Unconscious Christians

| 19/08/2010

Christians have many friends who do not believe in God, and they often wonder to themselves, “Will these friends go to heaven?” It is a very important question that needs a satisfying answer. Will many of our friends who are both agnostic and even atheist be in heaven? When we look to Scriptures and use our minds, we see that the answer is ‘Yes’.

These people will indeed be in heaven. This is because they are actually Christians, they are just unaware of it. They are ‘unconscious Christians’.

They are probably not aware of it because I do not think that even Christians are really aware of it. There is one criterion by which one loves Christ and that is loving your neighbour. Whether you have faith in Jesus or not, if you love your neighbour, you ipso facto love Christ. It is one and the same. Many atheists and agnostics love their fellow human beings and do not discriminate or treat anybody unfairly, regardless of where they come from. Such ‘unconscious Christians’ are people who do not intellectually accept Christ, but effectively, they do. They love Christ through their hearts, if not their minds. They love their neighbours, and thereby love God.

This is confirmed in Scriptures. When Jesus is asked by a scholar of the Law, “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" he answered by saying, “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself.” (Matthew 22: 36 – 39). Asked to name one law, Jesus instead named two. He says of the first commandment (loving God), that the second (loving your neighbor) is like it. He equated one with the other, so that we know that by loving our neighbour we thereby love God. This is why Scriptures also says “If anyone says, ‘I love God,’ yet hates his brother, he is a liar.” (I John 4: 20).

Logically, the concept of an ‘unconscious Christian’ makes sense because we know that human beings are made in the “image and likeness” of God. The human being alone among all creatures on earth is a self-conscious person. We are replicas of God, who is the eternal self-conscious Person. So because every human being is a replica of God, it follows that if you love human beings, you love God. This all makes sense.

Now in Scriptures, Jesus spoke about ‘unconscious Christians’. On the last day, when he is standing as judge before the throng of humanity, he says to those who are to partake in heaven, “Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink.” We recognize the ‘unconscious Christians’ by their reply, “Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink?” They are genuinely surprised. They did not recognize Christ in this life. But Jesus says to them, “I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.” (Matthew 25: 31 – 40). These people did not recognize Christ but they loved him nonetheless. So here we see ‘unconscious Christians’ going to heaven.

Now this view of things makes sense to our consciences and our minds, because we know that God is not a ridiculous and absurd God who would punish to all eternity someone who never heard about him. God is all loving, all embracing, and there are many sinners who will be in heaven (Matthew 22: 32).

Another criterion by which one loves Christ is to love life (in all its forms). Jesus said, “I am the resurrection and the life” (John 11: 25). All life that has ever existed on earth or in the entire universe was raised into being by Christ. All plants, trees, bugs, dogs, birds, and humans find their existence because of Christ. He is “the firstborn of all creation” and “by him all things were created” (Col 1: 15 – 16). Jesus is the person of God whose omnipresence sustains the whole of creation. “He is before all things, and in him all things hold together” (Col 1:17). So, generally speaking, if one loves life, one loves Christ. And by this criterion, we see that many people who do not believe in God nevertheless love God. These people want to protect the earth, and keep it free from destruction, so they can hand it down faithfully to their descendents. For them all life is precious, and beautiful. They do not think this way because God has told them in Scriptures, but because he has told them in their hearts. They do not recognize God in Scriptures, but by definition, they are Christian. By loving their neighbours and loving life, they love all things Christ, though they know it not to be him.

There are two things that a Christian should take from all of this. The first is that loving God is not just assenting to Christ intellectually, i.e. having faith. You have to DO something. Remember the story of the Good Samaritan. You have to love, with a real and passionate love, like Christ, who thirsted for love (John 19: 28). For, St Paul verily warns us that if you have “a faith that can move mountains, but have not love” you are nothing. You are “a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.” (I Corinthians 13: 1 – 2). Ouch.

The second thing to realize from this is that only a Christian can love and believe in life with complete interior freedom. Christians have a truth that sets them free. An ‘unconscious Christian’ has to deal with this troubling issue: if the energy of the sun (and the entire universe for that matter) will one day dissipate, and all life die, what is really the point in loving my neighbour? Why not get what is good for me while I can? One who knows in the back of their minds that one day the earth will fail to be here can be tempted to be an anarchist, in the strictest and pejorative sense of the word. A Hitler. An anti-Christ. Life is absurd. A Christian, on the other hand, knows the effect of the cause. Loving each other will one day bring the earth to completion. Long before the sun fades away, humanity’s love for itself will intensify until it culminates in the love of God, and the New Jerusalem will descend from heaven, and God will “be all in all” (I Corinthians 15: 28).

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Viewpoint

About the Author ()

Comments (129)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    The funny thing is:   There is no god ! ! !  Only humans and animals.  The dangerous ones being the humans.



    • Anonymous says:

      Quite frankly everyone of you in this forum need to read the book ‘A NEW BEGINNING" by Florence Goring-Nozza


  2. Anonymous says:
    Personally, I don’t like the term ‘atheist’.  I choose not to believe in the supernatural. I am a rational person. There have been those who adhere to countless different religions over the centuries and thousands of different gods. I do not believe in any of them, although I have no problem with those who are religious  – providing, of course, they do no harm to others.
    But why should there be a term for someone who is not something?
    Think about it;, I am not a poet – am I an Apoet?.  I am not a diver – am I an Adiver? I am not a conspiracy theorist- am I an Aconspiracy theorist? No, no and no. So, why, if I am not a theist (one who believes in a god or group of gods) should there be a word for it?
    • Anonymous says:

      Atheism is a positive disbelief in the existence of any god at all, not merely a lack of belief which may simply be agnosticism. To choose to disbelieve in the supernatural or to hold positively that there is no god is not a rational position. It is a chosen belief in the same way as people of faith have a belief. Accordingly there should be a name for you. You cannot disprove god’s existence. Even if one concedes absence of evidence (which I do not) this does not equal proof of absence. 

      • Anonymous says:

        Totally incorrect. There is a difference between ‘hard atheism’ – "I believe there is no god" and ‘soft atheism’ :  "I do not believe in god".  There is a difference – look it up.  Agnosticism is not a "lack of belief", it is not knowing whether there is a god or not.

        Oh, and "you cannot disprove God’s existence" ? That’s your point? Really? You cannot disprove Santa’s existence. You cannot disprove the Tooth Fairy’s existence. You cannot disprove the existence of a duppy in my yard. You cannot disprove the existence of aliens at Pedro Castle. etc etc etc

        • Anonymous says:

          My points were not incorrect. You’re just trying being pedantic. The poster stated that he/she "chooses" to not believe in the supernatural. He/she did not say that they had weighed the evidence and come to the conclusion that there was no evidence in support of the supernatural. My point is that is not a rational approach although he/she has claimed to be a rational person. 

          Your last para is just silly. There is superabundant evidence in favour of the supernatural as is reflected in the fact that 95% of the world’s population believes in a god. In order to rationally hold that there is no god you would at the minimum have to investigate and be able to dismiss all these phenomena as frauds.  

          Incidentally, many scientists do hold that aliens exist.      

  3. Anonymous says:

    With all this talk about "Christian" I would love to have some logical, rational person here try to do one seemingly simple thing:

    Please give us the correct, concise and unqualified definition of the term "Christian".

    This is critically important, because the essence of the original article is the writer’s definition of "Christian". He proffered what to some amounts to a new and incorrect definition. So someone here must be able to give us the correct definition, for until we do all references to "Christianity" in this thread are vacuous.

    For reference, an atheist here gave a clear, concise, logical and unchallenged definition of "atheist".  So it follows that we can define "Christian"? No?

    Go ahead!

    (Good luck.)

    • Anonymous says:

      Why do I have the feeling that this is not sincere but an attempt to bait Christians into opposing each other? Divide and conquer, eh?

    • Love Monkey says:

      Because I am an atheist, I can define "Christian" easily. Ironically, very few Christians, if any, can do it sensibly. They always bog down in details that favor their bias.

      To be meaningful it must be defined from the perspective of an outsider, one who has no bias or vested interest in that or any other religion.

      Definition: A Christian is simply one who believes in the existence of a god named Jesus and devotes some degree of loyalty to him. Everything else people may attach to that definition is debatable and subjective. 

      There are more than 30,000 distinct versions of Christianity active today. Each one filled with followers who are convinced they are right and the others are wrong, of course. This sort of confusion and division is inevitable when a belief system has no evidence or logical arguments to differentiate between reality and fantasy. 


      • Anonymous says:

        As an atheist you can afford to be careless with your definition of Christian. For a Christian this is a very serious matter.

        There are not of course "more than 30,000 distinct versions of Christianity today" who are convinced that they are right and the others are wrong". In the vast majority of cases there is no theological difference on any fundamental issue. Distinctions are often according to country. Thus the Russian Orthodox Church is seen as a different denomination from the Greek Orthodox church when in reality they are not different "versions" of Christianity at all.     

      • Anonymous says:

        Your definition is ridiculously broad, subjective and inaccurate. It would include as Christians the Ku Klux Klan although there movement is expressly based on hate and is explicitly evil – the very opposite of Christ’s message. Perhaps that is your intention so you can then discredit Christianity.  

