Don’t hate God out of ignorance or misguided belief.

There are two kinds of atheist, God haters, and those who don’t care because they don’t believe. The haters go out of their way to do everything to discredit that which they just cannot understand. The ones that don’t care are the ones who actually don’t believe, and so they act accordingly.

Why should a person who doesn’t believe go out of their way to discredit God, when there are so many destructive delusions out there? If someone raises a sword in God’s name, sure I can see discrediting that action. I would hope you would discredit that action. But that action does not discredit God.

There is a video that equates God to a jug of milk. This is by a group that doesn’t understand God, because they cannot see God; simple as that. Their pretenses for discrediting God comes from not knowing what God has said about knowing how to find him, and receive that which is His to give from His abundance in grace.

If a man, blinded by ignorance, cannot read a book, is it the writer’s fault or the reader’s fault? It is the reader’s, the writers, and neither. If the reader had the opportunity to learn but squandered it, then it is the readers. If the writer, knowing that the reader would never decide to read and believe, made it in such a way that he would never come to believe, then the writer’s. But what if the writer, had set disciples out to teach the people, and the time had not come for that individual to learn yet, or the disciple that was to come had not arrived yet? Go up one paragraph, if you are an atheist, to get your chuckle out of the way now, for when the time comes, and it may, that you are driven to the hands of God, to come to know him. At that time, you will think back to this, and fearfully tear up, and God forgave you for this, long before you came to know Him, knowing that you would come to know Him in His Glory.

So if you are an atheist, and you want to get along with your neighbors, because they should have the liberty to believe as you have the liberty to disbelieve, then to be hating on something that you may never come to believe in. If you don’t care to get along with your neighbor, then you will just make life that much more miserable for yourself, because God’s followers, and children, have a tendency to push back as hard or harder than what you atheist can actually see.

As a Christian Minister, I respect, and love, as brothers, my atheist friends, because if I don’t, and the come to ask of God, how will I answer them but in snide, or unbelieving remarks. No, put away your deceit, and put on Christ, that you can turn to those who the Gospels claim to be at war with God, and present them peace, that they to may come to know God as the God of Peace, Love, Prosperity, Life ever lasting, and most of all, the God of limitless forgiveness.


  1. An atheist is a non believer, a thiest is a believer….therefore an atheist CANNOT hate god(s) because they don’t believe they exist. These outspoken atheists you’re referring to believe in the spirit of humanity and intelligence, and that morality is very much possible without supernatural dictation. Religion teaches the opposite, to rely on tradition, and shun anything new that doesn’t scream ‘jeezus’.

    1. An atheist is a non believer, a thiest is a believer….therefore an atheist CANNOT hate god(s) because they don’t believe they exist[…]

      And you just highlighted the whole centric part of the problem with the haters. Why are they acting out in animosity of something that they supposedly don’t believe exists.

      The people I am describing are in the realm of calling Christians deranged.

      […]Religion teaches the opposite, to rely on tradition[…]

      That isn’t just religion, but yes, I will agree that the dogma of religion does support a reliance on tradition.

      I may be a Christian Minister, but there is a reason that I avoid working in the normal arena of established religion. Hell, most of the modern churches seem to actively, or passively, promote blind obedience to the government, and church dogma.

      When I preach liberty, I am also preaching liberty found in Christ, that is liberty from even the dogma of the church, and the sins of the mosaic laws.

      1. No christian I have met wants to jump on the hardcore fundamentalist bandwagon for many reasons, but the ones who don’t choose a more comfortable interpretation of a book that consists of nothing more than others interpretations. If you’re going to follow a book then follow it, but don’t cherry pick it to death until it fits into you’re own ideas more comfortably. You can’t say you believe in the bible, but only follow the guidelines halfway. It’s watered down and useless that way. As for athiests ‘attacking’ christians and calling them deranged, it’s because they are concerned with the well being of humanity and it’s forward progression. The indoctrination of children in the religious communities is a direct barrier toward that progression.

      2. If you’re going to follow a book then follow it, but don’t cherry pick it to death until it fits into you’re own ideas more comfortably.

        Interesting statement, however what I work on is eliminating those things that are dogma from what the scriptures actually say.

