


The Obliteration of Sodom and Gomorrah
Genesis 19:1-29


23 By the time Lot reached Zoar, the sun had risen over the land. 24 Then the Lord rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah —from the Lord out of the heavens. 25 Thus he overthrew those cities and the entire plain, destroying all those living in the cities—and also the vegetation in the land. 26 But Lot’s wife looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.
27 Early the next morning Abraham got up and returned to the place where he had stood before the Lord. 28 He looked down toward Sodom and Gomorrah, toward all the land of the plain, and he saw dense smoke rising from the land, like smoke from a furnace.

This is the prototype of the “fire and brimstone” aspect of the Bible. We speak of this event solely in terms of the horror its witnesses must have experienced. Some analyses have theorized that the description of the actual catastrophe is a pristine account of a nuclear explosion. It would have to have been a non-radioactive explosion, of course, since the bones of all animals and people buried before 1945 did not have Strontium-90 in them. With the detonation of the first atomic bomb at Alamogordo, NM, radioactive Strontium-90 is now forever a part of all living organisms and can be found in your bones.

God may have simply thought the explosion out of thin air, and it may have been the same power as a nuclear explosion, thus the mushroom cloud that would have looked like smoke from a furnace. Or, as he always seems to do, God may abide by his own laws of nature, leaving perpetual room for argument over his existence.

There is a fairly new theory out there that “the Lord rained down burning sulfur” indicates a meteor airburst or multiple meteor impacts. Properly speaking, it is possible that an asteroid did it, in 3123 BC at what is now Kofels, Austria. The asteroid clipped the top of Gamskogel peak at an angle of 6 degrees, traveling SE and smashing into Kofels with such speed that the debris it blasted into the atmosphere traveled in a mushroom cloud all the way to Sodom and Gomorrah where it rained down on the cities, igniting everything made of wood, clothing, and flesh, with chunks of flaming rock large enough to knock down the sandstone buildings.

The Bible is clear that not a single person made it out alive except Lot’s family, saved by two angels who may have been Michael and Gabriel.


The Locusts of the Abyss
Revelation 9:7-11


7 The locusts looked like horses prepared for battle. On their heads they wore something like crowns of gold, and their faces resembled human faces. 8 Their hair was like women’s hair, and their teeth were like lions’ teeth. 9 They had breastplates like breastplates of iron, and the sound of their wings was like the thundering of many horses and chariots rushing into battle. 10 They had tails with stingers, like scorpions, and in their tails they had power to torment people for five months. 11 They had as king over them the angel of the Abyss, whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon and in Greek is Apollyon (that is, Destroyer).

For the Revelation, you have to think in terms of metaphor, because a lot of the horrors, the signs and wonders throughout the book are obviously meant to represent other things. The overall story, however is no metaphor. Something horrible is going to take place, brought on by man’s contemptible sin, resulting in God’s final fury against it. God and Jesus are not metaphorical in the book, and neither is Satan. This is what makes the Revelation of Saint John the Divine, who was possibly the Apostle John, such a difficult book to interpret. Some events and descriptions seem more likely metaphorical than literal, while others seem the opposite. John Calvin famously refused to write a commentary on this book, stating flatly that he didn’t understand it.

But the infamous Locusts of the End Times, when you think in terms of John not understanding what he was looking at, could very well be a metaphor for helicopters. The crowns of gold could be the sun glinting off the rotor blades or the windshield. The human faces could be the pilots as seen through the windshield, or the windshield itself could look like two big eyes. The hair like women’s hair could be what John thought he saw in the spinning blades in mid-air. The teeth like lion’s teeth could be the popular “jaws” decal some helicopters and planes feature. Breastplates of iron is straightforward enough in this context, but the clincher seems to be “the sound of their wings was like the thundering of many horses.” Multiple helicopters flying together sound just like that.

The stingers in their tails is more difficult to explain, but it could be that John saw missiles and rockets being fired out the front of the helicopters, and the white smoke trail of each shooting out the back. The identity of the angel of the Abyss is impossible to ascertain, but the “jaws” decal some helicopters sport is a popularly American addition. If so, America may be attacked, by a nuclear missile described immediately before the locusts as the star of Wormwood, or Bitterness (radioactivity) blazing like a torch, given the key to shaft of the abyss, out which smoke rises like a gigantic furnace; and America would then be understood to retaliate against the aggressor with helicopters.

Or the locusts could be actual locusts made of iron, which is even more horrifying.


The Ten Plagues of Egypt
Exodus 7:14-12:29

Martin%2C John - The Seventh Plague - 1823

When God had had enough of his people being tormented by hard bondage in the land of Egypt (400 years of it), he sent Moses to prepare the way for him. Multiple times, God “hardened Pharaoh’s heart” in order to get glory for himself by continuing his miraculous deeds. First the Nile River turned into blood. Then out of the river came frogs. Then lice or fleas. Then biting flies. Then a pestilence that killed the Egyptian livestock. Then boils and sores. Then hail mixed with fire. Then locusts. Then darkness, and finally the death of the firstborn male of every Egyptian household.

The Israelites were spared all these plagues. Then Pharaoh let the Israelites go. He could not do so until after the 10th plague because God hardened his heart. This kind of messes with free will, doesn’t it? But the Bible never says God will not interfere with free will. In fact, the Bible is clear many times that God will break any rule he feels like breaking in order to accommodate his will.

Scientifically, some of these plagues have plausible explanations. The river becoming blood and not water may be taken as a metaphor for red algae, which kills fish. Frogs, however, can escape it by coming onto land. But there is no water in Egypt except the Nile, and in such a hot, dry climate, frogs don’t last long. Their carcasses brought lice, gnats, fleas, flies, and surely mosquitoes. The flies sucked the blood of the livestock. This eventually transmitted anthrax which killed the livestock, and then infected the Egyptians with boils and sores. Locust swarms are well known throughout the Sahara and Middle East. Where there are crops, locusts will eventually descend in clouds.

To surmise the scientific causes of the hail, darkness, and death of firstborn is much more difficult, and inevitably so coincidental as to be hard to believe. The hail and darkness might have been caused by the Santorini eruption, which would have rained down burning debris like hail easily as far as Egypt, with ash that blocked out the sunlight. The Israelites saved their firstborn by smearing lamb’s blood on their doorsills (a metaphor for #2) and staying indoors.


The Flood of Noah
Genesis 6:9-8:22


11 Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence. 12 God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. 13 So God said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth. 14 So make yourself an ark of cypress wood.

There’s no fire and brimstone here, but this remains the only time throughout Earth’s history, according to the Bible, that God has actually made good his threat to destroy the whole world. He sees that all men everywhere are only evil all the time, taking to themselves such women as they please, without sanctity in marriage, without law, given to malice, sadism, hatred, and violence. So God finds the only righteousness around in Noah, whom he decides will repopulate the world.

The actual flood did not last for just 40 days and 40 nights. That’s how long the rain was upon the earth. The Bible is quite clear on point, rather scary in itself: “the waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than 15 cubits.” If Mount Everest is meant as the highest peak, then the surface of the water was some 22 and a half feet over its tip. Every living thing on land died, even the birds. Sea life, of course, had less of a problem, but then, since the rain was freshwater, it desalinated the salt water quite substantially, which will kill some ocean species.

Earth was flooded utterly for 150 days before the tops of the mountains became visible again. Noah and his family and all the animals were inside the ark for 1 year and 10 days. When they emerged, there was absolutely no life around them except what came out of the ark. There would have been no grass and no living trees.

Every culture around the world records a severe flood occurring at about the same time, somewhere around either 5600 BC, or 2900 BC. Thus, Noah did not actually pack his ark with 7 pairs of every clean and 1 pair of every unclean animal in the whole world. It is possible that every ecosystem was replenished in the way the Bible demonstrates.


God’s Judgment against Jerusalem
Ezekiel 22:17-22


17 Then the word of the Lord came to me: 18 “Son of man, the people of Israel have become dross to me; all of them are the copper, tin, iron and lead left inside a furnace. They are but the dross of silver. 19 Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says: ‘Because you have all become dross, I will gather you into Jerusalem. 20 As silver, copper, iron, lead and tin are gathered into a furnace to be melted with a fiery blast, so will I gather you in my anger and my wrath and put you inside the city and melt you. 21 I will gather you and I will blow on you with my fiery wrath, and you will be melted inside her. 22 As silver is melted in a furnace, so you will be melted inside her, and you will know that I the Lord have poured out my wrath on you.’”

This passage is terrifying just on the power of its lurid imagery. God is, once again, infuriated with the impenitent sinners in Jerusalem. They are supposed to be his chosen people, but they repeatedly defy him, disobey his laws, and ignore the many instances of his justice against such impenitence. This prophecy of Ezekiel is generally thought of as metaphorical. God seems to be speaking in terms of fire in the context of refining precious metals. When you mine gold, you have to melt the raw chunks of ore in a furnace in order to separate the gold from the rest. So it is with God’s wrath. It is, and always was, intended to burn the sin out of people and leave only what is excellent in humanity.

Nevertheless, this passage is horrifying insofar as God seems quite literal in his description of what his fiery wrath will do to the inhabitants of the kingdom of Jerusalem. He will burn them so hotly that they melt like metal. This passage was Steven Spielberg’s primary inspiration for the death scenes of the Nazis at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark, when the Ark melts their faces off and incinerates them.


The Passion of Christ
Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John

Screen Shot 2012-06-22 At 16.47.06

26 Then he released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.

15 Wanting to satisfy the crowd, Pilate released Barabbas to them. He had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.

25 He released the man who had been thrown into prison for insurrection and murder, the one they asked for, and surrendered Jesus to their will.

1 Then Pilate took Jesus and had him flogged.

The Passion comprises all of Jesus’s suffering from his terror in Gethsemane to his death. His dread in Gethsemane of what was to come, which he knew perfectly well, caused him such distress that he sweat blood. Thus, his clothing would have been stained red when he was taken before the Sanhedrin and Pontius Pilate.

The Gospels do not go into detail about the actual flogging because everyone back then knew what it meant to be flogged on order of the Roman government. If you’ve seen Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ,” you know what it meant to be beaten with a Roman flagellum. The flagellum was a cat o’ nine tails made of leather strips with barbell-shaped pieces of metal tied into them. The flagella used in the film show jagged pieces of metal, but this is not accurate. These would have skinned the victim alive long before he could be crucified. Nevertheless, Jesus was beaten until he was an unrecognizable, bloody mess.

The rounded barbells, each about an inch long and half an inch wide, would bludgeon into the victim’s skin and rip out of the wounds just enough to be overwhelmingly excruciating without actually killing the victim. The standard Jewish sentence was 39 lashes, because the Old Testament states that 40 lashes is sufficient to kill a man. Thus, Jesus was beaten until he was almost dead. Then he was forced to carry his own 150 lb cross 2,000 feet uphill, according to the traditional sites. The historical Roman practice called for the victim to carry only the cross-beam. There is no reason to think Jesus was treated any differently.

Then he was crucified naked and left to die. Crucifixion typically causes death by exposure, not asphyxiation. A person may take a week or more to die on a cross, in agony all the while. Passers-by were encouraged to torture the condemned, and would cut off their toes for fun or for keepsakes. Because of the horrible torture Jesus endured before being nailed to a cross, he only lasted about 3 hours, from around noon to 3PM, possibly on Friday, 3 April 33 AD. The feet were nailed to the sides of the cross, with the nails driven through the sides of the heel bones to maximize the pain. The tops of the feet will not support the body’s weight on a nail driven through them.

He died from a combination of cardio and pulmonary edema (the blood mixed with water that flowed from the spear wound), dehydration, exsanguination, and shock. And he didn’t even do anything wrong.


The Lake of Fire
Revelation 19:20, 20:10, 14, 15

The Lake Of Fire - Revelations 20 Verse 15

Hell is described in only a few spots throughout the Bible as a place of fire, and all these descriptions are in the New Testament except for allegorical stories like Shadrach, Meshech, and Abednego in the fiery furnace. In God’s Revelation to John, the final end of the world is depicted as a war between good and evil. The good are not Christians. Christians are raptured to Heaven before the Great Tribulation begins, sparing them the horrors that ensue.

Instead, the good who remain are those who convert to the Christian faith and die as martyrs at the hands of the Antichrist, also called the beast. He is assisted by another beast, called the False Prophet, the antithesis of the Holy Spirit. They are both controlled by Satan. They first come to power by masterful diplomacy, making the whole love them and unite behind them in the name of peace, but then, after three and a half years, the Antichrist shows his true colors, taking over the whole world, something no one has ever achieved, not Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Napoleon, or Hitler.

In the end, an actual battle will take place at Har-Megiddo, in northern Israel. This place name was Hellenized as Armageddon.

The Beast will lead all the world’s armies against Jesus himself, who will ride on a white horse at the head of an army in the sky of all the Christians in history. Jesus will speak the truth, and the truth will destroy everyone below. Then the Beast and the False Prophet will be “thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur.” This means that they do not die first and then go to Hell; they are thrown into Hell still alive. John is clear that the rest of the people simply die by the truth of Jesus, and are then devoured by all the birds of the air. Satan is bound in chains by a mighty angel, ostensibly Michael, and thrown into the Abyss for 1,000 years. This is not the lake of fire. The Abyss may be another word for Hell, or it may be the same Abyss out of which come the locusts of #6.

This is interesting: all those killed at Armageddon go to Hell, but not the lake of fire. This means there must be more to Hell than a single lake of fire. After the 1,000 years are over, Satan is released, having refused to change his ways. He once again leads all the world astray against God’s holy people in the city he loves, and God rains down fire from Heaven and destroys them. Then Satan is thrown in to the lake of fire where he, the Beast, and the False Prophet burn forever in eternal torture. This is the second death.

Then God makes his final judgment for or against everyone who has ever lived. Some go to Heaven, now called the New Jerusalem, with streets paved in solid gold, twelve gates made of single pearls, twelve precious-stone foundations for the 1,400-mile high, 200-foot thick walls. The rest are thrown into the lake of fire with the Unholy Trinity, and there all the impenitent sinners burn for eternity. God saves the worst for last: this is the absolute culmination of all the “hellfire and brimstone,” “the wrath of God,” throughout the Bible.

  • andrewtpepper

    I argue that one of the problems with the Bible is not that people believe it’s true, but that people actually *want* it to be true.

    • Missy

      Why? Because some people are just masochists, or do they really believe in God’s judgement? Or maybe it’s a bit of both. Read Romans 12:19.

      • Stubborn

        I believe it’s true. I haven’t ever read a contradiction in the Bible.

        • Tomorrow Never Knows

          How about God is all loving but he kills Job’s family and everything he loves just to bet Satan. Doesn’t sound all loving to me.

          • Johan Philip

            God didnt do all that for a bet!! Seriously, just because JF wrote it that way! God did all that because, even though job was upright in heart (Job 2:3), he never gained God in his life; he trusted in his uprightness. But after the dealing by God, he learned not to trust himself, he abhorred himself (Job 41:6).

          • Zach

            Still a pretty dick move.

        • Canadianguy

          You haven’t read much of the Bible if you’ve never noticed any contradictions.