        If taken literally it would exclude orthodox Christians who hold that Jesus Christ is God the Son and not "a god". This is not some detail, but is absolutely fundamental.   

    • Anonymous says:

      What is Christian?

      What is Atheist?


      How about –

      WHAT IS a HUMAN BEING who is not brainwashed???

  4. Kyle McLean says:

    It’s amazing how we "humanize", an all knowing, all loving, all merciful, awesome God. Remember, we are made in His image, not the other way around.

    Badir, email me sometime. We need to sit and chat, I can see that you can find scriptures, let’s talk about the truth.


  5. Burnard Tibbetts says:

    Many conflicting opinions are being expressed, therefore some of the people have to be wrong.

    If Christianity proves to bewrong, then Christians will  have enjoyed a happy, confident life, thriving on the promises found in the Holy Bible, and  looking forward to the greatest delights that one could ever dream of. 

    Meanwhile the atheists  pleasure in this life is no greater than the happiness that  Christians enjoy,  and  if the atheists  philosophy eventually turns out to be wrong, the result would be sad indeed.

    I choose happiness with hope.

    Burnard Tibbetts

    • Anonymous says:

      Yes, Mr. Tibbetts, that’s a fine argument for getting drunk every day too. It’s also an excellent call to be a Muslim or to follow any other religion. 

      To help you see the light, here is your post with a few slight modifications: 


      "If Islam proves to be wrong, then Muslims will  have enjoyed a happy, confident life, thriving on the promises found in the Koran, and  looking forward to the greatest delights that one could ever dream of. 

      Meanwhile the Christians pleasure in this life is no greater than the happiness that Muslims enjoy,  and  if the Christians’ philosophy eventually turns out to be wrong, the result would be sad indeed.

      I choose happiness with hope."


      You can plug in Scientologist, Hindu, Buddhist, whatever you want. The point is, your point is pointless. 


      • Anonymous says:

        "Yes, Mr. Tibbetts, that’s a fine argument for getting drunk every day too"

        Huh? In case no one told you, getting drunk every day is really very bad for your well-being – health, relationships, work – you name it.

        And just when you were chastising Mr. Tibbetts for his lack of logic.

        • Rectus Femoris says:

          Oh really? Well, too much Christianity every day is "very bad for your well-being – health, relationships, work – you name it."


          Which has caused more pain, suffering, death, destruction and hindered progress, booze or Jesus?


          Not even close, Christianity has produced a bodycount and path of destruction through history that alcohol doesn’t come any where close to.


          It’s a fact.

          • Anonymous says:

            "Which has caused more pain, suffering, death, destruction and hindered progress, booze or Jesus?".

            No contest. Booze.  Absurd comparison. Christianity has been, and continues to be, one of the greatest forces for good in this world.  Yes, we know about the inquisition and the crusades etc. but one cannot make generalizations from these. What we need are more genuine Christians. 

            What is the case for Booze?  We all know the case against.

            • Anonymous says:

              No one is making a "case for booze". Just pointing out to you that alcohol has done less harm to the world than Christianity.

              No one ever launched a crusade or enslaved millions of people in the name of whiskey.


              Just ask any sane person who they would choose to spend eternity with:


              A few jolly drunks




              Pastor Al, the Pope, Rev. Sykes, Benny Hinn, George W. Bush, and McKeeva Bush.


              Case closed.



              • Anonymous says:

                Few drunks are jolly, and then only for a short time. That is your argument?!  

                Since I know him personally there is no question in my mind that I would like to spend eternity with people like Pastor Al. But you know, I really shouldn’t dignify this nonsense by responding so I am signing off.

    • Anonymous says:

      Mr. Burnard, what you have offered is a paraphrase of an argument known as "Pascal’s Wager". And, like just about every Christian I know, you are expert at taking things out of context. Pascal’s basis for choosing to believe in God was based solely on probability (i.e. gambling theory). Pascal wrote: "If there is a God, He is infinitely incomprehensible, since, having neither parts nor limits, He has no affinity to us. We are then incapable of knowing either what He is or if He is…God is, or He is not. But to which side shall we incline? Reason can decide nothing here. There is an infinite chaos which separated us. A game is being played at the extremity of this infinite distance where heads or tails will turn up. What will you wager?" 

      Pascal argues thus: Since our rational mind and reasoning capabilities are incapable of allowing us to render a sound decision regarding God’s existence, then we must rely upon on a logic model that weighs the payoff versus the stakes gambled.

      But therein lies the rub: What you have offered is – like Pascal – a purely selfish motive for belief that is based solely on saving your own backside and avoiding damnation. For a man who would condemn gambling, you seem to place an exquisitely high value on making a wager! Beats anything Las Vegas can offer, I tell ya. Mr. B.,  I am glad to welcome you into the ranks of the Pro-Gambling crowd. Come referendum time,  I trust you will support introduction of casino gambling as you believe in gambling big!

      But I am not finished with you yet:

      For your wager assumes the 66-book Bible and the Baptist/Protestant verbal plenary, free-will, vicarious sacrifice belief model is the only true and correct way to worship Jehovah God. No? However, this model fails to take into account that within "Christianity", around 34,000 separate Christian groups have been identified in this world! Many of those are at odds with the way you believe and a significant number of those differences are "mortal" issues.

      Pascal’s Wager (and your reworded proposition) is built around belief systems that offers eternal bliss or total damnation, depending on the bettor’s choice. Must I remind you that such a wager is not the exclusive territory of Christianity?  Islam has an eternal paradise and a "hell". Thus, the same wager is valid in the context of belief in Islam. (Gee, throw in dying in a jihad-based suicide bombing and the kinda hot promise of 72 virgins in Paradise, and the blown-apart Muslim seem to have obtained an even better deal than yours!)

      Within the definition of Christianity there are "Seventh Day" folks, Catholics, The Metropolitan (gay/lesbian) Church, to name a few. So you are saying that all these Christian believers will go to Heaven too? Yes or no?

      So, what is it exactly that you are wagering? Are you wagering that your "Christian" belief system is true and others (such as Catholic worship of Mary is idolatry, Adventist legalism nullifies grace, the gay Christian churches are hell-bound, etc) are full of lies and therefore empty, fruitless wagers?

      It is not enough to merely ‘believe in Christianity’ as many groups declare other groups to be hell-bound if they do not hold certain doctrines to be true. Paraphrasing your own words: Within Christianity, many conflicting opinions are being expressed, therefore some of the people have to be wrong. I am not as gracious. If there are so many conflicting dogmas and doctrines, then some so-called "Christians" are outright blatant liars. But who?

      How do we bet wisely here? What Christian group is the right one to place our bet on? Lots of choices. What is the truth?

      Please, be honest and do tell us plainly what you are betting on, for your argument is valid only if the terms of the wager are manifest. You were bold enough to sign your name, are you bold enough to give answer about your beliefs openly? Or will you do as so many "Christians" do and merely dilly-dally around the issue with lots of words and no substance?

      • Anonymous says:

        "Mr. Burnard, what you have offered is a paraphrase of an argument known as "Pascal’s Wager". And, like just about every Christian I know, you are expert at taking things out of context. Pascal’s basis for choosing to believe in God was based solely on probability (i.e. gambling theory)".

        Why is that the most pompous and self-assured are the ones most likely to get it wrong?

        Pascal was a man of faith who had had intense spiritual experience that changed his life. He spent the last 8 years of his life in a Jansenist Monastery leading an ascetic life. He wrote Apologie de la religion Chrétienne (Apology of the Christian Religion) (for your benefit "apology" here means "defence", not saying that your are sorry about the Christian religion). 

        Pascal wrote: "Men despise religion. They hate it and are afraid it may be true. The cure for this is first to show that religion is not contrary to reason, but worthy of reverence and respect. Next make it attractive, make good men wish it were true, and then show that it is". No, his basis for believing in God was not "solely…gambling theory". It was not about "selfishness" as you define it.

        Pascal’s wager was simply Pascal’s mathematical brain’s effort to show why faith is not contrary to reason. Incidentally, Pascal did have a particular faith in mind, namely Jansenism (a Roman Catholic sect whose teachings were similar to Protestants). So you see, it is you that has taken Pascal’s wager out of context, and to the extent that Mr. Tibbetts was responding to atheists his use of it was entirely appropriate.  

        So, when you feel the urge to talk down someone again, please at least ensure that you actually what you are talking about.     

    • Karl Marx Ebanks says:

      I wonderful example of advocating religion as an opiate.

  6. Anonymous says:

    No way,

               I do not want to go to fantasy land anymore than I want to go to disneyland.

    remember all the whores will be in hell, the booze and the drugs not to mention rock and roll.

    hell is the place for me and i have a reservation already booked!


  7. whodatis says:

    Well I’ll be doggone – judging by these comments it does appear that Cayman has done a complete 180 from being a "conservative Christian country" to a rather Atheistic country.

    What a difference a generation makes, as this for dang sure could have never happened in my mother’s childhood.

    Well, I guess the good news is that we now know that anything is possible in this country – hopefully a few other things can be "turned around" as well.

