Refutation of Ray Comfort's "The School of Biblical Evangelism" (Part 6)

Lesson 69: Atheism

Here Ray makes a case against atheism. He makes the following statement: ''I don’t believe in atheists. This isn’t because I haven’t met anyone who claimed the title, but because such a person cannot exist.'' After giving examples that it is impossible to know exactly the weight of all the sand on Hawaii, or how many hairs are on the back of a Tibetan yak, Comfort then goes on to say:''... let’s say that the atheist has an incredible 1 percent of all the knowledge in the universe. Would it be possible, in the 99 percent of the knowledge that he hasn’t yet come across, that there might be ample evidence to prove the existence of God? One who is reasonable will be forced to admit that it is possible. Somewhere, in the vast knowledge that he hasn’t yet discovered, there could be enough proof that God does exist.... Let’s look at the same thought from another angle. If I were to make an absolute statement such as, “There is no gold in China,” what is necessary for that statement to be proved true? I would need absolute or total knowledge. I must know that there is no gold in any rock, in any river, in the ground, in any store, in any ring, or in any filling in any mouth in China. If there is one speck of gold in China, then my statement is false and I have no basis for it. I need absolute knowledge before I can make an absolute statement.''

In this lesson, Comfort has said.

1. You cannot say that there is no evidence for God unless you are omniscient.
2. You cannot say that there is no God unless you can search everywhere, which would require omnipotence.

Basically, Ray's entire premise is false, since Ray claims that atheism makes an absolute statement that "there is no God" when the truth is atheism is defined as simply the lack of belief in god(s). Also, Ray has shifted the "burden of proof" fallacy. Ray is the one making the positive claim that there is a God, and thus the responsibility is on him to prove that there is a God, not argue that those who do not accept his belief are not infallible, thereby attempting to give credulity to his position.

Claiming that God could exist in the knowledge not yet obtained is a fallacial argument. Based on this logic, theoretically an infinite number of gods could exist, and the claim that "God exists" is no more reasonable to true than the claim "universal invisible sky pixies exist."

Finally, one does not require omniscience to prove something does not exist. for example, one does not need omniscience to prove that spherical cubes do not exist. By definition, a cube has 8 corners and a sphere has zero corners. It is impossible for both to exist. Likewise, an atheist can point to the philosophical contradictions in the attributes of God. Example, how can perfect being create imperfection? Why would a perfect being, when perfect by definition is something that is whole and complete, require praise and companions (followers, angels, etc.) How can God be omnipotent and omniscient; can God change his mind? How can God have omniscience and have free will? How can a all-good God knowingly create future suffering? How can a infinitely merciful God send people to eternal punishment for a finite crime? Why does God have emotions (psychologist Valerie Tarico makes a very solid argument that all gods have human psyches, and are just creations of the human mind and thus do not exist).

Lesson 70: How to Prove the Existence of God

This lesson is first started with a quote from Dwight Eisenhower, "It takes no brains to be an Atheist." Atheists, Kirk says, "... don't want to be confused by the facts." Comfort follows up by quoting Psalm 14:1 (“The fool has said in his heart, There is no God”), and then says that Atheists deny common sense.

How else can you defend an indefensible position? You have to twist everything around. That is why the Bible defines the “fool” as someone who does not believe completely the outrageous claims from the most incredulous sources even without asking for evidence – despite the fact that every other source in the world defines a fool as someone who does all of these things. Its a psychological spin.

Atheists deny common sense? Oh really? Would common sense favor explaining everything carefully through insightful investigation or simply answering everything with “magic”?

Here's Comfort's proofs:

1) The question, "Who made God?" is a silly question because, "the fact of the existence of the Creator is axiomatic (self-evident)."

"God is self-evident." Obviously this isn't true because if it were then the discussion would be over. God is NOT self-evident, period. God is no more self-evident than eternal Krishna or the Invisible Pink Unicorn.

Furthermore, this does not answer the question “who made God?” For the sake of argument, if Ray Comfort's point was accurate (which it clearly is not) then the question still remains where did God come from?

If Ray Comfort answers God is eternal and always was, and he was never created or came from anywhere, then congradulations Ray you've just destroyed your own argument and theological worldview. If God can be eternal and uncreated, then why not just save a step and say the universe is eternal and uncreated? Why must we add “magic” in the equation to explain the mystery of origins?

2) By observation, space doesn't have an end. "Strain the mind though it may, we have to believe (have faith) that space has no beginning and no end. The same applies with God. He has no beginning and no end. He is eternal."

"Space does not have an end." This statement is false. At least for our universe. If you want to talk about a multiverse you open a whole new can of worms.

3) Although space doesn't have an end, apparently Time does have an end. "... time is a dimension that God created, into which man was subjected. (the bible) tells us that one day time will no longer exist." "God Himself dwells outside of the dimension He created (2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 1:2); He dwells in eternity and is not subject to time."

"Time has an end." Does it? We're not sure about that. We won't know for sure though until we have a better understanding of Dark Matter and Dark Energy - which means we need a better understanding of the density of the universe. "Time has an end" is not an obviously true statement. The true answer is, again, "We don't know! Isn't that great?!"

4) Everything that has been created has a creator. A building has a builder, a painting has a painter. "We can’t see Him, hear Him, touch Him, taste Him, or smell Him. How can we know that He exists? Why, creation proves, beyond the shadow of the smallest doubt, that there is a Creator. You cannot have a “creation” without a Creator." Comfort wins us over on this point with another dig - "This is so simple that a child can understand it. The only ones who have trouble with its simplicity are those who profess to be intellectuals."

"Everything that has been created has a creator." An arch, for example, has a creator. Architecturally, arches are the best example of something that has been constructed. When constructing an arch it must be supported by scaffolding or else it will fall down. Arches require a continuous line of touching bricks. Non-parabolic arches must be supported by walls on the sides or else the arch's bricks will push the walls outward until the whole thing collapses.

There is just no way for this complex bit of architecture to form naturally - say over millions of years due to natural processes that include erosion due to wind and water. It's just too unbelievable... or is it? Here is a photo of a naturally formed arch that was developed exactly as just described.

That being said, does everything that is created have a creator? Ray Comfort assumes that the universe was created, without giving any proof that it indeed was. The only argument he has ever proposed as “proof” was “common sense” – perhaps the mindless argument from Ray Comfort. Common sense is not proof of anything. Common sense once told humanity that the Earth is the center of the universe.

That's all of Ray Comfort's “proofs” of God.

All Ray Comfort has shown is several “proofs” that he is full of poor arguments.