        • MindCrime

          Then you haven’t read the Bible cover to cover. What most people don’t understand is that the Bible that we have today has gone from Hebrew, to Greek to Latin to English in translation. Stuff gets lost in translation, as well as stuff got removed, censored and edited to accomplish political or religious motives during the reformation. Even Martin Luther said he wishes he could have only made people literate in the Bible.

        • Ehwadeva
          • Wood

            Without discussing the relative contexts or purposes of the text, naturally.

            In other words, yes, and..? The why is far more interesting and arguably vindicates the what.

      • andrewtpepper

        I don’t know why; if you think of the story of the flood – it’s actually horrifying; all but a few people killed – men, women, children and babies drowned, most plants and animals destroyed (apart from the fish getting off scot free!) – it describes an unimaginable disaster. As a child I can remember feeling quite relieved when our teacher said it didn’t actually happen but some people really try to convince themselves it did.

        • ButWait

          “A translation error eh? Ok, that’s cool. So can you point out which other verses I can ignore because they’re translation errors?” And sense you’ve already admitted that there are, in fact, errors in the bible you can no longer use it as proof of what you are preaching. “Well, the bible says…” Yeah, but you’ve already established that you can’t trust the bible so do you have any other proof as to why I should believe what you say?

        • Kevin

          So if a flood destroyed say… Nazi Germany circa 1944, you would be horrified?

          • andrewtpepper

            Yes. Not everyone in Nazi Germany was guilty – thousands of babies drowned would horrify me.

          • Ehwadeva

            Yes, but it’s evident that wasn’t and isn’t the case.
            For example, unborn babies, can’t be determined ultimately evil; Albeit the Bible is very very vague when it came to whatever people did to deserve the flooding. But since God is all-knowing, and all-powerful, he should have and could have came up with different, more effective solution at cleansing the Earth, perhaps one that doesn’t include genocide of everything excluding a few people

          • Wood

            Yes, because Nazi Germany isn’t a mostly fictionalised semi-historical myth rooted in a longstanding literary tradition of the context to which it belongs.

            Not so much horrified as pretty surprised, to be honest.

          • @Wood
            For a second I thought you said Nazi Germany WAS “…mostly fictionalised semi-historical myth…etc” and I was all like “Great, what this thread needs now is a holocaust denier, this should perk the discussion up…”

  • Fazrin

    ‘Son of God’ was killed? That’s funny.

    • The death of Christ is actually a part of a grand plan.

    • Christian

      Assembling the Profile of a Hatetheist

      I thought I would try and present a profile of the hatetheist vs. the atheist so Christians can have an idea of when to enter into discussions and when to walk away with unbelievers. The below is based on my experience alone.

      1. Whereas the atheist is respectful during a conversation or interaction, the hatetheist – either immediately or very soon – descends into ad hominem attacks and disrespectful name calling. The names used many times completely mischaracterize a Christian’s true position (e.g. “flat-earther”). Sometimes, the hatetheist will go so far as to say that anyone who believes in God is clinically crazy or insane.

      2. In addition to attacking a Christian’s intelligence or character, the hatetheist routinely tosses out derogatory names or references to God (e.g. “invisible sky fairy”) and Jesus (a “Jewish zombie” or “Bejebus”). The atheist, however, typically does not refer to God or Jesus in such ways.

      3. Hatetheists tend to be inordinately arrogant and border on narcissism when it comes to their perception of their own intelligence vs. those who hold to a theistic worldview. An example are hatetheists who label themselves as “The Brights”, with the obvious message being anyone who is not an atheist must be dimwitted.

      4. The atheist genuinely considers arguments and presented evidence where the hatetheist does not. The hatetheist either ignores expert testimony, uses numerous red herrings, or charges the Christian with “quote smithing” when various quotes from experts are used to support the theistic position, and never considers the expert testimony. Ironically, many of the same hatetheists who do this maintain web sites with rotating quotes from famous atheists and sport links to other atheist sites that contain quotable information. But the bottom line is there is a “willing unbelief” in the hatetheist that will not entertain a position that is contrary to their own.

      5. The atheist adheres to science, but understands and recognizes its limits, whereas the hatetheist is a devotee to scientism. If the faith of scientism is new to you, see what the limits of science are in a recent blog post of mine.

      6. The atheist tends to be universal in their critique of any god, but the hatetheist focuses mostly, if not solely, on Christianity. The hatetheist shows no fear in mocking Jesus in graphic ways, but is remarkably restrained where others such as Muhammad of Islam are concerned.

      7. The atheist’s actions are ones that are secure in that they will not lash out in irrational ways to thoughts of theism. Christianity is not threatening in that way, and they find no need to interject themselves into a Christian’s worship or their special days to interrupt them. The hatetheist, on the other hand, exhibits very insecure activity such as launching billboard promotional ads during seasons where their worldview is most threatened such as Christmas and Easter.….

      • Kennoth

        Christianity not threatening? Nice try.

      • DDay

        You hit it right on the head! Those are the people that give atheist’s and agnostics a bad name.

        VERY well said!

      • Lisa Annmarie

        For some reason the names Richard Dawkins and Maynard Keenan come to mind here.

    • FriendlyBob

      I think the Christian guy’s description is pretty spot on. I’m an atheist myself, but there are deffinitely people like he describes and their not helping anybody.

  • Aussie Josh

    This site needs more boobs.

    • Whoever

      I concur

      • skywatcher

        We have you two. That’s a set of boobs right there.

        • Aussie Josh

          haha yeah i was waiting for that.

  • Antrip

    Each religion have their own definition for “god” and different god. but bible states only christian as true religion which makes it a bullshit.

    • sjarrel

      Plenty of religions do that, I don’t think that is the one particular reason why it’s bull. I’d have more issue with some texts being written decades after the events they describe, contradictions of the laws of physics, just general inaccuracy with what we now know about the planet, like its age for one thing, and evolution for another.

      • Wood

        As opposed to, you know, all other ancient writings which were just dead on and completely reliable, 100% of the time.

  • Will Trame

    Revelation must be one of the most terrifying…as well as most confusing…books in the Bible. The passages seem to be subject to numerous interpretations. Definitely an intriguing list; one sure to generate some barbed comments.

    • raving

      I just ignore that book. It just doesn’t make any sense. You just understand the metaphors (or I can’t). It almost wasn’t included. I view the Bible as largely metaphoric, especially the Old Testament, which I think is useful largely for context.

  • I know there will be atheists/agnostics bleating in the comments; complaining that the Bible is just an elaborate fictitious book, and that the whole concept of religion is absurd.

    Well, they can say and believe whatever they wish.

    And I just had to say this: Flamehorse is a brilliant lister, and this list is one of my favorites on this site.

    • ParusMajor

      I’m an agnostic, and I have read the Bible many times with a lot of interest. It is one of the greatest books ever written imho. I have no sympathy for people who claim to be atheists or agnostics that have never even read the Bible… and are proud of that! Can they spell “STUPID”???

      • James

        I was forced to read it in primary school. I’m still an atheist. I feel the same way about the bible as I do The Lord of the Rings. But then I’m British, and unless you go to a church school you are taught the bible as fiction because our school system is actually sane lol.

        • mom424

          Yeah for a secular education!

        • fendabenda

          I think you should read the Bible just because it’s an important book that has had a lot of influence in the history of the Western societies. You can still be an atheist after reading it, but you should at least read it. Just for education, if nothing else.

          • as some may say about mien kampf or Anton levays’ satanic bible. Maybe even arnachists cookbook. All good “must read” material. I just wouldn’t purchase them all at the same time w/o expecting odd looks.

            I bought my evil X step sister Mien kampf for Christmas a few years ago. Apparently no one else shares my sense of humor.

          • ParusMajor

            I have read Mein Kampf. It didn’t turn me into a Nazi. I have read Anton Szandor LaVey’s Satanic Bible. It didn’t turn me into a satanist. I have seen D.W.Griffith’s film “The Birth of a Nation”. I didn’t join the Ku Klux Klan after watching it. I have seen “A Serbian Film”, and I didn’t become a pedophile.

            I have even read the Bible, and I didn’t become an Amish.

      • Canadianguy

        Right, because one must read the Bible in order to be able to formulate an opinion about religion? Sheesh.

        • ParusMajor

          Well, how would you formulate an opinion about a religion, if you don’t know anything about the religion? I am agnostic, because I HAVE read the Bible and I don’t agree with it. If I hadn’t read it, I couldn’t deny it.

          • sjarrel

            You don’t have to read the bible to be an atheist. By the same line of reasoning you’d have to read all the religious texts in the world before you could make up your mind.

            While I find religions very interesting, particularly in an historical way, it is not because I disagree with any of their texts in particular that I don’t believe there is a god. It is because I don’t see any evidence of the existence of a god to begin with.

          • ParusMajor

            OK, sjarrel, I hear you. I actually have tried to read every f*king religious text I’ve been able to get my hands on… not just the Bible. Indian, Chinese and Japanese stuff, whatever. I am not an atheist, because I cannot prove that one of those gods couldn’t exist. Hell, Stephen Hawking exists 50 years after his life expectancy ran out. I exist after nearly dying a couple of times.

          • George

            Your post is amusing considering Atheists know more about the bible than The people who proclaim to be of the faith. To many Christians treat the bible like an end user license agreement. They skip to the end and clock yes I agree and are done with it.

            A 2010 poll about religious knowledge broke down by religious group.

          • John

            How many americans have read the Koran? How many americans have an opinion about Islam?

          • sjarrel

            Well it’s never a bad thing to read more religious texts of course. I read a fair bit myself. Just for me, like I said, the disagreeing with the texts is not really the key issue. There is also a lot of value and a lot of good intentions and ideas in every religion and in every text.

            I do agree with you somewhat on what seems to be your key point, ParusMajor, that people that are Atheists should be so because of actual thought into the matter, with actual research into religion or at least some key scientific principles. Because if you are an Atheist because all the cool kids in your neighborhood or something are, that’s really no different than anybody who is religious for the same reason, in that you’d not be thinking for yourself.

          • Canadianguy

            ” I am not an atheist, because I cannot prove that one of those gods couldn’t exist.”

            You’re going at it wrong. The burden of proof lies with those who make a claim, in this case that God exists. That’s how logic works.

          • Steve

            This comment is directed at John below, for some reason my computer is not allowing me to reply to his post. Not all opinions are alike . Anyone can have an opinion but not everyone has an informed opinion. I think the sport of Cricket sucks but I have never seen a match or have any clue as to how it is played. Cricket sucks is an opinion, is it an informed opinion, not by any means.

          • Alsachti

            @Canadianguy “The burden of proof lies with those who make a claim, in this case that God exists. That’s how logic works.”
            Except that it is not a question of logic, but of faith. The existence of God can neither been proven or disproven, that’s beyond the realm of science.

          • Canadianguy


            Ironically, you’re argument is illogical.

            God may exist because nobody has proven that he doesn’t? Preposterous.

            It’s like claiming that little green men from outer space have been taking cell samples from millions of cows every night and erasing the memory of the witnesses because nobody has proven it wrong.

            You can believe it all you want, call if faith if you will, it doesn’t make it true.

            Simply put, you’re asking to prove the negative, which nearly impossible to do. Such an argument is a logical fallacy.

        • Chris

          Uhh ya. That is right.

      • BrahmaBull

        That’s a pretty dumb thing to say. You’re basically saying that one must stay a Christian until they’ve read the Bible, and then they can decide whether they believe or not. Shouldn’t the fact that I haven’t read the Bible coincide with me being an (agnostic) atheist? I’d rather just say “I don’t know, but this makes more sense to me,” as opposed to blindly believing in something I hardly know anything about.

        Unless you’re talking specifically of uneducated agnostics/atheists who take pride in their stance. If that’s the case, then I agree with you.

    • inconspicuousdetective

      personally, i think if you’re going to adhere to a certain religion, you should know about it in respect to what it says and historically what its done. like how the catholic church was (and is) very much about politics as it is about religion…and a semi-related sidenote: i am a practicing catholic who thinks the pope and whole vatican city needs to go, because that’s what’s outdated about catholicism…even though it’s part of whats made that particular religion last so long.

    • Okay… the bible is just an elaborate fictitious book and the whole concept of religion is absurd.

      Happy now?

      • sjarrel

        To call the whole concept of religion absurd is to spit in the face of history, as practically all people have had some form of religion. It would be fair to say that we as a species are predisposed to have something like religion. It may or may not have served some evolutionary function, for instance.

        • Canadianguy

          And claiming that diseases are caused by bacteria, viruses, parasites, and genetics is spitting in the face of history because people used to believe in humorism and divine intervention?

          Got anything better to justify religion than an appeal to tradition?

          • sjarrel

            If you read my posts above you will see I am not religious. And if you read the post you commented on you will see I am not justifying religion with an appeal to tradition, high school debate champion, but I’m pointing out that it was a major aspect of history which has shaped the world, and which interestingly enough was invented by nearly every group of people, independently. This last word is important. I then propose an idea that maybe religion has served some evolutionary purpose, or at least the predisposition to religion (which is of course an assumption I made). What kind of purpose that may be I leave open of course, as I do not know.

            Aristotle was wrong about almost everything, but he was still an important thinker and step to our current way of life. We didn’t go from cavemen to iPods in a single step.

            So just to clarify, your analogy falls flat not because it’s not witty, but because you didn’t understand what I was saying.

          • sjarrel

            Haha, I can’t say a nalogy.

          • Canadianguy

            Ironically, any high school student would have been able to understand that my comment was a reply to your argument that “to call the whole concept of religion absurd is to spit in the face of history, as practically all people have had some form of religion”. Not only is it clearly an appeal to tradition, it is also an appeal to majority.

          • sjarrel

            Sorry, I thought I made it clear that my point was not that because of tradition it must have been good, but that the fact that so many different people had developed the same tradition independently could be significant in it’s own right. And again, that does not have to make the tradition itself a valid one.

            You could also add to that what is absurd now was not always so, and that you’re doing people in history a disservice by claiming they were ridiculously unreasonable while you conveniently ignore the much larger knowledge base you have access to, enabling you to see the absurdity in their beliefs in the first place. A knowledge base that you sometimes (in the case of Aristotle, for instance) owe partly to the very people you mock.

            And when I say spit in the face of history I don’t mean the face of tradition, but history, as in information we have about the past.

            If you couldn’t get that out of my first post (which I think that, had you read past the first line, you could have), certainly my follow up made it quite apparent. In any case, I hope this clears it up a bit more.

          • Canadianguy

            “the fact that so many different people had developed the same tradition independently could be significant in it’s own right. ”

            Independently? Nope. I know it must be difficult for kids to believe it, but the spread of information and cultural exchange also took place before the internet…even in ancient times.

            Oh, right. What is absurd now wasn’t always so. Really? Do you really think so?

            “You could also add to that what is absurd now was not always so, and that you’re doing people in history a disservice by claiming they were ridiculously unreasonable while you conveniently ignore the much larger knowledge base you have access to, enabling you to see the absurdity in their beliefs in the first place.”

            Missed my reply to the one who was using the example that people once thought that Earth was flat as evidence that science shouldn’t be trusted? It’s somewhere here. Have a look.

            “A knowledge base that you sometimes (in the case of Aristotle, for instance) owe partly to the very people you mock. ”

            Those I mock? Aristotle? You’re aware that Aristotle died 3 centuries before Christianity, right? Maybe not.

