Today across the world people celebrate the crucifixion of their one and only true savior, who was tortured to death. Apparently his dad approved this event so that the people who were born after his death could be saved from going to hell for eternal torture for the sins they commit with mainly their sex organs. You can’t make this shit up.

Standard

attachment

the_cross jesus-on-the-cross1 thor3

Advertisements

119 thoughts on “Today across the world people celebrate the crucifixion of their one and only true savior, who was tortured to death. Apparently his dad approved this event so that the people who were born after his death could be saved from going to hell for eternal torture for the sins they commit with mainly their sex organs. You can’t make this shit up.

  1. Ja ek dink ook die fundamentaliste gaan de moer in wees vir Mad Mack hy het die heeltyd onder die dekmantel van Ateïsme sy satanaanbiddings werk gedoen om die satan se koninkryk uit te brei. . .! Hy is toe die heeltyd ‘n disipel van die satan. haha lekker gevang al die atijoote!

    Like

      • Mad Mack satanis, jy oortree ‘n logiese denkrigting met jou “straw man fallacy” en die 2 de sonde van satan:

        “The straw man fallacy is when you misrepresent someone else’s position so that it can be attacked more easily, knock down that misrepresented position”
        “2. Pretentiousness
        Empty posturing can be most irritating and isn’t applying the cardinal rules of Lesser Magic. On equal footing with stupidity . . .”

        Jou woorde val leeg op die grond en jou voorgee dat jy ‘n atijoot is is ge-“compromised”

        Like

        • Jirre Johann, jy is so deurmekaar dat ek seker is selfs die mense wat die naaste aan jou is jou nie eens kan verstaan nie. Dit gee natuurlik vir jou die idee dat jy slim is.

          Ek onthou goed die onnies op laerskool met hulle snorre, kortmou hemde en dasse. Nie veel tussen hulle ore gehad nie, maar gedink hulle was baie slim. Maar tussen ‘n klomp kindertjies kan mens seker verstaan dat hulle bo gemiddeld gevoel het.

          Like

          • Shit, McBrolloks, take the guy’s shit seriously! You are harbouring SATANISTS on this blog! Fuck fuck fuck fuck!

            Like

          • Jou lou kie respons van satanaanbidder tot laerskool onderwyser is tipies van iemand wat wol oor ander se oë wil trek (Don’t worry, everything is fine trust me. .!)

            Ek dink jy skuld die goedbedoelde, goedgelowige, gewone ateïste ‘n verskoning of verklaring oor wat jou lewensbeskouing, lewensfilosofie of godsdiens is in jou eie woorde met vermelding na jou dissipelskap van satan.

            Like

              • Hier steek ‘n baie ou ding weer sy kop uit. Toe dit op skool bekend geword het dat ek nie in Liewe Jesus glo nie, is ek ‘n satanis genoem. Dit het nie gehelp om te verduidelik dat ek ook nie glo dat Satan bestaan nie – die eenvoudige begrip dat ‘n mens spoke se bestaan verwerp, was te ingewikkeld vir die godiote. Netso is die bestaan van ateïste te veel vir Johannie se begrip – sy god-gene versteur die normale vloei van elektrone na en van sy benewelde brein. Daar moet iets veskuild wees in die ateïste se mondering – en siedaar!! = hulle is sataniste.

                McBrolloks, wat se pille kan ons vir Johannie aanbeveel? In die bos het die locals so ‘n snaakse soort boomwortel vir abnormal gedrag aanbeveel wat dan gerook is en blykbaar is normale gedrag weer herstel. As ek weer bos toe gaan sal ek daarvan kry en, Johannie, as jy my jou adres stuur, pos ek dit vir jou. Enige iets om jou te kan help, ou.

                Like

                • En jy is nie meer op skool nie, Koel Diek, en daai kinders het al lankal vergeet van jou en wat hulle gedoen het, maar as Mad Mack ‘n verkuilde agenda het dan behoort hy dit aan julle te openbaar (hy sal dit natuurlik nie doen as hy ‘n disippel van satan is nie) Waarom dink jy hou hy aan en aan om christene aan te val? Wat sou sy lewe gewees het as hy nie ‘n “ons” en “hulle” mentaliteit gehad het nie? En “ons” is reg het “hulle” is verkeerd?

                  Hy wil nie die ateïstiese “gospel” verkondig nie, hy wil sy haat en nyd ekspres teenoor christene, en die rede daarvoor is ooglopend, hy “mis” iets in sy lewe wat die haat en nyd en zolle nie kan verskaf nie, hy is nie vry nie en onbewustelik weet hy dit, nou klou hy aan simbole van die wetenskap met die hoop dat dit hom na saligheid gaan lei. . . en so kan ek aangaan oor wat Mad Mack se motiveering.

                  Gaan kyk na sy comments, dis almal dieselfde . . . uh julle is dom, . . .maar ek is slim. . . . julle praat oor ontlasting,. . . .uh ek praat nooit van ontlasting nie,. . . .uh. . .ek’s in die baarmoeder verwerp en nou haat ek julle almal,. . . .uh . . . .da da dah!
                  (mens kry die indruk dat sy brein regtig net so kol kol werk, ‘n kol om zol te rol en ‘n kol om op die blad te kots, verder het hy geen verhouding met iets anders nie, dink jy nie so ou vra vir hulp nie? Nou versterk jy hom deur hom op die skouer te klop? Die broeders van die gemeente)

                  Like

                  • Moeilike denge, Johannie, moeilike denge, En nou kortsluit die sinapses ook nog op die koop toe. En dan praat jy van iemand se brein wat net kol kol werk.

                    Like

                    • Savage, ek dink dit was jy wat so paar weke gelede geskryf het oor Johann se skrywes wat al hoe meer onbenullig word.

                      Ek dink jy is 100% korrek……..

                      Johan, kom ek spot ook met die ander gelowe om jou tevrede te stel…..

                      Like

                • “Molly is daar dan enige verskil tussen satanaanbidders en ateïsme?”

                  Jy vra die verkeerde vraag en dit is te simplisties gestel

                  Inteendeel, jy is dalk die grootste satanis hier aangesien jy n solipsis is wat veronderstel dat jy n got is. Die verskil is dat sommige sataniste hulle eie got wil wees terwyl hulle erken dat ander bewussyn – buiten hulself – in hierdie wereld van ons ook in materialistiese sin bestaan.

                  Either way, net soos sekere sataniste aanbid jy wat Johan is julself.

                  Dit is mos nou logies dat ateiste niks met self-aanbidding soos jy en jou “theistiese” satanistiese aanbidding te doen wil he nie:)

                  Sekere sataniste spot ook maar net….

                  Gelowiges is dikwels bang vir die supernatural….

                  Het jy egter geweet dat nie alle sataniste geharde materialiste is nie.

                  Like

                    • Stupid cunts. If I meet someone who calls herself or himself a born again Christian and pretends to want to be a client of my financial advisory practice, I tell that person to get lost immediately.

                      Like

                    • That hand-dyed brunette woman with the grey roots (“Omigod, fifty shades of grey!”) should clean out the fridge more often if she doesn’t want the Corningware flying out from under the Tupperware.

                      Like

                  • Regstelling: “Het jy egter geweet dat nie alle sataniste geharde materialiste is nie.”

                    Het jy egter geweet dat nie alle ATEISTE geharde materialiste is nie.

                    JOHANN, GAAN SPEEL JY MAAR MET DIE DUIWEL EN JAHWEH……

                    Like

                  • “Jy vra die verkeerde vraag en dit is te simplisties gestel” ? Watse vraag dan Gerhardus&egter en stel dit meer gekompliseerd. Wat is die relavante vraag dan, wat is DIE vraag dan?