        Such as the end of the old testament Mosaic laws were replaces with the perfect sacrifice. This isn’t watering down the scriptures, it is understanding that the scriptures have to be understood in both timeline and content. You cannot ignore forgiveness of the new testament for the laws of the old testament, nor ignore the sacrifice of the new testament without understanding that the laws of the old testament were evidence to why man cannot make himself righteous.

        As for atheists ‘attacking’ Christians and calling them deranged, it’s because they are concerned with the well being of humanity and it’s forward progression. The indoctrination of children in the religious communities is a direct barrier toward that progression.

        Concern without clarity is no better than drawing a line in the sand and shouting profanities. The Christians are going to circle the wagons and fight back. This is counter productive towards peace and being neighbors.

        If a religious community such as the Westboro Baptist Church rears its ugly head, then I equate them to the evils of the Nazi regime, true intolerance. But when I run into a group of Christians in Central CA, who would rather pray for you, regardless of your beliefs, and thank you for your patience and time, then I don’t see why they are attacked too.

        Simply put, I am trying to be as narrow of a scope to the haters as I can be, because most atheist I know are very good people. Also I bring the same narrow filter to the theist for the same reason.

        However, re-reading your comments, I need clarity, are you broad brushing the theist, or also narrow filtering. I’m not trying to add words, I just don’t want to make an incorrect assumption, and this is really the point where I have to ask, are there no good Christians? (Broad brush) Or are you clearly calling out key verbose groups? (Narrow filter).

        I suspect that since you have continued this discussion with me, that you are actually being narrow filter, but I would hate to be wrong on this. Especially since I would be part of the broad brush group. :)

      3. I am not saying anything regarding christians or any religious peoples individually, I see problems with the belief itself.
        I see religions as a crutch, something you are taught young to depend on, and to me, this is a barrier.
        But it is interesting that to you, a group of christians randomly asking people to pray with them may be just as intrusive and annoying as an atheist or group of atheist that openly question or debate your beliefs and are willing to state things more bluntly that other ‘quiet athiests’.

        It’s not a war, but I believe non believers have as much a right to divulge their beliefs as christians do.
        The difference is that generally non believers are happy to oblige to a debate (most an argument, and I’m not saying that none do), while the majority of christians (once again not all) are instantly victimized and call it an attack because someone layed out some facts and instead of responding with more facts, they jump straight to the ‘godless heathen militant’ warning christianity.

      4. I have had a real hard time replying to this. Partially because of distractions, which resulted in other blog posts, and partially because of an email exchange we had. The heart of the person I debate with is very important to me. It helps determine if I dismiss them (because they just want to have a verbal fight with me), or enjoy the debate (because we both get to learn).

        Just as I am expected to share my beliefs with all who want to learn, I would expect atheists to do the same. That is an expectation of free speech, and a reason I am glad we don’t live under a theocracy. So I don’t expect quiet atheists, just not ones chanting at my church that God is dead, or that Jesus was only a good philosopher. It is the same respect that I would want to forward to a meeting of humanists, atheist, Buddhists, etc. And I have seen the atheist groups, that seem to be support group (yay), over hate groups (double yay). So as for randomly asking people to pray, I don’t see that as any different than the activism I see at the Orange Country Spectrum in CA, when various groups have their political free speech zones, or at universities, or even door to door fund raising for some charitable activity. The big difference seems to be that these Christians didn’t want anything back, they just wanted to give. Maybe that is what is to abhorrent about their nature, it was a two way valuation, time of the receiver vs the prayers of the giver. For me, that is an equitable exchange, for a non-believer, I can see where that is I give you time, and you give me hot air. Meh, I deal with a lot of hot air in my very liberal backyard. Gotten used to it. So maybe I am not a good judge of weather or not someone should ask you if you want to be prayed for.

        As for a crutch.. so in the infinite expanse of time from void and null came something, and from that something came the big bang, (No I am not one of those the world and universe are only 5K yrs old. I am in the camp of only what is worth tracking for purposes of history was 5K years old. Everything else is of great scientific curiosity. More on this later.) Then some carbon based non-living slime oozed onto some crystals and pop! we have life? And over a few millennia of miraculous randomization events we just so happen to evolve from an ooze to an intelligent race of being that just so happen to evolve to the point where we can debate such things and their meaning. And all of this supposition is based on the observations of a man on the Galapagos islands looking at birds, and later partial fossil evidence, which we keep finding breaks in the fossil history, and we have several times found either misinformation from bad observations from archeologist, or from people who have falsified information to get a paper out for more funding.