    Lastly, I would just like to offer a bit of support for the personality of the Viewpoint poster.

    Badir is"good people" and it does bother me somewhat to witness this beating that he has been subjected to.

  8. Pastor Bucket says:

    My dear Badir Awe,

    Whether you like it or not, you & all of your fundie Christian friends are ATHEISTS

    You do not believe in Allah, Thor, Zeus etc etc therefore you are atheist to those gods, you cannot pick & choose

    Wake up you are  a bright young man. Just think…we have been on this earth between 200k and a Million years…

    So your man in the sky waited until 2000 years ago, a dot in the space of time, to announce himself & our purpose

    If you were born in Libya, Pakistan or Sierra Leone would you be as confident

    3 words to shatter your dreams: KING JAMES VERSION…

    dwell on what that means

    Can we please move on from this wasteful drivel before its too late?!


    Its so boring to still go over all this fairytale rubbish when a simple biology lesson @ aged 7 would deal with all this racism & homophobia fuelling drivel

    We are all the same, connected, as one…just not from a rib or piece of clay

    Build a bridge & get over it. Life is far more beautiful & amazing as it is, without having to make up stories about how we would like it to be



    • Anonymous says:

      I think you need some help with the terminology. Atheism is disbelief in the existence of a god or gods of any sort, so no, Christians are not atheists as the believe the Yahweh as the one true and living God. It is obviously nonsense to think it that theism means you must believe in every single god that anyone in any culture anywhere might embrace. If you believe in many gods then you are a polytheist. if you believe that there are many gods but only one worthy of worship then you are henotheist. 

      You clearly either have not read or do not understand the Bible if you think that it is saying that God waited until 2,000 years ago to announce himself and our purpose. He revealed that in the beginning when man was in close communion with God.    

  9. Anonymous says:

    If loving each other alone was enough, why would Jesus have to die and rise again?

    Would Hitler be in heaven?  What he did was out of love for his country and fellow man.  He was genuinely out for the ‘better of mankind’.  His love even drove him to kill.  I do NOT agree or approve of Hitler’s behavior but only use it to offer a basis for discussion. 

    Each person’s love and what they do for it is relative to him/ herself.  The love described by Christ is the love only He is capable of.  The love that sees human filth and evil and instead of allowing us no hope but to go to hell, His grace provided a way through His death AND resurrection.  HOWEVER, you cannot exempt the important part on our end.  The acceptance of what He has done and the carrying out of Romans 10:9.

    If we could get to heaven by love, wouldn’t that mean that getting to heaven was based on some point system?  We could then get to heaven by our actions… as if it was something we could do to control God?  (Faith and not by works, is it not?) If I love 3 people but hate 4 then hell?  By I could love 5 and hate 4 then I’d be set right?  Wrong!  Do we think that God is so stupid we can fool him by creating our own criteria and ways to Him?  No one gets to the Father except through Christ and belief in Christ does not just rest in our inconsistent forms of love.  Some say sex is love.  Can I then have sex with my neighbors and use that as criteria for heaven?  By the sounds of your post, you might say yes.

    I pray we not mock God (those who believe He exists for I would not require such from those who don’t) and stop compromising the GOSPEL and all it is just for comfort.

    (Note: this is not ment to an argument for Christianity but a response to the viewpoint of someone who claims to be Christian.  Whether God exist or not is another subject but it is already assumed in the viewpoint and so the tone of my response…)

  10. Anonymous says:

     Wow, no wonder Cayman is going to hell in a bread basket.  If this is the drivel we come with, we are doomed.  

    If you all put that much energy in trying to help with things that matter, like reducing crime…

  11. Mathew says:


    #1 – The Bible is a book that was put together into one canon, and consist of the views or "REVELATIONS" of around 40 different authors, throughout the span of about1500 years. The book consist of poetry, history, certain ethical standards, prophecy, and various stories.

    #2 – REVELATION, when applied to the Bible, means something communicated immediately from God to man. The Bible states that "holy men spoke as they were moved by the Spirit of God." Note what has been revealed to the 40 so authors of the Bible is a revelation to them only, because most naturally, when it is written down or told to a second person, a second to a third, a third to a fourth person, and so on, it becomes HEARSAY to every other person! Hence, not a direct experience to every other person!

    #3 – Considering pointers #1 and #2, people are not obliged to take the Bible as Truth (unless some personal REVELATION has told them to do so); or else, by taking the words of the book to be true, they would be accepting HEARSAY as a part of evidence! Thus, to accept HEARSAY as TRUTH would be to insult one’s own intelligence, one’s own five senses, and the personal mind of reason God has endowed you with.

    #4 – Now perhaps you say there must be some kind of "Word of God" for my life. There must be a divine REVELATION that is not HEARSAY, that is the full TRUTH and nothing but the TRUTH. I and most others in the spirit of humanity, can only refer you to yourself, because who knows the TRUTH better than you, yourself?  Who can judge another person who has had a completely different REVELATION than the other? 

    THE WORD OF GOD IS SIMPLY "PERSONAL EXPERIENCE," and it is this word of God that no human being can alter or counterfeit!

    #5 – And you may ask, is there not a UNIVERSAL REVELATION, which all mankind share in common?  Yes.  It is a mutual experience by everyone – called CREATION. When we live in harmony with Creation, sustaining life and loving others, we are living in harmony with God. We obey and follow the "Word of God."

    But this does not mean that FAITH doesn’t have its purpose; it is just not the bases for what is TRUTH!  Rather, it your PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF ALL THINGS AND CREATION THAT IS TRUTH!

    NOW PEOPLE, ALIGN YOURSELVES TO LIVE IN HARMONY WITH IT’S UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLES, such as, humility, fairness, love, human dignity, justice, nurturance, service, et cetera…


  12. Eiblo Goughts says:

    As an atheist, can someone explain why my going to the bookstore on a Sunday upsets the Baby Jesus given that I don’t believe that the sky fairy was his Baby Daddy or that there is a sky fairy at all?

    • Anonymous says:

       The bookstore must be closed on the Sabbath (well, one of the Sabbaths, anyway) because Baby Jesus did not come to "overturn the law but to uphold it". This means we are supposed to still pay attention to the Old Testament stuff, except for slavery, wife killing, killing gays, and so on (God was wrong about those things, according to today’s Christians. Well, fortunately most of them feel that way, anyway) 

      So, you can’t buy a book on Sunday (or Friday evening, or Saturday, depending on who’s rules you follow) because the Bible demands that anyone who does any form of work on the Sabbath "must be put to death". Nice. 

      I don’t think putting off a book purchase until Monday in order to prevent the staff of our local bookstores from being executed by Christians is too much to ask. 


      Ps. Badir, you are really an "unconscious atheist". You simply imagine that you are a Christian. The fact that you have a brain and can think means you are an unconscious atheist.

      Beneath the delusion you are an atheist. 









      • Anonymous says:

        What an ignorant post. Why don’t you try reading the bible with the purpose of understanding instead of selecting verses out of context in an effort to ridicule it?

        The absurdity of your comment is proven by the fact that the Pharisees wanted to execute Jesus for breaking the Sabbath law. Jesus explained that the entire law is fulfilled by loving God with all your heart and loving your neighbour as yourself.   

    • Anonymous says:

      As an atheist, why would you want to know? What difference would it make?

      • Eiblo Goughts says:

        Because I would like to go to the bookstore on a Sunday and get a bit annoyed that the sky fairy brigade veto it because they don’t want to upset the imaginary baby daddy of the baby Jesus.

        • Anonymous says:

          The point, as you have demonstrated, is that it really does not matter to you what the answer "why?" is.

  13. George Carlin says:

    George Carlin on the topic [cleaned up a little]:

    "In the B[S] Department, a businessman can’t hold a candle to a clergyman. ‘Cause I gotta tell you the truth, folks. When it comes to [BS], big-time, major league [BS], you have to stand in awe of the all-time champion of false promises and exaggerated claims: religion. No contest. No contest. Religion. Religion easily has the greatest [BS] story ever told.
    Think about it. Religion has actually convinced people that there’s an invisible man — living in the sky — who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever ’til the end of time!
    But He loves you.
    He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can’t handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, you talk about a good [BS] story. Holy S[xxx]!"
    — George Carlin Politically Incorrect, May 29, 1997

    • Anonymous says:


    • PurgatoryPriest says:

      I won’t even get going on the "Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television" (or for that matter CNS) bit.

      Good and thought provoking article even for me, an Agnostic.

      Defined by Thomas Henry Huxley as:

      Agnosticism is not a creed but a method, the essence of which lies in the vigorous application of a single principle… Positively the principle may be expressed as in matters of intellect, do not pretend conclusions are certain that are not demonstrated or demonstrable. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism)

      George Carlin, wacky & funny but always thought-provoking. One of my favourite’s by him is the Ten Commandments rant. A good laugh and makes one ponder.

      George Carlin on the Ten Commandments:

      • Rorschach says:

        HAHA….thanks for that…especially loved the last commandment..



    • Anonymous says:

      I am a believer, yet I think this Carlin monologue on religion is pure genius! I get a kick out of the way Carlin mocks the mockery of God’s love that Christianity has made out of The Creator’s message.

