Archive for November, 2009

Hypocritical Arminians of Refuted

November 30, 2009 Leave a comment

I meant to post this last year, but hard drive failures and my lap top screen being cracked on my main laptop, harassment from neighbors and cyber stalkers caused me to lose track of my original refutation of’s ranting against Calvinists, but I recreated it about an hour or two ago, and expanded it, here it is:

According to

“1. Every Bible passage that says, “If you hold fast the word” must be deleted. To the Calvinist, there are no ifs. These passages make no sense to them.”

My response: Because you said so. For the Arminian, there is no grace, no verse can be literal enough when it plainly states that salvation cannot be earned, so they have to resort to making a mere claim, and pretending any verse is evidence of their mere claim.

“2. All passages for watchfulness should be deleted: “be faithful unto death and I will give you the crown of life”. Why be faithful if you already have and can’t lose?”

My response: All passages referring to God implying and stating that salvation cannot be earned should be deleted, and no one should be faithful to God if they can’t take credit for having saved themselves by some supposed goodness of their own. “Pride comes before a fall” is deleted from their hearts.

“3. It would certainly lessen a Christian’s fear of sin and lead to increased sin.”

My response: Your personal certainty is Scriptural evidence, let alone any kind of evidence? And you are, who that I should care about your certainty, your feelings? And no, what increases sin is not the belief that God is forgiving, merciful, doesn’t abandon those he loves and doesn’t break his promises, but telling people that if they sin that they don’t need to trust in Jesus as having told the truth when he said taht he suffered and died for all their sins, that you don’t need to have faith in God, trust him, and can doubt his word, believe that God was a liar, believe that it’s good to interpret God’s word so that it suits your personal pride, and can just ask for forgiveness again and expect to be forgiven despite your your doubt and arbitrary beliefs.

“Historically, such an increase of sin based upon this theology has been documented.”

And so well documented Mr. Pretentious that you conveniently didn’t show any of this documentation, nor did you even mention a single reference to any of this supposed documentation. The only increase in sin was your lie upon lie, and preaching out of jealousy of those who preach the truth out of love. I can imagine your insane “refutation” now:

“Just believe me and you’ll be forgiven of your sins, you won’t increase in sin at all after wards, but those faithless Calvinists who do whatever sure will.”

The real iffers are you Arminians, who have many among you who’ve said to those who’ve spoken the truth, ” ‘If ‘ you’re right, but where’s your proof? ” despite the “proof” repeatedly being shown to you. Maybe this will get through to you, (and though didn’t use the “race” argument I call it, some do, so I’ll set them straight now):

“Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets a prize? Run in such a way as to get the [one] prize.” – 1 Corinthians 9:25

I’m guessing that many Arminiests use this verse or would given the right circumstance, to show that eternal life can be earned, at least one, maybe two of them have use these verses on me as evidence of this. But they are taking them out of and twisting the meaning of those verses by themselves. The previous two verses say:

“To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.” Not,

“I’m working for salvation because God’s not in control of my will or anything else and I have some goodness in me that allows me too, and I decide my destiny, no fate but what we make.” or some other nonsense like that. Further, Paul is talking about a single prize for multiple runners in a race, if this were about eternal life than he’s saying that only one person will get eternal life. Obviously then Paul is not speaking literally but metaphorically. But some Arminian might say, “Yes he didn’t mean just one person will get eternal life, it was a metaphor,” but that argument is false because there is no evidence he’s talking about earning eternal life as I pointed out, further, I didn’t say that merely because Paul was speaking metaphorically that that meant he wasn’t talking about salvation, my point is that he clearly didn’t make a two-sentence teaching that was self-explanatory and obvious as many Arminians think or would claim it is.

So what did Paul mean then? Paul next said,

“Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last; but we do it to get a that will last forever.”