          • Canadianguy

            Copy and paste mistake, but that should be obvious enough.

          • sjarrel

            Oh god. Okay. There still seem to be some parts where you misunderstand me and/or basic facts and knowledge (maybe even logic, which would be kind of ironic).

            For instance, when I say that people independently developed the same tradition, which in this case meant religion (I used the word tradition because of your point of ‘appeal to tradition’), and you just flat out deny that, that is absurd. I’m pretty sure, for instance that the Mayan beliefs weren’t influenced by say, Hinduism. You might as well argue that agriculture wasn’t developed independently.

            And absurd, by the way, means something that is ridiculous, completely unreasonable, which you may recognize as being not the exact same thing as wrong. So, like I already said, we recognize absurdities now because of our superior knowledge. But just because something was technically wrong a long time ago, like some of Aristotle’s ideas for instance, doesn’t mean it was also absurd at that time, whereas it might be in this day and age. It’s like context, yeah?

            Now, I say you mock him by saying that religion is, and always was, an absurd idea, because while he died 3 centuries before Christianity, he was still religious. You see, they had religion before Jesus walked across the water, who knew right?

            I like to argue for the sake of arguing like the next guy (and I’m open to the possibility that maybe some of my wording wasn’t clear enough), but if you’re going to just straight up deny facets of history, or the very existence of historical context, I don’t know what to tell you other than that is actually quite absurd (in this day and age).

          • sjarrel

            Before we drag this out again and again with little insults, please disregard the condescending tone and childish jibes of my response. I was getting annoyed, which really isn’t necessary, and who know, we might get somewhere with this.

          • Canadianguy

            Deny facets of history? No, I’m ignoring them because bringing them up would be a moot point. Really, what’s the relevance of Aristotle and Mayans in a discussion on how religion is an archaic interpretation of the physical realm?

          • sjarrel

            Well, we started this when I said that it would be spitting in the face of history to call the very idea of religion absurd (historical context and all that noise), a point I tried to expand upon later. Aristotle and the Mayans were merely examples. That religion is (part of) an archaic worldview and that the belief in religion in this day and age is absurd was never really up for debate.

        • If you look at history, you will see that the further a culture goes with its religion, the most likely it is to die out. It would be fair to say that humans desire to know how or why things happen, and in in the absence of science or the scientific method being utilized to determine the how, humans created a why (god). The predisposition is to explain what we cannot and gods fill that need.

          • sjarrel

            I think you’re oversimplifying it there, in saying that god is only there as an explanation. And when you say that the further a culture goes with it’s religion the more likely it is to die out, I think you’re grasping at straws or maybe aren’t aware of the distinction between causation and correlation. Take this for example: if you look at history you’ll see that the longer a civilization/empire/kingdom goes on existing, the more likely it is to die out. See what I mean?

  • skywatcher

    Thanks for an extremely powerful list, Flamehorse. I gather you’ve thought about thisstuff a great deal.

    I find much of this disturbing but nothing more than the conclusion of Job. God has allowed Job’s children to be destroyed, but he makes it okay by giving him more children. But if Job loved his children, could they ever be replaced?

    It would be out of place in this list, but the way Charles Manson interpreted the same verses you quote from Revelations is fascinating and, in its own way, horrible.

    • Job loved his family, but he loved God above all else; so whatever God’s Will is, it’s acceptable to Job, even if it meant the loss of his livelihood, or his death, or the death of his family.

      Job is a very righteous man, I sure will meet him in heaven. =)

      • fendabenda

        You think Job is in heaven? Wouldn’t it be the last flipping of the bird to him by God if Job actually went to Hell?

      • There is no being on earth I would appease at the expense of my family, specifically my children. And no loving being would ask someone to forfeit his family in his favor. One of the many reasons I’m an atheist.

        • I can’t explain what’s on God’s mind, but I do know He creates his own rules, and He can and may do whatever He wants to with us.

          Whatever His plans are, I’m sure there is a perfectly sound and justifiable reason behind it, we humans just can’t understand it.

          Moreover, I firmly believe that the first reason/purpose of our existence is to love, serve and glorify God; without Him, Earth is nothing, something atheists like you never understood.

          Sorry if I offended anyone, and sorry for the late response.

          • Canadianguy

            Gee, it’s as if you went through a checklist of logical fallacies that people use to justify religion. Argument from astonishment, argument from final consequences,…

          • sjarrel

            Ha, friendly neighborhood expert on logic strikes again.

          • Surely you jest… we humans can’t understand it because it’s ridiculous and we know it’s BS. You’ve given your imaginary friend so much power over your life, you have rendered yourself incapable of thought. Your God, this being that demands your utter and total devotion, free of thinking for yourself, existing only to love, serve, and glorify… wow. That is not a being I would worship even IF he were real.

            As a loving parent, I allow my child to make mistakes without fear of eternal torment. Any loving being would do the same.

            And without god, earth would be just fine… better, in fact. Science would further flourish and people would be free of the shackles of an unjust ruler, free to think for themselves for a change.


          • Canadianguy

            “Ha, friendly neighborhood expert on logic strikes again.”

            Ha, the puerile idiot flaunts his ignorance again.

          • sjarrel

            Ease up buddy, I’m just poking fun at the fact that you seem to go into every thread and look for opportunities to point out that you know the terms to certain logical fallacies that you (sometimes wrongly) identify. No need to start calling people idiots now, with or without a pretentious synonym for infantile (is there some sort of irony there?).

            I think it would be more interesting if you would add something constructive to the conversation, instead of listing some logical mistakes.

            I can agree that it was a little bit childish of me though.

          • Canadianguy

            No, the irony is that you’re being condescending.

          • sjarrel

            Sure I suppose I was being a little condescending, I’ll give you that, sorry.

        • leichttraktor

          No offense, but that’s exactly why you won’t and don’t deserve to go to heaven. You love the gift (in this case your family) more than the giver. Example: if someone gifted you a car, would all your love go to the car, or would you love the giver more than before, because he gave you a car you love? Applying the example, you love your ‘car’ more than the giver. That’s exactly what Satan plants into peoples hearts like yours: love for what you have. I’m sure God has blessed you throughout your life, but in your ignorance, curses will be added upon you since you don’t believe. It says so in the Bible. I’m not trying to ‘curse’ you like as witches do, I’m just trying to warn you because I seriously want the best for you and your family and your relationship with God. However, callous as you are, God is fully justified in letting Satan do whatever he wants to you and your family. “But then he’s not loving,” you say? How can you expect to live in your pleasure and sin and expect no consequences? If you reject God, why on earth would He protect you? “Because He made me,” you say? Well why would a father chase after his son who is so hard headed that he’ll never believe, and doesn’t even want to talk to his dad or admit his existence? God may have been trying to get to you many times but you’ve rejected, and He still keeps trying.

          And besides, God never wanted people to ‘forfeit’ their families or anything, it’s human’s sin that brought evil spirits onto the planet, and ignorant people that rely on themselves without God to live. God doesn’t cause harm to people, they cause it to themselves. But the pain usually leads into deeper denial, and people start saying, “If God were real, there would be no pain!” The cycle continues as they get further and further from God, not knowing that they need him most in such moments. Satan has deceived you just as he has billions of others. If you want to change though it’s never never too late.

          Good day

          • Burt

            So, basically you’re telling her to go to hell because she disagrees with you? Classy, real classy.

          • leichttraktor

            Burt: That paraphrase is a 99.999999% watered down version of what I said. It’s a completely inaccurate paraphrase by the way. I never told her ‘go to hell,’ I told her that there is punishment for doing WRONG. Wrong does exist. If you “believed” that there were lions in a forest and you saw someone (lets say someone called Mike) walking into it, wouldn’t you warn him of the potential danger? OF COURSE! That’s what I’m doing; not forcing my belief, just as you wouldn’t ‘force’ Mike to believe in the lions in the forest! Just warning a person for their own good. Also, I ain’t sure if what I did was “classy,” as you like to say, but it was honest and veritable, which is a thousand times more important.

            Good day

          • cannismajor

            wow. one can always spot a good christian. God be with you friend

          • I was just wondering, according to your religion, who gets to do the judging again?

          • leichttraktor

            God does the judges, I do the preaching. Understood?

            Good day

          • Incorrect. How are you supposed to inspire faith when people can’t have faith in you?

            How about being nicer, even to the people you don’t like?
            Thats what being a Christian is. Did I mention I was an atheist whaaaaaaat.

            Hint: it takes more than putting “good day” at the end of everything.

            And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how you preach.

          • leichttraktor

            1st off: When was I ever rude? Just tell me where in ONE of my messages I was rude. I don’t recall acting so. Plus, you don’t know me personally, so you can’t just ‘assume’ I’m a rude guy.

            2ndly: Who are you, an atheist, to tell me how to be a Christian? Just that fact makes me disregard all your opinions on ‘how to be a Christian’ as complete foolishness. If you were a mathematical engineer, and I were a Soccer player, would you value my opinion if I were telling you that you are designing that bridge improperly? NO! I would know nothing on the subject, just like you in this case. Don’t tell me how to be a Christian, because you are definitely not as moral as me. Do you keep Gods laws? Then what on earth are you doing telling me how to keep them when you don’t? Atheist’s are the most ironic beings on earth sometimes…..

            3rdly: You didn’t even explain how to preach, all you said was to be nicer. You know nothing about preaching and judging, nor to you provide any proof that I’m doing it wrong. Oh, and by the way, the ‘Good day”s I put and the end of my posts aren’t attempts at compensating my ‘previous’ (from the message) rudeness. In a way, it shows that I’m not bursting out in anger, but reminds the reader that I’m keeping calm (although that’s not the reason I put it there)

            Good day :)

  • Pauly

    Old Testament, Cliff Notes version;

    God creates everything, then creates man, and everything man does pisses God off.

    • Daniel Swiss

      Thats good . I like that . Very true

    • And that is why God created teenagers, so we’d know how it felt.

  • Jpsh

    I love how people on this site automatically bash christians and their beliefs. This list is merely giving ten examples from the bible and in no way says theyre true. Yet, all knowing people who feel superior because they do not believe in god (a lot of sarcasm, nothing wrong with being an athiest everyone is entitled just as christians, hindus, whatever are) already bash christians and act like theyre so idiotic for their beliefs. The ignorance and false belief that the ignorant people believe they are so superior to religious folk is astounding. I could care less if someone is muslim or athiest, i respect that. A lot of badasses hiding behind their computers should provide the same mutual respect, and not use these articles to try and downplay and bash christians and any other relgions or beliefs.

    • ParusMajor

      Exactly. I was raised as a Christian Lutheran, but nowadays I kind of think I’m agnostic. I don’t want to call myself an atheist, because most of the people who call themselves atheists that I’ve met have been arrogant bastards with no respect for other people or their opinions. Here’s a real conversation with one:

      Me: So, you’re an atheist. Why?

      Dude: I hate religious people.

      Me: OK.. so you don’t like some people. But what do you oppose about the Bible?

      Dude: Haven’t read it, and never will. Goddamn those religious people!

      Me: …ok…

      • Please don’t judge all people of “athiest” antifaith foundations due to the ignorance of a few. It would be the same then for me to judge all Christians because of my childhood experiences growing up in the bible belt Lubbock Tx with a plethora of narrow minded rednecks representing the whole.

        My athiest conversation with you would be much more detailed than your example above.

        • ParusMajor

          I would like to have that conversation with you. I’m not religious myself, but I’m not an atheist either. I do like to discuss these matters with intelligent people. BTW, wasn’t Buddy Holly from Lubbock, Texas?

        • Steve

          You mean don’t judge all atheists like a lot of atheists judge all Christians, by the actions of a few. This is a perfect example of a simple statement that should be taken as an indisputable fact (don’t judge everyone by the actions of a few) and turning it into a propaganda statement by adding qualifiers.

      • Libbihn

        I am really sorry to hear that has been your experience with atheists. I’ve found atheism to be more fulfilling than spirituality or religion ever was. Thinking about myself as part of a larger universe or as “made up of star stuff” makes me feel better, somehow.

      • Lord Stark

        You are more likely to find that atheists know more about the bible or religions even better than those that purport to believe do.

      • Funny how I frequently see posts by Christians having this same conversation but I’ve yet to meet an atheist, and I’ve met thousands, who would say they’re an atheist because they hate religious people or an atheist who has not read the bible. I HAVE met those calling themselves Christian who have never read the bible cover to cover yet will quote their pastor to me for an hour, not having any idea where the passages they are discussing are even located in the book.

        I don’t hate religious people… I do not wish to remove anyone’s right to pray to anyone or anything they choose, regardless how silly I think it is. I just want religious people to accept that theirs is not the only one on this earth, others worship differently and that’s okay, and to stop using their holy texts to make laws that affect us all or remove science from the classrooms.

        I don’t think that’s asking too much.

        • Les2point0

          Man, you sure are uncomfortable with people conforming to something you think is stupid. The arguement for God make just as much sense as the arguement against God, whatever just make sense for people. Just be okay with what makes people the way they are and helps them get through life. Rose, why don’t you calm down and read a different list.

      • alexander

        Here’s is another conversation between a Christian and an atheist
        Atheist: I don’t believe in god
        Christian: you will burn for eternity in hell for your sinful ways you unbeliever.
        Atheist: No I won’t you idiot
        Christian: how dare you call me an idiot? That is ignorant you can’t say that because I’m entitled to my belief.
        Also I don’t oppose the bible (unless it is taken literally) I oppose the problems it has caused and the way it has been used by people for their own ends

    • stop being so sensitive. 1) it’s the internet retard. 2) no one was “bashing Christianity” in any of the above posts.
      You have a serious insecurity issue most likely stemming from your own internal battle with agnostic thoughts that is scaring you.

      I am not bashing you because of your religion I am “bashing” you because of your ignorance.

      Good list. Even for this atheist. Of which in a foxhole I have been several times.


    • Mark

      I’ve read every comment down to this one and have seen no christian bashing, but just to give your confirmation bias something to latch on to I will if you want me to.

      You are also incorrect in saying the list in no way says they are true, in fact it goes out of its way to try to explain how vague descriptions given in revelations are probably helicopters, a very old interpretation I have been hearing for literally decades.

    • Please just remember… disagreement with your beliefs is not bashing. It’s just disagreement. :-)

    • Canadianguy

      Ad hominem attacks? That’s the best you can come up with against atheism?

      • sjarrel

        Do you have your little book on logical fallacies open in front of you when you read the comments here, or have you actually memorized them all?

        Also, which is the one you think will make people look up to you more?

        • Canadianguy

          I know it’s hard for you to understand, but we don’t all seek self-validation over the internet like you do. I was killing time. I couldn’t care less what your opinion of me might be.

          • sjarrel

            What is the technical term for the “I know your are, but what am I?” argument?

            Again, I’ll agree there was no real reason for me to jump on all of these posts you made, but since you were doing practically the same I felt a little bit justified in doing so while I myself was killing time.

          • Canadianguy

            Read ‘Prior Analytics’ and find it out for yourself since you seem to like Aristotle so much.

          • sjarrel

            Ha, I thought he’d make a good example, but nice one.