      Basically organised religion in the Cayman Islands of today says" Don’t touch, taste, hear, see, smell, enjoy, (and especially do NOT be gay) because if you do, you will burn forever and ever. Oh…and…BRING MONEY!

      Thanks so much for posting the excerpt from Carlin and bringing a smile into my day!

      (I hadda give ya a "Thumbs Up" for this one!)

      • Anonymous says:

        Carlin is not mocking "the mockery of God’s love that Christianity has made out of The Creator’s message". Carlin mocks the very idea that there is a creator who may have a message. You say you are a "believer" and yet his comments bring you smiles.   Believer in what exactly?

        • Anonymous says:

          The substance of Carlin’s mockery was derived from the caricature of God as presented by organised religions. It is safe to assume that Carlin’s only exposure to God  was via contact with "believers", (most likely "so-called Christians") most of whom have no clear idea of who God is.

          Cariln may be easily forgiven if he offends. But  as to the "believers" who contributed to Carlin’s cynicism: "…it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea".

          • Anonymous says:

            "It is safe to assume that Carlin’s only exposure to God  was via contact with "believers", (most likely "so-called Christians") most of whom have no clear idea of who God is".

            Why would it be safe to assume that? Was he illiterate? Was he not able to meet any genuine people of faith in his 7 decades of life? Did he have no capacity to appreciate the wonder of the universe? It seems to me that would be a ridiculous assumption. 

            In view of the quotation above according to Carlin religion has a very clear and detailed concept of who God is, he just thought that idea was absurd.  

            Just to be clear, Carlin was not merely cynical about religion, he was an atheist. The quotation in one of the posts above shows that he did not believe in a god at all whether he is the Christian God or any other god.  Rather than maliciously suggesting that it must have been because he met some "believers" whose caricature of God "contributed to his cynicism" and made him disbelieve in any god (which is obviously absurd) why don’t you read a bio for an account of Carlin’s atheism, rather than post nonsense? 

            • Anonymous says:

              Proof that Carlin is basing his comments on a caricature:

              "Religion has actually convinced people that there’s an invisible man — living in the sky — who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever ’til the end of time!"


              That’s hardly a correct understanding of the one true God.

              • Anonymous says:

                Maybe you should start your own religion where you can authoritatively define and convey the correct understanding of the one true God. LOL.

                The point, which you continue to miss, is that you evidently do not know sufficient about Carlin to make the comments you have. Your quote does not show that Carlin was "basing his comments on a caricature" but rather that he was himself creating a caricature for the purpose of ridicule because he himself did not believe in any god. 

                Anyway, you are like a mule so there is no point in continuing this exchange.      


  14. Danny Boyle says:

    I have rarely read such a badly constructed ill thought out arguent in my life. Utter drivel and nonsense from start to end – a comfort blanket for the faith deluded and afraid. Intellectually dishonest cowards who shiver in the dark and mutter prayers to make the sun come back, grovelling in the dust of superstition too afraid to stand up and look around.


    I am an ATHEIST. This is a philosophy. It is, in simple terms (XXXXX), a total disbelief in the supernatural, It isnt just disbelief in YOUR god, its disbelief in ALL gods, ALL faiths, and ALL articles of faith. I disbelieve in your god and so called messiah in the same way I disbelieve ( as do you) in Allah, Buddha, Shiva, Vishnu, Ahura Mazda, Horus, Zues, Odin, Thor, Jupiter Capitolina, and any other "invisible friend" you can name.

    As an intelligent atheist with a sound grip on history and evidential fact, I also disbelieve in the fictional construct character you call Jesus. You consider him your messiah, I consider him a badly cobbled together construct of the many "messiahs" of the time, including Appalonius of Tyre and YehudaBen Pantera. You can do a three monkeys all you like, but I will still ask you to explain the direct plagarism in the New Testament from other earlier Hellenic, Roman, and Egyptian texts and apprant glaring contradictions in even the most basic facts of the Jesus story. Archaeology and geology serve to totally discredit every word of the Old Testament – no Jericho walls, no flood, no exodus….etc etc etc. 

    I am also an ANTI-THEIST. This means I actively advocate an end to any place for organised religions in public life and politics. Organised religions, and partiularly the filth of the three Abrahamic faiths, are the biggest threat to global security there is. In their names hideous acts are committed by the faithful on a DAILY basis, and the body count grows on and on. Ive seen first hand the hatred and murder commited in religions names in the Balkans, then in Asia and SE Asia. I grew up in a country torn apart by sectarian religions, and under the constant threat of a bomb planted by one side or the other. Ill be damned if I let evil faith driven swine do that to my kids, have drawn a line in the sand and said ENOUGH!

    I advocate HUMANIST beliefs enshrined in the Golden Rule – treat others as you would have yourself treated. And dont claim thats a Christian belief…it was carved into the walls of an Egyptian temple a few thousand years before the earliest book of the Old Testament was even written down, attributed to a teacher who was born to a virgin, was a carpenter who had desciples, was crucified and rose on the third day….sound familiar? His name was HORUS…that Egytian bloke with the hawk head. Its found in India, in Assyria, in Persia…..all over. In other words its a HUMAN rule, not a divine one.

    DO NOT seek to patronise me or make my beliefs cheap and shabby wth your faith driven drivel and threadbare patchwork quilt  theology. I will have none of it, nor none of your nonsense. I advocate a universal simple humanist philosophy a thousand years older than your shabby hate filled hypocritical set of superstitions and lies, thees, thous, and thou shalt nots.

    There is NO god, NO heaven. Man made god to fill in the gaps when we knew nothing about how the world worked. Now we do, and god is fading along with those gaps.

    This is it – make the best of it because when you die you rot. This world, this universe is full of wonder and grandeur, and if thats not enough for you its a damn shame.

    You carry on whispering to your fears concerns and worries to your invisible mate in your head…. Ill be on the beach at night staring up at the stars and wondering whether theres another being like me looking back from that star system so bright up above, or appreciating the wonder of Brownian motion as demonstrated by smoke from my cigarrette in a dusk filled room. your world is a waiting room and test centre for the next life, I live mine full of wonder at this life I have.

    Yours is a world full of fear and darkness and a life spent on your knees like a slave to an invisible arbitary master whose only voice is your own.

    I stand upright in the light.

    • Anonymous says:

       "Now we do, and god is fading along with those gaps."


      Do you realize we have historical documents from 300 CE which speaks about the ignorance of Christianity and how it will soon fade away?

      People thought Christianity was stupid 1700 years ago.

      Good luck in your mission as an anti-theist, I only recommend, that you be NOVEL


      because nothing as worked so far…

      • A Theist says:

        "because nothing [h]as worked so far…" because there has always been to many sheep or those indoctrinated when they were too young to have free choice.

    • O'Really says:

      Now that’s what I call a rant! Love it Danny boy. 

    • 5 cents says:

      Well said, Danny! This is a brilliant piece!

    • Anonymous says:

      Absolutely excellent comment.

    • Anonymous says:

      I don’t have time to respond to all of this but for the time being it is sufficient to point out that you have made a number of demonstrably false statements and you have a distorted understanding of what it means to live a spiritual life. 

      "Archaeology and geology serve to totally discredit every word of the Old Testament – no Jericho walls, no flood, no exodus….etc etc etc.".

      Quite to the contrary there is no known case where archaeology disproves the Bible. In many cases it confirms the Bible.  The absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence.

      Even the most skeptical scholars would not take the view you have expressed. See, e.g. 


      "…the Golden Rule – treat others as you would have yourself treated. And dont claim thats a Christian belief…it was carved into the walls of an Egyptian temple a few thousand years before the earliest book of the Old Testament was even written down, attributed to a teacher who was born to a virgin, was a carpenter who had desciples, was crucified and rose on the third day….sound familiar? His name was HORUS…that Egytian bloke with the hawk head. Its found in India, in Assyria, in Persia…..all over".

      This theory originated with Gerald Massey, an English poet, born 1828 with an interestin Egyptology who based it on the Egyptian Book of the Dead. As to the details, it appears that you have simply repeated this nonsense from Zeitgeist.

      Horus’s mother is Isis. Isis was married to Osiris. After Osiris is killed, Isis puts him back together again (he was hacked into 14 pieces) except for his penis which was tossed in a river or a lake. Iris fashions a substitute penis for him, humps him and here comes Horus. There is nothing virginal about that.

      There is no basis whatsoever for the statement that Horus was a carpenter, that he was crucified or that rose on the third day. Those statements are absolutely false.  

      Finally, there is absolutely no historical evidence whatsoever that Horus taught the Golden Rule.

      "Yours is a world full of fear and darkness and a life spent on your knees like a slave to an invisible arbitary master whose only voice is your own".

      I am happy to inform you that that does not accurately represent the life of a spiritual Christian which is about faith and peace which dispel fear, hope which overcomes adversity, and inner joy. It is a love relationship with the Father through Christ Jesus.

      You do not have "a sound grip on history and evidential fact". What is most disturbing is not only your mendacity but the malice evident in the fact that so many others are willing to post congratulating you without bothering to take a moment to verify your ‘facts’.    