Lesson 71: Atheist Obstacles

Comfort does not create a list of such obstacles, so here they are, properly picked out.

1) "let God show himself" objection: Comfort calls the people who use this argument “proud and ignorant sinner” with “no understanding of the nature of His Creator” who says, “I will believe if God will appear to me.” Comfort then mixes Exodus 33:18–23 with 1 Corinthians 10:4 in order to explain why, “No man has ever seen the essence of God.”

For those unfamiliar with this section of Exodus, Moses has asked God to “Show me your glory.” God responds by saying he likes Moses, and would love to do as he asks, but exposing him to God’s full glory would kill him. God then stuffs Moses into a cleft in a rock and places his hand over Moses to protect him as he walks past. For some reason, Comfort leaves out part of Exodus 33:23, which says, “And I will take away mine hand and thou shalt see my back parts but my face shall not be seen.” The original Hebrew word is achowr, which means things like “backside” or “hinder parts”. Some religious scholars interpret this to mean the “after effects” or "essence" of God’s presence, but that doesn’t seem to agree with the use of the word for “hand” which the same scholars say does in fact mean “hand”. In either case, saying that no one has ever seen the essence of God isn't exactly true.

To answer Comfort, Yes, some Atheists have asked God to show himself, and Comfort uses the bible to answer that by saying that God actually can't show himself without killing the viewer with God's glory. (Except that God's backsides are apparently a little less glorious.) Still, "showed himself" through the appearances of a burning bush, for example, or the huge pillar of cloud and fire are both direct, visible revelations from God.

2) "Prove God doesn't exist" objection: Comfort states that the Atheist, "...takes an illogical leap by concluding that there is no God, because it cannot be proved that He doesn’t exist. Such reasoning is absurd. Why would anyone try to prove that God doesn’t exist when it can be proved that He does? Creation proves scientifically and absolutely to any sane mind that there is a Creator. His existence is axiomatic."

It has not been established or proven that the universe is a "creation," despite Ray Comfort's repeating pleas and assertions.

3) "The Problem with Prayer" objection: Comfort sets up a scene with a sick child and a praying family. If the child dies then the Atheist, according to Comfort, points out that the prayer didn't work. If the child lives then he lives due to what the Atheist calls naturally explained reasons. Then Comfort completely misses the point by going on to say that, "... one thing we do know is that answered or unanswered prayer has nothing to do with God’s existence." He gives a "broken car" analogy where he says, "What would be my intellectual capacity if I concluded that (my car) had no manufacturer simply because I couldn’t contact them about the dilemma? The fact of their existence has nothing to do with whether or not they return my calls."

Replace "God" in Ray's reasoning with any other deity or any fictional character or creature in your imagination, and it all works just as effectively. While prayer may or may not, this does not prove that universal invisible sky pixies, magic sandwiches or red fire-proof whales that swim inside the sun don't exist.

The real problem is the ''lack of positive evidence.'' Prayer is often claimed as proof that a groups particular deity exists, but under controlled studies, prayer has yet to provide any evidence whatsoever.

4) "God exists regardless of Human Testimony" objection. Here he says that miracles, or the lack of same, do not have anything to do with God's actual existence. He uses the sun as an analogy, "The sun doesn’t exist because we see its light, or because we feel its warmth. Its existence has nothing to do with any human testimony. Nor does it cease to exist because a blind man is not aware of its reality, or because it becomes cloudy, or the night falls. The sun exists, period."

The next paragraphs aren't an Atheist objection.

The first piece is about "Odd Rant about Idolatry." In these paragraphs Comfort says, "If men will not embrace the biblical revelation of God, their nature is to predictably go into idolatry."

Finally Comfort finishes with a paragraph about the, "Adamant atheist April Pedersen". Here Comfort says he sent a copy of the Atheist Objections to Ms. Pedersen, who responded by saying that they were, "...worded with impeccable logic..." and "...nearly impossible to find holes in your premise...."

Agreed. The sun exists whether we agree with or deny its existence. The sun exists even if every one of us were blind, and living on the bottom of the ocean where we could no longer directly detect it. It exists regardless of what we say. But we can test that the sun exists. We can feel it's warmth, turn it's radiation into electricity, calculate how it's mass affects the planets in our solar system, watch its sunspots, and experience what happens to our cell phones and radios when it flares. We can even experiment with what would happen if it did not exist, through astronomical observation of gas and matter that do not orbit a star like our sun, or by examining the absence of solar radiation on the dark side of Mercury or our own satellites. The sun exists no matter what we say - and we have mountains of evidence that prove its existence. We have no such evidence for God.

Who the hell is Ms. Pedersen? Is she a prominent Atheist? A quick Google search for “Atheist” + "April Pedersen" revealed a mere 22 hits.

Lesson 72: Atheist Questions Part 1

Kirk's Statement: Read this atheist group’s questionnaire. It is really insightful and wonderful material to have ready for your next encounter with an atheist.

There is nothing "wonderful" about this material, rather it is a repeat of very old theist arguments that have been shown to be false many times long ago.

Question 1) "How would you define God, and why are you so convinced that there is one?" Ray answers: God is the Creator, Upholder, and the Sustainer of the universe. He revealed Himself to Moses as the one and only true God.

The historical evidence for Moses is actually very feeble. In fact, the historical search for Moses is considered dead, and it is widely held that Moses is simply a fictional character of the Old Testament. Basically, Ray is convinced their is an invisible deity because said deity revealed himself to a fictional character, which is similar to believing Albus Dumbledore is a real person because he revealed himself to Harry Potter.

So, we have a fictional character claiming there is a “Creator, Upholder, and Sustainer” of the universe. Well, why don't we just examine the universe to see if it requires any God to function and maintain itself.

The ending result: the universe does NOT need a God, just as lightning does not need a divine smith in the sky to strike his hammer to magically create lightning. The universe is fully capable of originating naturally without the need of a magical entity.

Question 2) "If everything needs a creator, then who or what created God?" Ray answers: No person or thing created God. He created “time,” and because we dwell in the dimension of time, ''reason'' demands that all things have a beginning and an end. God, however, dwells outside of the dimension of time.

When Ray states that “reason” demands that everything had a beginning and end, and yet Ray presents something that does not have a beginning and end, then clearly “reason” never did demand such a thing that everything needs a beginning. The only other option, if “reason” still demands that everything has a beginning, then God must indeed be a created being.

So which is it? If Ray Comfort still insists that this imaginary entity had no beginning, then Occam's Razor has totally destroyed Ray Comfort's theological worldview. If God can be uncreated and have no beginning, then why can't the universe?