  • Pauly

    That load of trash called the Bible was written by demigods to get fools to stop worshipping REAL gods, like Zeus and Poseidon. I’ll bet anything it was written by Atlas or any other lowly Titan to take power from Olympus. May the fates have mercy on your heathen christian souls, because the God of Thunder won’t.

    • TheViking

      God forgives, I don’t.

    • geraldm459

      Hear, hear! Tell it like it is Brother Pauly. Hail Zeus, the mighty God of Thunder!

    • Pauly

      I posted that for a good reason, besides the obvious satirical one.

      There’s a group of people out there who believe a supreme being exists that created the world & created mankind a few thousand years ago and sent his son to preach the good news. Sound familiar?

      One big difference;

      They don’t believe God did it, they believe space aliens did it.

      The group is called the Raelians, and it goes to show that what sounds ridiculous and unrealistic to one group of people is another person’s religion. Keep in mind both have the same level of truth to their story.

      • PowderedToastMan

        Thor is the God of Thunder, right? Your story, Pauly, sounds stupid and fake… which makes me think it’s true. Life is stupid and fake.

        • Pauly

          Rael will bless you on the mothership.

      • Missy

        Are those boofheads still around?

  • pkisme

    ok ok, personal belief aside

    better list than the ones written by Ryan Thomas, agree?

    • flamehorse

      I like Ryan’s lists immensely.

      • skywatcher

        Ryan’s lists have gotten better, partly because he’s toned down the sarcasm. It would have been interesting to see how he would have written this list.

        Aside to Pauly: “The Odin Brotherhood” by Mark Mirabello. Some people still believe.

  • Reggae

    Anyone who takes an ounce of this seriously is seriously demented.

    • ParusMajor

      No, anyone who doesn’t take the Bible seriously is seriously demented. You don’t have to believe in it, but if you don’t take it seriously… where have you been for the last 2012 years? The Bible is the most influential book ever written, whether you like it or not.

      • Not too smart

        “Influential” isn’t always a good thing. We would be far better off if it wasn’t as influential as it’s been.

        • ParusMajor

          You may be right… but the Bible doesn’t go away if you ignore it. You can’t beat the enemy by pretending they don’t exist. That’s why I have no respect for so-called “atheists” who haven’t actually read the Bible. You should know your enemy. Maybe you should even know your enema.

          • Headmire

            Your comment and comments like yours are the main reason many people are against religion. By your comment I am guessing as I am an atheist that has never read the bible that makes us enemies ??

          • Xyroze

            The greatest trick the devil ever played was making us believe he was god.

          • ParusMajor

            Headmire, listen to yourself. What did you just say? You haven’t read the Bible, but you are against it nevertheless? Do you find that attitude intelligent? Do you think Jesus existed as much as Forrest Gump, or Judas as much as Freddy Krueger? Let me tell you, Sir, that there’s a thing called real life. Jesus, Judas, Luke, Mark, and the other dudes in the Bible actually existed in real life. You might argue that Jesus was just a regular dude and not the Son of God, but you cannot deny that he did exist. There are records about it, those guys lived in goddamn empire of Rome, and Romans kept records.

          • raisinfuntime

            I’m twelve and I don’t believe in God but my parents are Catholic so they make me go to church. My whole family believes in God and I don’t think religion is my enemy. I just don’t think it’s true. I tried to read the Bible because a lot of people agree with you but I couldn’t. I got bored

          • Headmire

            ParusMajor you know what an Atheist is don’t you because by your comment there it sounds like you don’t. I am not saying those people didn’t exist in my opinion they existed as regular people if you think differently that’s up to you but the fact that we believe different things doesn’t make us enemies as you stated earlier and my point was idiotic thinking like that is the reason people kill in the name of religion

      • holysh1tdisturber

        No, today anyone who takes the Bible seriously is seriously demented. As you so boldly stated, this is the year 2012.
        What you are happily taking so seriously is based on a compilation of manuscripts written in the uncivilized desert outskirts of a long defunct empire by various factions of incestuous, warlike and fanatically religious tribal sheep herders.
        A little dementia is most certainly needed to take this seriously…

        • Mark

          Amen brother!!

        • ParusMajor

          OK, so what other book has had such a lasting impact on the world? The Fairy Tales by the Grimm Brothers? No? What about One Thousand and One Nights? No? Hemingway? Steinbeck? Kafka? No? Well, how about

          The Bible.

          I am not religious myself, but I accept a fact: the Bible is an important book. You people who are trying to deny that are just making fools of yourselves.

          • holysh1tdisturber

            Principia Mathematica by Issac Newton, The Histories by Herodotus, The Republic by Plato, Geographia by Ptolemy, The Magna Carta (1215), On the Origin of Species by you know who…I could go on but that’s not the point.
            I stated that taking the Bible seriously is demented and that a little dementia would be helpful for those interested…
            Never said it wasn’t an important book, this is obvious.
            The Bible is unarguably one of humanity’s greatest books but you still have to be a retard to take it seriously in 2012.

            You may be more religious than you’re willing to admit.

          • ParusMajor

            OK. Those are good books as well (although I think “The Origin of Species” is overrated… have you read “The Interpretation of Dreams” (Die Traumdeutung) by Sigmund Freud?)

            And I am definitely interested in religions, but I don’t have FAITH in any of them, so I wouldn’t call myself religious.

          • You need to go further and ask WHY did it have such impact. Read up on ancient history, Constantine in particular. Rulers learned early on that if they instilled in their people a healthy fear of God, the people were more pliable. With that fear is the insistence that they read and keep the bible.

            It wasn’t borne of a need to know what’s in the book… it was borne of the need of rulers to control their populations using fear and the fear of God and the afterlife was the best way to do that.

            I agree with you that all people, regardless of their beliefs, should read the bible. Its very influence on humans makes it an important book. It is the best selling book of all time and to read it, truly read it and understand it from the time it was written, will guarantee atheism.

          • sjarrel

            Origin of species overrated? Wasn’t that book fundamental in that it was the first to show that there is no need for a god to create life as we know it?

            Also, rlrose328, to say religion or the bible are just tools is taking it a bit too far to one side I would say.

          • sjarrel: That rulers used it as a tool is merely a point I was trying to make. Religion is also a business, used to raise money and spread lies in order to bring in even more money. Some people, my own mother included, need religion in order to survive their day-to-day lives. It gives them hope (false though it may be) in the world and they can cling to their desire to see their loved ones again in heaven (a major issue between my mother and me).

            Religion and faith serve many purposes. Being used by rulers in ancient times and politicians today is merely one example.

          • holysh1tdisturber

            rirose238,I’m certain Constantine himself would agree with your comment.

            He commissioned a great number of statues in honor of the old Gods for his own private use, not one to put all his eggs in one basket that Constantine! christianity as official state religion be damned!!

  • roryy101

    This is one of the best lists I have read on this site in a long time, well done you!

  • Nerd

    Nice list. Those are some scary tales, whoever wrote the bible was like the Stephen King of ancient times.

    • StephenKingOfAncientTimes

      I resent the implication.

      • geraldm459

        I resent the resentment of the implication!

        • DuckMySick

          I implicate the resentment of the implication!

          • Pauly


  • 1. There’s nothing like atheists complaining about the existence of religion on the internet to prove their superiority. It’s hilarious that they are so dead-set in their belief that there is no god that they feel the need to run down and denigrate those who don’t hold to their position.

    As I said elsewhere: a true atheist shouldn’t care what others think because true atheism believes that everything, including belief, is a random interaction of chemicals with no more value than any other random interaction of chemicals. Sadly, most modern western atheists aren’t atheists at all: they’re anti-Christians, who are as quick to push their own beliefs as any evangelical missionary, and who are just as fundamentalist about their beliefs as a Jack Chick comic character.

    2. I despise most of Flamehorse’s lists. They’re poorly researched piles of fluff, often plagiarized from other sources. However, s/he occasionally gets it right for the most part and I will give credit where credit is due. This list mostly covers exactly what is advertised: 10 fairly horrifying moments in the Bible, and it does so fairly well.

    3. Having said that… simply as a matter of opinion, I would’ve thrown “hell” in its entirety to number 1 (not just the lake of fire), followed by the other events in John’s Apocalypse to #2. (An “apocalypse, kids, is not “the end of the world” – it’s a just genre of literature). And I’d move some stuff around and use other… In fact, my own list would look more like:

    10. Samson’s Private War Against the Philistines

    9. The Fall of the Cities of the Plain (including S&G)

    8. Elijah and the Prophets of Ba’al

    7. The Plagues (all of them)

    6. Ezekiel (let’s be honest: that’s one freaky book)

    5. The Ten Plagues

    4. The Flood

    3. The Torture and Crucifixion of Jesus Christ

    2. The Events in John’s Apocalypse

    1. Hell

    • ParusMajor

      Hell isn’t actually described at all in the Bible. The concept of Hell as a fiery place with demons that torture you comes from Dante Alighieri’s book “La divina commedia” and some medieval paintings by Hieronymous Bosch and some other artists.

      • fendabenda

        Apropos of nothing, did you happen to steal my bottle of Viru Valge the other day (that I was saving for the midsummer festival)? Parus?

        • ParusMajor

          Absolusitively not! Do you think I would steal from you? (I would) What kind of a person do you think I am? (I’m a thief, loser and a cheater) I didn’t take your bottle of Viru Valge (but my one-night stand probably did, if you lost the bottle).

      • Hell’s described, but it’s very vague. Smoke and fire, weeping, gnashing of teeth, etc. Either way: it’s not a pleasant place.

    • PJMurphy

      I think you’re mistaken about a lot of (but not all) atheists.

      Atheism is not a “belief that there is no god”, it is a refusal to believe in the existence of any gods without evidence. That goes for Jesus, Odin, Ra, Ganesh, Shiva, Zeus, Jupiter, Poseidon and all the rest.

      Personally, I don’t really care if someone believes in the Abrahamic god (Jehovah, Yahweh, Allah), or the Hindu pantheon, or follows a Buddhist spiritual tradition. As long as they behave in a decent fashion and do me no harm, then their beliefs are none of my business.

      But I will oppose those who attempt to change society as a whole to conform with their theology. I will oppose those who attempt to have creationist mythology indoctrinated into the impressionable minds of children attending public schools. I will oppose those who deny gay people their right to marry based on a short passage in Leviticus. I will speak out against laws that deny atheists the right to hold public office.

      And most of the people trying to do this are Christian. If Jews and Muslims were advocating a law banning the sale of pork products, I’d oppose them, too. If Buddhists were campaigning to have the concept of reincarnation taught in schools I’d be speaking up against it. But they aren’t, are they?

      And I’m not against Christians. I’m against people who accuse me of having no morals, and who hate and fear me because I don’t live me life in fear of an invisible being, who will condemn me to eternal torment for my refusal to worship him.

      Remember when you were a kid, and you found out that Santa Claus wasn’t real? Remember trying to tell the other kids who still believed? Well, being an atheist is like that, only with adults.

      I could go on, but let me conclude this with 2 pithy quotes:

      Atheism is a religion in exactly the same way that Transparent is a colour.

      Threatening me with hell is like having a hippie threaten to punch me in my aura.

      • Arsnl

        “But I will oppose those who attempt to change society as a whole to conform with their theology”

        So you’re telling me that only religious people try to change the world to conform to their views or their desires? Because that sounds like total BS. In the end to a lot of religious people, religion is a list of moral principles that guides their life.

        And through out your comment you keep repeating: “I will oppose those”, “I will oppose those”, “I will oppose those”. It is obvious that you do not try to convince people to join your side on those issues. You fight them instead of trying to convince them.

        ” fear me because I don’t live me life in fear of an invisible being”

        holier than thou much?

        • PJMurphy

          No, I am not saying that only religious people try to alter society. I’m saying they try to alter society to conform with their theology. Take prayer in the schools for example. The people fighting to have prayer in the schools don’t want prayer, they want CHRISTIAN prayer, and Christian prayer only. I have had conversations with Christians who want prayer in the schools, and when I ask exactly which day of the week should begin with a reading from the Koran, they burst a gasket.

          So no, I don’t believe there should be prayer of any kind in schools. I don’t believe that City Council meetings should begin with a prayer. I don’t believe that the Ten Commandments should hang on the courthouse wall.

          I will engage in rational debate with anyone, but I have to say that it’s difficult to find a believer of any faith that can debate it rationally.

          “Holier than thou much” — as a staunch Atheist, I must say that this comment threw me into a fit of laughter that left me breathless.

        • Canadianguy

          Oh, so you’ve substituted theology for desires…

          Twisting his words a bit, eh?

      • PT2

        Likewise, I’m sure that many of the religious posters on this list will oppose those who attempt to turn religious beliefs into something that should be frowned upon in society. Oppose those who openly antagonize them with billboards and signage aimed at children stating there is no God. Oppose those who desire to remove all signs of religion from society because they do not agree with it and they must be accomodated at the expense of everybody else. And most importantly, oppose those who look down on the religious, not because of their character or actions, but for the sole reason that they believe there is a God.

        We could go in circles here, really. Atheists and the religious are guilty of the exact same crimes against each other; trying to claim superiority is pointless and pathetic. Whether you believe or not doesn’t make you a better person than someone else, nor does it make you more “right” than anybody else. It’s a wonder of existence that we can all differ on the question “where did we come from” and I guarantee we won’t be getting an answer anytime soon, so why bother arguing about it? Quite frankly, it is pathetic, and you don’t need a supreme being (whether it be God or Chris Hitchens) to tell you that.

        • pjmurphy

          Not “remove all signs of religion from society”.

          More like “remove all publicly funded signs of religion which favor one religion over all the others”.

          Religious people are free to put whatever they want on a church sign, they can print leaflets and hand them out, they can rent airtime on television and broadcast evangelical sermons, and they can rent billboards, too.

          But leave it out of the schools, out of the courts, and out of City Hall.

      • I’ve already been around this issue this week (leaving me a big behind at work), and needless to say, I’m always right.

        >> But I will oppose those who attempt to change society as a whole to conform with their theology.

        And I will oppose the atheist effort to remove religions other than theirs from society. It works both ways.

        >> I’m against people who accuse me of having no morals, and who hate and fear me because I don’t live me life in fear of an invisible being, who will condemn me to eternal torment for my refusal to worship him.

        I’m not going to condemn you to hell, but I do believe you are headed there. I would rather you not, tho.

        >> Atheism is a religion in exactly the same way that Transparent is a colour.

        Like I said, I’ve already been around this subject this week.

        >> Threatening me with hell is like having a hippie threaten to punch me in my aura.

        Just punch back. It’s like punching an infant, but with more whining.

        • The annoyed elephant is an annoying know it all. The part of the bible that is taken so literally is when God says to believe in him with no questions asked whatsoever. I just can’t fathom this. “Do as I say, or else.” Sounds like crap to me but I am an American Indian and we have a completely different belief system. The Great Spirit is what I believe in. Christianity killed off my people so to say I loath it is an understatement.

          • >> The annoyed elephant is an annoying know it all.


            >> The part of the bible that is taken so literally is when God says to believe in him with no questions asked whatsoever. I just can’t fathom this.

            Neither can I. Especially since this part of the Bible doesn’t exist.

            >> Sounds like crap to me but I am an American Indian and we have a completely different belief system. The Great Spirit is what I believe in.