        So you don’t have to counter with the religion part, I will cover that too, and I will find it fun to be critical of the church with believes that a magical bearded man who was outside of time was able to create everything in 7 days, create dinosaurs, and destroy them in a blink of an eye, create people from mud, make them dominion over the world just so they could commit an act that was supposed to kill them, but they lived long enough instead to have children, and their children’s children had magical powers to separate the sea, call down plagues, and all forms of death, slaughter whole nations, just so that they could be enslaved a second time by the Romans. Then God gave birth to himself through some virgin girl, just so that he could let himself be ravaged by the Romans and die on a cross, and come back mysteriously just a few days later. Then we are to believe that this began a church that would sell absolutions for cash to people, wage wars across 3 continents, and mercilessly slaughter its own people in which hunts throughout the ages, just to appease some multifaceted God who seems to take joy in the blood of others. I suspect that this is a pretty good summary of some atheists view of Christianity. I cannot speak of views of other religions. And I think I have covered the spaghetti monster and milk jug commentaries well enough in the past, so I won’t rehash those, even though I am completely entertained by their folly. :)

        So in addressing the problem with the belief itself:

        1. It is easy to write any belief into a full ridicule. And I had a lot of fun making sure that I got to write these rather than you opening the door to one of my readers attacking you for doing it.
        2. Understanding the words of a belief does not equate to understanding the belief.
        3. If Christianity is wrong, the first question is, are we talking about a Church, a Religion, or the whole principle of God
          1. I personally will not defend a church or religion that I am not personally involved in.
          2. Christianity is made up of many Christian religions, many of whom scare the spirit out of me.

        On that note, I might as well cover a brief of what I do believe, since it is clear that I am a Christian, but with open ears to hear from the atheist humans out there.

        • The laws of the old testament were evidence that righteousness is from believing God.
        • The laws of the old testament were also evidence that righteousness cannot be achieved by works.
        • By the old standard of the laws, righteousness was so unachievable that God had to provide a perfect person who could fulfill the laws, and provide the perfect sacrifice for all of men who would believe.
        • The distance of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 is measured in millions of years, to give proper time for dinosaurs, which is why the fish had to replenish the sea, and the birds replenish the sky. Things were there, and then they were not. The big meteor hit that wiped out the dinosaurs also would be covered by and God said let there be light, and he separated the light from the darkness. Volcanic plumes glow at night, and it isn’t until they cool that their glow goes out. And if we find solid evidence that counters this, then we have to research the scriptures to see what we may have mistranslated.
        • I do teach that Christ Jesus rose after 3 days and 3 nights.
        • I also teach that the breaking of bread at the last supper was symbolism for what was to come.
        • Since we have taken his teaching into us, we are part of his body, and He is the head, and God almighty is the only one over him.
        • There are a million more things I could cover, but I am going to have to stop somewhere, so this is a good point.

        So based on my other posts, and what I cover hear, I don’t really see this Christianity thing as a crutch, but I do use it as a reason to promote liberty. :) On the other hand, I also can see where being an atheist wouldn’t be a crutch, but also a reason to promote liberty. I just don’t want atheists to shout at me for carrying a bible, or chanting in front of my church, that is just plainly rude. Now, if they want to stop me, and have me answerable for my beliefs, hell, I would expect that of a Christian, so why not. Come and ask me questions, let me show you how wise, or stupid I am. Just don’t hate for hates sake, or stop me if I have a schedule to keep, or I am too tired to debate. Free speech is either free speech for everyone or no one, but politeness is also golden for being neighborly.

      5. Not to disregard the rest of your response ( I am not feeling well today, not in the writing spirit), but where does your theory of an entire million years passed between genesis 1:1 and genesis 1:2 come from?

      6. The proper translation of Genesis 1:2 is and the world became without form and void.

        This comes from the fact that the verb form of to-be in Hebrew doesn’t have a word for “was”. So years ago, when I asked about “was” they pointed out that it only could have one proper translation, which is became.

        And here I was looking forward to hearing your amusement on how well I cam ridicule my own beliefs. :)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.