Religion divides men into two opposed collectives:

the chosen versus the damned.

Peace to you and your's, and love from us...

I'm sorry, I thought you were upset that I bothered you, good I'm glad that's out of the way.....cuz I hate fighting, and you seemed so smart too, it would have been such a waste..

Let's get something out of the way first, I'm sure you've met many Christians, and many of them say they know God, and they don't. I do, without a doubt, and more than you can imagine....Do not take that lightly, for if you have something to say, be ready to think, or do not concern me with foolishness.... Lets put down our pride, listen, and seek what is said to see if it is true, but do not think that I will battle back-n-forth with you, it is your freewill to believe what you wish, if it is wrong, you will suffer the consequences. On the other hand, if I was as you say I am, wrong, I'd never know, there will be no bad consequences on my part, for I live now as I please also.......

When you make the claim "I do [know God], without a doubt, and more than you can imagine," I already see that you're having a problem. You want me to accept what you claim, even though it's the same garbage that others claim, but you want me to reject their claims in the meanwhile. I have no problem simply rejecting both theirs, as you suggest, as well as yours, too. So, you're on an even playing field with those with whom you're competing. Game, set, and match. Time to come out of the fryer.

You exhort "Do not take that lightly, for if you have something to say, be ready to think, for if you have something to say, be ready to think, or do not concern me with foolishness…"

First of all, though I consider this kind of interaction to be a form of entertainment for me, I do not take this lightly at all. I do not dichotomize between the pleasurable and the profound.

Second, you will find that I always have something to say, and that I am always ready to think. Where the Bible says "Judge not, lest ye be judged," I affirm the opposite: JUDGE, AND BE PREPARED TO BE JUDGED. I do not fear other men's minds, so I do not fear their judgment. Why do you think the authors of the Bible wanted men to fear the judgment of others? Answer: So that they would refrain from using their minds, so that they would "judge not."

And naturally, since I am a man of Reason, not of faith, I will not ask you to concern yourself with foolishness. You've got enough foolishness with the primitive god-beliefs of the Bible to last you a lifetime.

You also wrote: "Let's put down our pride, listen, and seek what is said to see if it is true, but do not think that I will battle back-n-forth with you, it is your freewill to believe what you wish, if it is wrong, you will suffer the consequences."

Pride is the sum of man's virtues. As Ayn Rand writes:

When you ask me to "put down" my pride, this is what you ask me to put down - the sum of my virtues, the very virtue that makes my life worth living. I will not do this for you, nor for anyone else, regardless of who does not approve. If your arbitrary mystical claims cannot surmount the unyielding wall of my pride, then you will have to live with the results.

As far as "believing what I wish": I accept the fact that existence exists, and that existence exists independent of consciousness. It is because existence exists that I reject your god-belief, and every variant of god-belief on the planet ever known to man. I argue that because existence exists, god-belief is invalid. The argument I have assembled to prove the invalidity of god-belief, both yours and the Muslim's, the Jew's and the Hindu's, etc., is sound. I argue that even for you to attempt to take issue with my argument, you validate its essential premise, which is the certainty of the metaphysical primacy of existence.

I submit for the record: Your god-belief is INVALID.

Therefore, any attempt you make to validate your god-belief, since it is invalid, must also be invalid as well. And furthermore, I argue that your attempt to validate the invalid is motivated by deep-seated irrationality, ignorance, and/or resentment of the facts of reality.

Read my website for more details on this.

As for the threat implied by your words "if you are wrong, you will suffer the consequences," I have this to say:

Threats do not validate the arbitrary. But since your god-beliefs are irrescindably arbitrary, you have ultimately nothing more than the issuance of threats to back them up. That is why the Bible's (primarily the New Testament's) preferred means of transmitting its faith claims is by THREAT. "Believe, or go to hell," saith the priest. Why? because he has surrendered his capacity reason.

"Belief in the supernatural begins as belief in the superiority of others." - Ayn Rand

You write: "On the other hand, if I was as you say I am, wrong, I'd never know, there will be no bad consequences on my part, for I live now as I please also......."

