Don’t Let Them Silence Us!

Some major players on the left are trying to silence many of us on the right.

By Michael Brown Published on August 9, 2017

I’m not a conspiratorialist. I don’t believe the sky is falling. But I do know that some major players on the left are trying to silence many of us on the right. Our views are considered toxic, dangerous, discriminatory and hateful. Our views, we are told, belong to a bygone, bigoted era and do not deserve a hearing. Our views, in short, must be suppressed and silenced. Those who dissent will be punished.

The recent events at Google should be a loud and clear warning to any who are still in denial. James Damore was fired for his manifesto on viewpoint diversity. Google also announced that it will be working with the ADL to flag “controversial” videos on YouTube.

But it’s not just Google and YouTube which are controlled by leftwing “progressives.” The same is true for Facebook and Twitter, among other internet giants. If they decide that our views are unacceptable, the consequences will be massive.

It’s Already Happening

Every day, my team and I use the AskDrBrown Facebook page, which has more than 535,000 fans. We share all kinds of content, from memes and live stream talks to links to our latest articles and videos. Several times, Facebook has shut us down or denied us access to the page after complaints about one of our posts.

Every time, they have then apologized and restored our access. But when things were down, it crippled much of our communication. What if they decide to shut us down for good?

I also have friends whose Facebook pages have been shut down because of “unacceptable” content. (Specifically, they posted what Scripture and medical science say about homosexual practice). To this day, those pages are closed.

 “There are efforts to demote anything non-PC, anti-Communist and anti-Islamic terror from search results.”

Dennis Prager has been fighting a battle with YouTube since last October, when the company restricted access to 21 videos from Prager U. This prompted Prager to ask, “Will Google and YouTube do to the Internet what the Left has done to our universities?”

Not one of those videos violated YouTube guidelines. Every one of them was worthy of watching. Yet today, ten months after the battle began, some of those videos have still not been fully restored.

University of Toronto professor Jordan Peterson, who has gained international fame for refusing to capitulate to extreme transgender activism, woke up one day last week to discover that his YouTube channel, with more than 350,000 subscribers, was down. He also found that his Google account, which held hundreds of thousands of his emails, was blocked.

He was first told that he was in violation of Google/YouTube standards, with no further explanation, before his account was quickly restored. This too is a warning we must not ignore.

The Bigotry of the Left

Things have reached the point that Ezra Levant of Rebel Media, with over 860,000 YouTube subscribers, is already announcing plans in anticipation of being shut down by YouTube.

When it comes to Google, which controls the flow of so much internet traffic, a former engineer there claims that “he personally witnessed efforts from leftists within Google to bias YouTube’s algorithms to push anti-PC content off the platform’s ‘related videos’ recommendations.” He said, “A number of friends have privately confirmed this to me. I know there are efforts to demote anything non-PC, anti-Communist and anti-Islamic terror from search results. To what extent that has been successful, I don’t know.”

Andrew Torba, chief executive of the social network Gab, said that “anyone who deviates from the talking points of the liberal left is shunned, shamed and forced out.”

Brendan Eich, a highly respected internet pioneer, can testify to this. He was forced to resign as CEO of Mozilla in 2014 when employees learned that he had donated $1,000 to uphold natural marriage in California in 2008. He broke one of greatest the PC Commandments: You shall not hold a dissenting view, even in your personal life.

We must shout out our message more loudly, persistently and accurately than ever before. The more of us who do this, the better.

Ironically, if you type in “define bigotry” on Google, you get this definition: “intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.” Bullseye! And now Google has put that definition into practice.

Game Plan

What can we do? First, we must pray for God’s blessing on our endeavors. If they are worthy, we should ask Him to back what He approves. Next, we can take these steps.

  1. We must shout out our message more loudly, persistently and accurately than ever before. The more of us who do this, the better. It will be very hard to censor us all.
  2. We need to challenge Google, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter to do what is right. We must expose bigotry, intolerance, and double standards whenever we see them. As private companies, they can do as they please. But since they champion “diversity,” let’s hold them to it.
  3. We can support those who develop viable alternatives to some of these other platforms. This may take some time, but there was life before Facebook and YouTube, and there can be life without them. We can also financially support those voices we believe in, thereby helping them to be less dependent on internet-generated income.
  4. We should establish other ways to stay in touch with each other. Periodically, on our Facebook page, I post a link to my website, encouraging followers to sign up for my weekly emails and even offering a free e-book. (You can do that here if you like.) This way, if Facebook does shut me down one day, we won’t lose contact with everyone.

I hope the pendulum will swing back towards the middle, where a wide range of dissenting viewpoints can be expressed without fear of censorship or reprisal. This will also allow us to isolate those voices that are truly dangerous, like terrorists calling for the murder of innocent people.

But it’s not dangerous to express different viewpoints, be they political or cultural or religious. If we lose our freedoms here, we lose our freedoms everywhere.

Let’s stand together, then, with resolution and determination and faith. We shall not be silenced!