                    En ek is seker dat materialis nie dieselfde vir jou na wys as vir my en ander nie, wat is ‘n materialis? En ons weet dit ook dat nie alle “gelowiges” of dit ateïste, sanantiste, chreistene is, dieselfde is of dinge doen nie, ego’s groei verskillend vir almal, so wat is jou punt?

                    Like

                    • Dink bietjie weer oor wat jy skryf.

                      “Molly is daar dan enige verskil tussen satanaanbidders en ateïsme?”

                      Die blote feit dat jy so n belaglike vraag vra wys daarop dat jy probeer om die ateistiese posisie gelykstel te stel aan satanisme.

                      Dit is die taktiek wat jy dikwels hier volg. Beskuldig my dat ek lelik praat, maar dan is jy die eerste een wat van “skyt” praat.

                      Like

                    • For Johann it is necessary to believe that all satanists are devil worshippers and that atheism and satanism are the same thing. Johann’s whole identity is invested in believing in a Christian god. If he can convince himself it’s ok to physically attack atheists on grounds that they are devil worshippers, he will round up a lynch mob. To deny Christianity is to deny Johann himself and is seen by him as physical attack on HIS person.

                      Like

                    • Nee Gerhardus, as jy dalk gelees het wat Molly gekoppie en pyst het is dit wat julle doen hier met jul aanvalle/bespotting van die “kerke” en mense wat hulself as gelowiges bekendstel, so dan maak julle dieselfde as Anton LaVey

                      Wat ek probeer in jou psige losmaak is dat as mens ego gedrewe is dan is die eind resultaat altyd dieselfde – ‘n illusie van “superman” word geskep en maak nie saak wat die benaming is nie die konstruksie is dieselfde. Jy kan dit noem wat jy wil, maar in jou kop is daar ‘n konsep van iets wat groter is as die mens wat jy is, meer as die lewe self, ‘n super “power”, en dis paradoksaal, want as die “iets” deur die ego geskep is, is die idee geleen van dit wat mens in jou onderbewuste “weet”, maar nie kan onthou nie, dat daar wel “iets” is wat groter as mens is, maar dis nie dieselfde as wat die ego kan opdis nie.

                      Like

                    • What happened, Johann, did Anton LaVey cause your computer to explode so you have to borrow one from your atheist brother? You cannot seem to get away from your superhero concept, whether it’s Jesus Christ or some imaginary guy with a white beard pulling the planets around, and now you’ve got a case against Anton LaVey, and he died in the nineties. Raak ontslae van die godbeeld in jou kop, moenie jou eie waansin op ander blameer nie. Ons dink nie soos jy nie.

                      Like

                    • “dat daar wel “iets” is wat groter as mens is”

                      Daai groter ding is waarskynlik Tyrannosaurus rex, ‘n moerse groot reptiel.
                      ‘n Deel van ons brein en die van reptiele het immers baie in gemeen.

                      Nietemin, ek reken as ons Jo-Anus lank genoeg toesluit met ‘n tikmasjien sal hy eendag al Shakespeare se werke herproduseer.

                      Like

            • Anton LaVey was an atheist and existentialist who pretended to be a devil worshipping satanist for the fun of it. He was a mocking eccentric in the vein of Salvador Dali and Vincent Price.

              In the Devil’s Notebook he writes:

              It’s amazing how much fear is invoked in others by the presence of a known Satanist. People who never advertise their religious backgrounds, when confronted by a “Devil worshipper”, suddenly become devout. How often I see crosses around the necks of those who’ve been informed of my arrival – as if, like Dracula, I will be rendered powerless. And when I’m not fazed by such precautions, the aroma of nervous sweat really fills the room. It’s then that I feel sadistic, if that term ever applied. I love to see those dusty crucifixes salvaged from the bottoms of bureau drawers, unworn since catechism. The evangelical bumper stickers that might just as well say “kick me”. The little gold crosses. The pathetic victims of Christian propaganda wearing the symbol of their role model’s death around their necks like tiny electric chairs or gas chambers or hangman’s nooses, actually believing it will protect them.

              Wearing a display of dormant faith allows them to be safe – as safe and sure as their advertised deodorant – to ask me about Satanism.

              My brand of Satanism is the ultimate conscious alternative to herd mentality and institutionalised thought. It is a studied and contrived set of principles and exercises designed to liberate individuals from a contagion of mindlessness that destroys innovation. I have termed my thought “Satanism” because it is most stimulating under that name. Self-discipline and motivation are effected more easily under stimulating conditions. Satanism means “the opposition” and epitomises all symbols of nonconformity. Satanism calls forth the strong ability to turn a liability into an advantage, to turn alienation into exclusivity. In other words, the reason it’s called Satanism is because it’s fun, it’s accurate and it’s productive.

              Like

              • Holy, this idiots tells us his argument over and over as if we are retarded. A man who used to work for my father a few years ago often clamed that a family member got killed in an accident or something to that effect. Every single time he proceeded by telling the sorry tale asking for money for a funeral. When we rejected the nonsense of helping out his huge family by refusing extra money he then repeated the story for a second time as if we couldn’t understand him the first time.

                Seriously, Johan must go and play with his superhero’s as you mentioned. Johannus Godius is the main superhero in the game…..

                Johann, menigde ateiste sien hulself juis nie as die “centre of the universe” nie. O, die ironie……

                Like

      • Johann doesn’t know how to download a flash player. He keeps saying he doesn’t have enough download speed to view a video. The download speed isn’t the problem. It’s the lack of stuff between the ears to be able to do anything except press the power button.

        Like

  2. Daar bestaan tegnies gesproke nie goed soos Sataniste nie. Daar is drie groepe wat geklasifiseer word as satansaanbidders. Die eerste is die kerk van satan. Satan is slegs ‘n naam om te gebruik. Hulle gebruik die naam om ‘n bespotting van geloof te maak. Hulle glo aan niks, nie aan Satan of God nie. Hulle leef ‘n permissiewe losbandige lewe en geniet dit so veel as moontlik sonder om te worry oor morele waardes wat deur geloof op hulle afgedwing word. Dit is eintlik ‘n uiterse selfsugtige leefstyl.

    Dan is daar die kwazi – Sataniste. Hulle eksperimenteer met die ” bose ” maar hulle soek eintlik net ‘n verskoning om bose, siek dinge te doen ( Diere mishandel, losbandige sex, dwelms, moord). Baie keer is dit net ‘n fase in hulle lewe. Dan is daar ‘n groep wat gedurende die middeleeue as “hekse” geklasifiseer was maar hulle was eintlik wat mens noem pagans. Hulle het die magte van die natuur aanbid en was nie regtig aanbidders van een of ander bose, magtige entiteit nie. Baie mense wat gedurende die middeleeue as hese geklasifiseer is was heelwaarskynlik geestelik versteurd.

    Daar word ook melding gemaak van ‘n vierde groep wat wel die duiwel self aanbid maar hulle is nie eens few and far between nie. As jou kind by Satanisme betrokke is is hy/sy heelwaarskynlik van die kwazi – Sataniste. Dan dink ek dis tyd om daai kind na ‘n sielkundige toe te neem. Heelwaarskynlik, juvenile delinquency.

    Nee Johann. Mcbrolloks is nie ‘n Satanis nie. En wat as hy is. Dan is hier Christene, Ateiste en Sataniste al teenwoordig op hierdie blog. Ons almal het ons se gese, dis al.