While our universe may have begun at the Big Bang (which did happen, no matter how much Ray Comfort denies it), people may argue that means the universe is not eternal. Unfortunately, such a point is without merit. Thanks to the multiverse, and the fact that matter cannot be created and reality is composed of atoms, matter is indeed infinite. The Big bang was the start of our universe, but the Big Bang was not the start of all there is. Atoms are eternal and continue to make new worlds, and according to physicist Victor Stenger the multiverse (all there is) is eternal.

Question 3) "How can something that cannot be described be said to exist?" Ray answers: The color blue cannot be accurately described to a man who was born blind. Just because it cannot be described doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist. There is plant life on the bottom of the deepest oceans that has never been seen by man, let alone described by him. Despite this, it still exists. Does the (unseen) far side of a planet fail to exist merely because man cannot describe it?

Blue can be described, for starters a very simple definition would be something like “it is a color whose portion of the color spectrum lying between green and red” or a colored figment the eye transfers to the brain, which then interprets the light density picked up and then gives it an appropriate colored tone.

God is defined as many many things, such as omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, omnibenevolent, transparent, eternal, AND God has sentience. Philosophically, an entity that has more than one of these attributes cannot exist (and this has been pointed out to Ray, who has not provide a justifiable response to).

Question 4) "Since countless religions in the world today claim to be the one true religion, why do you think yours is truer than theirs?" Ray answers: No religion is “truer” than another. “Religion” is man’s futile effort to try to find peace with God. The Christian doesn’t strive to have peace with his Creator. It was given to him in the person of the Savior. The uniqueness of Jesus of Nazareth is His statement, “The Son of Man has power on earth to forgive sins.” No religion of man can do that. Christianity is not a manmade “religion,” but a personal relationship with the one true God.

Christianity IS a man-made religion, written and constructed by men who credited their work to their personal deity. The Bible was put together by men through debate and vote, it was not simply faxed to humanity through heaven.

So Ray Comfort says that he has a personal relationship with the creator of the entire vast universe ....and atheists are the arrogant ones???

Question 5) "Can more than one of these religions be right?" Ray answers: In one sweeping statement, Jesus discards all other religions as a means of finding forgiveness of sins. Jesus, who claimed to be God, said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). The Bible says about Jesus, “There is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5) and,“Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). See also Answer #4.

Not a very satisfying answer. There are thousands of religions throughout human history, and many more that can be created. They all cannot be right, BUT they can all be wrong.

Judaism began, saying there is only one God and God says “you shall have no other god before me, there are no gods beside me, it is just me and me alone” (Isaiah 45). AND THEN jesus comes along and says “I am the way, I am the light, I am the truth and there is no way to get to god but through me.” So jesus positions himself before god. Right off the bat, Jesus puts himself before the very first commandment, turning himself into some sort of idol gateway in order to get to God.

Question 6) "If you feel in your heart that your religion is the right one, how do you answer those of other faiths who claim the same thing?" Ray answers: Christians don’t base their faith on feelings; their feelings are irrelevant to truth. If I am flying from Los Angeles to New York, my feelings about whether I am going in the right direction have nothing to do with that fact. We can know with our intellect that Christianity is true, regardless of our feelings. The Bible’s thousands of fulfilled prophecies, historical accuracy, and many infallible proofs attest to its reliability.

Every prophecy proposed by Christianity has shown to not be a prophecy at all, incorrect, or rather predict the inevitable.

What historical accuracy? Nothing in this book has provided an valid example. What is more interesting is that pieces Ray does not bring up when and where the Bible is historically inaccurate. Such as: there was no Flood, the population of the ancient world did not start from 8 people in 300-500 years, there was no Exodus, no city of Nazareth, Herod did not slaughter thousands of children, the grand consensus never took place, David's kingdom did not stretch as far as it proclaimed in Scripture, nor did the wall of Jericho fall around the time Scriptures claimed it did. There are numerous other examples, but the bottom line is that the Bible is not a history text, rather it is a theological text (and Ray knows this).

“Infallible proofs” – name one? Furthermore, do “infallible proofs” found in sacred texts prove they are entirely accurate about their core message? For instance, should we declare that Hinduism must be true since the Bhagavata Purana mentions the “multiverse” several times. One example: “Every universe is covered by seven layers — earth, water, fire, air, sky, the total energy and false ego — each ten times greater than the previous one. There are innumerable universes besides this one, and although they are unlimitedly large, they move about like atoms in You. Therefore You are called unlimited” (Bhagavata Purana 6.16.37) It should be noted, that the book fo Genesis only created Yahweh with creating only one universe: this universe. In Hinduism, Brahma created ALL the universes, this one and every other universe. It seems Brahma is greater than Yahweh.

Question 7) "How do you settle the debate and find out which of these religions, if any, is the right one?" Ray answers: Jesus promises that He and the Father will reveal themselves to all who love and obey Him. This is the ultimate challenge to any skeptic. If you repent and place your faith in Jesus Christ, He will give you eternal life and you can know that your eternity is secure.

In other words, believe your whole life and you'll just figure it out after you die. How moronic can you get. The question presented was how do we find out, right now, which is the correct religion? Ray Comfort provides nothing, all he does it say “just believe it.”

This is not more of a satisfying answer than a ghost-skeptic being told just accept without evidence that they are real. Simply believing ghosts are real does not prove they are real. Similarly, the Flying Spaghetti monster promised to reveal himself if you follow him and put your faith in him. You could raise a community of children to believe in Cthulhu if you always insist that he’s true. If you make them worship him regularly, and pray to him in fear begging for signs or impressions revealing his existence to them, then at least some of those children will eventually claim to have experienced that god despite the fact that he only ever existed in fiction.

Occultists, transcendentalists, and faith-healers of every religion know the auto-deceptive power of faith. It doesn’t matter which gods or spirits they pray to. No matter which devotion one practices, if the ambience of the ritual is right, then faith can prepare the mind and psyche the senses into perceiving or experiencing whatever the subjects want to believe. Seemingly miraculous feats and visions occur in every faith because faith itself is the cause of them, rather than whatever devotees may have faith “in”. That has to be the case, because faith is the only common bond between all religious beliefs.