Are Arminians training to get eternal life, or working for eternal life and / or trying to keep it by obeying God’s law? They aren’t “training” to get it. Paul is saying that the competitors concentrate to win, possibly suffering even to win, he mentions training because some races are short, but training often takes a long time since no one is born in shape and people don’t spend their lives running around to win races, and in the same way no one is born being religious and perfectly obedient to God, knowing and understanding his word or having instant preaching skills. It takes time, a long time to know and understand God well, to obey him well, and to get good at leading people to Christ who have different beliefs and widely varying intellectual and language skills. And what is this eternal crown? A crown is an object of glory symbolizing a person’s very high status. Paul even said,

“But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory” – Hebrews 2:9

and Peter said,

“And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that will never fade away.” – 1 Peter 5:4

Jesus called it “the crown of life” (Revelation 2:10), a statement which supports Peter’s comment about this crown being so glorious that he refers to it not merely as a “glorious crown” but “of glory”, as if to say “of God’s glory”, however according to Scripture God will not share the glory that radiates from himself, so this type of glory God will give could only be something similar, and incredible, but not so similar as to be not a big difference. The similarity being that the glory will be incredible like God’s. It is also clear that this glory will radiate outward from around our heads because God doesn’t say, “a robe of glory” or “belt of glory” or “ring of glory”.

But what about this verse:

“Hold on to what you have so that no one will take your crown.” – Revelation 3:11

Though that verse isn’t talking about eternal life, why did Jesus say that Jesus already had their crown? It was because the way they were living at that time was leading them to getting this special reward. However, if they stopped being as obedient as they were or turned from God, they wouldn’t obtain it. So, this isn’t a reward that can be earned with a few good deeds or easy obedience, unlike what I assumed at one point (assuming isn’t good), which was that they had already earned this special reward.

Darwinist Richard C. Hoagland Supports Lying To Keep The Peace

November 30, 2009 Leave a comment

“[The] social fabric requires lies to hold them together. Don’t you agree?” said and asked Richard C. Hoagland on Coast to Coast A.M. last night, a Darwinist and Big Bomber believer who spends his time rambling about Torsion Field Physics, the face and pyramids on Mars, and NASA, hoping to be seen as a legitimate scientist by mainstream scientists and “the masses”. Ian Punnet, who was hosting that night, didn’t say a word against that statement, and that wasn’t a surprise to me, being that he’s a hypocrite who claims to be a Christian yet strongly opposes the Christians who believe in absolute truth and promote it.

I wonder, if because Richard is desperate to embraced by NASA and the federal government, agreed with the Darwinists among them, that lying is a necessary thing, so that they would accept him as one of their own and let them in on their secrets and share their power with him.

Darwinist and Liberal ‘Integrity’ Torched by ClimateGate

November 30, 2009 Leave a comment

Has anyone noticed how Darwinists were the ones who were mainly promoting and worrying over global warming, and that it was the opposite in the case of Creationists?:

And now, it’s recently been found that the some of the top global warming scientists, all Darwinists, had been lying about there being a global warming trend, and that Earth had actually been cooling, possibly about to enter another ice age even (on the ice age site is a link to a book being sold which goes along with the false claim that Earth is billions of years old, and that animals suddenly evolved new useful features or into other animals because of magnetic reversals, but obviously magnets don’t cause people to grow wings or tails).

One notorious psuedo-scientist, a trolling idiot, claimed that it wasn’t true that Darwinists were the ones always promoting global warming when a notorious plagiarist atheist and wannabe-wise woman noticed the same thing months ago, claiming, “Not true” because oil companies were denying global warming. So a few oil companies are the majority of Darwinists? There are so many millions of Darwinists oil companies that other atheists not apart of any oil companies or any company at all are just a small minority? And how can oil companies deliberately lying (lying in their own minds) count as people who sincerely deny the truth, if, again, they “knew” they were lying? How absurd and stupid atheists are, especially Darwinist ones.

On top of that, Mr. “Not True” Atheist was lying about all oil companies denying global warming, though in my judgment in his ignorance being that he busies himself trolling Christian creationists, desperately and frantically posting mere claims without evidence to defend anti-Christian doctrine, like he did in this case, rather than carefully researching.