Reality will not be so easily evaded as you wish. The fact is, when you sacrifice yourself to a god-belief, the first thing to go is your mind. You think you still have a mind, but your mind is not yours, but a pretense you hold up before others. Many probably buy into the bull which you like to spread. I do not. I see right through it.

I think you've misunderstood. You did not disturb me. Actually, I enjoy getting e-mail like yours. It reminds me where I have been (I was a believer for quite some time myself, but eventually I woke up), and it reminds me how far I've come (since I woke up from the stupor of Christian mysticism, my life has become an astounding success in every area of my effort and enterprise).

Being a great success is not a surprise:

St. Luke 4:5-7 5 And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.

6 And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it.

7 If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine.

If you resent my success, a flourishing which can only have been made possible by rejecting the god-belief of my youth, in my case Christianity, then you will have to answer to your own conscience as to why that is. I suspect what it is that you resent already: the responsibility of thinking and the fact that wishes do not alter reality.

On what do you base your claim that I had not understood what you had written?

Right from the start, I told you that I have seen God, you must think that I have lied, or you would have understood what I said, because you would have saught to know more, knowing I'm not lying, but you do not know me, nor do you know that I would not lie.

If you've seen God, what does he look like? Does he wear a beard?

How do you prove that you've seen God, as you claim?

Of course, you'll evade these and many more questions which I have for you.

Meanwhile, can you answer one question for me:

HOW DO YOU DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE INVISIBLE AND THE NON-EXISTENT?

If you respond to anything in my message here, please answer this question in certain, testable terms.

Do I think you're a liar? Yes, of course I do. After all, the Bible even calls you a liar. Paul wrote in Romans 3:4: "Let God be true, but every man a liar." Of course, that makes Paul a liar as well.

Does that make me a liar? According to Paul it sure does. But Paul admits that he is a liar, so we must consider the source. Again, the mystical holy book incriminates itself.

Think about that Anton, Your saying there is no God, while I have seen our God, do you think now, that after having seen Him, that you could utter some mircle words that would make me deny what I saw, even you base your understanding in the facts ?

A miracle is a violation of the law of identity. In other words, a miracle is a self-contradiction. I do not accept the claim that miracles are valid. All contradictions are invalid. See the following links:

The message is simple to see Anton, so simple even dedicated Christians as they call themselves, are blinded by their zeal. Jesus revealed to us to love one another as best we can, and to strive in that daily, perfecting it, so that we, [as He did,] can express that same love to others, so they can also experience that love, and know also that loving one another will reach a mans heart to turn him from himself.

The cross, an instrument of torturous execution, is a fitting symbol for your anti-life beliefs.

The Gentiles were in darkness to this understanding, even God's chosen people were, as so many of us are today. God sent Jesus to a world that would reject Him, and kill Him, but God would raise Him up again and they would see the glory, and know that this life is not the end of life if one could be raised from the dead.

I quote Ayn Rand:

If you worship Jesus, then you worship the sacrifice of virtue for the sake of vice. In other words, virtue must be sacrificed for the sake of vice, which means: Vice holds moral primacy over virtue.

It is a sick and disgusting mythology which inflicts your mind.

The impact it would have on the spirit of the men that saw it, would be tremendous.

Ideas put into action have a dramatic effect. The result of putting rational ideas into action is to benefit man's life. The result of putting irrational ideas into action is to destroy man's life.

This is the history of the Christian church: the destruction of men's lives.

You are not without excuse for promoting an anti-man philosophy, and I will not hesitate to oppose it with every fiber in my body, every effort of my mind.

Isaiah 6:5 Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts.

These 11 other men, the disciples, are written to have ran when they caught Jesus in the garden, to try Him.

Why did these same men give their lives after they claim to have seen Him rise again, if they really didn't see what they saw?

Be realistic now, if they lied about what they saw, then they would know in their heart, that they were lying, then they would not know truly if there was an after life or not, so giving their lives to a lie is pointless.

Does their sacrifice make what they claimed true?

The belief that the sacrifice of one's life establishes the truth of a knowledge claim is the end result of the primacy of consciousness view of reality. The primacy of consciousness view of reality, which all god-belief implicitly but necessarily presupposes, is invalid. Why? Because the primacy of existence is true.