Believers often say they “know for a fact” that their beliefs are the “truth”. They “testify” to things they don’t know anything about. They pretend to “witness” things they’ve never really seen, and they like to use other confident-sounding terms like “conclusively proven” when they’re really only talking about baseless assumptions, (and vice versa). They often claim “absolute truth” when they’re really talking about bald-faced lies, and all too often, they will continue to repeat and appeal to arguments they know have already been proven wrong. But if you believe in truth at all, then you should make sure that the things you say actually are true, that they are defensibly accurate, and academically correct. And if they’re not correct, you should correct them! You wouldn’t claim to know anything you couldn’t prove that you knew, and you wouldn’t talk about anything being “proven” at all, unless you’re clearly using that term in the sense that a court of law would use. But in either case, it doesn’t matter how convinced you are; belief does not equal knowledge. The difference is that knowledge can always be tested for accuracy where mere beliefs often can not be. No matter how positively you think you know it, if you can’t show it, then you don’t know it, and you shouldn’t say that you do. Nor would you if you really cared about the truth. Knowledge is demonstrable, measurable. But faith is often a matter of pretending to know what you know you really don't know, and that no one even can know, and which you merely believe -often for no good reason at all.

Question 8) "Why does God allow all these false religions to exist?" Ray answers: Because God wants mankind to worship and love Him, He gave Adam and Eve the free will to choose whether to obey or disobey Him. People have chosen to reject God’s way and instead seek to establish their own righteousness through works-based religions. God allows these false religions and atheism to exist for the same reason He allows sinful humans to exist. The Bible tells us that God is not willing that any should perish (regardless of whether they are religious or profess atheism), but that they all come to repentance.

Adam and Eve are fictional characters, and this story Ray is repeating is without evidence. In order for a person to make a “choice” they must be aware of their options. Christianity was no an option for centuries amongst humans before Judaism, and certainly not an option for many human civilizations across the globe after the supposed Christ died. So why punish people (good people) who did not know anything about Jesus or God?

Question 9) "Is the bloody history of Christianity consistent with what is supposed to be a religion of love, or does it simply illustrate the consequences of abandoning reason for faith?" Ray answers: The Bible commands Christians to love their enemies and do good to those who spitefully use them. The terrorists in the World Trade Center tragedy carried out their agenda in the name of Allah (their god). This is nothing new. The Crusaders and others who have committed atrocities in the name of Christianity were also evil men who were carrying out their depraved agendas. A thinking person can distinguish between those who use the Christian faith for their own political or “religious” ends and those who are true followers of Jesus. In other words, just because someone claims to be a Christian doesn’t mean that he is. He could be what is commonly known as a hypocrite, or an impostor.

If a Christian is a person who follows Jesus, while others who don't are hypocrites, then Ray Comfort is undoubtedly a big hypocrite. Ray Comfort violates numerous laws he claims to be true and nor does he follow the words and teachings of Jesus. Does Ray do any of the following?

You must sell everything.(Matthew 19:21-24, Luke 14:33, Matthew 6:19 and 6:24, Matt 13:22, and Luke 12:33 couldn’t be any clearer)

You should abandon your family.(Matthew 19:28-29 and Luke 14:26-33)

You should cut off your hand. (Matthew 5:27-30)

You should eat flesh and drink blood. (John 6:53-54)

Jesus encourages more eunuchs. (Matthew 19:12)

"And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover." -- Mark 16:17-18 (Wow, drink poison and heal cancer with your bare hands…. How many modern believers fulfilled this one?)

"Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you." -- Luke 10:19

Many Christians may object to Mark 16:17-18 above, claiming that it was never part of the original bible ad was later inserted in. However, this does not fly for the simple reason: if you are a Christian, if you believe your God is infallible and wrote every word in the Bible (inspired by the Holy Spirit), and accept every word in the Bible as it is as completely true, then by this alone you must accept every word and letter in the Bible – this includes handling snakes and drinking poison. Even if you do not like it, you cannot dismiss it because your infallible all-knowing all-good God commands it.

Furthermore, if you pretend to follow a fictional character like Jesus who demands you to never lie, then Ray Comfort lies nearly on a daily basis regarding proven science. To make things even worse, Ray Comfort profits off these lies.

Question 10) "If everything is the product of a “grand design” by an omniscient, benevolent designer, why is the history of life a record of horrible suffering, blundering waste, and miserable failures? Why does this God go through billions of years of such carnage without yet arriving at His goal?" Ray answers: God’s original creation was “good,” but because of mankind’s sin we now live in a “fallen” creation. Before sin entered the world there was no suffering, disease, decay, or death. The Bible’s explanation of suffering actually substantiates the truth of Scripture.

Basically, everything is human's fault. This is kind of an excellent starter for a guilt-based religion to engulf you into feeling guilty simply for being what you are, and then shove you towards accepting its invisible product to clear its made-up guilt.

No suffering or death before the Fall? This is absolute nonsense, for the simple reason that there never was a “Fall”, a garden with two naked couples, or any point in time where death was non-existent.

Many animals have strict diets that require consuming other animals. Claiming that they were all once vegetarians does not cut it either, because their teeth and digestive system reveals that certain animals are strictly carnivores.

Here is one inescapable answer that shows death had to exist before the Fall: sharks. They prove that death had to exist for them to simply breed. While still in their mother's womb, shark babies must eat their fellow sibling embryos to survive. This is simply cannibalism, and every shark is born a predator.

For something to die, life must be lost. Plants, fruits and vegetables are living things. Ray claims there was no death in the world before Adam brought sin into the world. However, in the book of Genesis, God told Adam and Eve they were free to eat whatever they wanted from the trees (with the exception of one). Trees bear fruit, which are living things, and once they are consumed their life is lost. Basically, life had to be lost and consumed for others to live (this is the exact definition of what it is like to be an animal, and humans ARE animals).

Ray Comfort says there was no disease either until man sinned? Then why would God create and design humans as they are (and God said it was “good”) with an immune system if there was no disease? The purpose of the immune system is to defend the body from infections, diseases, and other external harmful forces. So why would God create man with this if there was no such thing as diseases? Why do organisms have defenses against pathogens in the first place if they weren't needed or necessary? It seems God already knew long before he created humans that sin would enter the world, meaning he knew this would happen and did nothing to stop it.

Finally, no decay before the Fall? What about fungi? Fungi, by their very nature, cause decay. Did they exist in the original creation? If they did, then there was indeed decay before sin. If they did not, then creationists like Ray Comfort have just demonstrated that new “kinds” of animals can evolve.

Question 11) "Why did God intervene so many times in human affairs during antiquity (according to the Bible) and yet not do anything during the Holocaust of the Second World War?" Ray answers: No human can claim to know whether or not God intervened in the affairs of humanity at any time between 1939 and 1945. However, the Old Testament makes it very clear that there were times when God didn’t intervene in the affairs of His people. He purposefully allowed their enemies to overpower them so that they would turn back to Him.