    Like

    • Anton LaVey founded the Church of Satan and you are right, it is a big piss take of Christianity. LaVey was an atheist satanist – no belief in satan or any other gods – who advocated “responsibility to the responsible” i.e. don’t do dumb shit that will bite your arse. They are attracted to intellectualism.

      Devil worshippers are not satanists even though they would like to think they are. They are a bunch of cunts who derive their half baked ideas of a devil from the lies in the Gospels. They are the “kwazi” crowd. It’s often difficult to tell them apart from the frequently nasty church going Christians, which is not surprising as they are rebels against their usually Christian parents – the apple does not fall far from the tree.

      Theist satanists are a minority; they pray to heathen gods of old but don’t harm animals or children. They are vegan hippie types, eating nuts and scratching their balls all day.

      So the worst, by far, of the bunch are the Christian derived devil worshippers. No surprises there!

      Like

    • Anton LaVey on how to make fun of “entertain me” visitors:

      Decorate a room with the most hokey Halloween bric-a-brac you can find. Make sure the room is red and black. Fill the chamber with as many obviously plastic artifacts as you can find. Halloween is the perfect time to stock up on rubber bats, plastic pitchforks, and the like. Don’t forget Jack-o-lantern and black cat cutouts. Remember, if you’re a Satanist, it’s supposed to be Halloween every night.

      Above all, while “entertaining,” keep a straight face. Show absolutely no sense of humour other than monster movie puns on a nine-year-old level, just to show you “really do have a sense of humour” as media folks and civilians usually point to others, with a sigh of relief. To start, serve your guest a Bloody Mary with Dracula style.

      Furnishings should be in awful condition. Try to seat your victim in a lumpy armchair with a strategically sprung spring poking his arse. Your position while talking should, naturally, be upon a seedy throne chair. (To construct such a chair, attach doodads like bats and devil heads and skulls to the top and arms of a regular armchair. A dais can be made from a packing crate painted silver and sprinkled with glitter.)

      Clothing should be incongruous. Wear the most conservative, well-tailored suit you can afford; or if a woman, a tasteful ensemble of good fit and fabric. Over the tasteful garments, wear a cape. Not a well-made cape of rich fabric and quality workmanship, but a think and skimpy model showing creases and wrinkles, crooked seams and at least one loose thread pleading to be pulled. Wear it slightly skew – just enough to be unnerving. If you can keep a straight face, stick some plastic suction cup horns on your forehead while your victim isn’t looking.

      For background music try Disney’s “Sounds of the Haunted Mansion”. Assistants can be employed to advantage, provided that they too can keep a straight face. Your assistants should wear ill-fitting robes (too short or long an droopy) of similar quality as your cape. They should stand about looking as expressionless as human possibly while you entertain your victim with “sincere” comments and answers.

      Now is the time when you yank the carpet out from under. When your victim has departed but is still within earshot, bellow forth the loudest and most delighted laughter you and whomever may be on hand can produce. Continue your whooping until you are certain your victim has vacated the immediate neighbourhood.

      It is essential to select a victim who is conspicuously patronising or condescending; smug despite his “sincere interest”. If your victim has a sense of humour and discriminating eye, he will find it all very funny. Don’t hold your breath, though. Chances are good your victim is not imbued with that rare sort of perception, and you will have given him exactly what he deserves: ridicule.

      Like

  3. The Mind Virus Called Religion
    By Zack Smith (https://firmitas.org/)

    Religion is a virus that invades a host — the human mind — and as with any virus, it takes over the host and uses that host for the sordid purposes of reproduction of the virus itself and the infection of other hosts. Like other viruses it competes with other parasites, such as other mind-viruses, as well as all-encompassing ideologies.

    1. Meaning

    The religion-disease convinces its host-victims that only religion is a source of “meaning” or a “meaningful” life in the world, but it discourages its host-victims from interacting with non-religious people to learn how they’re living and how they find meaning in life.
    The religion mind-virus tries to tie all experiences to itself so that all experiences are infused with its “meaning”, and induces the illogical belief that life and experiences that are disconnected from the religion have no meaning or importance.
    This use of such false meaning allows the religion mind-virus to exert greater control over the host-victim because its use ensures loyalty; and everything that is a threat to the virus can be easily deemed “meaningless”.
    It is known that hard drugs have a similar effect on people; a heroin user will consider anything not related to his addiction to be meaningless or pointless, and only the drug and the various means of getting the drug matter.
    Corporate marketing departments attempt to establish a similar effect: If you don’t own a BMW or Lexus, your life has no meaning. If you don’t smoke XYZ brand of cancer-causing tobacco, your life has no meaning.
    Labelling some things as “meaningful” and others “ meaningless” is thus merely a tactic, shallow and insipid.

    2. Corrosive Ambition

    The religion-diseases need to dominate human hosts in order to proliferate, and they convince their hosts to seek dominance over other humans.
    This takes many forms, such as external wars (the Crusades as well as the Muslim expansions), pogroms, religious wars, and revolutions (e.g. the Christian takeover of the Roman Empire).
    It can also take the form of encouraging the infected to seek success through control over money, politics, business and the media. When this is the case, the mind-virus encourages ambition but in so doing it moulds believers into petty, shallow, controlling people who are even less likely to see or question their disease.
    In one variant of this idea, some sects assert that monetary success and power ensure increased favour from their gods, thus greed is not just good but divine.

    3. Isolation

    Religion discourages its host-victims from interacting with people who have different ideas, especially with people who are non-religious. Therefore the virus is granted maximal control without interference from people who might risk disinfecting the host.
    Heretics who assert that infection with the particular mind virus is bad, or who assert that all mind-viruses require action to disinfect hosts will be avoided at all costs. Their words will be ignored. Their ideas will be mocked. Their experts will be criticized.

    4. Illogical and Irrationality

    The religion mind-virus discourages logical thinking, because such thinking might show the contradictions and inconsistencies of the religion itself. Logical thinking would also point out the sheer absurdity of the religion’s premises.
    Irrationality must be practiced in order to wear down the believer’s natural tendency toward questioning. The mind-virus often achieve this in the form of rituals, group prayers, and misinterpretation of events to imagine divine intervention.
    Logical thinking is a clear threat to the mind-virus. If directed at oneself it may cause self-disinfection, thereby dealing a severe blow to the mind-virus. It may also uncover unhealthy impulses such as for narcissism or self-aggrandizement or perverse hypocrisy that the religion mind-virus is exploiting to exert control.

    5. Blindness and Ignorance

    The religion mind-virus induces a kind of blindness to obvious benefits of scientific thinking and engineering. Thus, the virus will encourage people to exploit technology without allowing them to recognize that every piece of their technology is a result of scientific advances and scientific thinking. This seems like hypocrisy but really it is caused by the thinking mechanism of the host being disrupted. There is a logical disconnect. That separation between the reality of technological advances and the reality of scientific advances exists to prevent self-questioning.
    In a way, the religion mind-virus reduces the otherwise smart human into a monkey-like animal, which uses technological tools without understanding them.

    6. Bigotry and Supremacist Thinking

    The religion mind-virus manages its particular group of host-victims by inducing in them bigoted views against those of different groups. This has the purpose of assuring host-victims that it is not worth the trouble to stray from the pack because outsiders are inferior, morally or otherwise. Preventing the formation of new loyalties or even friendships with others undermines the mind-virus’s control of the host. The reason for not connecting with others is established as being that the others being inferior, e.g. they are dangerous, and you are superior.
    A mind-virus may even promote loony supremacist views, such as we are the chosen people.