Here’s another passage, 2 years older than Mr. Not True’s lie, which refutes it,

And just a few words later, months before the Prison Planet article, this Businessweek article then says,

There’s a maddening grammatical error in the top part of that article by the way.

So, Psuedo Christian Science Monitorers, who seven months ago mocked Christians and those who believed in Intelligent Design scientists over their disbelief of global warmin, lumping them in with astrologers, and who continues to mock them, clearly, the jokers, are you, the evil type: mockers. Not April fools, you liberal fools.

What Is Mike Huckabee’s Gospel and Why Won’t He Tell Us?

November 30, 2009 Leave a comment

Ever since I saw this video last year, in which Mike Huckabee, a supposedly true Christian, had praised Clinton, I was suspicious of Mike.

After or about the time I saw the video I tried hard to find out what his Christian beliefs were, but failed. And a few hours ago learned that he is trying to hide most of his religious ones. and has given the appearance of trying to hide a bad mistake in his past (the pardoning of an evil man who a few hours ago murdered some police), by blaming it on some prosecutors instead, and not mentioning that he was the governor at the time over this evil criminal.

Last night, after hearing a Catholic radio show host, Billy Cunningham (who tonight before closing out implied that we can deserve eternal life), get surprised over hearing a caller present information that showed it was Huckabee who released this criminal, I decided to look again into Huckabee’s beliefs, and though finding out some good news, found some evil news, apparently true, about him. Here’s something from Mother Jones Magazine:

At an early debate, he indicated he does not believe in evolution, but at a more recent debate, when he was asked by Wolf Blitzer if the creation of the Earth occurred six thousand years ago and only took six days, as stated in the Old Testament, Huckabee said, “I don’t know. I wasn’t there.”

Yet some other things he’s said indicates that he does believe Genesis is literal, at least partially. Though his “I wasn’t there comment” was illogical, and showed a lack of trust for that part of the Bible, whether he meant it to seem that way or not, it did make it clear how much more absurd it would be if he were asked, “Do you believe that this endlessly beautiful, extremely mathematically ordered universe fine-tuned for life hear and earth and seemingly trillions of other planets (and possibly the existence of billions of other universes with life) all came from a giant explosion

During a CNN/YouTube debate, the Republican field was asked by a man holding a Bible, “Do you believe every word of this book?” Huckabee said that portions of the Bible should “obviously” be seen as “allegorical.” He again stated that he could not know the exact meaning of parts of the Bible, saying, “There are parts of it I don’t fully comprehend and understand, because the Bible is a revelation of an infinite god, and no finite person is ever going to fully understand it.”

“Huckabee has indeed mixed religion with policy previously. In 1997, when he was governor, he answered a question about capital punishment during a call-in show:

Interestingly enough, if there was ever an occasion for someone to have argued against the death penalty, I think Jesus could have done so on the cross and said, “This is an unjust punishment and I deserve clemency.”

Huckabee’s argument: since Jesus didn’t say that, according to the New Testament, capital punishment is fine.” – MJ

From an article titled, Where Word-Faith Meets Southern Baptist

Republican hopeful Mike Huckabee reached out to a questionable funding source this week—Texas televangelist Kenneth Copeland, one of the targets of a Senate Finance Committee investigation into the funding and governance of “prosperity gospel” ministries. …

According to video clips of the conference obtained by Trinity Foundation, an investigative watchdog group in Dallas, Copeland revealed that Huckabee had pledged his total support to Copeland’s ministry while dismissing the Senate investigation.

Video clips of Copeland’s comments are posted on The Wittenburg Door Magazine website.

One video clip shows Copeland describing a phone call from Huckabee regarding the Senate investigation:

“[Huckabee told me] Why should I stand with them and not stand with you? They’ve only got 11 per cent approval rating.’ And then he said, ‘Kenneth Copeland, I will stand with you.’ He said, ‘You’re trying to get prosperity to the people and they’re trying to take it away from ’em.’ He said, ‘I will stand with you any time, anywhere, on any issue.’ That settled that right there. I said, ‘Yeah, that’s my man! That’s my man, right there.'”