So this God-character allows millions of people to die just to satisfy his own ego? Despite promising to be there for those who believe in him and follow him, despite the pleas and prayers of the Jewish people, God remained silent and inactive just because he wanted what ever was left of them to worship him?

Question 12) "Why should one’s inner convictions about the existence of God indicate that He/She/They/It exists outside of that person’s mind?" Ray answers: The Bible says that God has placed eternity in the hearts of men and given all people everywhere an awareness of Him so that they are without excuse. He created us to know Him. Throughout history and throughout the world, all cultures acknowledge the existence of God. Besides, why should one’s inner convictions about the non-existence of God indicate that He doesn’t exist outside of that person’s mind? Our personal convictions and beliefs do not affect reality. God simply is.

Not all cultures acknowledge the existence of God, especially not the Abrahamic God. For instance, Buddhists acknowledge no God, certain Native American tribes hold a similar philosophy, Shamans hold a godless view, and finally Chinese ancestor worshipers do not believe in a god.

God is not simply “is” without evidence to show that he even is, anymore than Allah, Thor, or universal time-less eternal sky pixies. If God “is” anything, he is imaginary. Or as the original question implied, God only exists in the believer's mind.

Question 13) "Can a God who would abandon His children when they needed Him the most still be considered “all good”?" Ray answers: One of humanity’s great errors is to misunderstand the meaning of “good.” A “good” judge will pronounce a stiff sentence on a vicious murderer. A “loving” judge who dismisses a case against a vicious killer because he loves him is not a good judge. Justice and goodness are inseparable. Many times God chastened Israel (gave them their just dessert) because of His goodness. He wanted them to turn back to Him for their own good.

A judge who dismisses a case against a criminal is not “loving” but merciful. The Abrahamic god is claimed to be infinitely merciful. So by extension, a infinitely merciful God would never have punished its creation for whatever reason.

An important note: Ray Comfort does not decide what constitutes as “good.” Based on his history and core evangelical messages, Ray Comfort's idea of “good” includes unapologetic lying, and a finite crime deserves infinite punishment. He cannot distinguish killing a person and a murderer, yet he believes killing a threatening person does not count as murder despite the fact he would have killed another human.

Question 14) "If the God of the Bible is “all good,” why does He Himself say that He created evil (Isaiah 45:7)?" Ray answers: The word translated “evil” in that verse (“I make peace, and create evil”) means “calamity” or “suffering”—God uses both good and bad events in our lives to bring us into a right relationship with Him. However, because God is sovereign over all events, He did allow evil to come into being. God gave mankind a choice to have a loving relationship with Him. The original sin was when Adam and Eve chose to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Once man knew both good and evil, he had to choose between the two. Because God wants people to worship Him freely out of love and enjoy His incredible blessings, He tells each one of us: “See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil . . . , therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live” (Deuteronomy 30:15,19).

“He [God] did not allow evil to come into being” how can this be when God is the creator of all things?

Question 15) "If something is not rational, should it be believed anyway?" Ray answers: At one time, the concept of a thousand-ton aircraft flying through the air seemed irrational and absurd. But after man studied the laws of physics, it was discovered to be quite rational and believable. If one studies God’s Word and understands His Law, Christianity is seen to be infinitely rational and believable. Atheism, on the other hand, rejects logic and evidence and is the epitome of irrationalism. It should be abandoned by any rational person as being foolishness.

The question was asked if something is not rational, should it be “believed.” A massive flying plane was not “irrational” but rather at one point implausible. Many doubted that the Hercules would fly, despite the debate amongst pilots, engineers, and such on both sides. Studying physics played a role, but it was mostly aerodynamics, but simply studying was not enough. They had to test everything. Unlike massive planes, nothing in Christianity can be tested (accept for perhaps prayer, which has been shown numerous times to be completely ineffective.)

There is nothing rational about Christianity any more than Islam, Scientology, Mormonism, Hinduism, or any other faith. Atheism, on the other hand, is the exact opposite of irrationalism. All it does is show that the theistic burden of proof has not been met. Ray thinks that the existence of his god has been established through the argument from design, but this argument has been shown to be wrong and fallacious many times.

Anyhow, is it rational to believe in something that is irrational? Of course not. There is nothing rational about believing gnomes exist hiding under your garden or believing green whales swim underneath the surface of the sun. In fact, it is rational to doubt these things and be skeptical until the burden of proof has been met. Basically, Ray is saying that anyone who denies the existence of the green whales in the sun are the “epitome of irrationalism” and are being “foolish.” Any reasonable person reading this can see why Ray is wrong in calling atheists and doubters of the green whales in the sun as “irrational.”

Question 16) "Is there a better way than reason to acquire knowledge and truth?" Ray answers: No. That’s why the Bible says, “‘Come now, and let us reason together,’ says the LORD.” That’s why when the apostle Paul spoke “the words of truth and reason,” King Agrippa said, “You almost persuade me to become a Christian.” That’s why Paul “reasoned” with Felix (the governor) about “righteousness, self-control, and judgment to come.” And that’s why Felix “was afraid.”

The message the Bible encourages is nothing but blind faith. It may mention reason in a passing moment, like Isaiah, but what is reasonable of putting faith in a book written by superstitious men who thought they knew more about the universe than people in the 21st century?

Question 17) "If you would answer #16 with “faith,” then why are there so many contradictory faiths in the world?" Ray answers: There are many faiths because all nations recognize that there is a Creator. However, in their ignorance they worship the moon, the sun, or an idol. No one has ever found an atheistic tribe, because people are not that ignorant. God has given light to every man.

“No one has a ever found an atheistic tribe, because people are not that ignorant” how about the Buddhists? Buddhism is an atheistic philosophy. Ancestor worship is a godless form of religion as well, such as certain Native American tribes. Druids, Chinese Ancestry worship, Daoists, etc.

Question 18) "Is comfort more important to you than intellectual integrity?" Ray answers: No, it’s not. That’s why I am a Christian.

There are several reasons that brought Ray to Christianity, but it was not intellectual integrity. Among the top things that likely drove him to Christianity could be any or all of the following;

• The fear of death and Pascal's Wager; which Ray repeatably stresses his viewers to allow fear to take hold of them to determine their decisions rather than their intellect.
• The god of the gaps and willful ignorance; in the case of Ray denying several fields of science
• Irrationality and lack of honest fact-gathering; as seen throughout all Ray's material (even this book) or Ray's willingness to lie and deliberately quote-mine.
• Or this whole shebang is all for the money

Personally, I say Ray Comfort is TOTALLY IN FOR THE MONEY. I don't think he is that stupid, especially when he has been engaged and corrected for several years about science, but he may have some belief in God.