    7. Infection of the Young

    Religion would disappear within a few generations if children were not infected with it. So for the survival of the mind-virus called religion, it is vital that young people be infected. This can be perpetrated by their parents or by professional infectors (priests, pastors, imams, rabbis, etc.) but it must be done before they develop a natural immunity to mind-viruses in the form of cognitive ability and critical thinking.
    Luckily for religion mind-viruses, children are programmed to believe whatever adults tell them is true. Children can even take in nonsensical threats about hellfire and eternal damnation as being literally true, and they may believe that miracles are true.
    The function of the local infector is similar to that of Typhoid Mary or any other person who has sought to infect many people with a disease. The purpose of the infector, conscious or not, is to spread the infection among those most vulnerable to it, namely the very young and the old.
    Sometimes the infector is somewhat immune to the religion mind virus himself, but harbours a self-important attitude that the rabble need to be infected and controlled. Often the infector has schemes to use infected people for various sordid purposes, like obtaining money or sex from them. Often the professional infector views the public as fools.
    However in the process of infecting children, the mental torment imposed on children in the form of threats of persecution and eternal damnation can quite fairly be called child abuse. The virus is injected into their brain but the infectors seek to keep the child from resisting it, using various kind of conditioning that can amount to torture.

    8. False Bravado and Baseless Pride

    The mind-virus causes the host-victim to declare an attitude of cocksure confidence to anyone who might undermine their loyalty to their religion-infection. The infected host will declare that they can’t be changed from their (self-destructive) course as an infected (religious) person. They will ridiculously express that they are 100% sure of many little invented facts about the invisible man in the sky, whose existence cannot be proven.
    Despite the irrationality of this, the host-victim is really exposing his or her own inner imbalance and vulnerability. “You’ll never change me” actually means “I have given up my free will to the mind-virus and am adrift under its influence”.
    The tiny bit of free will that they have is bullied by the virus into silence, but it is still there.
    Some religion mind-viruses even induce a rather queer attitude in the infected person that anyone who is not infected is somehow weak or unmanly. The ironic perversity of this is extraordinary, because it is specifically the weak and unmanly who are most susceptible to infection with the mind-virus and the most perverse who desire the infection most. Indeed, the people who are most often targeted for infection are the children and the old.

    9. Genetic Code

    A religion possesses two genetic codes, two kinds of “DNA”, if you will:

    (a) The written viral DNA that changes very little over time since it is contained in “sacred” books.
    (b) The spoken viral DNA which evolves rapidly to adapt to the cultures of new host-victims and the predicaments they encounter. Its new viral strains also permit newly-infected groups to break away into self-quarantining sects.

    Like

  4. Molly se reaksie:

    “You cannot seem to get away from your superhero concept, whether it’s Jesus Christ or some imaginary guy with a white beard ” en
    “Raak ontslae van die godbeeld in jou kop,”

    Mooi Mollie jy verstaan die helfte, 50% vir jou, al hierdie atijoote het die gekondisioneerde godbeeld in hul koppe verwerp as vals en ek sê hulle is arrogant omdat hulle glo dat al die ander mense ook so ‘n gekondisioneerde godkonsep in hul koppe het wat hulle “worship”, en sekerlik is daar nog sulke “nut” gevalle. Julle weet mos hoe stjoepit julle self was.

    Vir die arme atijoot was dit sekerlik die grootste gebeurtenis in sy/haar lewe om nou die “bedrogspul” in sy eie “kop” te ontdek, die godbeeld was toe deur sy eie ego geskep en dit bestaan nie, en hou julle aan en aan vir jul”self” vertel dat jul eie godbeeld nie bestaan nie, en onbeskaam herhaal julle dit hier oor en oor op die kotsblad sonder om te besef dat julle aanhou om vir almal te “wys” hoe stjoepit julle was en nogsteeds is, dis net asof julle nie kan aan beweeg nie en dan draai julle al in ‘n sirkels rond en kots weer op hul eie opbraaksel.

    Gerhardus beweer nou dat julle, die gemeente op die blad, verstaan wat ek probeer vertel en ek is so stjoepit ek dink die heeltyd julle response wys my dat ek dit nie deur julle dik velle kan kry nie. Die godbeeld in jul koppe is deur die ego geskep en is nie waar nie, maar al het julle dit verwerp is dit nogsteeds daar en inplaas daarvan om dit te “worship” het julle nou net omgedraai en dit verwerp.

    Like

    • Johannie, ek het spesifiek Zack Smith se skrywe geplaas om jou reaksie te sien. Ek is nie verbaas op jou antwoord nie. Die godsdiens-virus is beslis besig om jou verstandelik impotent te maak om enige rasionele redenasie te voer.

      As jy al jou “redenasies” reduseer tot ‘n kern, kan mens tot die gevolgtrekking kom dat die gebrek aan bewyse vir die bestaan van jou Liewe Gode, jou gat krap. Jy (of enige van jou genote) kan geen bewyse lewer nie, en ons wat die logiese gevolgterkking maak dat julle gode nie bestaan nie, word aangeval.

      Ou Kokkerman is nie meer hier om jou te help nie, so ek sê maar: “Tramp maar voort, Johannie, tramp maar voort.”

      Like

      • Savage, dit sal my nie verbaas as ou Kokkerman n “comeback” gaan maak nie. Dalk is hy besig om hier te lees met n nuwe poging wat gaan kom.

        Toevallig weer van sy skrywes gelees. Daardie skrywe van Mcbrolloks pas hom soos n handskoen. Oor die algemeen dink ek egter dat Kokkerman n baie giftiger pen het as Johann wat meestal skadeloos is.

        Nietemin, het ou Danie die debat verloor na sy groot bravade waar hy sy mond uitgespoel het oor die bestaan van got, oosterse seekos en wie die “ware” Afrikaners is. Toe verwys hy ons nou ou Josh Mcdowell vir “evidence” nadat hy lekker in die hoek gedryf was. Mcdowell, gebruik o.a. C.S. Lewis se 3 L’e argument as n “bewys”.

        Like

        • Well you can be sure he’s reading all of this and you’re tempting him to make a comeback where he will once again get his arse kicked. There is a limit to the number of times the “kick me” sign is still funny.

          Like

      • A: spesifiek Zack Smith se skrywe geplaas
        B : nie verbaas op jou antwoord nie.
        C: impotent te maak om enige rasionele redenasie te voer.

        Miskien kan Fielijas aan my die logika agter die stelling uitwys, A + B = C?

        Ek het net so deur Smith se o so slim skrywe geskiem en kon optel dat ateïsme as ‘n godsdiens sekerlik mense verblind, “As die lig in jou lewe die donkerte is, hoe donker is dit dan vir jou?” (so iets), as die frase vir jou niks beteken nie, dan sou ek miskien dink aan wat is die “lig” in my lewe. (As Smith se skrywe vir jou ‘n ligpunt is, dan sou ek sonder vooroordeel dit gelees het en tot die slotsom gekom het dat dit vol haat en nyd en boosgeid is, en dis ‘n ligpunt? Die donkerte?)
        Dis fassinerend dat dit so naby en tog so vêr is, dis asof daar ‘n sluier oor jul oë geplaas is wat so flimzie en tog so sterk is en daai ego sal enige gedagte wat teenstrydig is met die “eie ek” in die onderbewuste hou. (“Ek is reg en dis onmoontlik dat God bestaan . . .blah blah blah” gaan daai stemmetjie aan en aan)
        (As ek nou aan Adriaan dink dan is daai stemmetjie ‘n “tormentor” wat hom teister en eers vertel hoe sleg is hy en nou projekteer hy dit op “ander” deur selfs God aan te val omdat hy nou met sy stemmetjie in sy kop geïdentifiseer het)

        Ek het ook al aan jou male sonder om te tel die “bewys” van die bestaan van God gegee, maar jy wil die wa voor die perde span en eers die resultate van die eksperiment hê voor jy die eksperiment doen. Praat van logiese denke?