      • Dark Angel says:

        Danny Boyle

        There are some things that can not be explained mysterious things sometimes happen in this life that defie reason.

        No one knows for sure what is beyond death,No one.I do know that there are Evil Spirits, so therefore there must be a counterpart,as in good spirits.  

      • Anonymous says:

        A well-delivered pin prick to a big hot air balloon. 

        Here’s another link to a Time magazine article that suggests that archaeology has in fact confirmed the fall of Jericho. 


      • Uncommon Sense says:

        "Quite to the contrary there is no known case where archaeology disproves the Bible."

        I presume then that the teachers where you went to school were forbidden to talk about dinosaurs, because that is such an obvious demonstration of how very wrong you are (among so may others).

        I don’t suppose we need to mention that the earth is actually NOT only a few thousand years old, or that this business about being created in 6 days is contradicted both by archeology and cosmology. 

        I suppose it wuold be a waste of time to talk about science at all… dinosaur bones are just a trickof Satan, right Brainiac?

        • Anonymous says:

          You do a lot of supposing.

          Just so you are aware, scripture does not require you to hold that dinosaurs never existed or that the earth is just a few thousand years old.  Six days does not have to be six literal 24 hour days.

          Not all of the Bible is history. Some of it is poetry and allegory. 

          • Uncommon Sense says:

            Ahhh.  So the stuff the bible says isn’t, well "really" true, right?

            Well then, if you and I agree that it is a fable, then we’re good!

            I suppose…

            • Anonymous says:

              You have a limited understanding of "truth". Truth can be conveyed through poetry or allegory, for example. And yes, it is true.

    • Anonymous says:

      This is what Wikipedia has to say on the supposed Horus/Jesus parallels: 

      "Self-taught amateur Egyptologist Gerald Massey argued that the deity of Horus and Jesus shared identical mythological origins in his 1907 book Ancient Egypt, the light of the world. His views have been repeated by theologian and Toronto Star columnist Tom Harpur, author Acharya S, and political comedian Bill Maher. Theologian W. Ward Gasque composed an e-mail to twenty leading Egyptologists, including Professor Emeritus of Egyptology at the University of Liverpool Kenneth Kitchen, and Professor of Egyptology at the University of Toronto Ron Leprohan. The e-mail detailed the comparisons alleged by Massey which had been repeated by Harpur. The scholars were unanimous in dismissing any similarities suggested by Massey, and one Egyptologist criticized the comparison as "fringe nonsense”’.

      At this point we should be hearing apologies from you, but I suspect we won’t.   And to think you criticised Christians as "intellectually dishonest cowards".

      • Anonymous says:

        Ok, unlike the person whom you are so critical of,  I will not classify Christians as "intellectually dishonest cowards". I will classify them as intellectually crippled believers in spooky unproven tales.

        That better?

        Lest you think you are special in me singling you out, I hold the same opinion of staunch evolutionists and other adherents of organised religions.

        The truth is that for all your passion your beliefs are not one whit more "proven" than Islam or any other religion or evolutionary science. Both you and the dogmatic evolutionary scientist and the atheist and the Muslim hold personal beliefs that are impossible to prove and are thus solely faith-based.

        You quote scholars who deny the truth of what Massey wrote. Big freaking deal! A well-learned atheist can dig up countless "scholars" who think the Bible is bunk. An educated "Christian" can do the same about scholars who regard atheists as stupid. So the opinion of so-called "scholars" just because they are classified as such is next to worthless.

        So why waste your precious time trying to prove or disprove what cannot be factually supported or denied? Believe what you want to believe just keep it out of my face and we can be friends.

        You are pretty darned intellectually crippled if you think you can prove your point.

        • Anonymous says:

          "You quote scholars who deny the truth of what Massey wrote. Big freaking deal! A well-learned atheist can dig up countless "scholars" who think the Bible is bunk".

          The big deal is that the poster lied in pretending that his position was based on his superior knowledge of history and the facts and objective reasoning. It has been demonstrated that there was absolutely no objective basis whatsoever for a number of the statements not limited to the absurd account about Horus. He was spreading false propaganda and he has been called on it.  He should at least have the decency to apologise. 

          Scholars’ personal opinions of the Bible is obviously not in the same category as relying on the knowledge base of top-ranking Egyptologists about the life/myth of Horus. You are comparing apples and oranges. Note also that there was not merely consensus – they were UNANIMOUS.       

          "So why waste your precious time trying to prove or disprove what cannot be factually supported or denied?"

          I don’t have a thing to "prove" to you but I will call you on it when you falsify the facts to ridicule my religion and promote your agenda. However, that is plainly the point of the atheists posts. Why didn’t you address your post to them?

          Oh, and I am not the least bit impressed by the name-calling.

          • Anonymous says:

            For the record I have not "falsified" any facts. The fact remains that you have proven nothing of any consequence. So you have managed to find refutations to the "Massey" theory. I still say "Big freaking deal!"  you deserve no pats on the back as mighty Defender of the Faith for this as we are still on square one, faith.

            Being a pragmatist and a believer, I must accept that most of the more important biblical stories have striking parallels in ancient tales. Massey’s flaw was an attempt to draw far too many parallels and broad conclusions in his postulation and he did so on relatively tenuous grounds. However, if you do some scholarly research you will find  that ancient writings are rife with sacrificial kings, soters, blood-sacrifice, resurrections, virgin births, wise men, 12-based numerology, etc. This is well-accepted historical truth with much archeological evidence. That all these could be attributes of Horus may have been stretching it.

            While on the subject of scholarly opinion I would think that you are aware of scholarly opinion regarding the books of "Moses" in the Bible? Today the majority of rational biblical scholars are of the opinion that the Pentateuch is a patch-work of several authors over a long period of time. In addition, many scholars believe that the biblical creation story may have roots in ancient cosmology myths. Moreover, many well-regarded biblical scholars believe that a great deal of the ethno-geography set forth in the Bible from Adam to Abraham is inconsistent with historical evidence? Still, most preachers today still speak as if Moses wrote the Pentateuch.  Are they lying? Will you "call them on it" based on the opinion of "scholars"? 

            A common criticism is that the biblical person Jesus was a total fabrication based exclusively upon copying ancient parallels to mythological figures, but that is drawing a broad conclusion and is subject to much dispute. But then so is the typical biblical characterisation of the personof Jesus Christ. The same holds true for virtually every major biblical character.

            So we are back to square one: the broad basis for my beliefs and your beliefs and evolutionists’ beliefs and atheists’ beliefs vis-a-vis religion and God, etc, are strictly faith-based as there is no "proof" one way or another. To attempt to argue the point is pointless.


            • Anonymous says:

              The poster was falsifying the facts in order to ridicule Christianity. Many may have been misled as result and no doubt that was the intention. The fact that you think dishonesty on an issue of such grave importance is of no consequence says much about your character even while say you are "a believer".  The point, which you continue to miss, is that while each man must be persuaded in his own mind, any ethical person should not seek to persuade anyone by what are clearly falsehoods. This is not about matters of interpretation or speculation.  

              What I cannot figure out is why you are not addressing these comments to the atheists? Is that you are too corwardly to do so as you sense you are outnumbered?       

        • Anonymous says:

          What a clown. Whether the discovered papyri, cave walls, Egyptian Book of the Dead etc. have shown that Horus had these similarities to the biblical account of Jesus is a  matter of fact. It is either true or false. It is not about "denying the truth". The Egyptologists all agree that it is nonsense. What part of that do you not understand? 

          It is so funny when anti-religious people oppose people of faith based on their supposed intellectual superiority only to show that they have very little reasoning ability.      

    • Anonymous says:

      Wow. The objective, logical atheists are putting thumbs down to factual posts which expose the falsehoods of one of their brethren, and continuing to put thumbs up for the exposed falsehood. All of course without any comment attached. So much for intellectual integrity. It guess it goes to show that facts and logical reasoning are not what distinguish atheists from theists after all. When you are prepared to lie in order to attack what  you oppose then you must lack confidence in your case.   

  15. Anonymous says:

    ABCs of Christianity:

    Admit that you’re a sinner.

    Believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who died on the Cross and rose again so that all who believe may have eternal life.

    Confess that Jesus Christ is Lord and commit your life to Him. 

    Nothing there about being a Christian solely by "loving" your neighbor. Not discounting its importance, just the emphasis the author seems to place on it. 

    Furthermore, Christianity – like all religions – is a way of life. If you are (not merely claim to be, but truly are) a Christian, you know it, you act [like] it, you believe it. The term "unconscious Christian" is an oxymoron.

  16. whoITis NOT says:

    I need to puke, this sticky sweet crap is just killing me.

  17. Master Jedi says:

    A few points on Science vs. Religion and everything in between…

    Once you start to throw the Annunaki, Enki and Enlil, and ancient alien genetic scientists in the mix, everything will start to make sense. 

    The human race is the creation of (and slave to), the pretender "gods". Yet the imaginary form of these "gods" exist in the consciousness of groups of followers (so who’s to say they are not real?). Quantam Physics proves human thought-form affects creation on a sub atomic level. Think, the Matrix.