            Funny thing being a know-it-all… I know that not all “American Indians” believed in “The Great Spirit”, and that even those that did believe in it had different understandings of what The Great Spirit was. Some of those Native nations had belief systems that were so close to Christianity that they adopted Christianity very easily. Others, not so much.

            >> Christianity killed off my people

            Christianity did no such thing.

            >> so to say I loath it is an understatement.

            Your bitterness is your problem.

          • Arsnl

            “Christianity killed off my people so to say I loath it is an understatement.”
            What part of Christianity killed your people? The Russian church? The Armenians? Or maybe the Ethiopians? I bet it was those Ethiopians. They run really fast and you guys just couldnt keep up.
            Now stop being so melo-dramatic. Christianity didnt kill your people. People killed your people, the people who spoke the same language you speak now, and you arent speaking bulgarian or polish right now.

          • Missy

            I understand where you’re coming from. The Christians who killed off your people were a bunch of ignorant jackasses, who just had to be right. My grandfather had the same problem. When he first came to Australia to live, he tried to stop a government official from taking some Aboriginal children away from their parents. The officious official told him to mind his own business or my mum and aunt would be taken away from him because he was a ‘filthy black gypsy’ (in the official’s words).
            ‘You can’t do that, I’m an Aussie citizen.’ said grandpa.
            ‘Oh yeah, watch me. One more word out of you and the kids are gone.’ said the official.
            Grandpa, not being a violent man, backed off.

          • Maggot

            Especially since this part of the Bible doesn’t exist.

            Maybe it’s that part called Commandment Number 1.

        • >> And I will oppose the atheist effort to remove religions other than theirs from society. It works both ways.


          1.The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.

          2.Details of belief as taught or discussed.

          Atheists do not have a religion… but I’m sure you’ll insist we do. Unlike religious people, who have a whole slew of beliefs in common with their religion and who meet on a regular basis to cement that belief via readings and songs, the only thing a group of atheists have in common is not believing in a god or gods for which no evidence exists. Period. They share no political affiliation, or favorite color, or favorite book. They do not meet on a regular basis to discuss or worship anything specifically, much less their own atheism.

          It is the contention of the religious right (conservative republicans, specifically) that atheism is a religion. This is an attempt to belittle our nonbelief. It never works and we mostly find it humorous. Nice to see it hasn’t disappeared from your rhetoric.

          • inconspicuousdetective

            no, they don’t meet to discuss it, but they never stop when someone says “god”. for crying out loud most atheists are stuck up know-it-alls. if you need proof there was that atheist convention that got rained out a while back…oh wait…i guess they do meet in big groups to discuss their nonbelief. carry on weirdo.

          • sjarrel

            A lot of atheists are only atheists because of the environment they’re born in though, in the sense that they would be religions of they were born somewhere else. They lack the basic understanding of the world that ended the need to rely on a god in the first place. Of course that is not true for all atheists, but for the group of which it is, atheism is no different than a religion. The lack of a belief in a god does not necessarily rule that out in the sense that Buddhism and Confucianism are often qualified as religions as well, for instance.

          • Just because atheists don’t meet in a building doesn’t mean it’s not a religion. Many other religious adherents don’t meet, sing songs, discuss matters, etc.

            re·li·gion [ri-lij-uhn] noun: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe

            As atheism has a set of beliefs concerning the cause (random chance), nature (completely random), purpose (none) of the universe, I’d say it’s a religion. Plus, calling it a religion tweaks atheists…

            >> It is the contention of the religious right (conservative republicans, specifically) that atheism is a religion.

            The Dictionary = The Religious Right

            >> This is an attempt to belittle our nonbelief.

            Aw… you mean like how atheists belittle my beliefs by telling me I believe in a fairy tale sky god?

            Besides, if I want to belittle atheism, I don’t need the dictionary definitions. All I need to do is laugh at the fact that since atheism is ultimately built around the random combination of chemicals to make the universe and all that’s in it, including your own belief that atheism is true.

          • Maggot

            I’d say it’s a religion.

            Of course you would. It’s an act of desperation, and it’s been done before. You aren’t breaking any new ground.

            Plus, calling it a religion tweaks atheists…

            You really don’t care whether you are right or wrong on this one, do you? You’re just happy to be able to goad some people into this off-point argument so as to misdirect attention away from the fact that you gullibly believe in wild and fanciful ideas. Maybe one day you will grow up and stop feeling the need to desperately reach for such blatantly false statements to use as “ammunition” in your imaginary war. I guess your “faith” in your “god” isn’t strong enough for you to overcome such obstacles as people questioning it, so you need to convince yourself you are “winning” these little battles? Little do you realize, the harder you try putting up this front, the more it looks like you have doubts.

            if I want to belittle atheism, I don’t need the dictionary definitions.

            Lol, but you’re sure quick to bust them out when they suit you.

            All I need to do is laugh at the fact that…

            I sure hope that laughing is working for you, because it is about as effective against your targets as you p.issing on your own shoes. At the end of the day, you still believe in a deity without any basis whatsoever. Whereas the intended recipients of your laughter would like to have proof before accepting crazy ideas. All your desperate gyrations and clutter and laughing these past few days do not change this simple, basic fact.

          • leichttraktor

            @The Annoyed Elephant

            Hahaha! You tell ’em brother! I really like you. Too bad there is no ‘add friend’ option on listverse! keep it up!

        • Canadianguy

          You can’t even formulate a logical argument. Being you would be hell.

    • we

      pretty good list

    • Canadianguy


      Ad hominem attacks add no weight to your argument.

      • sjarrel

        Ho, ho, you already used ad hominem attacks.. starting to make me doubt your determination in showing off your pocket watch.

        I’ll stop now, though, sorry to jump on all of these, I can see how it’s a little childish of me.

        • Canadianguy

          Well, you are a puerile idiot, after all.

          • sjarrel

            I was wondering what your reaction would be when you’d see I already acknowledged I was being a bit childish a day before you came back to tell me the same thing.

            I have to say, a little disappointed. I think it’s the use of the word puerile, not only because you used it earlier (and I already admitted this being a little childish), nor because I find it pretentious for you to use it like this, and not even because I kind of already called you a teenager with that high school debate comment quite a few posts up, but because it just doesn’t gel with idiot. The two words together, puerile idiot, as an insult (or observation, right?), it just seems imbalanced. Know what I mean?

            Also had you figured for somebody that knows a lot of quotes somehow, and figured you would get the pocket watch thing. So, that’s a miss for me.

          • Canadianguy

            I wasn’t paying close attention. A pocket watch? You mean, Voltaire? I read that in middle school, was decades ago. Ironically, you’re very wrong.

            There is neither a pocket watch nor a watchmaker.

            Voltaire wrote about a clock and a clockmaker:



          • Canadianguy

            The quote somehow disappeared (I guess HTML isn’t guillemet friendly)…

            “L’univers m’embarrasse, et je ne puis songer que cette horloge existe et n’ait point d’horloger.”

          • Canadianguy

            English doesn’t do him justice, by the way. Read his works in French.

            PS. Kafka is another author whose works should be read in their original form. English or French translations do not do justice to the fact that he must have pained over every choice of word and sentence structure he wrote (some would call him anal).

          • Canadianguy

            Or rather, every choice of word and sentence structure he made.

          • sjarrel

            That would’ve actually been a much better suited quote, in the larger sense of this list and all the arguments it has inspired.

            But I meant the one which google tells me belonged to Lord Chesterfield and apparently goes like this:

            “Never seem more learned than the people you are with. Wear your learning like a pocket watch and keep it hidden. Do not pull it out to count the hours, but give the time when you are asked.”

            I’m afraid neither my French or German will good enough any time soon to truly appreciate either of those literary artists, but I still appreciate the English translations.

          • Canadianguy

            A quote from Lord Chesterfield? You must admit, your reference was almost cryptic given the topic at hand.

            And here’s quote you’ll like, ” L’existence précède l’essence” (existence precedes essence).

          • sjarrel

            Ah yeah, I do like that quote, quite fitting in a way, too.

            Of course Lord Chesterfield’s is no Sartre, I just happen to like that quote.

            I suppose it might not be as well known a quote as I thought, but looking at my post again I must admit I did not make that a clear reference, at all.

            At least I was right in figuring you enjoy quotes.

          • Canadianguy

            I do love a good book. Before I discovered the depository of trashy pop culture, or the internet, I was quite well read.

            Nowadays, I read and write research papers and I’ve recently contributed to a well reviewed bestseller (my name comes up a few times in a Google Books search, which is immensely cool).

          • sjarrel

            Awesome, what’s the book?

          • Canadianguy

            I’d rather not say, but it’s a history book.

          • sjarrel

            Ah too bad, I always enjoy a good history book.

  • iuuk

    You know, I was kind of buying the lake of fire thing until the golden streets!

    Ok, I wasn’t really, but that thing really bugs me nonetheless. Isn’t greed a sin, and what’s the worth or use of golden streets if not for it’s (greed inspired) value. Sure I don’t know how much of the commandments were actual early Christian lore, but I am sure that it can never be a virtue to like gold that much. ‘Be saved and you can be greedy all you want’
    Also, why would heaven even need streets to begin with. You’re a spirit and you still have to walk, saved people are really cheated.

    • theItalian

      There are Scriptures describing the new spirit body that a believer has in the new Jerusalem. The gold, pearls and gems are not there for greed or wealth, but rather the decor of a holy city, much like the breastplates of the ancient high priests.

      • iuuk

        But why would Heaven need an earthly decor. Gold also isn’t particulary beautiful, it’s shiny, but mostly coveted because it’s a ‘pure’ (doesn’t rust, etc.) earthly material. Sure, it has is aesthetic value, but not one that can not be replaced by unimaginable beauty, or even imaginable.

        It just sounds solely like the guy trying to imagine his perfect city on earth, rather than something heaven would be like.

        That stuff just bugs me. Like a kid trying to add wings to his drawn car because it just wasn’t flashy enough.

  • oouchan

    Interesting topic. I would like to see a similar list for the koran. That would give a contrast between the two that might be interesting to see. Both were good story books to give people hope and to give lessons that were needed at that time.

    Ok list.

    • mom424

      I would or could argue quite successfully that some of these stories we could have done without. In fact most of the Old Testament eye for an eye crap. We were already living that life. You kill mine, I kill yours. The New Testament though? At the time, quite groundbreaking. Interesting that all the major religions came to the same conclusion – the turn the other cheek conclusion. Buddha, Vishnu,the Dalai Lama, even Mohammad, (if you actually go by the Koran and not the crazy Terrorist version) – everybody gets there eventually. It appears to be a necessary step in human evolution. And so will shedding it…

      • sjarrel

        Eye for an eye comes from Hammurabi’s code of law no?

        • mom424

          I am talking about the entire punishing, nasty, vengeful god of the O/T. Eye for an eye describes the mind set of the Old Testament bible.

          • sjarrel

            Yeah sure, I just meant it in a sense to point out that it’s kind of a universal theme.

  • lovesya

    AWESOME! We need more lists like this…good job :)

  • Mon

    “Mene, Mene, Tekel, Parsin”

    That story in the Bible is my second most favorite. My first is the story of Joseph the Dreamer.

  • fendabenda

    This list has just been approved by the Squirrel Council. Thou art a hero, Flamehorse! :D

  • mom424

    Good job Flamehorse. Very good – I can tell; a subject close to your heart. I’ve always said that the Bible is the original soap opera. Begetting going on all over the place, lots of murder and torture and infidelity. Puts Dallas (either incarnation) to shame.

  • Ergo

    The actual Hebrew word for the “lake of fire” is “Gehenna”, which was the name of the rubbish dump near Jerusalem where fires were lit to burn trash. It was also the place where pauper’s bodies were disposed of. It has been theorised that what Revelations actaully meant was not a literal burning for eternity, but that the bodies of the evildoers would be cast into Gehenna to be disposed of like rubbish.

  • Questioner Jones

    Here is my theory of the Christian God. This is the only way I can rationalize ever believing in him. The Old Testament is God attempting to interfere in the ways of man as an immortal. Seeing how pointless and trivial it was because no matter what he did, Man disobeyed him, God enters the world as his own son to live among them and attempt to understand them. As Jesus, he is betrayed, and realizes that “Hey, these people are hopeless. They have it horrible down here. Let me forgive them completely because I sure as heck couldnt be them. My bad.” Then he dies, and we havent heard from him since. All are forgiven, and God will see you in Heaven because it sure as heck is terrible on Earth.

    • ParusMajor

      That was actually a very interesting interpretation.

  • odaltyr

    Interesting list but some items made me cringe a little when the author tried to justify that these events really happens, or that whole explanation that revelation can be about helicopters shooting missiles… please…

    Also :

    “Every culture around the world records a severe flood occurring at about the same time, somewhere around either 5600 BC, or 2900 BC”

    Every culture doesn’t mention a severe flood. And the judeao-christian flood story is obviously inspired by the flood stories from Babylonian myth, which isn’t surprising since the Euphrates and Tigris rivers in the Middle East were extremely unstable and would flood regularly. Obviously, a global flood never happened or we’d see it clearly in earth layers around the world.

    • Arsnl

      “the judeao-christian flood story is obviously inspired by the flood stories from Babylonian myth”
      Do you have proof that it is *obviously* inspired from that?
      And I really doubt the sumerians would create a myth of a giant flood based on regular events. It seems very non-sensical. Your explanation is like saying that the myth of a dragon eating the sun is based on sunsets and not on eclypses.
      In fact the myth might come from a huge flood caused by the black sea.

      • odaltyr

        Ok, well, the Babylonian flood myth is considered, in comparitive mythology circles, to have inspired the Judeao-Christian flood myth. Maybe I shouldn’t have used the term “obviously”, but the comparison is usually accepted in that field.

        Also, there’s nothing nonsensical in my mind to creating a giant flood myth based on regular events. They knew floods could happen, they saw some, so it wasn’t a stretch for them to believe that at one time a huge flood devastated all the known world. But yeah, sure, again I may have not expressed myself correctly. I do believe the flood myth in the Middle East sprung from one, or perhaps 2 or 3 other floods which were particularly devastating in the region, and it was later exaggerated. The story of a global flood was just more believable to people who have seen floods happen.

        • sjarrel

          The flooding of those rivers, which were certainly rather volatile and at times a bit unpredictable (compared to say, the Nile), was the whole reason early civilizations like the Sumerians even existed in the first place. I think they where aware of that. I would agree with Arsnl on this one, in that it would be at least a bit of an odd base for a myth about a devastating flood.

          Also I would be surprised if there weren’t at least a few devastating floods around the world between 5600 BCE and 2900 BCE, as that is rather a long time.

  • Travis

    Great list that illustrates the abrahamic god’s contradictory nature. An all knowing, loving and powerful god that has to torture people to win bets and prove to himself that he is always right. A god who creates imperfect beings yet blames them for their wrong doings. Hiding behind free will yet intervening when he feels? If he was all knowing and powerful why would he have created Humans in the first place knowing majority are damned. Cmon guys use some common sense and stop being afraid to see the contradictions throughout the bible.