        Aan die einde van die dag WIL jy nie die bewys aanvaar nie nie, vir die simpel rede dat jou godbeeld in jou kop so afgryslik is vir jou ego dat die weier om eers naby dit te gaan en jy glo dat jy “vry” is van die godsbeeld in jou kop, maar eintlik is dit nie vryheid nie, daai monster van ‘n godbeeld in jou kop hou jou gevange en maak dat jy enige “geestelike” groei sal ignoreer of vermy deur bv. te glo dat al wat werklik is is die heelal en “ek’ wil bewyse hê vir alles bllah blah gaan daai stemmetjie voort (streaming non stop en in Molly se geval screaming ook) En dan wat is “bewussyn” nee die saaintes weet nog nie, moet ek dan die logiese afleiding maak dat “bewussyn” nie bestaan nie?

        Braak maar voort Koel Diek kots maar aan.

        (Sorrie die bogenoemde geld nie vir Molly nie, sy is so uniek dat sy eintlik onder ‘n ander spesie geklassifiseer behoort te word . . .onder die wonder van die 21 ste eeu)

        Like

        • “Ek het ook al aan jou male sonder om te tel die “bewys” van die bestaan van God gegee,”

          Nonsens! Jy het geen bewyse vir die bestaan van jou gode gegee nie. Onthou, die geraas in jou kop dien nie as ‘n bewys nie, so ook nie al jou illusies en hersinskimme wat net jy sien nie.

          So, probeer maar weer, Johannie, probeer maar weer..

          Like

          • Op dieselfde toon het jy dan ook nie bewys dat gravitasie bestaan nie (Jy het net die formule oor hoe om die sterkte van gravitasie te bepaal – verwoord)

            En as jy “vry” is kan jy die geloofsprong maak en bewys lewer dat jy wel vry is, maar jy kan nie omdat jy gebind en verblind is deur jou dogmatiese ateïstiese geloof.

            Like

                • Ek dink nie die antwoord met Kont Hovind is dat mens met hom debatteer nie. Ek dink ‘n naald en garing is ‘n beter antwoord. Werk sy bek toe met naald en garing. Ek het spesifiek ‘n petisie geteken om hom langer in die tronk te hou. Die ding van hom wat my opval is, dit is altyd – Jy’t gese, hy’t gese argumente. Hierdie een ou maak vir my baie sin. Hy se dit maak nie vir hom sin nie. Duidelik is Kent Hovind so buite sy diepte dat hy nie eers daar moes wees om mee te begin nie. Ek verwys nou na ‘n ander video wat ook op youtube was Gerhard.

                  Like

            • “Op dieselfde toon het jy dan ook nie bewys dat gravitasie bestaan nie”

              Kom ons doen twee afsonderlike eksperimente, Johannie. Ons laat ‘n voorwerp in ‘n vakuum val en meet die tyd wat dit neem om ‘n sekere distansie te val. Ons ontwerp ‘n masjien wat hierdie eksperiment ‘n biljoen keer herhaal. Wat dink jy gaan die resultaat wees?

              Die resultaat sal dui dat elke keer wat die voorwerp geval het, dit dieselfde tyd geneem het om die distansie te val. Dit is ‘n demonstrasie van die Natuurkrag, Gravitasie.

              Nou neem ons tien miljoen christene (ek is seker jy kan tien miljoen bymekaar kry) wat dan elkeen ‘n honderd keer bid (dit gee een biljoen gebede) sodat julle gode die voorwerp wat val (as demonstrasie aan ons ateïste) se val tyd kan verander.

              Die resultaat sal dui dat julle gode geen invloed het op die natuurkragte nie.

              So, Johannie, probeer maar weer. Julle gode bestaan nie en daar is geen metode wat jy kan uitdink om die teendeel te kan bewys. As daar ‘n metode was, sou iemand dit al uitgedink het. Die enigste metode is julle rasende koppe.

              Tramp maar voort, Johannie, tramp maar voort.

              Like

              • Those ten million Christians will say it was not God’s will for the object to fall any differently. “Only in faith can ye believe. God shall not be mocked.”

                Like

              • Savage wat jy beskryf in jou eerste eksperiment is die effek van gravitasie en nie gravitasie self nie, wat ek beskryf is die affek van die geloofsprong en nie ‘n gelykenis van God nie.

                Jy sal dit seker nie verstaan nie, want jy het ‘n “gelykenis” van God in jou kop wat nie bestaan nie.

                So hoe kan jy bewys dat gravitasie bestaan sonder om na die effek daarvan te verwys?

                Tas maar voort Koel Diek tas in die duister rond.

                Like

                • Het jy al van pastoor George, Johan?

                  Ek weet jy kan dit nie sien nie maar jou argument klink nogal soms baie soos hy.

                  Like

                  • Kan jy ook nie maar weer n plan maak met die “argument from personal experience” nie. Ek is seker jy kan dit iewers te lese kry…….

                    Like

                    • Ek is vrygewig vandag so het jy al gehoor van die “broken compass argument”?…..

                      Lees jou skrywes ook weer teen die agtergrond wat jy vantevore geskryf het:

                      ““Argumente van persoonlike ervaring”, miskien kan Gerhardus ons inlig oor wat se ervaring kan mens anders hê as persoonlik. . .?

                      Het jy al bv die oerknal ervaring gehad.

                      Of stem jy saam met Molly dat “time is an objective reality” . . .(sonder enige bewyse) . . . .nou kan mens tyd dan as ‘n objektiewe realiteit ervaar ook, sonder dat dit persoonlik of subjektief is?
                      Hoe sou jy dan die bestaan van “tyd” bewys het?

                      Ek sê nie dat ek die “regte’ ervaring het nie, ek sê dat voor jy God en “die ander” aanval oor geloof behoort jy eers te weet wat godheid is en om te weet moet jy dit self ervaar, dis nie ‘n dooie teorie oor die bv. oerknal nie.

                      As jy nie soos die ander tjikensjt is nie sal jy die vryheid neem om teen jou ego se wil die geloofsprong maak en self uitvind, maar jou pêntie bewe te veel!”

                      Like

                  • H. Ford het ‘n beeld in sy kop gehad voor karre bestaan het. . . en so is elke artikel hier om my – moes eers in iemand se kop ‘n beeld gewees het voor dit materie geword het, die rekenaar, klavier, die muis alles het nie “bestaan” voor iemand dit nie as ‘n beeld in hul koppe “gesien” het nie. Nou die vraag is: Is die beeld wat mens in hulle koppe het net ‘n illusie of “bestaan” dit ook, want die een (beeld) en die ander (materie) is interafhanklik van mekaar. As Ford nie ‘n beeld gehad het van ‘n kar nie sou karre nie bestaan het nie. (Behalwe as iemand anders dalk ook die beeld gehad het)

                    As mens ‘n beeld van God in jou kop het werk dit op dieselfde beginsel en is dit iets wat die verbeelding / ego geskep het wat dié dan in materie sal omskep deur ‘n beeldjie te maak uit hout of goud en silver, en as jy glo jy is meer gevorderd ‘n konsep soos ateïsme, moslim, boeddhisme, wat vol van dogma is.