And then, about about 7:14 A.M., thanks to God and no thanks to a certain irreligious, suicidal though God-believing neighbor suddenly blasting her stereo at 6:32 A.M., I found this from

It was a regular Sunday in January 1992 when Huckabee told his congregants that he was leaving the church for politics. In his 2007 book Character Makes a Difference, Huckabee says he had grown increasingly frustrated with church life. He’d lost the idealism that marked his earlier days as a pastor.

“In my early years of ministry, I was quite idealistic, thinking that most people in the congregation expected me to be the captain of a warship leading God’s troops into battle,” Huckabee said. “As the years passed, I became increasingly convinced that most people wanted me to captain the Love Boat.

“Too many people seemed unconcerned about how many marriages were salvaged, how many kids got off drugs, or how many teen pregnancies were prevented,” he said. “Rather, the chief concerns seemed to be whether the menus for Wednesday night dinners were appetizing, what color the softball jerseys would be, how loud some guest musicians might sing, whether the coffeepot was ready in the Sunday school building, and whether there were paper towels in the women’s rest room.”

At 8:56 A.M. I found this: Here’s the most significant part I could find besides, once again, the glaring lack of at least a one sentence how-to-be-saved statement:

“I wasn’t bitter or angry [about leaving my position as a pastor]; I just wanted my life to count for something more than being an ordained cruise director.” Commenting on that passage, Huckabee said in an e-mail: “I didn’t leave the ministry, as I am still ordained. The good news is that churches have been changing over the past 15 years – with not only a continuing and proper focus on eternal issues”

How can your life count for anything as a Christian, how can you lead righteous people into battle against sin, if you wouldn’t acknowledge the heart necessary truths to do so?

Yes, many Christians do have messed up priorities, sadly. But if only you would get yours straight, and not forget that the gospel of salvation is a higher priority than getting kids off drugs, preventing abortions, being concerned about what age a young adult has sex at and when a young adult female gets pregnant, and the uselessness of telling people to be moral for the Hell of it, as if that was all God was about.

Like Huckabee just said, at 9:57 A.M., who could take the time to mention the petty Tiger Woods car crash just now, but not the murders committed by the hardened criminal he pardoned, let alone that it was he who pardoned him and with no indication that he gave the gospel to this criminal: “There’s nothing ilke a dose of hard time to make us rethink our priorities.”

The apostle Paul said,

“For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—
not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be
emptied of its power.” – 1 Corinthians 1:17

Glenn Beck: A Dangerous, Passive Agressive, Mocker

November 30, 2009 Leave a comment

Glenn Beck, about two or three weeks ago, was obviously trying to incite conservatives and Republicans to war, at least two prominent liberal radio show hosts noticed this. This man is more evil than liberals, as he uses Christianity to try and justify his war-mongering, which can mislead people into thinking that true Christians are war-mongers. Though making such a stereotype is not justifiable despite Glenn’s subtle, but obvious calls to violence. And how can this man be expected to be taken seriously when he spends his time, often, which moronic co-hosts, mocking others and making childish jokes in snide arrogance? He bashed and bitterly mocked hundreds of thousands of 9/11 Truthers and he thinks he’d be safe in a war after that? I’m sure plenty would be gunning for him for his hypocritical, arrogant, traitorous, mocking.

Even on his new book, Arguing with Idiots: How to Stop Small Minds and Big Government, he shows himself to be a moron. What is meant to be conveyed by such a picture? A pouting general with a black eye? Meaning? I think it means: “Look at all these gullible idiots who will buy my books and listen all day long to me no matter how obvious I make it that I’m preaching for fame money.

True Christians are caught between violent anti-Christians, liberals, and fundamentalist false Christians. We should find another country to move to the moment it becomes clear that these three groups intend to go to war with each other, lest they attack us in their narcissistic role-play, with some pretentious excuse like, “If your not part of the solution you’re part of the problem.”

Meanwhile, we should pray often that there will be no civil war, or not any time soon, and that the state governments and federal governments will stop being oppressive and turn to God. Though that is not going to happen any time soon according to the Bible, prayer from enough decent and righteous Christians will help slow the increase in bad behavior by non-Christians and also keep other Christians from sinning as much.