  • For the record; I’m an Atheist

    If you wonder why Atheist are often quick to critique Christians it’s because frankly it’s scary to know millions of people loyally serve an entity who is a sadistic dictator, no different than Adolf Hitler. Although it’s understandable how people latch-on to the blissful future tidings and friendly association, is it not troublesome that the Christian support a God whose endless wisdom justifies genocide, infanticide, extreme torture, and mind-control?

    • ParusMajor

      OK, let me try to answer this (I’m an agnostic, I was raised as a Christian).

      You seem to confuse the Old Testament with the New Testament. In the former, God was like you said, genocidal, infanticidal, mind-controlling beast. This is the Jewish God that is still worshipped by the Jews of the world. Now: enter Jesus Christ and the New Testament (which Jews don’t accept). God is now forgiving and definitely not an Adolf Hitler. Jews still believe in their Hitler-like God, because they never accepted Jesus as the Saviour.

      • Arsnl

        Oh you beat me to it.
        I find this guy’s comment really funny. Here we have a religion that allowed an entire community to keep existing for 2000 years even though they didnt have a country of their own. They were persecuted basically because of theor religion, they killed by the millions by Hitler’s regime, and this guy compares their god to Hitler. I’m sure that the Jewish community will be pleased by the comparison.

        And on another note. He is an atheist so he believes that God is make believe, a fairy, imaginary. And like we all know, imaginary beings cannot kill. So this guy compares actions of an imaginary being to the actions of Hitler (who was very much not imaginary and caused a very real genocide).
        I wonder if other atheists will come out and call this guy a dbag and that his comments are in no way better than the comments made by a fundamentalist that shouts out that everybody will burn in hell.

        • I should mention that until the age of 23 I was a Jehovah’s Witness, after much research I concluded the bible is not divinely inspired.

          Actually, many Christian religions, at least the ones who read the bible, believe that the god of both testaments is the same, and never changes. Jesus referenced the Old testament frequently and undoubtedly subjected to that god Jehovah.

          The actions of a race of people in the past are in no way a reflection of others in the present. Everyone is an individual, race is meaningless.

          You seemed to have missed the point of my argument. It’s not that a God actually caused these events, or that the events are real. Rather, that people BELIEVE that god DID and they SUPPORT his actions.

          Any individual who supports a god who kills 42 children for teasing a bald man by means of being mauled by bears needs to re-examine themselves.

          (2 Kings)

          • ParusMajor

            You were a Jehova’s Witness, but you aren’t any more? I would really, really, really like to have a conversation with you. I mean it.

          • Arsnl

            Due to the nature of your comment don’t expect any understanding from me.
            ” until the age of 23 I was a Jehovah’s Witness”
            So you were an idiot until you were 23, and you haven’t changed much?

            “after much research I concluded the bible is not divinely inspired.”
            No sh*t sherlock. Let’s call the Nobel commitee, Einstein here made some research and found the bible aint real. I’m sure many atheists will be relieved. They knew god doesn’t exist but they still thought the Bible is divine.

            “many Christian religions, at least the ones who read the bible”
            I never knew religions could read. I wonder if they’re also a stickler for correct grammar.

            “Everyone is an individual, race is meaningless”
            Are you saying the jewish are a race of people?

            “Any individual who supports a god who kills 42 children … needs to re-examine themselves”
            Are you the type of douche that thinks that teenagers who play counter-strike, doom, GTA will turn out to be violent serial killer, the type of guy who doesnt buy his kids plastic guns and thinks The Godfather is what created the Mafia? Because if so, let me tell you: everybody hates you. They’re FICTIONAL you idiot. Nobody dies if you read the bible. If i open a history book no seas of blood will come out of it and if 14 year old girls like Twilight that doesn’t mean they want to eat your face.

        • odaltyr

          Your second paragraph is kind of dishonest.

          Yes, he doesn’t believe in God, but that doesn’t mean he can’t compare the stories of the “fictional” character to a real-life dictator, or mafia boss as some atheists like to compare him to. He’s just pointing out that its “worrying” that a homicidal, genocidal, jealous, bipolar maniac God is praised by billions. I can say that a fictional serial killer in a movie is like Jack the Ripper, and I don’t need to believe that the actions of the fictional character are true to make the comparison.

          • excellent point, thanks for your support.

          • Arsnl

            “God is praised by billions”
            Included by the ones persecuted by Hitler. And that God was mainly the reason those people were persecuted and most of those people still reunite at synagogues to remember those events. And he compared that God to Hitler the main architect of the genocide. I find his remark highly offensive to everybody. But of course you as a voter of the FN, a party who suported ancient collabos, I dont expect you to understand the seriousness of his comment.

          • odaltyr

            Arsnl, again, you’re acting like an idiot.

            First off, many agnostic atheist Jews criticize the God concept in the same way and agree. Actually, a huge proportion of Jews aren’t believers. Also, I didn’t go into the Hitler comparison, but even if I did, what you’re doing is jumping in the bandwagon of false outrage. You’re the typical guy who acts offended on behalf of other people, while those other people don’t care. Chill out.

            “But of course you as a voter of the FN, a party who suported ancient collabos, I dont expect you to understand the seriousness of his comment”

            Wow… The FN also has and had many people of the resistance in its ranks, and most of the most notable collabos were leftists, yet you don’t see me parading around pointing it out. You’re obsessed. Not me.

            Also, I’ve criticized all religions many times here, including Christianity, and I’m an outspoken atheist. Does that not surprise you? Doesn’t that contradict the usual stereotypical view of the FN being all catholics or something? Or do you only chose the stereotypes that suit you at one given time?

          • Arsnl

            “many agnostic atheist Jews criticize the God concept”
            Citation needed.
            “a huge proportion of Jews aren’t believers”
            Citation needed.
            “while those other people don’t care.”
            Citation needed.
            And again you don’t know me. I’m not a french bobo.

            And this is the very attitude i criticise. We want to banalise comparisons with Hitler, say the Jewish arent even offended about comparing the Jewish God with Hitler, that its no biggie. It is an attitude that the extreme right has championed. We start comparing everybody with Nazis, Hitler, Stalin, Petain, that the acts that these people did become less serious. And this comparison goes so far, that we can even compare the Jewish God to Hitler. But no. Thats not fine and thats no normal. The Jewish still get persecuted for their connections and their god (Merah), the rromas got thrown out of France.
            “notable collabos were leftists”
            So was Jean Moulin and Raymond Aubrac. And collabos were 2 of the 3 people who created the FN.
            “stereotypical view of the FN being all catholics”
            No. The Catholic Chuch and the FN have very different views. On the rroma community for example. The FN would very gladly continue to remove the rromas from France, but the Catholic Church was the single institution that reacted, the left was quite silent.
            And the voter for FN has become a frustrated french, fearing outsourcing, barely getting his SMIC, somewhat irrational and afraid of “multiculturalism” scared and feeling left behind. I remember an interview with a guy from Marion Le Pen’s circumscription: “ouais, y a trop de roumains”. How many romanians are there in Vaucluse? And i’ve seen that attitude with you. You think the media is out to get you, and i still remember your rather pathetic comment a few weeks back about how you know me, im in the media, in your family at your job, you know how i think how ill reply. Etc etc etc. You’re funny :-)

          • odaltyr

            “Citation needed. ”

            Really? You can’t think of any atheist/secular Jew who has criticized Yaweh? I can think of many, but I guess I know about the works of more famous Jews than you do.

            I see that when I told you I knew you it hurt your little feelings. But I’ll confirm, I do know you. As I said before, there’s nothing you could possibly teach me. You don’t need to give me your opinion on any subject, I know it in advance. All I need to think of is “how would a leftist pseudohumanist bisounours politically correct zealot answer?” and then I’ll stamp your name on it. It’s not a stretch, really, so don’t worry, I don’t take any credit for it. :D

            Anyway, you contradict yourself. You talk about how awful it is to ba-nalyse Hitler or Nazism by making hasty comparisons, but you’ve been ba-nalyzing it from the start by ceaselessly comparing the FN and all to Nazism. It doesn’t get more ba-nalyzing than that! Leftists always do that, it’s hilariously hypocritical. Everyone who isn’t a leftist is eventually called a nazi by you guys, and then you parade around saying they’re the ones ban-alyzing?

            I rest my f-ucking case, hypocrite.

          • sjarrel

            Ah, politics, the new religion.

        • Arsni, maybe you can help me by clarifying your general stance and beliefs. I’m guessing you’re Jewish or practice Judaism and I have offended you by stating facts about the similarities between the actions/personality of Hitler and Yahweh.

          In response to your later post, the reason why I remained a JW until the age 23 is because it is a “well-meaning” yet highly repressive organization. From an early age I was brainwashed to believe and never question the bible at the cost of being dis-fellowshipped. Although I never really believed, it’s only recently that I’ve had the courage to come out as an Atheist, henceforth losing all of my family and friends.

          A bit of friendly advice. To be taken seriously in a debate, refrain from childish name-calling, and exploiting semantics and mannerisms. Only the gullible will be taken by such tactics.

          • Arsnl

            “friendly advice”
            Coming from you, I’d pass.

            “To be taken seriously in a debate”
            If you want a serious debate, learn to not make comparisons that disqualify you from the get go.

      • Hey, you said you’d like to have a conversation, I’m down for that. Not sure how I can contact you however. Email me at [email protected].

        looking forward to hearing from you.

        • ^^^^ParusMajor

          • sjarrel

            I would say that if you are at the point where you believe in a god that can and will do all those things, you would have a lot of reason to please the guy. If the old testament was all about god just watching Lost over and over again, trying to figure out what the deal is with the smoke monster, why would anybody bother paying attention to him?

          • ParusMajor

            Niin, sjarrel. Olet varmaan tämän wanhan vitsin kuullut:

            “Jumala on kuollut”. -Friedrich Nietzsche, 1889
            “Nietzsche on kuollut” -Jumala, 1900

          • ParusMajor

            …and I might as well translate dat, just in case you don’t understand Ukrainian:

            “God is dead”. – Nietzsche, 1889.
            “Nietzsche is dead”. -God, 1900.

          • sjarrel

            Don’t understand a word of Ukrainian, but I got that one.

      • Canadianguy

        …And American Evangelical Christians have been waiting for the end of the world since the 1800’s.

        Is 2012 it? If they really believed it, why aren’t any of them selling all their belongings and donating the profits to charity? After all, it won’t matter next year, right? ;)

        • Nuckztar

          The whole end of the world panic for 2012 is based on the end of the Mayan calender. Therefore I doubt any “Evangelical Christians” would be selling their belongings due to the fact that a “pagan” tribe’s calender ends on said year.

          • Canadianguy

            Tell that to the Evangelical Christians who are keeping their fingers crossed.

            PS. What’s most funny about this is that when a calendar round ends, a new one starts. For example, the Gregorian calendar repeats every 146,097 days.

  • Getekid

    Awesome, the “Lake of Fire” MUST be made into a movie!! It will be epic!! (Of course the second death will be the sequel) !!
    No seriously, it could rival Lord of the Rings!!!

  • Tronco01

    Excellent list. About hell, there is a place where people goes now before the judgement day, according to Jesus. It is called Hades. Read the story o Lazarus and the rich. The lake of fire is the real final place where all bad souls will be sent after God judges all the prople that has ever lived, demons and more: notice he will throw Hades there, too.

    • ParusMajor

      Hades? O really? I thought the place where ppl go to die was called Florida.

  • Romina

    This is so depressing.

  • undaunted warrior 1

    Well researhed – not an easy topic to write about, knowing that you will take some flak, from a few comments posted.

    Well done Flame.

  • just_plain_name

    Blessed be Jesus, who died for your sins.

    • Canadianguy

      You sins?

    • Canadianguy

      Correction: Your sins?

    • An Atheist

      Mate if you wanna be taken seriously u should change that ‘your sins’ thing cause ur making urself look like ur a freaking saint or something

    • I never asked him to. Funny how he died for a concept that he/his dad made up to begin with then holds it against us if we choose to ignore it. Yet another reason I believe man made up the entire story.

      • Canadianguy

        Frankly, I’m not convinced that Jesus existed. What if he was the protagonist in a religious fable?

        • sjarrel

          Am I taking crazy pills or did you just say that you think it’s a made up story to comment on somebody who said she thinks its a made up story? See, this is why I don’t think you got my point earlier and why it looks to me like your arguing about superficial points.

          • Canadianguy

            I don’t know what pills you’re on, nor am I interested in knowing.

            I was agreeing with her. I guess the concept is foreign to you.

          • sjarrel

            I suppose I was reaching a bit there, I thought you’d missed her point in the same way I felt like you missed my point earlier. My mistake.

  • Andrea

    How about not inserting your opinions into a fact-based article and let the story speak for itself?

    I’d love to see an article about scary parts in the Quran. But you’d be too scared.

  • major harris

    i go to church and bible study. i am more of faith and spirituality, not religious. now that being clear, even i have a big problem with the story of job. i have tried to ask my pastors about this and all i usually get is don’t question god. what did job’s wife and children do to deserve death? they were caught between a bet! that is wrong! and the author missed something. god granted job a NEW wife and kids to replace those who were killed in the bet.

    also, lot had sex with his daughters after the cities were bombed by god. they bible SAYS that the daughters got daddy drunk and took advantage of him. really? after he offered them up to be gang raped by the mob out side his house? even back then, a father abusing his kids was wrong. and women were even more property of men than in some places today. lot got drunk, raped them, and blamed it on his daughters. who were the people going to believe? the head of the family or two lowly daughters?

  • polishkingski


  • PT2

    I really like this list, just because of it’s attempt to explain events of the Bible without trying to argue a Christian/aethist point throughout. As someone who refuses to be labelled a Christian or an atheist/agnostic (I have no position because I simply do not care), too often people try to describe the Bible and ultimately take a side, so it is refreshing to read a neutral religious item for the sole purpose that it is INTERESTING. This is well researched and well written and I’d love to see a follow up with the Koran.

    • sjarrel

      I think that, as always, Flamehorse clearly takes sides in that it’s quite obvious he’s a theist.

  • Harooo

    It must be an interesting existence to measure your worth against the words of an ancient Bronze age science fiction novel.

  • Doc

    Except the bible is a fictional book written by men to keep other men in line. Keep drinking the kool aid.

    • ParusMajor

      What is your point? Of course the Bible is a fictional book written by some men who had the ability to write. It doesn’t mean that John the Baptist, Jesus, Judas, Paul and the rest of the guys were fictional, though. Their lives have been documented by the Romans.

      • An Atheist

        Nobody said they didn’t exist as regular people like you and me but who’s to say that the entore son of God wasn’t just some elaborate story to try getting people to renounce “their heathen ways” and get them to believe in “the one true God” (much like the Catholic Church back when people actually gave a rat’s ass about what they where blabbering if u ask me)

        • DuckMySick

          But wait… aren’t John, Paul, George and Ringo fictional, at least? Or did they actually exist? Get outta here, next you’ll be claiming that Elvis was a real person, too!

  • Cliff

    Well, Flamehorse’s last list was lackluster so it’s only natural that he would follow it up with a list on the Bible for controversy’s sake. I only had to read the title to know who wrote it. Ridiculously predictable.

  • MikeFeelingFine

    I do not recall there being anything about being rapture at all. Why would it be catholic people who are raptured anyways? I have heard of many good people who are not catholic, in fact many are better then the catholic people I do know. If people are indeed raptured, then it can’t be that many since many people wouldn’t qualify for such an honor. I believe if something like the end does happen, everyone will have to suffer it all…its just part of the process hard to move on into the next life without some suffering before you die in this life.