                    Like

                    • Reg, “God” is ‘n beeld wat jy self in jou kop maak en die beeldjies van hout, silwer en goud is wat jy met jou kop en hande maak. 10 uit 10.

                      Like

                    • Jo-Anus, jy maak glad nie sin nie.
                      Wat is JOU geloof?
                      Wie of wat aanbid jy? En hoekom?
                      Kort en kragtig, helder en duidelik asseblief.

                      En terloops, buddhisme het nie god nie.

                      Like

                • Jo-Anus:
                  “So hoe kan jy bewys dat gravitasie bestaan sonder om na die effek daarvan te verwys?”

                  Liewe-fokken-land.
                  Gravitasie is presies dit, die EFFEK wat twee liggame op mekaar het.
                  Nou gaan jy seker vra om te bewys dat ‘n liggaam bestaan? Maak ‘n stoofplaat warm tot dit rooi gloei. Druk dan jou hand daarop. As jou hand begin rook, dan bestaan jy. QED.

                  Like

                  • Mooi Fielijas jy begin vir jou”self” te dink, wat is die “effek” wat 2 liggame op mekaar het, en wat veroorsaak dit?
                    Koel Diek het die effek net omgeskakel na spasie en tyd (die afstand wat die liggaam aflê gemeet in sekondes of wie ook al besluit het hoe “lank” is ‘n sekonde ), maar as mens vra wat is TYD het Molly gekopie en pyst van wat iemand anders geskryf het oor wat tyd nou eintlik is met geen konklusie wat mens kan maak nie . . . . blah blah blah.
                    So wat is gravitasie, wat is die effek wat 2 liggame op mekaar het en wat veroorsaak dit?

                    Like

                    • Poepol, lees weer jou oorspronklike vragie:
                      “So hoe kan jy bewys dat gravitasie bestaan sonder om na die effek daarvan te verwys?”

                      Gravitasie is net ‘n ou naampie, so mens kan jou vraag verander na:
                      “So hoe kan jy bewys dat [die EFFEK wat twee liggame op mekaar het] bestaan sonder om na die EFFEK daarvan te verwys?”
                      Watse ONNOSELE vraag is dit?

                      Gravitasie is eenvoudig om te bewys:
                      As ek jou ‘n poesklap gee en jy val op die grond, dan bestaan gravitasie. Maar as jy in die lug bly ronddryf…

                      Wat veroorsaak gravitasie? Who cares? Feit is DIT BESTAAN.

                      Wat is jou punt nou eintlik? Nugter weet.

                      Like

                    • Phineas

                      “Wat is jou punt nou eintlik? Nugter weet.”

                      Hy weet self nie wat sy punt is nie. Blykbaar het hy die “regte” gotbeeld en ons nie. Verder skryf hy dan dat hy NIE die “regte” ervaring gehad het nie. Hy sugereer seker dat die mensdom n ingeboue gotbeeld het waarvan net een reg is, wat soos uie geskil moet word. Tog wonder ek of hy die regte “gotbeeld” van al die ander gode het. Ek sal bietjie moet soek maar ek is seker Johann het gese dat hy nie n konsep van “Thor” (ek dink dit was die got waarna ek verwys het) het nie. Wat van al die triljoene oneindige gode wat opgemaak kan word en in “materie” omgeskakel kan word.

                      Hy skryf alweer homself net verder in n hoek in. Laat hy maar voor brabbel met sy fallacies.

                      Rakende wetenskaplike teoriee soos die oerknal, evolusie, “germ theorie” asook die konsepte van tyd en spasie: Selfs al bestaan dit nie of dit word nie of dit word verkeerd bewys beteken dit nie onmiddelik dat got bestaan en dat “creationism” (in die geval van veral moslems en christene outomaties korrek is nie. Dit werk nie so nie…..

                      Let ook op hoe Johann sy posisie verander…..

                      Vir jou gerief Johann, stuur ek vir jou weer een van jou vele fallacies. Maak seker om alles te lees. Self die skrif in blou asook die ekstra literatuur. Veral die gedeelte oor “Which God” kan nogal waardeval wees.

                      Weet jy dat mense selfs vandag nog nuwe gotte opmaak?

                      http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Argument_from_personal_experience

                      Amper vergeet ek. Hoe werk hierdie helle en hemele storie. Kan ek tergelyk hemel en hel toe gaan soos bv. Jahweh se hemel en Allah se hel. Maar is Allah en Jahweh nie eindlik amper maar die dieselfde got nie?

                      Ek vra maar net.

                      Like

                  • Die punt is dat as jy met jou ego geïdentifiseer het, kan jy enige konsep in jou kop opbou en dit “worship”, soos die atijjoote wat die konsep van god in hulle koppe “worship” en die konsep is nie ‘n vriendelike ou toppie met ‘n baard nie, dis ‘n walglike onware, nie bestaande, godbeeld wat hulle glo ander mense met konsepte in hul koppe opgebou het en dan hul konsepte aan die atijoote probeer afsmeer.
                    (vir dummies as ek ‘n konsep “worship” wat net in my kop is en dit dan as die diengkim truf probeer aan julle verkoop doen ek dieselfde as die atijoote wat weer hul konsep wat hulle ateïsme noem aan my wil verkoop)

                    As mens nie jou”self” verloën en dis-identifiseer met die ego nie is die “ek” ‘n slaaf van sy eie “mind” en is die “ek” verblind.

                    Like

                    • Johannie, gaan kry vir jou n drankie of twee want die rugby het begin. Wie weet, miskien het dit n kalmerende effek op jou en dan kom skryf jy weer.

                      Like

                    • ‘n Vriendelike ou toppie … dis nou snaaks. Miskien is Satan ook ‘n vriendelike ou toppie.

                      Die punt is dat ateiste nie in denkbeeldige ou toppies glo nie.

                      Like

                    • Jo-Anus:
                      “Die punt is dat as jy met jou ego geïdentifiseer het…”

                      Hallo? Ek dag ons praat oor gravitasie?

                      Like

                    • Jo-Anus:
                      “As mens nie jou ”self” verloën en dis-identifiseer met die ego nie is die “ek” ‘n slaaf van sy eie “mind” en is die “ek” verblind.”

                      “Ek” “dink” “jy” het “breinskade”.

                      Like

                    • Gravity is the distortion of space and time causing the curvature of space-time.

                      An analogy is: Johannie’s “ego” and “ek” combine into a “Jo-Anus” that causes an awful smell.

                      Like

            • Johannie, ek is weer oppad bos toe maar as jou eksperimente die gravitasie natuurwet deur jou gode kan verander, is ek seker die bostelegraaf sal diè nuus ver en wyd verspry. Sterkte ou maat, al die godiote ondersteun jou in jou tog!

              Like

              • Vanoggend verras met fantastiese verjaarsdag present v vroulief: “Evolution – the story of life” deur Douglas Palmer en Peter Barrett. Uitstekende opsommong v lewr opr die afgelope 4 biljoen jaar en pragtige illusrasies, foto’s asook beskrywings v geskiedkundige paleatologiese vondse. Wat die bpel spesiaal maak is die akkurate tydlyn. Anders as Dawkins se “Greatest show on earth” wat die werking v evolusie verduidelik, is hierdie n feitelike dokumentasie van doe bestaan (en vergaan) van organismis sedert die begin v lewe. En boonop geillustreer met fotos, illustrasies en fossiele. In kort – n volledige geillustreerde opsomming.

                Like

                • Congrats on your birthday, Malherbe, and also belated cheers for the anniversary of Hitler’s birthday yesterday. It’s my birthday next week. Tauruses of the world unite!