When men reject reality and sound principles based on the facts of reality, beginning with the primacy of existence, destruction can be the only result.

Also, we cannot go by the idea that, "these men," would carry the cause for Jesus, being they ran, and it was against even the high priests of that time who ruled the idea's of the people as did the Catholic's. So these men could not find confidence in the words of Jesus, if He had not really rissen again, since they fled from Him in His capture.

How do you prove these highly suspicious claims? You have not done so, nor has any other apologist.

Again, I reject your god-belief, and I do not blindly accept the claims made in your holy book.

If you resent this fact, my advise is: Get over it.

Now is where you had misunderstood me, it is not the magic that he rose again that reveals Jesus as the Son of God, but the love He has for us.

We read in John 15:13: "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."

To call Jesus' act of self-sacrifice an "act of love," is to contradict oneself.

To claim that you "love Jesus," is to contradict yourself.

I pointed out my article to you twice before this, and you offered no rebuttal. It must be the case that either you agree with it, or you simply do not know how to use reason against reason.

Indeed, to attempt to use reason against reason is simply self-defeating.

St. John 17:8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.

He gave His life so that others would understand that Love He tried to showed us, without limits, even giving His life over for that way of understanding. One thing here is for sure, Jesus walked on earth claiming to be the Son of God, and they killed Him for preaching love and forgiveness. It is given to me on the behalf of Christ, to not only believe, [if I do believe,] but also to suffer for His sake. Anton, the sake of loving you no matter what, is greater than all, for if you do not see this, it will be against you in the judgement. There is no malice in love, or evil, it is pure, undefiled, when it is used for the greater purpose. When you have beaten me down, I will rise without judgement, and without anger, my anger is against evil, not man.

You have offered no argument in response to this. Why is that?

Because you cannot.

Jesus did not preach love. What Jesus preached was a pretense that obliterates and destroys love.

Love is one's commitment to his own values, and is thus profoundly selfish in nature. Love is possible only to those of unbreached self-esteem. Those who relish in self-sacrifice have surrendered their self-esteem, and thus their own capacity to love.

Love is not a blanket embrace of all men. The man who is capable of genuine love does not cheapen himself or his virtues by saying "I love everyone," attributing value indiscriminately to all men, regardless of their character, regardless of their rejection of Reason, regardless of their commitment to vice.

Love is not the emotion which one has for his moral enemies. When Jesus says "Love your enemies," (Matt. 5:44), he utterly destroys the concept.

For men of reason, the emotion which one feels for the viciousness of others is repugnance and disgust.

Love is not the embodiment of sacrificing virtue for the sake of vice, as we discovered to be the essential nature of the Christ myth.

Love is the commitment to virtue and value regardless of what vice drives other men.

According to Christianity, assuming possession of one's own mind is "sin," i.e., evil.

According to Objectivism, surrendering one's own mind to others is evil.

Take your pick, and live with the consequences.

As I mentioned in my previous note, I have tentative plans to publish an analysis of what you wrote on my website. It is a non sequitur to

draw from my announcement of such plans the conclusion that I have misunderstood something.

I have written 9 books, "Faith, Hope & Love," "The Balance of Truth and Understanding," "Jesus' Purpose," "Following on the Cross," "The Saving Grace," "Jesus, Son or God?," "The spirit Within Man," "The End Times," "Revelation," and one epistle called, "The Light." If you wanna' analyze something, read them all they are free, and post them with your analization.

Please Note:

Only, "Faith, Hope & Love," "The Balance of Truth and Understanding," "Jesus' Purpose," "Following on the Cross," are available now at http://www.homestead.com/jesuswon/freebookspage.html but, "The Saving Grace," and "Jesus, Son or God?," will not be available for 2 more months. "The End Times," and "Revelation," will not be released do to the fact that someone doesn't need to come to God in fear, because the fruit of fear is not the fruit of repentance. "The spirit Within Man," and the epistle, "The Light," will not be released at all, except to churches, [The learned,].