    • Missy

      The Rapture was made up by Cotton Mather and that Puritan lot, to put the fear of God into the people, and make them come to Church.

  • Coots

    So just because I a

  • An Atheist

    Top 10 reasons God isn’t the merciful deity we were taught it was. At this point considering all the moments listed above make God look no better than Satan. Anyways in my opinion all who believe in God are too weak to believe in their own forces and take responsibility for their own actions.

    • ParusMajor

      That’s what a satanist would say (and I’m not saying it’s necessarily wrong). One of the best tenets of satanism is this:

      Walk your own path without disturbing anyone. If someone disturbs you, ask him to stop. If he doesn’t stop, destroy him. (Anton LaVey)

      Couldn’t have said it better myself.

      • An Atheist

        Ok let me see if I understand: what what was that I said that made u think of a satanist? The fact that all this things stated in the list make God look like a crazy mass murderer or the fact that people should start taking their lives into their own hands and not rely upon a higher being that has not provided a single proof that it exists (though if it is omnipotent it couldn’t be that hard to make a freaking appearance once in a while or something to let us know it’s there)?Please enlighten me.

        • sjarrel

          Maybe the god no better than satan bit?

        • ParusMajor

          Did you take it as an insult that I compared your opinions to a satanist’s? I didn’t mean it that way at all, some of my best friends are satanists. And I’m not even joking.

          • An Atheist

            Ok so maybe the God – Satan thing would be interpreted that way (though by no means am I a satanist) but never thought that considering that a man shouldn’t put his life in an imaginary friend’s hands is considered a satanist’s point of view.

  • hba


  • ConstableDubs

    What about Samson? He’s the original suicide bomber. He kills himself and a bunch of pagans by collapsing a pagan temple on top of all of them.

  • rono

    next list about koran?

  • philip

    It’s nice to see it put together like this. It clarifies the graveness of the illness in question.

  • The Other Darren

    youre kidding, right?…all this cool story telling is in the bible?…damn i may just have to pick it up and read….

    • Veronica

      I totally agree!! When I tried to read it I missed all the good parts apparently and almost bored myself to death!

  • Alan

    Awesome list.

    (“Dontreadthecomments, Dontreadthecomments, Dontreadthecomments”)

  • ZTH

    Interesting list, but the creator had to assume the comments would come down to a religious debate which (in my opinion) ruins the chance of intelligent discussion. But hey, at least it isn’t Ryan Thomas’s recitation of wiki.

  • Jesus Christ Almighty God in Heaven

    Here comes Flamehorse with another shitty list. He probably composed this one just to piss people off.

  • darkknight9761

    As an Atheist, and a surviving Roman Catholic, I am familiar with all of these stories. The Old Testament shows a vengeful, jealous god. The New Testament show, with the teachings of Christ, a forgiving and loving god. It is interesting to know that the Jew’s version of the Old Testament differs very much from the Christian’s version of the Old Testament. Then you have the King Jame’s version of the Bible. It goes on and on. Anyway, very good list. I enjoyed it and I think I’d like to share on Facebook. “Two Thumbs Up!”

    • GrammerNazi’sWife

      King James’. There hasn’t been a King Jame.

  • Ere

    Stupid list, stupid writing, stupid content.

    Bible shit is such a waste of space.

  • LuvsHorror

    If god was really as explained in the old testament, then I would rather cease to exist when I die. I cannot worship something so egotistical and cruel.

  • My bottom line: Anyone who believes these stories are factually true needs help in the worst way (most violate the laws of science as we know it) AND anyone who worships a being who did these things or commanded these things be done needs help because he is not worthy of praise or worship. He should be condemned as a monster.

    Believe it if you so choose… but I will not… not now, not ever.

    • ohIcanseetheHEY!

      “Will you condemn even God just to put yourself in the right?”

      –Job 40:8.

      • The bible was written by man to justify his belief in a being that did not exist. Your argument is invalid.

        • inconspicuousdetective

          valid science was that the earth was flat once. stop acting self-righteous just because you can. you’re argument will be invalid in a few years when science discovers it was wrong about what it said before. not that science is wrong, but it’s all about theories.

          • Nestea80

            So you’re saying that maybe in the future, there is a chance science can prove that donkeys can talk?

          • sjarrel

            You don’t really seem to get science..
            The fact that it’s fallible is kind of the point, and a key difference with say, religion.

            But these asinine arguments are pointless from the get go, OP, nobody is impressed by your Atheism.

          • inconspicuousdetective

            @Nestea80 – i’m saying that, maybe in the future, we could better understand what donkeys want thanks to science, and that what we previously thought might be wrong.

            @sjarrel – oh, i do seem to get science. you really don’t seem to get my point. it’s that science is fallible, but it’s fact to people right now and they ignore the fallible points which in the future turn out to be wrong (or right. it’s all about proving the theory). take the earth is flat for example, at the time that was science. the counter argument to it at the time? “Shut up! If you try to sail around the flat earth you’ll fall off the edge!”

            point being people defend something yet to be proven, or put faith in science which is still being validated, or proven, but the leading theory is available and it’s being taken as stone cold fact despite there being other theories or a few holes in it. that’s my point.

            as for religion, it’s to be taken as fact and it’s full of metaphors and it’s at times extremely specific, and at times vague. trying to argue about it is taking the same thing someone else is reading and bending it to suit your perspective. and thanks for throwing in the entire point of what the post was about in the first place there at the end. ;)

          • The thing about science is that it never said it was perfect. No scientist ever said that. Scientists are happy when their research fails because at least they can rule out that which they were testing and move on. Further, when a scientist said the world was round, he was persecuted far worse by the church than any religious people were at the time.

            Unlike religion and its associated texts, science changes its mind all the time as new data is found and tested and either ruled out or deemed to change what we found before. That’s the nature of science.

            So saying science changes its mind isn’t a slam… it’s merely a fact.

            And the word “theory” as defined by use in science is “a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain natural phenomena,” not “just a guess.” The great thing about words is that they can have multiple meanings and be used differently depending on the context. :-) It’s a common error among believers and Republicans.

          • inconspicuousdetective

            i’m sure somewhere along the lines, misguided science has claimed perfection only to be challenged by more science and proven wrong. and i wouldn’t say scientists are happy when their research fails, they very well might be disapointed, for example, a hypothetical cure for cancer turns out to only appear to work, but actually do nothing. (horribly worded, i know, but i think you get the point. if not i’ll try again)

            speaking of errors, atheists often make two big ones….they make very general assumptions (that i intended science changing to be some kind of slam or something…i thought it was obvious and was pretty blunt in pointing it out, which you did again…so thanks i guess) and the other is arrogance. a sense that they (not all but an overwhelming majority) of atheists tend to throw definitions out there to make a point, or use very formal language to give an air of intelligence to what they’re saying….the point is while i appreciate the definition of theory as used by science, the whole context thing you mentioned made it irrelevant. we’re using the same context, and it’s still a guess. plausible and acceptable don’t mean fact. the theories science comes up with are guesses until data backs them up, because the data is the fact. so, when science proves something, it becomes fact not theory. they teach this in grade school, you know how things work up to their end in science. the scientific method and all.

            anyway, i think you more than know you’re stuff. but the whole “you’re a christian? you’re an idiot and because of that i’m superior.” attitude puts me off.

          • sjarrel: Not out to impress anyone. Just stating my POV, like everyone else here. Like it. Don’t like it. Makes no nevermind to me.

            Have a great day!

          • Canadianguy

            ” it’s that science is fallible, but it’s fact to people right now and they ignore the fallible points which in the future turn out to be wrong (or right. it’s all about proving the theory). take the earth is flat for example, at the time that was science”

            Ironically, you seem oblivious to the fact that people used to believe that Earth is flat and square because the Bible mentions “the four corners of the Earth”.

            Yes, science will always fallible when it’s based on religion because religion is not based on fact.

          • Canadianguy

            I love typos.

          • Canadianguy

            “speaking of errors, atheists often make two big ones….they make very general assumptions (that i intended science changing to be some kind of slam or something…i thought it was obvious and was pretty blunt in pointing it out, which you did again…so thanks i guess) and the other is arrogance. ”

            Arrogance, you say…And one of the many errors people do is using personal attacks instead of arguing a point logically.

          • inconspicuousdetective

            well, if i seem oblivious i’m sorry. rose went ahead and pointed that out before (in a sense) saying that the church punished the scientists who spoke out more harshly than anyone, just like they did with the whole earth at the center of the universe thing. and i guess you’re going to make me find another example of science being wrong? this one’s a long shot but the coelocanth was supposed to be extinct. religion played no part in that and science was wrong. fact was overturned and now it’s just another living animal. so maybe my example was bad, sorry for that. but hopefully this is better.

            and about the arrogance thing, or not “arguing” (which we weren’t doing) i did discuss this logically. i saved the insult for the end, just like she did (a very subtle one aimed at theists, but i guess you’re the oblivious one…or it might seem we both are).

    • An Atheist

      I couldn’t agree more with you. More, I would like to say that i don’t understand the people that for example if they had a surgery and didn’t go well they blame it all on the doctor but when the surgery goes well and the surgery fixed what needed fixing they all go Praised be the Lord or bullshit like that instead of thanking the doctors that performed the surgery.

      • inconspicuousdetective

        i think in that senario it’s more about blurting out appreciation you’re alive than thanking anyone. the surgeons get their due thank yous, i’m sure. i agree with you’re point though, it was the doctors not the hands of god.

        • sjarrel

          This is a reply to your earlier post just above, just wanted to tell you that now that you’ve explained yourself about getting science, I feel even more strongly that you don’t.

          • inconspicuousdetective


          • inconspicuousdetective

            you’re just out for an argument, aren’t you? *sigh* i guess i don’t get science. i’m sorry i’ve lowered the iq here.

  • we

    ya true

  • we


  • khulan1443

    Stuff gets lost in translation and powerful people probably tampered with it quite a lot. I do believe in the essene religion because they have translated the pure form of the earliest scriptures that were found.

  • Nestea80

    There’s a talking donkey in the Bible. For me, that was enough to indicate that this book is fiction. I thought that would be obvious to most people.

    And that’s just ONE example.

    • ParusMajor

      Don’t you know what a metaphor is? Do you take everything you read literally? The Bible is full of metaphors and poetry. Did you expect it to be the f*ing nine o’clock news or what?

      • Canadianguy

        Many Christians read the Bible literally, unfortunately.

  • Gill Avila

    If I was Job I wouldn’t have wanted my family replaced–I would’ve wanted them RESTORED!

    • GetAJob

      I concur.

  • But wanting it to be true makes it more fun!

  • nimi

    100% agree with you!

  • Daniel

    There are some things like the 10 plagues which make sense. But more often than not there are arguments that don’t make sense. An example of this is the flood of Noah. Yes they may have been some flooding, but it is not actually possible to flood over mountains especially mount everest.
    The flood came from rain but where did that rain come from? There is only a certain amount of moisture in the world that can be rain. Only way this could happen is if the ice caps melted instantly and somehow re-froze… Which is imposible by the way… Alternately this could happen by a massive ice meteor flying in such an angle is gets caught in gravity and melts up but never hits the earth for 40 days. But that extra moisture would still remain today.

    Also the revelations. Keeping Satan in an abyss for 1000 years. If god knows the future (and he does because he shares the visions if revelations). Why will be even bother waiting 1000 years? Why by just get rid of him now?

    God is an all powerful being but the bie often makes him sound like a lazy old man who will get to it when he gets to it.

    NOTE: I am catholic and I do believe. But some things just can’t be possible and others just don’t make sense. You have to take things with a grain of salt, or you will end up giving all your money away trying to help a Nigerian prince who emailed you…

  • Kennoth

    This would have been a nice and interesting list if not for the author’s desire to trying to constantly rationalize things in the work of fiction, and trying to offer scientific explanations behind them, which is awfully painful to read.

    Pointing out interesting stories from the Bible? Fine. But half your text is trying to give them sense when they’re not supposed to have sense, and trying to offer plausible scientific evidence. How do you offer such to a fictious stories? It is as if I were to argue that Cthulhu actually existed and Lovecraft was actually a mysterious prophet that lived for a thousand years. Get a grip man.

    • The bible is NOT fictitious. Scientific evidence provided in the list proves it. Though many people today believe that if there is a scientific explanation behind an incident , it instantly loses value. Not so with the Bible, it only emphasizes that God DID do those things, that those things really DID happen, and that HE is able to do them, either by the use of nature and precise timing, or by manipulating them by His sovereign authority. The bible is the only book that is written by different people of different age groups, professions, locations, cultures , languages but does not contain contradictions. So YOU get a grip. Don’t comment anything about something you know nothing about.

      • Oh yes, the “God is real, the bible says so,” argument. The bible contradicts itself all over the place. These stories listed above and MANY more show your god to be a vindictive killing machine to will wipe out humanity because we succumb to the very base desires he instilled in us to begin with.

        Also, please keep in mind that nonbelievers are, by and large, better read on your bible than most believers. In my own experience, I’ve come across very devout believers who have yet to read the bible cover to cover, preferring to just parrot the sermon they heard on Sunday.

        Try reading the bible with a nonblinded eye. You’ll be amazed at what you find there.

      • Kennoth

        Wow. Where to begin?

        Alright. First and foremost: exactly what scientific evidence is present on this list? Nothing but pure speculation and pseudo-science combined with “probably”, “perhaps”, “maybe”. Here is an excerpt of one such “scientific explanations”:

        “God may have simply thought the explosion out of thin air, and it may have been the same power as a nuclear explosion, thus the mushroom cloud that would have looked like smoke from a furnace. Or, as he always seems to do, God may abide by his own laws of nature, leaving perpetual room for argument over his existence.”

        May have, could have. I expect my lists to be written in a neutral, nonbiased tone. And this ain’t it. I am *not* here to waste my time on bashing god or believers or whatever. I don’t bother with that s.hit. What I do bother with, and does bother me, is trying to rationalize every single think in Bible, which even most Christians don’t do as they are aware of its metaphorical nature, and trying to explain every single of these moments listed with scientific and/or historic “facts” or speculation. That’s what irks me. List by itself, if we ignore the latter, is perfectly fine and entertaining, and stories and passages selected were fun to read.

        Now, “hough many people today believe that if there is a scientific explanation behind an incident , it instantly loses value” – are you for real? It’s exactly the other way around. If you can scientifically explain something without a fraction of a doubt, THEN, and only then, does it increase in its actual value both for researchers and scientists, and for the general public. Your reply to me is nothing but one long, not well thought out and disorganized rant without any actual statements. I’m probably ill-fated to argue with someone who’s main argument is “bible cannot be fictious because God really did to those things”. And if I ask for any shred of evidence regarding that I will probably get another reply in the vein of “because it is so”. Do you now realize how retarded your reply actually is?