    Science and religion emanate from the same source. It is the story of that ancient spaceport, "The Tower of Babel".

    The One before the previous Melchizedek was Amen… in other words… In Jesus name Amen.

  18. Where's Waldo says:

    I am an atheist. Calling me an unconscious Christian is incorrect and an insult.

    • Anonymous says:

      You are right except the last bit. It is an unwarranted compliment.

  19. Rectus Femoris says:

    While I admire the attempt of this writer to reconcile his religious belief with his kinder instincts, I find myself worrying for his safety. Most atheists, of course, will react to this with amusement but he should be worried about his fellow Christians. Some of them undoubtedly will want to stone him or burn him at the stake.

    Be careful Badir.

    Why do believers such as this writer struggle so hard to remake their immoral, illogical, and destructive religions into something that is sensible and compatible with basic decency? Why not just walk away from it all?

    Here we have a bright and good-hearted person who is bending over backward in an attempt to make the vile madness contained in the Bible seem sweet and sane. Sure, you can reject 99 percent of what the Bible contains and pretend that you still have a source for this religion. Sure, ,you can ignore all the bad stuff and cling to a few nice parts, but this would be silly. Think it through. There is nothing there. Christianity is a nightmare dressed up like a dream.One can love a neighbor without the threat of a hell or the seduction of a heaven, both of which almost certainly do not exist anyway.

    Just walk away and live in the real world, my friend.

    • Anonymous says:

      Evidently you were wrong. The most outraged responses were from atheists. Christians understand that he means well but is a bit misguided.  

  20. Flint says:

    This whole Christian thing is so outdated and out of touch with present realities. With all due respect, I find such religious people SO HEAVENLY MINDED and NO EARTHLY GOOD!  But they are so quick to intervene or interrupt a democratic process, and think that everyone should comply with their moral book of rules.

    I can’t help but not hate them!  Knocking on people’s doors and trying to psychologically have them "see" how they "see!"  Just disgusting!  And I think many people like me feel the same way – that is why you have so many empty churches on this island, and they seem to have no control over the young people, filling their minds with religious crap and telling them this is "right" and this is "wrong," making them see a black and white world.

    Pure hypocracy, because their ministers drive fancy cars, live over the average person’s means, and just like the rest of sinners who sin in secret! Talk about how faith saves them!  Faith is a mental mere belief, a virus! Show me love to your fellow man and supporting a democracy – make that your pure and undefile religion without beliefs and strings attached, and then I will say different

    • Anonymous says:

      Truth is never outdated my friend.

      "I can’t help but not hate them!".

      Double negative. Did you mean that you really hate Christians? That is pretty self-evident from the rest of your post. 

      • Bob the Foreman says:

        "Did you mean that you really hate Christians? That is pretty self-evident from the rest ofyour post." I think you need to read the post again.  The criticism was not about all Christians but rather just those that go out to actively impose their views on others as an absolute truth while living in a manner which is not "Christian".  Do as they say not as they do.  That type of hypocrite is everywhere.  hate may be a strong word, but hypocrisy and self-justification can bring out strong emotions.


  21. Anonymous says:

    The problem with this piece from a christian’s perspective is it’s diabolical plausability.  That said, there’s quite alot I’m even (as a christian) inclined to agree with – BUT, it entirely dodges the issue of original sin, or indeed sin of any kind.  Also, it is not ‘love’ that saves us.  If that were so, God is love the bible tells us and therefore all would surely go to heaven, and heaven would end up in the same kind of mess we have made of this world – and what kind of heaven would that be?

    The bible makes it abundantly clear that we can neither work nor love our way into heaven.  It is by the grace of God we are saved, by faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

    All we should be doing as Christians instead of "bashing people over the head" with our bibles, is to demonstrate by example the Holy Spirit being allowed to operate in, through and upon us which is our only hope of glory (heaven).

  22. Dred says:

    I believe you all have been Trolled.

    Throw out something stupid and watch everyone fight and bicker.

    Christianity is a touchy subject and half of the wars in this world hasactually been rooted in spiritual beliefs.

    What i say is this. Believe what you believe and believe it fully. Live it, breathe it, die with it.

    I believe we do not know the full picture any of us and that’s from thepastors down to the bumps who have never graced a Church or Mosque or any holy place. Saying that we may come to find out that we are COMPLETELY and UTTERLY wrong by who makes it across when it does happen.

    The one verse that keeps riniging from the bible in my head is "Other sheep I have which are not of this fold, those too I must tend". I am not saying what it means because honestly I do not know and we can sit and say it means XYZ but might well be surprised what it really means.

    • Anonymous says:

      "…half of the wars in this world has actually been rooted in spiritual beliefs".

      This is one of those claims that is repeated so often it is often assumed to be true. 

      What were the world’s greatest military conflicts in scope and number of deaths and were they in fact inspired by religion?


    • Anonymous says:

      "The one verse that keeps riniging from the bible in my head is "Other sheep I have which are not of this fold, those too I must tend". I am not saying what it means because honestly I do not know and we can sit and say it means XYZ but might well be surprised what it really means".

      John 10:16.  It really doesn’t have to be a guessing game if one places the verse first in its textual context, and second in its proper historical and religious context. 
      Textual Context
      Jesus is speaking to his followers who were Jews.  In that passage he lays claim to uniqueness as the means of salvation.  Immediately following your quote he says “I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd”.
      He is clearly not talking about non-Christians.
      Historical and Religious Context
      The nation of Israel were the people of God. They alone had entered into a covenant with Yahweh (at Sinai). The Jews had nothing to do with Gentiles who were regarded as unclean. . It was therefore quite a revelation for Simon Peter and the early church to find, as he declared, that "I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism but accepts men from every nation who fear him and do what is right” (Acts 10:34,35).  Christ had initiated a new covenant for people of every nation, tribe and tongue who put their trust in him.
      Simon Peter had been convinced because he saw the manifestation of the Holy Spirit as the apostles themselves had experienced. However, note that this was not an endorsement of the followers of other religions as the people of God. First, it is clear that Cornelius, the Roman centurion, worshipped Yahweh.  Second, he was nonetheless baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.  Third, this did not in any way detract from the missionary activities of the apostles who after all had been commanded to go into all the world preaching the gospel and making disciples for Jesus Christ.  


  23. Burnard Tibbetts says:

    The viewpoint“Unconscious Christians” appears like another theory built on selected scripture verses, by a person who wants to establish his own philosophy, to justify a liberal life-style, telling himself and those that would believe him, that they can live any way they feel like, and still be accepted by a Holy God.


    Perhaps the Serpent that visited Eve, may have also persuaded him that what God said, did not really mean what He said, and that it would not have serious consequences. A person can use select scripture verses and  arrive at a conclusion which conflict with, and even contradict, the overall intent of Gods holy word and His message to the people of the world.


    As for who will go to Heaven is concerned, the Holy Bible states clearly that the one and only way, is the Lord Jesus Christ (see John chapter 3 verses 5, 18 and 36, John 14:6, Acts 4:12, Acts 16:31 and 1 Corinthians 1:18 for a few of the references).


     The Holy Bible claims to be inspired by the Almighty God and has proven its authenticity over and over, by the things and events that were told and foretold in it, some of which have occurred in our life-time and indeed continue to be fulfilled. Doubting and failing to believe the scriptures, does not alter the facts or exempt anyone fro m its promises.


    People who believe that some other philosophy or religion will enable them to enter Heaven, should examine and scrutinize the holy Bible for themselves, being sure to consider seriously, the New Testament writings. Each person needs to do this and make sure that they know all the facts, not just what they thought or were taught. They are likely to find some great surprises.


    The matter is far too important to be ignored, as it is possible to be sincerely wrong, and to suffer irreversible consequences.


    Burnard Tibbetts


    • Hufflepuff says:

      Seriously this inter-fundamentalist debate about a work of fiction is a fascinating and terrifying spectator sport.

  24. Anonymous says:

    Wow, you really believe in all this "creation" stuff.  I thought that most of us had moved beyond that.

  25. Anonymous says:

    This essay…………….. what utter rubish!

  26. whodatis says:


    Let us imagine that the Arabs were the group of humans that managed to colonize this part of the world approximately 500 years ago … do you believe your post would have read in the same way?

    Furthermore, after taking this into consideration – are any of your sentiments rendered somewhat hollow as a result?

  27. Atheist says:

    Wow thank you for worrying about whether I will meet your fictional Sky Fairy. 

  28. Anonymous says:


    Thoughtful and well written.
    It is amazing what you can come up with by quoting scripture selectively.   For example, the thesis doesn’t appear to square too well with these quotes:
    Romans 4:1b-5: “What did our father Abraham discover about being right with God? 2 Did he become right with God because of something he did? If so, he could brag about it. But he couldn’t brag to God. 3 What do we find in Scripture? It says, "Abraham believed God. God accepted Abraham’s faith, and so his faith made him right with God."  When a man works, his pay is not considered a gift. It is owed to him. 5 But things are different with God. He makes evil people right with himself.  If people trust in him, their faith is accepted even though they do not work. Their faith makes them right with God
    Hebrews 11:6 “And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him”.
    1 John 6:28, 29: “Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires? Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent
    John 3:16-18: “God loved the people of this world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who has faith in him will have eternal life and never really die. 17Goddid not send his Son into the world to condemn its people. He sent him to save them! 18No one who has faith in God’s Son will be condemned. But everyone who doesn’t have faith in him has already been condemned for not having faith in God’s only Son.
    Incidentally, faith is not mere intellectual assent as you suggest. It is believing in, trusting, relying upon and clinging to [Christ as your Lord and Saviour].    
    • sandra says:

      It is your definition of FAITH.