Is it the case that you do *not* want me to understand? Remember, I was a believer like you for quite some time myself. I read the Bible, I taught it, I evangelized and sought converts on street corners, I stood alone to proclaim the so-called "good news" of the gospel, not knowing any better. I had become a Christian, probably much like you, without any genuine understanding of philosophy. In essence, like so many "believers" I've met in my life, I had become a Christian in ignorance. Many believers today claim to have become Christians in their early teens. Now what real knowledge of reason and of the world does someone have when their 13 or 14 years old, that they can make a life-long decision at that age, and 20 years later, never having genuinely put forth any legitimate effort into understanding what reality is, say that their religious faith is "the truth"?

Amen...

Hosea 4:6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.

7 As they were increased, so they sinned against me: therefore will I change their glory into shame.

8 They eat up the sin of my people, and they set their heart on their iniquity.

For me, I was 23 when I was found by God, I had already established what life was about, so I thought. The ignorance of thinking that faith is, "reading the Bible, teaching it, evangelizing and seeking converts on street corners, or standing alone to proclaim the so-called "good news" of the gospel," is not faith. Faith is trust, and you don't even have to move physically to have faith. I cannot show you my faith, you may see me as faithful, but then one would be seeing through their own eyes, and not by the eyes that God has given us. My faith is in me, no one can see it, to take a count of it, nor a measurement to know that it exists, one can only assume, that I follow based on my actions. But if one should see something in me, it is that I try to let live and live. I am called to pass no judgement accept that which is the truth, to testify to what I have seen and know, but the only judgement I agree on passing as I have been shown, is words of truth.

As Ayn Rand so eloquently put it:

"Intellectually, to rest one's case on faith means to concede that reason is on the side of one's enemies - that one has no rational arguments to offer."

("Conservatism: An Obituary," Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, [New York: Signet, 1967], p. 197.)

Think simple Anton,

one thing you can always say about me, is that I have given you no cause to hurt me, to punish me, to bring me grief in anyway. I will do nothing to provoke you, unless you are easly provoked by words, but I'll tell you a secret. If what I know is truth, then nothing can shake that truth, not even me, and it is the confidence, not me, so I cannot be easly provoked, for then I would be dening what I say I know, if I anger at another's opinion I have not had the confidence in me in the first place. I say then, find that confidence, or walk away as you did.

You don't have to worry about provoking me. I am always prepared to reason. I do not lash out in violence.

Even Jesus says:

Revelation 3:15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.

May we each get what we deserve.

I will accept nothing but that, which I deserve.

I know your works does not mean labours, but what it is that one seeks from their heart to consider their faith, as you did above, considering works as the proof of your belief. This is lukewarm, and unless one turns from the idea that they can earn something that's been given, they will perish in their own ways, because them ways lead to distruction.

Why do you choose to do this?

They have destroyed your faith, see what I mean ?

I do not give credit to others for removing my dependence on faith, as when I was a believer. I give credit to myself. As you mentioned earlier, it is a question of one's freewill, i.e., of my own volition, which is my power to choose between alternatives. I was fully acquainted with what the Christian religion was going to give me: the non-life of a zombie. I pulled myself out of the mass grave of Christian god-belief by my own strength, by the strength of what little pride I had left, by my life and my love for it. I summoned every last bit of strength remaining in me to pull myself away from the walking carcasses who had for years inhabited the church I attended.

Once finally free from their blood-sucking clutches, I was able finally to wake up, and wake up I did. And believers resent this fact, and they resent me for exposing their mind-games.

This is all I have time to respond to at this time.

I urge you to read every word of it.

As I mentioned above and in my e-mail to you, if you desire to contact me again, you must meet me as an adult and address every point in my response to you. Otherwise I will see you as an intellectual and moral coward, and ignore you completely.

You know where to go to discover what I have to say.

And remember: You sought me out first, I did not seek you out; I merely responded to you, but you keep coming back for more, so something must be drawing you.

I think that something is your own exhaustion of mysticism, and your latent hunger for principle.

It is time to admit it to yourself: your god-belief is not satisfying you, that is why you are seeking outside your own believing social circles. You desire a model of Reason. You desire Rationality.

Rationality is yours for the choosing, but it cannot exist side-by-side next to your commitment to the arbitrary, mystical beliefs which you've inherited from the primitive authors who wrote the Bible.

May we each get what you deserve,

Anton Thorn