But Ray Comfort's one and true God is not Yahweh or even Jesus Christ, its MONEY

Lesson 73: Atheist Questions Part 2

Kirk's Comment: Atheism may seem intellectual, but intelligent people should also be reasonable and honest about the facts. If you’ve ever felt nervous about discussing the facts for the existence of God, don’t be. The evidence is on the side of God. After reading this lesson, you’ll be better equipped to talk with skeptics.

As this review (as well as the review of all of Ray and Kirk's material here on my blog), the evidence is not on their side at all. The only thing they possess are presuppositions they try desperately to prove, but all they have to offer is blind faith and delusional beliefs, but no actual empirical, testable, observable facts.

Question 19) "If you believe, as many do, that all religions worship the same God under different names, how do you explain the existence of religions which have more than one god, or Buddhism, which, in its pure form, has no god?" Ray answers: All religions do not worship the same God. People who reject the one true God of the Bible can find any number of gods, of any type, to suit their tastes. They may choose to worship a small wooden god that asks only for shelf space, one that promises paradise in exchange for a certain number of daily prayers, or one that demands specific offerings or good deeds. People who reject the one true God have always been able to devise a replacement.

And those who claim to have accepted the “one true God” can devise any form of him as they wish, and since there is no established or proven one true God, then the unknown variable can take any form as anyone see fit. In this case, Ray has devised a God that forsakes everyone unless they live a certain life in order to please said God to get a reward after death. What Ray has done is no different than what he states people of other faith do.

Is it curious at all that whatever form God usually takes, it is almost perfectly clear that this entity has a human mind? Why does God have emotions? God gets angry and wrathful, or likes the smell of burnt offerings, but why? Does God have a nose? Most Christians would say no God does not, and for the same reason God would have no need for emotions. Emotions are natural intricate chemical reactions that activate and direct bodily responses to the external environment. As Dr. Valerie Tarico demonstrated in her work, God is simply a human invention. Ever wonder why gods take human forms? Egyptian gods with human bodies but heads of animals, Greek and Norse gods have human bodies, Hindu gods often have human bodies, and so on. Some say that if dogs had a god, their god would be a dog. The point being, Ray says that people can easily find their own version of God to suit their needs, and this is exactly true and is the whole case (and Ray is no exception).

Question 20) "What would it take to convince you that you are wrong?" Ray answers: I have already been convinced that I was wrong. I was wrong for my 22 years of unconverted life. Conversion to Christianity is when a fallible human being admits that he is wrong and that the infallible Creator is right.

Ray completely dodges the question. How did Ray “know” he was wrong? To have knowledge means that you can demonstrate it, otherwise if you cannot then you do not know it. Any honest nonbeliever and skeptic will straight forward tell what it would take to pass the test for burden of proof, but Ray Comfort and many Christians constantly dodge the responsibility of providing proof, and usually repeat the same old tiring arguments that have already been refuted a thousand times (unfortunately, just repeating debunked arguments while expecting a different result is not only a waste of time but also ludicrous). When all else fails, theists like Ray Comfort just demand nonbelievers to simply just “believe.” Unfortunately, this is not good sufficient enough for any rational thinker. It is very easy to simply believe anything, but does not change the rest of reality. For instance, the person reading this may think he or she is 1) the King of Persia, 2) the reincarnated Prince Hamlet of Denmark himself or maybe 3) Cleopatra of Egypt. Obviously and clearly, anyone who accepted they were any of these, they would immediately be branded insane. All this comes to show, mere belief is not good enough and people understand that. Likewise, belief in the existence of a “infallible God” or “universal eternal sky pixies” or whatever is not enough to establish that said entity or entities are even real. This is why actual empirical, testable, observable proof is demanded, and Ray has still failed to present any.

Therefore, the question still stands. What would it take to convince Ray Comfort that he is wrong? However, in the very next question, Ray reveals his closed mindedness by stating that “nothing can convince me that I am wrong—but my belief is still true.”

Question 21) "If nothing can convince you that you are wrong, then why should your faith be considered anything other than a cult?" Ray answers: A cult is defined as “a system of religious worship and ritual,” which would seem to describe every manmade religion. Christianity, on the other hand, is not a strict adherence to ritual, but a personal relationship with a living God. When a person repents of his sin and places his trust in Jesus, God fills him with His Spirit—the person becomes spiritually alive. He has moved out of the realm of belief into the realm of experience. Once he knows the truth, nothing can convince him otherwise. Besides, why should adherence to the truth be a determining factor in whether a belief is valid? I believe in gravity and nothing can convince me that I am wrong—but my belief is still true.

Christianity is not a strict adherence to ritual? How about prayer? Reading the Bible? Does Ray celebrate Christmas?

Ray states that upon conversion, they ''experience'' a wave of divine interference. How does Ray know that this is coming from God and not an imposter who claims to be God (to make it worse, this imposter has fooled every Christian with the lie that “God cannot tell a lie” thus trapping them all to believe this imposter without question).

A number of investigations have shown that deep temporal lobe stimulation in the area around the amygdala and hippocampus of the limbic system produces feelings of intense meaningfulness, of depersonalization, of a connection with God, of cosmic connectedness, of out-of-body experiences, a feeling of not being in this world, déjà vu (a feeling that something has been experienced before), jamais vu (a feeling something is happening for the first time even though it has been experienced before), fear, and hallucinations.

Based on this, we know that mind is capable of experiencing things that feel so real, but rather they are simply stimulation’s of brain synapses. This can happen naturally or through the aid of traumas, seizures, drugs, and such. Example, Michael Harner, and anthropologist who lived among the Jivaro Indians of the Ecuadoran Amazon, described his experience with ayahuasca as follows:

“For several hours after drinking the brew, I found myself although awake, in a world literally beyond my wildest dreams. I met bird-like people, as well as a dragon-like creature who explained they were the true Gods of this world. I enlisted the services of other spirit helpers in attempting to fly through the far reaches of the Galaxy. Transported into a trance where the supernatural seemed natural, I realized that anthropologists, including myself, had profoundly underestimated the importance of the drug in affecting native ideology.”

Granted, if we did not know the detail that Harner consumed ayahuasca, his “experience” testifies that he did encounter dragons and bird-people. How would Ray distinguish this feeling with his “experience” with God's spirit that entered him upon conversion? For that matter, how can Ray demonstrate, test and show that his experience was not only genuine but also different from the “experiences” of Muslims, Hindus, pagans, etc.