Why Christianity is Wrong and Destroying America and the World

November 28, 2009 6 comments

Why Christianity is Wrong and Destroying America and the World

by Lucky the Liberal

Hello, I’m Lucky the Liberal.

I’m succesfful and have my own house and have many friends and parties in it all the time with educated people from universities and also buddhists come over and its all paid off its big im rich and I went to college, also im neutral because im an atheist therefore you should listen to me.

Today we’ll be learning why Christians are bad people

One, Christians r bad bcuz they read teh bibLe alot and they keep saying God ovr n over.

number 2 also they did you notice they have way more websites and books then athiests? and so therefore they are lazy.

Three: they dont use theyre churches for homeless people and they should. If I were in charge of America I would convert all churches to homeless shelters.

Also Christians fundmentalists –  THATS the worst kind of christians – they deny evolution, big bang and spotaneuos life generation from soups puddles therefore they are stupid. They ahve no education and theyre hypocrites since they teach science but say theres no evolution big bang or sponteuos generations from soup puddles. Ok. So, do you see why liberals are way more smart and useful than Christians, specually the fundsementalist ones? See we don’t wastes time we speak the truth, we have facts and refrences, like this watch, look:

Richard Dawkins, who wrote Origins of Species,  bones in museums, and also a dinsaour creationist museam got shut down bcuz the owners didnt want to pay taxes which is clear proof they are wrong,

We are better at spelling and we had a survey that showed we’re smarter than religious people. Well some liberals are religious but its not much so that’s why I said we’re smarter than religious people. Oh and also we get along with the rest of the world better, so also yes therefore that’s proof we are right and the peaceful ones. More references: Multiple studies by scientists (and all scientists are libearls), so we have all the research and facts on your side.

So as you can see it’s liberals, who, advance the, world, make great technologies, are not the ranting ones, and we dont need to hear about Hell to do good and dont have sky daddies in the clouds. Oh yeah notice how Christians always right big paragraphs and say sooo much stuff and so YOU CANT READ IT!!!???

oH ALSO another huge refrence is wikipedia and it’s clearly the truth. Its better than all other encycleopdias because its got references for everything it says and none of the people in charge of it are bad they are all good because they are in charge. if they werent good why would they be in charge of it?

Also christians burned alexandrias library, bcuz they hate knowledge and they are primitive and simply like bacteria. Atheists didnt want to burn the library instead they wanted to make great civilizations and save lives. Atheists are perfect and never say or do anything wrong.

See I’m logical. Now stop wasting peoples money and time you stupid Christians and making global warming and melting icebergs with your Bibles and God talk!!!! BLAH BLAH BLAH!!!!! OH YEAH: GO OBAMA!!! HE’S FOR CHANGE AND CHANGE IS ALWAYS GOOD AND BEST!!!!

P.S. my name is really Smile Amani and I love to help peolpe on Yahoo Answers. My bests friends is Novangelis, Footprints in the Sand, Gorgeoustxwoman, Grim Jack, Tash, Batgirl2good, Pangel, Great Gazoo, Green Witch, Spike (I love you Spike what happened to you? Did you ever lose all that fat?),  Babbling Blue, Psuedodododia, Justin His Royal Highness and we all think its funny to put babies in microwaves. Oh speaking of babies, stop preventing kids from aborting their babies you mean Christians! We need to teach rapists a lesson by killing their babies instead of letting them turn kids and women into baby machines which is why rapists rape! Also we can use their stem cells for science and we need to them to save real lives, not protolplasms festuses which arent even human! And one day maybe we can get so advanced that i can get stem cells put in my brain so that Im finally good at math and science and can help the world better and keep more babies from being born who will just be poor and pollute the world!