      The Bible says "FAITH without WORKS is DEAD."  Thus, unlike how so many Christians falsely claim, FAITH my friend, is not a mere BELIEF. It is alive! The faith that is mere belief is what Paul referred to when he said you can have all the faith to remove mountains, but if you have not love you are nothing. He was really talking about a super mind-faith OR mind over matter. Ironically, later Paul says that faith is necessary for salvation. But the FAITH he was talking about, was one that is conjoined with love. It is Faith with Works, or an expressed faith.

      In sum, when you love someone – THAT IS LIVING FAITH! 

      Again… be careful not to intellectualize Christianity! Just like what Badir Awe was saying that LOVE is not a head intellectual thing, FAITH should not be taken as a mere belief that is so shallow.

      Many people who study the Bible don’t realize this, but there are 2 definitions of FAITH in the Bible. One is referring more to TRUST and BELIEF. The other is referring more to CHRIST-LIKE ACTION, PROFESSION, LOVE. May I say, the latter is NECESSARY for Salvation. The former will get you no where, because it is locked by the mind only.

      • Anonymous says:

        You seem to be a bit mixed up. The closing point of my post was that faith is NOT mere belief but involves trust, reliance upon, clinging to Christ. (It was Badir’s suggestion that faith was nothing more than mere intellectual assent). As my quotes show, scripture teaches that this is indeed saving faith. There is no doubt at all love in action is EVIDENCE of faith but is not itself faith.    

        • noname says:

          You said, "no doubt at all love in action is EVIDENCE of faith but is not itself faith"

          If love in action is EVIDENCE of faith, is it not then a "part" of faith or faith itself demonstrated or made alive?

          Sorry but your "trust, reliance upon, and clinging to Christ" is a BELIEF because there is no EVIDENCE. A belief is a mental and psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true. There is no evidence involved. You just hear what someone says to you and in the final analysis, you accept it as true.Of course, there are emotions involved, but whatever is of the mind, varies from person to person. Hence, such faith is sole mental reality. Interestingly, mental health professionals and researchers around the world, treat delusional people as if they harbor genuine beliefs. It is a mere psychological state of the mind.

          True faith can always be seen and experienced. It goes beyond mind, because it is in touch with reality. It is LOVE!  LOVE is more than just EVIDENCE of faith; LOVE is FAITH – not the mere belief one, but the wholistic one, which consist of the physical, mental, spiritual planes


          • Anonymous says:

            You are still not getting it. I have listed a broad array of scriptures that speak of faith as the means of salvation. The meaning of the Greek word (pistis) translated as "faith" or "believe in" is precisely as I have given it, i.e. it is not mere intellectual assent. Surely you understand that trust etc. is more than mere belief?  

            While good works MAY be evidence of faith it is not necessarily so. Someone has rightly pointed out that atheists can do good works too. So we cannot draw the opposite conclusion that merely because we see good works that that person has saving faith.     

            True faith is divinely inspired and not merely accepting what someone says as true.  


            • Mat says:

              Excuse me, did you say, "saving faith"?

              So faith ALONE saves you???  I hope that is not what you believe!

              The Bible does not teach that "FAITH ALONE" saves you!

              The Bible says, "Faith without Works is Dead!"

              Anyone or minister who tells you that all you have to do is believe and trust in God and you will be saved, a NON-CHRISTIAN person that trust in God and does charitable deeds is in better standing than he!

              Jesus said in Matthew 7:20-23:

              "Wherefore BY THEIR FRUITS ye shall know them. Not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven; but he that does the WILL of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not preached in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity… " 


              • Anonymous says:

                As all of the quotes I gave above show that the Bible clearly teaches that weare justified by faith, that is saving faith as I have explained and not mere belief. That is not at at all contradicted by "faith without works is dead".  It clearly, states that we are not saved by our works. It is  key for you to understand is Eph 2:8,9:

                "God’s grace has saved you because of your faith in Christ. Your salvation doesn’t come from anything you do. It is God’s gift. 9 It is not based on anything you have done. No one can brag about earning it".

                One can only enter into a saving relationship with the Father through Jesus Christ.




                • Anonymous says:

                  So… all I have to do is just believe and…

                  Great!  I have license to now murder, rape, steal, and commit all manner of crimes under the sun, because my faith will save me and God will forgive me… so according to you, I am justified. I am not saved by any of my good deeds!

                  I wonder who you think you’re fooling?  I know its not God! 

                  • Anonymous says:

                    Er…no. You still have not grasped what faith means. If you (continue to) do those things it is clear evidence that you do not have saving faith. Read the entire thread. It will save having to repeat myself.

  29. Anonymous says:

    ‘only a Christian can love and believe in life with complete interior freedom.’

    From other religons and schools of faith/ life one can have the same ‘complete ‘interior freedom’ e.g. Buddhism and Hinduism and practioners of yoga and meditation, Taoists.

    I do like the inclusive nature of your piece, and that the focus is love and love for humanity as the most important principle – however, it is very Christian-centric and seems to suffer from a lack of familiarity with other faiths. The same old – despite the fact that almost 70% of the world’s population believe in other religons – and believe just as ardently – ‘we’ Christians are the only ones that have it right.



  30. Anonymous says:

    What your telling me is that all people of other faiths (Muslim/Hindu/Jew) are wrong in their beliefs…they’re all just unaware Christians!

    Very arrogant and presumptuous!

    Even though your essay may be of a positive nature that does not make you right

    Just because it says in a cook book that everyone likes food not all will eat scrambled eggs! (Gordan Ramsey Ch1 Page10)


    • Anonymous says:

      "What your telling me is that all people of other faiths (Muslim/Hindu/Jew) are wrong in their beliefs…they’re all just unaware Christians!".

      Err..the first bit would be orthodox Christian doctrine based on the words of Christ himself so it doesn’t involve any arrogance or presumption on the part of the writer. 

      Truth does not become less true because it is not believed by all and sundry or is not politically correct.  It is not up for negotiation and compromise and they obviously can’t all be true.


      • O'Really says:

        You’re right about it not being arrogance on the part of the writer, it is of course massive arrogance on the part of orthodox Christian dogma.

        And belief does not become truth just because it is shared by a minority of the world’s population.

        I know no Christians who claim to know the mind of God, so what is your basis for saying they all can’t be true? If your God wanted them to all be true they would be true and who are you to question it?

        Of course the alternative is that they are all false, but present a useful template for living in harmony.

        • Anonymous says:

          It is only arrogance if it is untrue.

          My faith is not based on mere belief but on revelation.

          My basis for saying that they can’t all be true is that truth is consistency although consistency is not truth. If they are not all consistent they can’t all be true.

          • O'Really says:

            So your God is not capable of creating beliefs systems which appear inconsistent to mere mortals, but  which make sense from his exalted position. A Christian God with limited power, that’s a novelty. 

            I take it that, given the inconsistencies in the various forms of the Christian religion, yours is the only true Christian faith. No arrogance here though, because you say its true.

            • Anonymous says:

              My God cannot contradict himself.

              You are arguing that God could not create a belief system which would appear "arrogant" to mere mortals but which makes sense from his exalted position.  

              • O'Really says:

                So we agree your God is not all powerful. I didn’t think we were going to agree on anything, so I am surprised. Behold the power of keeping an open mind!

                • Anonymous says:

                  That is not a question of power, but of integrity.


                  • O'Really says:

                    Ah, so you do know the mind of your God. Interesting, you really are well connected.


                    • Anonymous says:

                      We know such of the mind of God as he has revealed. We know the moral attributes of God. It is antithetical to his nature to lie. But I am well connected, yes. That is what it means to be a Christian – to be well connected to (i.e. have a relationship with) God through his son Jesus Christ.

                    • O'Really says:

                      This will be my last post on this because I have been down this path enough to know it has no end. Suffice to say your attempts to justify your God by reason and logic are doomed to failure, because of course there is no reason or logic underlying your position. Your last post is riddled with so many logical inconsistencies I wouldn’t know where to start a rebuttal! But that’s fine. You have faith and believe and I have no problem with this as your right. I just don’t happen to share your views, which is my right.

              • Buy My Sky Fairy says:

                Surely an all powerful God has the power to contradict himself if he wants to.  What other limitations do you choose to impose on your all powerful God?

              • Religion at its finest says:

                My god can contradict itself, so it follows that my god is more powerful than your god.  Best tell your god to stay out of my backyard, or my god will kick his xxx.

                • Anonymous says:

                  If your god is a liar then he is the Father of Lies – Satan. And we know that his complete defeat will be manifest at the judgement. Following the thinking of your god you think that he can rival the one true and living God but his waterloo is coming.  