Ray says that he ''believes'' in gravity and nothing can prove him wrong. Here is the difference between Ray's dogmatic mindset with a rational freethinker. Gravity is a scientific law, and science demands that everything must not only testable but also falsifiable. This is why scientific facts are accepted (not believed) to be true ''until'' they are demonstrated to be false. Say for instance that tomorrow, scientists demonstrate that the theory of gravity was completely wrong. Ray says that “nothing can convince me that I am wrong” shows his closed mindedness. Truth is based on evidence, and to deny truth is dishonest. This is why Ray is incredibly dishonest when it comes to science, history, and philosophy.

Question 22) "If an atheist lives a decent, moral life, why should a loving, compassionate God care whether or not we believe in Him/Her/It?" Ray answers: No matter how decent and moral we think we are, we have all sinned by violating God’s holy Laws. To see how you fare against God’s standard, review the Ten Commandments (given in Exodus chapter 20). God’s concern isn’t whether or not we believe in Him; the Bible says that even the demons believe—and tremble. God commands that we repent of our sins and trust Jesus Christ alone for our salvation. If we refuse do that, we will be given justice on the Day of Judgment and we will perish.

It is common for religions to say that no one is innocent or without excuse. For example, Islam says that we are all sinners, Scientology says we are all born with defects, and so on.

Ray is asking us to review ourselves through the Ten Commandments given in Exodus 20, but what about the ''actual'' Ten Commandments in Exodus 34? By that standard, Ray is not only in trouble with God, but he has been preaching a false message.

How can Ray say that it is not necessary to ''believe'' in God, and yet the first Commandment in Exodus 20 states that we have to believe the Abrahamic god and no other? In order for us too fulfill the second Commandment (taking his name “Yahweh” under a false oath) requires belief in him. And yet, Ray states that we must ''believe'' that Jesus is our path to salvation.

Question 23) "Should any religion that demands we elevate faith over reason be trusted?" Ray answers: Never elevate faith over reason. Exercise faith because of reason. A man who has to jump 25,000 feet out of a plane exercises faith in a parachute because he reasons that he will perish without it.

All faith is blind, and cannot be supported by reason of any sort. Faith is by definition belief in something without any evidence or belief in something contrary to the evidence. We develop knowledge, the basis of knowing things (which is the exact opposite of faith), through experience, observation, and testing. Before skydivers jump out of a plane, their parachutes are checked for any flaws. After the jump, based on experience and statistics, the possibility of a parachute failure is miniscule. Skydivers do not require faith, rather they rely on the preparations of expertise based on the knowledge of their skill.

Question 24) "How can the same God who, according to the Old Testament, killed everybody on Earth except for eight people be considered as anything other than evil?" Ray answers: Look at the lifestyle of those people—they deserved death because of their evil actions. That’s what happens when men reject God. We will all die because God, the Judge of the universe, has pronounced the death sentence upon us: “The soul who sins shall die.” Criminals rarely speak well of the judge. To them, he is “evil.”

“They deserved death”! How can anyone make such a heartless statement? Does Ray have a clue of what these people did in their lifetimes that was so offensive to the ego of an all-powerful being? How can a collection of primates (carbon-based lifeforms on a small planet in the far dark corner of the vast universe) offend this almighty being that supposedly gave these people free will?

Basically, Ray is stressing the point that disbelief in his particular narrow-version of God leads to all the troubles of society, and yet whenever given an example of an extreme Christian country full of devoted believers, the same troubles remain or escalate. How about the Roman Empire, became the worlds largest and powerful Christian empire in the world, and yet it failed. Likely, Ray would respond that these are either 1) not real Christians or 2) they slowly turned away from God. Basically, it is a circular argument: Belief in some entity or not, life is full of suffering. It seems that the belief in a deity is not even necessary at all, and the Buddhist were on the spot: life is suffering. If a person would wish to deal with suffering, prayer and belief in God or universal eternal sky pixies won't change a thing.

Question 25) "Must we hate our families and ourselves in order to be good Christians (Luke 14:26)?" Ray answers: No. Luke 14:26 is what is known as “hyperbole”—a statement of extremes, contrasting love with hate for the sake of emphasis. Jesus tells us that the first and greatest Commandment is to love God with all of our heart, soul, and mind (Matthew 22:37,38). As much as we treasure our spouse and family, and even our own life, there should be no one whom we love and value more than God, no one who takes precedence in our life. To place love for another (including yourself) above God is idolatry.

By what criteria do we determine what is a hyperbole or not? This is one answer that Christians fail to provide a satisfactory answer. With over 30,000 denominations within Christianity, each proclaiming to be the true faith and know how to correctly interpret the Bible all the while following the Will of God exactly the correct way, how can we determine what is meant to be taken literally or figuratively in the Bible? Are we to take the phrase “love thy neighbor” as another example of not taking his word literally and not practicing it?

In this passage in Luke, Jesus gives no indication that he is speaking in a hyperbole. The language being used is too literal. In Luke 22:36 he told his disciples that “he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.”

Question 26) "Since the ancient world abounded with tales of resurrected Savior-Gods that were supposed to have returned from the dead to save humanity, why is the Jesus myth any more reliable than all the others?" Ray answers: I have never heard of any such “tales of resurrected Savior-Gods.” Any myths there have been have died out for lack of proof. The “Jesus myth,” however, has endured through the ages in cultures all around the world because it is true and provable. Simply read John 14:21 and then try it . . . if you dare. If you place your trust in Jesus Christ for your salvation, He will come into your life and reveal Himself to you.

Never heard of a “resurrected Savior-Gods”? How about Hercules? Surely everyone knows the mighty Greek hero, we know him for his legendary strength and epic tales. How about Dionysus? Greek God of wine, who was born of a human virgin and later died and resurrected to Mt. Olympus? The Jesus Myth is not the only tale of a savior God who was humiliated and then killed. The Greeks had numerous examples of even full-blooded Gods forced to endure humiliating acts before returning to heaven. How about the Sumerian god Inanna, the “Queen of Heaven” who was stripped naked and crucified, yet she triumphantly rose from the dead. History is laced with hundreds of heros and gods who died and resurrected, creating large groups of followers believing that they will one day join their deity in the afterlife.

The reason why the Jesus Myth has not died out is because it was established as a mandatory faith in the powerful Roman Empire, causing it to endure for centuries and continue on through established churches and converting kings – who would later bestow the faith on his subjects. There is no proof needed for the Jesus Myth to survive, in fact there is no proof at all to provide.