        “The bible is the only book that is written by different people of different age groups, professions, locations, cultures , languages but does not contain contradictions” – again, juvenile, immature and uneducated rant (also the first letter of your holy book should be capitalized). Even the hardiest of believers will tell you that Bible is so full of contradictions. It’s practically crawling with them. And one of the reasons behind it IS because it was written by so many different people. Also, the only book? Looks like I know far more about the subject matter than yourself, so please refrain yourself from making another reply because you’re an incredibly ignorant person. Research, and be careful about what comes out of your mouth, and if you can stand behind it.

      • ChristineM

        1) We have exactly zero scientific evidence supporting the existence of a god, or other supernatural, being.
        2) The supernatural, and many natural, stories in the Bible are in direct contradiction to science, such as the Genesis which paints an inaccurate understanding of the rise of life; most notably, that not all species coexisted at the same time (there have been 5 extinction events), that humans do not come solely from two individuals (our genome says otherwise), that light did not preexist the solar system, that the physiological and anatomical structure of species contradicts the perception that carnivores could have survived on a herbivores diet in Eden, etc.
        3) The Bible DOES contain contradictions; 462 of them to be precise. And those are just self-contradictions, not including scientific and other evidence based ones

        and ftr, I have read the entire Bible; it didn’t take long for me to leave Christianity after doing so. Quite possible one of those most demented books I have ever read, and I read Mein Kampf and 120 Days of Sodom, is that says anything

      • There is no scientific evidence presented in this list.

        I do not believe that religion and science are necessarily mutually exclusive but the former seems to almost completely lacks the latter in this present day.

        In other words, religion seems to me to make about as much sense as throwing a snooker ball and having it ghost through a wall. It does not compute.

        Also, I think there is a strong possibility that you are trolling.

        The only reason I say this is because your statements are so emphatically one-sided and confrontational.

        I’d remind you that Christianity (I used to count myself among them) teaches tolerance and the acceptance of other people. Mind you, it also teaches that every other religion is wrong, so what the hey.

        The bible did get one thing right:

        people, in general, are selfish, often malicious and pathological liars.

        I wouldn’t trust any religion based on the teachings or writings of any human, and nor should you.

        But of course, one is free to choose ones own path, but if one does, I’d ask that one keeps one’s aggressive marketing schpiel out of my face, and off my internet please.

  • God i loving, but HE is also Just. He punishes sin, and rewards faithfulness.. ALL the things mentioned in this list reveal the might of God. He is not sadistic as is oft portrayed by unbelievers. As to Job’s story, God allowed it to happen, not to gratify Himself, or to beat Satan,the former being a ridiculous comment , the former He could do with His eyes closed. I believe it was an opportunity for Job to declare his faithfulness to God. We are all tempted, the idea is to NOT succumb. Temptation is the perfect opportunity to display strength in God. Like how one can only be brave if you are afraid. And I believe in the end, when Job goes to heaven, He is rewarded with a crown, the one for those who suffered for the sake of God. God could have just told Satan the outcome and have done with it. But for Job it would be an opportunity lost. We may not understand what is currently going on, but God is in control. IF you are one of His children He will never forsake you

  • There are things that cannot be explained by human logic or cannot be breached by the extent of human intelligence. ISAIAH 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways declares the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts higher than your thoughts. He has a plan. We are just living in the in-between. We cannot fathom His ways because we do not have to. but take ROMANS 8:28… You have to be more than catholic to grow. Try being CHRISTIAN instead.

    • ParusMajor

      OK, let me ask you this (you’ve probably been asked this question before, but I’ll ask it anyway). If God is the almighty powerful being, why does he let Satan exist? If you believe that God exists, you must also believe that Satan exists as well. Why doesn’t God destroy Satan? He should be able to do that, right?

    • Sweetie… your brainwashing is showing here… Catholics ARE Christian. To say otherwise is just ignorant (as in uneducated, not stupid). They believe that Jesus died for their sins. They pray to God. They have many rituals that are not understood by the evangelicals and fundies, but that does not make them any less Christian. Remember… Catholicism was the original religion and was not differentiated until Martin Luther broke off to form the Lutheran church.

      Please, do some reading and research away from your bible and church for awhile. Learn about other religions from nonbiased books and publications. You’ll have a richer fund of knowledge that way.

      • Mr. Bean

        Would shut up you fat nasty cu.nt? As long as she is happy believing what she wants, at the end of her life will all this stuff matter? You are an atheist, you believe that you have one life to live, yet you still fight with people trying to get them to see that life has no meaning and everything was an accident. Shouldn’t you be living in the moment and letting people live and believe the way they choose because you want everyone to be happy in this life because this is the only one we have. You’re just miserable and looking for a fight to pick, and I hate atheists like you because you’re 10 times worse than any Christians because you speak of freedom and happiness and talk about being oppressed by Christians but you’re the one trying to oppress them. Do you know why Christians will argue and debate with people? Because they truly believe that at the end of the argument you will actually benefit and they are helping you, but atheists argue just to strip away everything that has given Christians happiness and hope and something to believe in.

        I’m an atheist and when a decent Christian takes the time out of his or her day to try to help me, I respect them for it. I will never be able to believe what they do, but I’m happy they have found something to believe in and they put themselves through nasty arguments with crazy atheists like you just to try to help you when they don’t have to. Actually, you know what? I don’t want to be called an atheist or a Christian, I just hate people like you and they exist on both sides of the argument so I don’t want to be associated with either. You have tainted both beliefs and think you’re cool for being atheist and constantly shove it in peoples faces and for some odd reason want everyone to know it. Don’t be so bitter towards religion.

    • Oh.. and the bible? The version you cherish has been edited largely by Catholics for generations.

      • ParusMajor

        You talking to me, rlrose328 (or to wilkawaii)? Because I’m not a Catholic and never have been. I used to be Lutheran, but I’m not even that any more. I don’t pray to any god or man. If I want to have e.g. a n a l s e x with my girlfriend, that’s what I’ll do, and I don’t feel any shame or remorse about it. A man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do. Sic transit gloria mundi. And Gloria’s sister, too.

        • Not you, but the last few sentences of wilkawaii regarding Catholics. I, too, was raised Lutheran. :-)

          • You’re mean

            Go to the ant, you sluggard; consider its ways and be wise!

            –Proverbs 6:6

            (Gluttony is a sin.)

          • ANL

            You’re mean…how do u know she doesnt have a thyroid disorder…or a condition that makes her how she is…you preach that “gluttony” is a sin…but you dont know what “gluttony” is…its just not eating too much…its overendulging in general…how christian can you be when u pass judgement on others…false christian!!!

          • Krispy Creme

            Yuck! Go eat until you die you fat b!tch. You disgust me you slob. You can’t even practice a tiny bit of self control not to stuff your face with a pizza and cake. How can you expect people to respect you when you have no respect for your own body. Btw, how do fat people wipe their butts?

  • Nuckztar

    I dont understand why people have to turn this list into a God vs no god debate. No one here is going to change their minds because of one comment made for or against the existence of a higher being. One should come to this decision on their own, through their life experiences. We don’t know if there is a higher being or if there isn’t. And while I do believe this list was written to start a debate (which really ticks me off) I think the comments should remain either critical or appreciative of the list. That is all… Thank you.

  • tjh

    It’s a good thing none of this actually really happened then hey?!
    I guess we can all breathe a sigh of relief.

  • Akiva

    Herod the great in the book of Matthew is not the same Herod in the book of Acts. The Herod in the book of Matthew dies before Jesus reaches adulthood. this Herod ruled from around 37 BC until his death in 1 BC. This is the HEROD who was on the scene at the time of the birth of Jesus. ARCHELAUS was the eldest son of Herod the Great. This Herod ruled after his father died and is only mentioned once in the biblical account. In the gospel of Matthew it is recorded that after Joseph had been told that Herod was dead and that he could return home he learned that Archelaus was now ruling over Judea and was afraid. Joseph was warned in a dream not to return to Judea, and so he settled his family in Galilee. So Jesus was born in Bethlehem but grew up in Galilee.

    HEROD ANTIPAS was married to the daughter of King Aretas of Arabia: then took Herodias, his half brothers wife, as his own. John the Baptist called upon Herod Antipas to repent of this sinful act. This resulted in the arrest of John the Baptist, and finally his beheading. Herod Antipas was the one that Pontius Pilot sent Jesus to see when he learned that Jesus was from Nazareth, which was in the region that Herod Antipas ruled. Herod Antipas ruled until around 40 AD. this Herod died in Spain after being exiled by caligula.
    Herod Agrippa I, also called the Great, was a grandson of Herod the Great. This was the Herod who had James behead and imprisoned Paul. He is also the one eaten up by worms, he gave up the ghost.” He died at Cæsarea during a grand public festival; when the people having heard him speak cried out, “It is the voice of a god and not of a man”, his heart was elated, and “an angel of the Lord struck him, because he had not given the honour to God”
    The last Herod Agrippa II was the one that Paul almost “persuaded to become a Christian” He died, childless, at the age of seventy and was the last of the house of the Herods.

  • AND this is a God worthy of worship? So petty as to make a bet with Satan and torture a man to test his belief? Not my God, maybe the Catholic Church can decide for the multitude what they should believe….BUT the Catholic Church can kiss my A/S/S!!!!!!!!

  • Advent


  • cpjt

    Someone really should re-write all of the bibles stories in an easier to understand way and release them under a different name i.e. take all the stories and change them so they seem like a modern book, without telling people where the stories come from and see how long it takes people to recognise the story and see the public reception to the stories. And also see how many people would be willing to take that book as stone cold fact, without knowing it was essentially the bible, re-written.

  • Deb

    I think the most terrifying thing is when Jesus said that at the end of times, when people realize who he is and say “Lord, Lord” . . and he tells them, “sorry I didn’t know you”. It will be too late for anyone who hasn’t accepted Jesus as their Lord and they will pay for it eternally.

  • A E

    Wasn’t sure what to expect from this list, but I must say you did a pretty good job of approaching the subject with a fairly unbiased position. My only criticism could come from #6. I dislike when people try to explain prophecies, especially when it’s that much of a stretch. Just because it sounds crazy doesn’t mean we can just pretend he was seeing a helicopter.

  • Well this list has its ups and downs.

    Its always interesting to read about the fancy parts of the bible.

    But the interpretation of the author were almost senseless. What was he describing in #6? Some sort of invasion of America? A biblical metaphor for helicopter gunships? I couldn’t think of anything more spurious. Most ridiculous thing I’ve read today.

    Stick to reporting and leave the analysis to somebody a little more grown up I’d say. I couldn’t even get a clear impression whether the author was pro-or-anti-bible…

    Ooh, also:

    Re #1

    New Jerusalem is where most people will go who are judged to be ok, but new jerusalem is not heaven.

    According to this book, only 144,000 people get to go to heaven, 12000 each from 12 tribes. The rest of us get to live in this new city, which is the shape of a cube, 1400 miles to a side, of solid gold.

  • Deb

    I don’t think that is quite true. They took great pains to keep the bible exactly as it was written. When the Dead Sea Scrolls were found they were amazed that it was word for word of the bible with very few changes.

  • ANL

    dont you just hate how the bible portrays God as a psychopath???? no wonder so many are athiests today. i actually know more atheists than christians..

  • chala

    If everything happens according to god’s will, how come the people become sinful? It doesn’ make any sense. Also god and satan are supposed to be eternal enemies, so how is it possible for them to make bets? If god is a powerful, laws of physics and nature abiding creature, how is it so that satan does all that trouble for him? It’s just mind-puzzling that people are still taking that stories as a literate truth, maybe the myth of heaven just gives them a reason to live. Who knows..

  • SoupMastah Delux

    ok first off im not even gunna say if im believer or not, we’re all human and breathe the same air. and do you honestly think that calling someone crazy for believing or if somebodies gunna go to hell for not believing is going to help your argument? Its just turning them away from the message your trying to get at. Everybody is entitled to their own beliefs and unfortunately there are those who try to impose these beliefs on others or criticize them on it instead of trying to co-adapt with one another. Your arguments wont change anyones opinion if their truly dedicated to that opinion. Theres no need to disrespect or demonize the other parties beliefs, all its gunna do is make you look like a fool to the other person. You may as well be debating that grass is blue with the other person. This argument has been going on for a long time and no ones opinion on a website is going to change anything. So just chill out peeps, hating on people for believing or not believing isnt helping anyone. And i didnt mean to offend anyone if i did.

  • The Bible is just a mythology book, full of atrocities in the name of a god unwortht to be worshiped, genocidal, paranoid, cruel and unjust.A god I disown. Why nobody realizes the book of job is a Religious Satire? God betting with satan? well, gouldn’t jhave said to job “I ruined your life for a bet”, really!

  • Edoc

    God is also wrath, judgement, jealous, omnipotent. You could argue that God knew Job would be OK and knew his faith and the faith of those around him would be strengthened by this ordeal. It also served to show Satan that God is the one truly in control and Satan has no power except that which God allows for now. People were born into sin, through our nature after Eden. This means we are all doomed to the penalty of sin, death, unless we have Jesus as our sacrifice. So, no matter how much God loves us, he also has a nature of justice and wrath, which explains all the things we declare terrible. Then again, it is sort of difficult to explain and understand the nature of God since, by definition, he is ‘above’ any restraints we place on ourselves. He is ‘above’ morality, ‘above’ logic, ‘above’ the laws of nature, etc.

    • chala

      You have a point in some way. But there is a problem because every believer delivers arguments based on that god exists. They explain the existence of god by argument that god exists. And that’s called circular logics because if there will never be explanation for god, then don’t try to explain it with your faith or “personal experience”. And if you think you have an explanation, try to bring it out with clear and straight-forward facts.

  • just a little light reading before bed…

  • Firestallion


  • Firestallion
  • MangaTime

    After reading this list, it sounds like God is no different from a dictator like Kim Jung Il. You don’t abide to his will, he freaking kill you, and your family if he wants to.

    All loving my ass……..

  • religion is severely outdated

    The lengths people would go to believe in a higher power are ridiculous. There is no proof that there is a God and religion just about seems as a way for people to overcome guilt they put upon themselves without confronting the cause of the guilty. Call me crazy but I’d rather do good things because I want to and not because I’ll burn in some fictitious pit after I die. If I did it to avoid hell, then wouldn’t it just be another way of being selfish and self-serving?

  • akiva

    absence of proof is not proof of absence

  • Jason

    It’s interesting how Satan gets a thousand years to “change his ways”, but humans don’t get the same chance, and get roasted in some Adolph Hitler style torture chamber for all eternity for reasons as petty as not belonging to the correct religion. Even worse, nothing gets done to apprehend Satan while he is wreaking havoc against human hearts and minds. I am thankful that I am finally free from this despicably cruel and monstrous religion.

  • Veronica

    Since when the locusts of the abyss will attack America??? Because some nutcase wanted to see american helicopters with jaws? That’s even crazier than the locusts themselves.

  • thatgirl

    The way you said ‘the torment of job’ it’s so bias on so many levels. You presented it so wrongly. And it seems to me that you are on the one sided team. Which shouldn’t be the case. As a writer, you should be able to present both sides. just sayin’.

  • God concious

    Then what if its true? So how are you going to deal with that? You did not create the universe so you know its not even true?

  • jilblair09

    To test man’s faith and strength is not at the times of comfort and pleasure but at times of trials and discomfort. job is a great man but God made him even greater

  • dalekemp

    #6 Doesn’t have anything to do with helicopters. It is the description of a great comet.