                  My husband is always asking me to source lekker scientific books to read so I’m going to check that one out. Enjoy the rest of your day and evening.

                  Like

    • ‘Die godbeeld in jul koppe is deur die ego geskep en is nie waar nie, maar al het julle dit verwerp is dit nogsteeds daar en inplaas daarvan om dit te “worship” het julle nou net omgedraai en dit verwerp.’

      Do you know what you just did there?

      Luckily I was not raised in a religious household so the virus did not get me at an early age. I was humouring a born again Christian friend by going to church occasionally but didn’t really believe in this god story. She was very stressed out which was the reason for her delusions. But then I became stressed out myself and became more than a half-hearted “believer” -with disastrous consequences. The born again friend trashed a BMW that belonged to me – it was old, but still running, she wanted the temporary use of it and caused the engine to seize. Then she harassed a Muslim friend of mine by phoning his workplace and telling his employers that he had stolen a small laser printer which I had obtained from him for her at demo price. So I terminated the by then very sour “friendship” and stopped the whole Christian pretence, which is really what it is, a pretence, in 95% of so called Christians.

      So I am immune. One word from someone talking about Jesus and being born again and I avoid that person for good. I had one incident at a hair salon where the temporary beautician doing facials asked me chirpily, “And how is your relationship with Jesus?” I replied, “How is your relationship with your arsehole?” You have to be blunt sometimes.

      Coy invitations to talks about “innerlike skoonheid” don’t work on me. I just have to ask, “Is it religious?” and then the shame faced answer is, yes it is. Like these people know it’s bullshit but they will feel better if they bring along another sucker. These invites are never “free” or “bring a cake”; there is always an entrance fee and you can’t walk out like you can walk out of a bad movie.

      Like

  5. Kom ek antwoord jou op n ander manier want wat jy sopas geskryf het is presies wat jy nog die heeltyd oor en oor skryf:

    Argumente van persoonlike ervaring (“Argument of personal experience”) dien nie as bewys nie.

    Jou probeer ook n bietjie versuursuiker om die mond smeer deur te beweer dat jy nie die enigste een is wat die “regte” ervaring gehad het nie.

    Like

    • “Argumente van persoonlike ervaring”, miskien kan Gerhardus ons inlig oor wat se ervaring kan mens anders hê as persoonlik. . .?

      Het jy al bv die oerknal ervaring gehad.

      Of stem jy saam met Molly dat “time is an objective reality” . . .(sonder enige bewyse) . . . .nou kan mens tyd dan as ‘n objektiewe realiteit ervaar ook, sonder dat dit persoonlik of subjektief is?
      Hoe sou jy dan die bestaan van “tyd” bewys het?

      Ek sê nie dat ek die “regte’ ervaring het nie, ek sê dat voor jy God en “die ander” aanval oor geloof behoort jy eers te weet wat godheid is en om te weet moet jy dit self ervaar, dis nie ‘n dooie teorie oor die bv. oerknal nie.

      As jy nie soos die ander tjikensjt is nie sal jy die vryheid neem om teen jou ego se wil die geloofsprong maak en self uitvind, maar jou pêntie bewe te veel!

      Like

        • I have an old friend who I feared had developed Alzheimer’s disease, the way her memory seemed to be failing. But brain disease affects short term memory, not long term. Her mind has merely caused her to forget the more painful parts of her past from many years ago – husband died, son died. Otherwise, she’s completely in the here and now. Nature can be kind.

          That’s not to say shit things don’t happen to good people, Johann. But sometimes it’s better to forget about those shit things.

          Like

  6. What could possibly go wrong here, with all these Christians filled with brotherly love? Bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! I have listened to Christian sob stories of back stabbing, a priest jealous of a women’s league president, arguments over money, you name it. You will never see so many bloated egos as you will in a typical church.

    The whole SYSTEM of back stabbing and talking about people behind their backs is legitimised by the church itself. “You WILL talk about each other. You WILL tell the priest or pastor what others will get up to.” The result is ONE CONTINUOUS BITCHFEST.

    From here: https://victoryoverdepression.wordpress.com/2011/05/04/christian-backstabbing/

    CHRISTIAN BACKSTABBING

    Do not be deceived: “BAD COMPANY CORRUPTS GOOD MORALS.” —– I Corinthians 15:33 [SO STAY THE HELL AWAY FROM CHURCHES! 🙂 ]

    There are two questions I want you to ask yourself. Be honest. Honesty is critical for any healing and growth to occur.

    1. How many times have you had knives stabbed into your back?

    2. How many times have you stabbed some people in the back? Yes, you have to answer this question about yourself. To be honest with yourself is a must to ensure your heart is pure in that area. Hypocrisy must be avoided.

    The term CHRISTIAN BACKSTABBING sounds like an oxymoron. How can two words be so opposite? Unfortunately, they do go very well together.

    After personally experiencing Christian Backstabbing this past year and remembering my previous experiences, I felt it necessary to address this issue and bring it to the forefront of the Body of Christ.

    CHRISTIAN BACKSTABBING needs to be recognized for what it is:

    The Putrid Stench Of The Flesh, From the Pit of Hell.

    ———————————————————————————————————

    Christian Backstabbing needs to be dealt with appropriately —– crucified on the cross of Christ. One then needs to walk wisely to avoid future stabbings.

    A Christian Backstabber will appear as a genuine friend. You will usually get to know the person over a lengthy period of time. The person becomes so trustworthy that you believe you have a true friend and brethren. Genuine brethren can occur for sure, but there is also the flip side to be aware of. Often, the person is not so genuine and you gradually begin to see more areas of flesh behavior come out.

    The maturity of your walk with Christ will reveal how long a Christian Backstabber remains hidden from your knowing.

    ———————————————————————————————————

    MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE

    I have been a Christian 32 years. My immaturity with a broken heart permitted a few Christian Backstabbers to take advantage of my help. As I trusted two specific people over the years, I shared personal information about myself. (Not wise.) I also helped these people financially.

    I have a servant’s heart and enjoy helping people’s needs be met. However, my immaturity and naivety showed because I went overboard with my sharing. These two people took advantage of my giving a hefty amount. When I finally confronted them about using me, I got the sweet smile that they will pay me back and help me when I needed it. They never came through. Instead, they actually started turning against me and accusing me of being ungodly. They gossiped about me and slandered me.

    I sure felt the backstabbing. I was so deeply hurt and betrayed. It was a good growth experience, though I must admit I wished often God would get them and get them good. Even to this day, they avoid me and will not even want to talk about it. I have reached out, but they have shut the door. So be it. It is in God’s hand.

    Does God honor their praising Him and turning a blind eye to a brother they had a problem with? ABSOLUTELY NOT.

    ——————————————————————————————————

    These are some of the habits that the Christian Backstabber usually displays:

    They refuse correction, especially from biblical authority. [Yeah right.]
    They refuse to even acknowledge the possibility they are insincere and sinning.
    They will gossip, slander, complain, and covet about other people and what God is doing in their lives.
    They will boast publicly, looking for any ears to listen, about the great things God is doing in them.
    All the while, deep down the sinful flesh has taken hold and blinded them to the truth of God. Satan has much control over them.
    The biggest shame is how they walk around confidently showing themselves off with a puffed up pride. They also will have animosity and bitterness toward you.
    Backstabbers are ravenous wolves and a ravenous wolf wants whatever you got. Paul talks about this to the leaders of the church of Ephesus. They will then tear you apart, shame you, and leave you stripped naked to die. They will also complain, gossip, and slander to you about others. Rest assured, they do it also about you to others. As much as you permit them, they will strip your dignity and your character. Remarkable is they will still think they are doing God’s will.