Copyright Lucky the Liberal 2009-infinity.


atheist, no god no guilt

In Response to Frances Kelly’s Request To Receive an Opinion on Channeling

November 25, 2009 4 comments

Channeling is forbidden by the Bible, it is the same as trying to speak with the dead, whether the person channeling knows it or not. They are opening themselves up for communication from a demon, and demons are all liars, everyone except Satanists and those as deluded as them know that demons, are, by definition, evil beings.

There is no evidence that any channeler has ever channeled an alien, all the evidence suggests that they are either lying or a demon is speaking through them, as the things that come out of their mouth is always wrong in some way, and always fits a certain type of communication style, that is the person supposedly being channeled always claims (and they are always things that anyone could make up, like about Atlantis) that what it is saying is fact, never opinion. For example, something lie this, “The Atlanteans lived 10,000 years ago but destroyed themselves in their carelessness), and that is the sign of a prideful liar. I’m not saying that people must arbitrarily saying, “This is my opinion” but I’ve heard and read supposedly channeled aliens and dead humans, and there is always something that goes against the Bible. Why isn’t there one single spirit that agrees with the Bible? If you claim it’s because they find out it’s wrong, well then why don’t any say, “I was a former Christian and learned this part of the Bible was wrong.” No, it’s always, “Go for the kill” so to speak, in other words, get the lie out as fast as you can. And the lack of sophistication also shows that the beings speaking are careless about the truth (not bothering to be clever about it like saying that they were a former Christian or that they also had a Bible on their planet that turned out to be false and that they learned their lesson). This is evidence of low intelligence or a lack of concern for the truth, of a personality that just goes about sloppily bashing the truth as if it were a joke. On the other hand it could be that the reason we only hear stupid spirits that lack sophistication is because God only allows the stupid ones to possess a person or speak through them. The reason for that may be that if more clever spirits were allowed to use a person to speak, that the deception would make it more difficult for people in general to tell the truth from a lie, a level of difficulty that God doesn’t want the world in general to have to deal with for whatever reason.

Evidence of God or at least some superior being imposing a limit on what these spirits can do is that it’s known they can sometimes possess people and do things that humans are not able to do naturally: manipulating objects without touching them, speak in languages not known to the person being possessed, do things that are so painful that it’s unlikely that even an insane person would do them (like repeatedly biting on things that cause teeth to immediately break off or scratching things with your fingers so that your nails ripped off), floating, saying things that couldn’t be known without having been spied on or seeing and hearing a person’s memories, making smells seemingly out of no where (probably by transmuting the particulates in the air into some other form that smells),  changing the temperature of the air or an object, making or projecting images like of an object or possibly of some creature (which may be a demon or part of a demon itself rather than a projection or temporary manipulation of matter), making vocalizations or music on audio recordings that were apparently directly imprinted onto the recording, making images directly onto video recordings so that the images couldn’t have been seen by anyone, causing wounds that don’t get infected, and that can remain opened for long periods of times and bleed greatly without the person they’ve wounded, dying (stigmata), HOWEVER, that these powerful spirits aren’t doing this whenever they want, and let us know now and then that they don’t like to hear or see anything that is strongly related to God (for example a certain famous prophet who commanded that his followers randomly terrorize non-believers, and that command is recorded in their holy book) was said to go beserk when he saw crosses, suggests that it’s God who is limiting them. And note that no one has ever heard of a spirit being saying, “Stop talking about Shiva! I don’t want to hear about Zeus!” to someone trying to cast them out using their names, but only throwing fits when hearing something like, “In the name of Jesus,” or verses from the Bible, and so on. Though God seems to have limited the kinds of spirits that can possess people, he has allowed much great deception in the form of misleading people as to what the true religion is (as opposed to allowing any supposed alien or dead human to teach that there is no God). For example implying that no one goes to heaven but just reincarnates or reincarnates a certain amount of times then goes to Heaven, or that Catholicism is the true religion (a few times Catholics or people that could be persuaded to become Catholics have seen or at least claimed to have seen visions of angels fighting or while possessed, supposedly hate to be touched with holy water, and the holy water concept is strongly associated with the Catholic religion). You never, not even in movies, see a possessed person being exorcised by an Episcopalian priest, a Mormon, or Baptist, it’s always, suspiciously, a Catholic, and since the New Age, by sorcerers/witches and or mediums. The malicious intent of the demons is also evident by their choice of what they throw fits over with regards to who and how they are repelled: Catholic priests, mediums, and witches. Why these three? Here is a psychological analysis again:

1) Catholic doctrine and the Bible forbid channeling or consulting demons, casting spells, and even fortune-telling. And demons give us the impression that Catholics can repel them, but not other types of groups that many consider Christians, whether considering them to be hypocritical Christians or not. And a careful study of a certain chapter in Revelation indicates that God considers the Catholics church to be the “whore that rides the beast” who is “drunk with the blood of the saints”. In other words God considers them to be unfaithful, both physically and spiritually adulterous (including not being faithful to God) and to be responsible for the deaths of a great many true Christians. The clue is the reference to the city on “seven hills” in this chapter (Rome is the only known city on seven hills with great influence of the world). Now if you suppose that Satan is a very malicious liar, and a clever one as the Bible teaches he is, then it’s makes sense as to why he would want to give the appearance that one “Christian” group (that God took the time to write about as being the worst on Earth), as being the only Christians powerful enough to stop him, or that even have a chance (Catholic priests have a high failure rate of getting rid of demons, and as far as the evidences shows, they don’t actually get rid of any demons, but rather the demons leave on their own, and according to the Bible, possess the same person again, and probably sometimes when their are no priests around or anyone to notice the possession, (like hidden abuse)).

2) Demons give the impression that mediums and witches can make them leave, at least in the mass media (for example no medium has ever been shown being attacked by a demon, a ghost investigator was recently attacked/possessed, supposedly, and it can be seen on youtube, but there was no indication that he was a medium or a witch that I knew of). Now what makes no sense about that, is that, again, traditional and official Catholic doctrine teaches that mediums and witches are evil and are under the persuasion of Satan, and if Satan, then the rest of the disobedient angels/demons, as Satan is their leader. The Bible also implies this.

Notice the polar opposites: Catholics, supposedly the only true Christians or rather only ones who will make it to Heaven and live forever in peace, and the mediums and witches, mediums who are said to channel demons, and it’s implied that witches, even if they don’t know it, rely on Satan/demons to accomplish their magic. Do you notice the irony, or the joke of this “Trickster”, this comedian, this mocker, called Satan?:

He’s simultaneously promoting the Catholic denomination, which at least in the opinion of 50+ million Christians is the most hated by God of of all Christian cults and the mediums and witches, whom Satan works and speaks through, and more ironic, is that Satan often uses mediums to console those who are tormented over the loss off someone they loved. In other words Satan is making it look like the worst cult on Earth is the true religion while causing great confusion also by making it look like Catholicism is completely wrong, by putting mediums and witches in a good light. And this makes the Bible look wrong to those WHO KNOW that the Bible forbids speaking to the dead and witchcraft, and which implies that the Catholic denomination prevents lasting peace.

Is what I’ve said just ranting? If so, then show the flaw or flaws in my logic. Note: simply telling me that the Bible is false is not evidence of anything, let alone scientific evidence, also showing any supposed evidence that it is won’t be accepted by me, since I’ve already examined it all, and though I’m not a professional biologist or physicist or archeologist, I don’t need to be anymore than any who disbelieves the Bible needs to be in order to “know” it’s not true, rather we can read the research of those who are and examine their trustworthiness in various ways to know if they are telling the truth, or if their research makes sense. And for those of you who think, “Well if you won’t except the only evidence that the Bible is false then you’re preventing anyone from showing your reasoning is false”, that’s wrong, because you can view my belief in the Bible as true as a hypothesis that it is true, and then look for any flaw or flaws in my exposition based on that hypothesis.

For example, if someone wouldn’t accept that the basic evidence for macro-evolution were true, and wrote a exposition based on it, that wouldn’t prevent me from showing that their exposition was wrong (if it were long enough) being that flaws are inevitable in any teaching based on a lie, especially a great amount of lies as many think the Bible is.