Ray's example of reading a certain passage, daring us to drop to our knees and pray is pointless. Anyone can convince themselves that any fictional deity is true, because that is the power of faith. Telling us to seek something that does not have any proof is no more better then asking to “seek with (insert name here) all your heart” - that name could be Allah, Odin, ghosts, Big Foot, UFOs, invisible universal eternal sky pixies, and so on and so on. However, simply convincing yourself that whatever entity revealed itself to you is not proof of their existence. For instance, George Harrison, the guitarist for the Beatles was a Bhaki Hindu. He believed in a personal god, and he said that if one chants the mantras with devotion, Lord Krishna would visibly appear and speak to him in an audible voice. Many pagans are similarly convinced of having met their deities too. For example, a cat fancier in Texas insists he began worshiping Bast only after the Egyptian goddess dramatically appeared physically manifest, having personally chosen him to become her disciple. Every religion boasts their own miracles and prophecies proving theirs is the truest faith. So its no surprise that Christians say the same things about their versions of God too. No religion is significantly different from any other in this respect. But whatever else may be going on, when men claim revelation from God, it usually means is that they’ve decided to promote their own biased and unsubstantiated opinions as if they were divinely inspired.

Question 27) "If the Bible is the inerrant word of God, why does it contain so many factual errors, such as the two contradictory accounts of creation in Genesis?" Ray answers: There are not two accounts of creation in Genesis. Chapter 1 gives the account of creation; chapter 2 gives details of the same creation. I have been reading the Bible every day for thirty years (without fail) and I am not aware of any “factual errors.”

The two different accounts are indeed contradictory, and Ray has done nothing to solve the problem (despite himself insisting that he has, but his arguments are without merit).

If Ray has been reading the Bible for so long, how can he miss the factual errors, such as in Genesis 1 when it says the sun, moon, and stars were created AFTER the Earth. Here is the order of events: water, land rising from the water, and then vegetation and bingo its Earth. Only AFTER that, it says the stars and two illuminating lights (Sun and moon) were created. So if Ray is not aware of the factual error that the Earth is NOT older than the stars, then he has not gotten past the first chapter in the first book of the Bible (so what book he has been reading for 30 years is quiet a mystery).

For more examples of factually incorrect errors in the Bible (historically and scientifically), here are some links;

Skeptics Annotated Bible: Science and History

Debunking Christian Fundamentalists

http://www.christianism.com/

Question 28) "Why isn’t the Bible written in a straightforward way that leaves no doubt about what it means?" Ray answers: The Bible is very clear to those who obey God. It says of itself that it is spiritually understood, and that the “natural” man cannot receive the things of God. To someone who hasn’t been born spiritually, “they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Corinthians 2:14). However, we can all understand enough to realize that we have sinned against a holy God and need to repent. Once we do that, God gives us the ability to understand His Word.

This does not really answer the question. All it is saying is that you have to be “spiritual” to piece together the tales in the Bible. Well, there are millions of spiritual Christians, they have been reading the Bible for centuries, and if the Bible was an easy read to spiritual followers, then why are there more than 30,000 denominations within Christianity?

Based on this fact, the Bible is NOT very clear to those who obey God. It is difficult to think off another book that has caused mass confusion than the Bible. Even today, spiritual Christians can and interpret the Bible, pray for hours, and yet come to different conclusions regarding certain issues.

Question 29) "The last time Christianity attained total power, it resulted in the Dark Ages, so why should we expect anything different from Christian fundamentalists today?" Ray answers: It was not Christianity but the Roman Catholic church that had power during the Dark Ages. The doctrines of the Roman Catholic church and the Bible are opposed to one another. It was the Roman Catholic church that opposed Galileo, was responsible for the Inquisition, and refused the common people access to the Bible during the Dark Ages. The Christian Church isn’t seeking “total power.” Its agenda is not political.

Basically, Ray is playing the No True Scotsman fallacy by attempting to portray Roman Catholics as non-Christians. Nice try. Ray does not give any clue when, where and how the doctrines of Roman Catholicism is opposed to the Bible.

Ray seems to portray all the dark history of Christianity unto the Roman Catholics. How about the Puritans persecuting the Native Americans and Quakers. How about the Baptists kidnapping, sodomizing and murdering children in India (even to this day). How about the 30 Years War of Christians on multiple sides slaughtered each other.

Or how about Christians within the Bible itself. Jesus cursed a fig tree, violently drove out people from the Temple, told his disciples to steal a horse, and so on. According to the book of Acts, when Peter (a disciple) came to power, he issued forced collectivism upon a village, however when a couple refused to give up their possession, Peter had them killed. He could have imprisoned them, exiled them, or any lesser evil, but instead he had them put to death.

Christian church is not seeking “total power” and is not politically driven? Why then do Christians want their faith recognized above all others? How about Ann Coulter who said on September 13, 2001 “We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity”?

There are numerous examples of Christian ministers and Christian politicians fighting to have Christianity dominate the United States, and they often reveal their plans of what will happen once that goal is achieved. Introducing the American Taliban: Randall Terry, founder of Operation Rescue, an organization for intimidating abortion providers.

“When I, or people like me, are running the country, you’d better flee, because we will find you, we will try you, and we will execute you. I mean every word of it. I will make it part of my mission to see to it that they are tried and executed.”

Terry was here referring to doctors who provide abortions, and his Christian inspiration is clearly shown by one more of his statements, (emphasis added)

“I want you to just let a wave of intolerance wash over you. I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good…Our goal is a Christian nation. We have a Biblical duty, we are called by God, to conquer this country. We don’t want equal time. We don’t want pluralism. Our goal must be simple. We must have a Christian nation built on God’s law, on the Ten Commandments. No apologies.”

This ambition to achieve what can only be a Christian fascist state is entirely typical of the American Taliban; it is almost an exact mirror image of the Islamic fascist state so ardently sought by many people in other parts of the world.

There is one more preacher I would like to mention: Gary Potter, President of Catholics for Christian Political Action, had this to say:

“When the Christianity majority takes over this country, there will be no satanic churches, no more free distribution of pornography, no more talk of rights for homosexuals. After the Christian majority takes control, pluralism will be seen as immoral and evil and the state will not permit anybody the right to practice evil.”

Question 30) "Has anyone ever been killed in the name of atheism?" Ray answers: Yes. Atheistic Communist regimes have slaughtered 100 million people. In China an incredible 72 million were murdered, in the Soviet Union 20 million, Cambodia 2.3 million, North Korea 2 million, Africa 1.7 million, Afghanistan 1.5 million, Vietnam 1 million, Eastern Europe 1 million, Latin America 150,000.

Actually, this does not answer the question. The question was asked has anyone every killed ''in the name'' of atheism? What is the answer? Zero. Ray's examples are actually not the mas killings of people in the name of atheism, rather they were the result of power-hungry dictators under the guise of communism.