    Therefore, you must be wise in whom you associate with.

    First, ensure you are not a Christian Backstabber.
    Walk wisely. Be wary of the company you keep. Remember the Scripture from the top of the blog: “BAD COMPANY CORRUPTS GOOD MORALS.” There are genuine Christians and genuine Christian Backstabbers, disguised as genuine Christians. Seek the Holy Spirit to teach you and reveal the truth behind everyone you meet. PRAY FOR THEM.
    As wrong and evil what the Christian Backstabber does, you are not responsible for their actions. You are responsible for yours. If they have hurt you, it is mainly because you permitted it to go that deep. Walk wisely to prevent this in the future.
    Here is the Biblical approach for conflict resolution:

    Matthew 18:15-17

    15“(M)If your brother sins[b], go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother.

    16“But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that (N)BY THE MOUTH OF TWO OR THREE WITNESSES EVERY FACT MAY BE CONFIRMED. [ROUND UP THE LYNCH MOB.]

    17“If he refuses to listen to them, (O)tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, (P)let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. [IN OTHER WORDS, PERSECUTE THE LIVING CRAP OUT OF HIM.]

    Like

  7. Ek het ‘n groot probleem met bid. Bid maak geen sin nie. Eerstens as bid gehelp het dan sal enige iemand gebid het want dit werk. Jy sou letterlik ‘n gat in ‘n muur kon bid as jy wou. As christene redeneer dat god regverdig is, is dit onmootlik dat bid eenkeer werk en ander keer nie. Daarom moet dit altyd werk. Die wette van die natuur kan duidelik nie verander word nie. Voorwerpe val nie opwaarts nie! Bid werk nie! Net so frequent soos goed statisties gebeur, word gebede waar.

    Like

    • “Bid, en julle sal ontvang.” Of iets in diervoege. Ek wonder hoe verklaar die godiote hierdie segge van Liewe Jesus. Ek het al menige keer vir ‘n blond en ‘n rooi Ferrari gebid, maar heelaas, niks verskyn op die horison nie.

      Like

      • Savage ek se altyd dat predikante met die mees silly goed vorendag kom. Julle het seker al die preek gehoor van – Jy kan nie bid vir ‘n Ferrari as jou buurman lanksaan jou nie eens ‘n kar het nie. Die waarheid is dat dit presies nie so werk nie. Kyk wat besit ‘n ou soos Floyd Mayweather. En daar is mense wat vannaand by die Kentuky staan en bedel. So waar is hierdie logiese regverdige god van hulle nou? Dit is ‘n kak argument om die minste te se.

        Hoekom ry Savage nie ‘n Ferrari nie? Oordat daar ‘n klomp redes is behalwe god wil dit nie vir hom gee nie. Statistiek is die grootste rede. Vir die selfde rede dat iemand wat die lotto wen dit reggekry het. Harde werk is nie noodwendig die antwoord nie. Daar is mense wat op die myne werk, wat hulle gatte elke dag afwerk en regtig nie naastenby so baie uitkry soos sekere supermodelle wat ook baie hard werk. Ja die supermodelle werk hard, maar kyk wat kry hulle uit vir wat hulle doen.

        So die regte werk wat jou die platvorm gee dat as jy hard werk, jy groot prestasies sal bereik is van meer nut as net hard werk. Daar speel luck ook ‘n rol. Dan speel genetika ( Intelligensie, temperament, persoonlikheid etc) ook ‘n rol. Daar is ouens wat goed geld maak maar hulle werke is maar boring, maar vir hulle is dit lekker want dit is in hulle belangstellinsveld. So daar is ‘n magdom redes behalwe een of ander bonatuurlikke mag wat vir jou dit gaan gee.

        Wat aanbetref vrouens. Hulle gaan amper eksklusief vir die grootste douchebag. Ek wil amper se dit gaan nie net oor geld nie maar ‘n mate van douchebaggery wat daarmee saamgaan.. Ek is single my hele lewe deur simply vir die rede dat ek ‘n regverdige, logiese mens is. Ek is ‘n nice mens.
        Vrouens gaan nie vir daai soort nie. Ek is ook baie realisties sonder om kras en onbeskof te wees. My quest na regverdigheid het veroorsaak dat ek tot vandag toe single is.

        Savage, wie weet. Miskien werk ‘n bietjie douchebaggery om daai mooi blondine aan te trek en verlief te maak op jou. Geld is ook nie onmootlik nie. Gewoonlik is ‘n duur kar en ‘n mooi vrou ingesluit in die package.

        Like

        • I don’t think all wealthy guys are douchebags, Adriaan, but I would say that Douw Steyn is definitely a douchebag.

          Magnus Heystek is a wealthy guy who is not a douchebag. Magnus says people who invest in residential property to rent are stupid because it’s better to invest in listed property overseas – if you really must invest in property at all – than to have too much risk in a place where the lights don’t work, and I agree. Steyn City, my arse. What Magnus Heystek thinks of throwing money at expensive cars is not fit for repeating on a respectable family website like this.

          You don’t need to drive an expensive car to attract an attractive woman, only a dumb one. If Savage had enough spare cash lying around to buy a Porsche, you can be sure he wouldn’t invest it in a depreciating liability like an expensive car or woman.

          Like

    • Adriaan, n bietjie van die punt af.

      Gister so met een oor geluister na n dominee wat oor die “hel” gepreek het en hoe got so “lief” is vir almal is…..

      Die doom het almal gewaarsku oor die hel maar dan kla hulle as daar met hulle en hulle got gespot word.

      Selfs, al was daar n got of gotte dink ek nie hulle sal so kinderagtig wees nie..

      Like

  8. “Gravity is the distortion” Koel Diek dis darem ‘n beter poging as die vorige keer, (met jou verwoording van die formuletjie), maar dit laat nog vra in my bewussyn inkom, hoe verwring mens spasie, ek kan miskien verstaan dat tyd vinniger of stadiger kan . . . . .kan . . . .uhm. . .”beweeg”(?), of dat ons deur tyd beweeg en tyd staan stil?, maar wat doen mens met spasie? Wat sê jy is spasie inelkgeval?

    Fielijas se stuiwer van gravitasie “is effek”, klink nou meer na fosiel newtonian teorie, en dit was ‘n baie slim vraag of soos hy skryf dom vraag (“So hoe kan jy bewys dat [die EFFEK wat twee liggame op mekaar het] bestaan sonder om na die EFFEK daarvan te verwys?”) en daar het Koel Diek dit sommer net so sonder effort gegee.

    Like

    • Johan, ek dink eerlikwaar nie jy het die vaagste benul wat Savage probeer verduidelik nie. Jou lompe poging tot kommentaar bewys my stelling.

      Like

      • Ek sien die hitte het nou weer verskuif na ‘n ander kotsblad, en ek hoop Mallies jy het jou molekules geniet met nog ‘n jaar wat oor getiek het, mag jy in die nuwe jaar dinge besef wat jy nooit gedink het moontlik is nie, en dat die wollerigheid en vae idees in jou kop sal opklaar en die haat wat jy vir jou eie nasie het afneem, mag jou iditifikasie met jou ego”dtjie” begin taan en mag jy vir lank nog so jonk bly.

        “vaagste benul” nogal wat Koel Diek verduidelik . . . . . het hy regtig iets probeer verduidelik? Mag die skille van jou blindheid afval.

        Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s