          • Reason says:

            "My faith is not based on mere belief but on revelation."

            Pure sophistry.  You deliberately omit the parts of the argument that prove that Christianity is based purely on unsubstantiated beliefs:

            #1. Premise: The Bible tells you what to believe (through, in part, "revelation");

            #2. Premise: The Bible tells you that it’s contents are true; so

            #3.  Conclusion: You can believe that the "contents are true" (#2 above) because the Bible tells you what to believe (#1 above), and it says that the "contents are true" so its parts about "what to believe" are true.

            This is obviously circular logic, i.e. wrong (formally "begging the question" or "self-referential proofs"), unless you are getting your revelations from a source external to the Bible (which you did not say). 

            So: have you spoken to the sky fairy directly, or are you limited to referring to the contents of the Bible?

            Put another way, shortened, you are saying #2 is true by saying that #2 is true.  If I say #2 is not true, what will you offer as proof other than by saying #2 is true because #2 is true?  What will you point to?  If you have proof outside of unsubstantiated "faith", please do share it.  Empirical proof of the existence of a sky fairy has eluded the best thinkers humanity has generated.  I’d be most interested in hearing you out-perform them.

            Here’s my circular logic:

            #1. Premise: This posting tells you what to believe (through, in part, the "revelation" contained in the next line);

            #2. Premise: The Bible’s contents are not true;

            #3. Premise:  This posting’s contents are true; so

            #4.  Conclusion: You can believe that the contents of the Bible are NOT true" (#2 above) because this posting tells you what to believe (#1 above), and it says that the "contents are true" (#3 above) so its parts about "The Bible’s contents are not true" are true.

            If you wish to argue that the Bible is written by a higher authority than me, and is therefore more reliable, I’d be most interested in your research as to God putting quill to scroll and delivering the Bible as divine truth, without reference to the contents of the Bible of course please.  History as I know it has a bunch of guys writing this stuff roughly 2000-1700 years ago and a bunch of other guys collecting it for publication as an anthology some time thereafter (from sources external to that anthology, being the Bible, thank you very much) . 

            Logic also tells us that the invalid arguments above do not prove the existence of God, but nor does it prove the non-existence of God.  We’re stuck looking for external evidence to help decide what is true and what is not.

            Over to you.

  31. Ali Louya says:

    The only problem with this is that the evidence to support the central proposition is self-referential since it is derived solely from the Bible – the paragraph "This is confirmed in Scriptures" is the kicker.  Unless you can make a credible case for the accuracy of the scriptures then the rest is supposition.


    • Pooi says:

      I have a suggestion for you. If you are TRULY and objectively interested in the accuracy of scripture, please read "the case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. This guy used to be a former atheist himself, and embarked on a years long journey to scientifically disprove the Bible and Christianity. However, interestingly enough, he encountered so much factual and historically proven evidence to the contrary that he decided to wrote a book about it.

      Again, if you are seeking truthful and objective info, read this book. It’s a great education on history and accuracy of historical documents including the Bible.


  32. John says:

    Now that is what I don’t understand. You have people who call themselves Christian yet they waste their time trying to make the secular powers pass laws in their favor upon everyone. When if they only preach or teach like how you just did, they could change people’s hearts and lives.

    It is just like gambling. Gambling starts off as a choice!  Although it’s addiction has negative consequences of slavery, you can not force or have laws pass against people in order to ensure it becomes illegal. People have a choice to be enslaved by gambling or not! A Christian should encourage freedom of choice, liberty, and fair democratic system… don’t you think?  Did not God endowed us with freedom of choice?

    Hence, what I am saying is, a Christian should focus on changing the "human heart" and preach or teach about addiction instead of trying to forcefully change people. Anytime you have government get involve to pursue your objectives, I garantee there will be force. It is just like tax. Tax is force! You are oblige to pay!  So Christians should not get involved in any kind of force against people’s will. We should never portray gambler as someone who is evil, but is it not the addiction which causes irresponsibility and the ills of society that is the evil?

    In other words, Christian people need to learn to call sin by its name! Sin is found no where else, but in the heart. That is where there needs to be change! Jesus even taught that we had a CHOICE when it comes to salvation. Preach the truth with power, humility, and loving kindness.

    Thank you Badir for doing so!

  33. Hmmm says:

    I’m happy to read that Christians worry about whether I will go to heaven or not.  What I want to know is, do Christians, who are only Christians when it suits them, go to heaven?

  34. Rational Thinker says:


    I am not Christian. However, because I act upon my innate sense of what is right and wrong and I’m the product of a good upbringing, I am an ‘unconscious’ Christian? It is the height of arrogance, to suggest that just because someone acts in a moral way, such as loving their neighbor, they could only do this because they are really a Christian.
    By the way the Good Samaritan is a story Jesus told in his lifetime and so therefore pre-dates Christianity. It therefore follows that it is impossible that the protagonist could have been a Christian. Therefore, your reference inadvertently proves in Jesus’ own words, that people can love their neighbor in the absence of Christianity.
    I believe that morality is something innate in human nature and not given to us by a supernatural being. For you to say that the reason people are good, is that really we are all Christians whether we know it or not, by implication rubbishing every other world view from Poseidon to Buddha to Judaism, is folly and arrogance in equal measure.
    • Anonymous says:

      Actually evil is something innate in human nature which has been distorted from God’s original creation. 

  35. Al says:

    Great essay. Just wondering though, do women who cheat on their husbands go to Heaven?

    • Anonymous says:

      If it was with a neighbour, yes.

      • Atheist says:

        What about hermaphrodites who are unfaithful but not with a neighbour?  Does half go to heaven and half not?

    • Tin says:

      I guess, true is like the rays of the sun; there are no restrictions, it shines on everyone.  Hence, if you happen to get yourself involved in an intimate relationship with someone else other than your spouse, there is nothing wrong with that!  Who says you can’t love your spouse and see someone else?  Alot of people I know who cheat, especially guys, love their spouses. It is just a natural thing for opposite sex to bond with each other or else you are not a human being. Most people bond with someone else because they need more than a spouse to fulfill their need. Also, familiarity breeds boredom. You will find that if you go out and appreciate the flowers God has given you instead of one flower all the time, you will be alot happier because you won’t be attached to a person. Attachment is awful. Love means to allow the you and the other person to be free! 

      • Dirk says:

        Um. No. Swingers and adults in consenting open marriages can do whatever they want and "be free." And I agree that many times people in these types of relationships still love their spouses. However, if you married someone and promised to be faithful, and your spouse is not okay with you cheating (or does not know), then it is NOT okay.

        If you "need more than a spouse to fulfill [your] need" DON’T GET MARRIED!

        • God's Child says:

          Exactly….anyone who cheats on their spouse, man or woman, is doing WRONG in the eyes of God (and most people for that fact). Don’t get married if you can’t stay faithful…and keep out of the arms of your sporting buddies! Oh snap! "MA" and "PL"! 

        • Tin says:

          It’s all in the mind!  Attachment is the real problem. People become attached to each other and therefore don’t won’t to lose each other, and that is where you get jealousy and stressfully argumentative relationships. So the best way to deal with that you say, is to not get married. However, that does not solve becoming attached to someone. Married or no married, it doesn’t matter. Marriage is a christian ceremony. Back then, there was no such ceremony! The problem is attachment and co-dependcy with someone. How I see it, live life to the fullest, be humble, and never become attached to anyone. Love them and treat them kind – but never become attach. And if you want to marry or live with someone, just have a mutual understanding with each other to include more than one partner. Don’t do it behind the person’s back… that is just respect. You will find that enjoying life does not have to always be between you and your spouse. You got 1 life to live – live it!  Just be wise and transparent in what you do. Someone gave me this advise: Always put your wife first, love her first… never cling to another woman… always make her second, but the one taking care of you, make her first and show her respect. Let her know your intentions and your friends, and give her the freedom to do likewise. It all has to do with communication and allowing the other person to be free. Where there is freedom, there is love! I can’t see how love can survive in an atmosphere of fear, restrictions, and dishonesty. 

    • Anonymous says:


  36. Beautifully pieced together!

    Love has to do with harmonious living, peace of mind, togetherness, courage, nurturance, fairness, compassion, and humility. It is an underlying principle that goes beyond faith, religion, doctrine, head knowledge, sexual experience, race, political persuasion, or some mere belief or concept of a God. I guess the best way I can describe Love in words –

    Love is a realized sense of Oneness

  37. Slowpoke says:

    What happens if I don’t really like my neighbors that much but "love" the young hottie down the street?  Does that count? 

    • Anonymous says:

      We were all born in sin and shapen in iniquity, and our imperfections are taken care of by His grace – "mercy extended to the sinner".  We sin every day, every minute, every second"…The scriptures say, none is perfect. So those walking around in self-righteousness are on the path to hell. They are the ones playing self-appointed judge on God’s behalf. So, gazing at a hottie does not keep you out of heaven—that’s my opinion. We are human beings–not zombies!

    • Anonymous says:

      It’s not that kind of "love". It is agape (self-sacrificial) love.