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Why not simply create conservative Christian versions of Google, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter?

    By the way, Michael, you shouldn’t imply that “censorship” is exclusive to liberal website. I have been banned from commenting at WorldNetDaily, Crisis Magazine. Breitbart, American Thinker, and MANY other such conservative websites …. NOT because I was spamming them or using foul language, but because they couldn’t tolerate dissent.

    • KPX-2017

      Charisma deleted some of my comments, despite the fact that I was polite, on topic, not trolling.

      • Mensa Member

        Me, too.

        And not just some. All. Even ones where I just quoted the bible.

    • Andy6M

      Quite right – it needs to go both ways.

    • Dominic Lombardo

      Stop lying. You were banned from Crisis Magazine precisely because you were posting spam (lots of it) and because of the language which you used in a number of those comments. Also because you were obstinately, obdurately, and repeatedly posting lies in your comments.

      • Hannah

        Aaaaaaand “user’s activity is private.” /notshocked

    • Mensa Member

      >> I have been banned from commenting at WorldNetDaily, Crisis Magazine.
      Breitbart, American Thinker, and MANY other such conservative websites

      I have experience the same. I will follow the rules and get banned for just disagreeing.

      I assume some liberals sites do that, but the conservative sites, especiall Christian sites, can be really bad about censoring people. Even their fellow Christians.

  • Deplorable Rican ☨ʳᵉᵈᵉᵉᵐᵉᵈ

    So Michael do you have a GAB account yet? If not, time to do so!

  • tether

    I think we need to be more vocal than ever speaking truth to the world.

    • Mensa Member

      You go, tether! It’s your freedom.

      But if your truth is racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic etc, expect push back from those people

      • JM

        You’re a Fake

        • Patmos

          He’s also a prideful jerk. In the face of exposure he does not change, just stubbornly clings to his erroneous personal interpretation of scripture. He’s a follower of a false gospel, and as such knows nothing of the Holy Spirit, or the wisdom and power of Christ. He’s a genuine fool.

          • Mensa Member

            Patmos

            Take a breath, dude. I’m pretty sure personal attacks violate the rules here. I won’t flag you because I believe in free speech.

            Instead of personally attacking me, how about some facts and logic? Other people do that, here, and we have fine discussions, even if we disagree.

          • JM

            Amen

          • JM

            Very true. he does not follow the actual God of the Bible. he follows a god he made up in his own mind

        • Mensa Member

          >> Mensa Member is phony pro LGBT ”christian”

          Now you are just attacking me. Why the hostility?

          The Stream explicitly says, “The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not.”

          Do you understand that thousands of American Churches and tens of millions of Christians share my view on LGBT issues? We’re a majority by some counts. (Probably not in your bubble.)

          Google “Most U.S. Christian groups grow more accepting of homosexuality”

          if you don’t believe me.

          • JM

            You Subscribe to the LGBT version of god (the one the LGBT created) not the real God. a god who is pro LGBT. pro sodomy and that does not care what people do withe their gender. the true God (the found in the scriptures) is not like that. he does care what people do with their gender. God would not be okay with men being with men and women being women. God would not be okay with men entering the womens restroom and locker room. God would not be okay with men painting their nails and wearing makeup. God would not be okay with any of this. and unlike the LGBT God does care about gender and established gender roles. he is not into this whole Gender twisting thing that the LGBT is into. He wants men to be men and women to women. Deuteronomy 22:5 A woman must not wear men’s clothing, nor a man wear women’s clothing, for the LORD your God detests anyone who does this.if God does not want people wearing the clothes of the opposite sex than he would also not want people doing thing that does not go in line with the gender that he created them as. the LGBT wants this no-boundaries-anything goes god. I’m sorry but that is not God. also just because people call themselves Christian does not mean that they actually and the Bible makes this clear. Matthew 7:21. supporting homosexual sinful ”rights” is not doing the will of the father. read Isaiah 5:20 to see what God has to say about people like you. no Christian is pro LGBT or pro Abortion

      • tether

        There is only one truth. The rest is not.
        As for racism, sexism, or any of the so called phobia’s so commonly thrown around today.
        They can say what they want, but to disagree with something does not imply phobia. But if it is more fun for them to call me names than to accept that I don’t agree then so be it.
        Even a 2 year old can get mad a call someone names when they don’t get their way.
        Solutions come from rational dialect not from oppression. One of the many things our founding fathers wanted to prevent was censorship of peoples ideals. That is why we have freedom of speech.

        • JM

          Mensa Member is phony pro LGBT ”christian” I don’t take this guy seriously at all

          • Dorothy Pohl-Scot

            Thankfully for him hate speech is protected speech. And someone should let him know that Islamophobia is a made up term Islamists use to try to squash the truth. Is he a Mensa Member in name only?

  • Mensa Member

    I wonder if Dr. Brown has ever censored a user from his own Facebook page?

  • Seawalk

    The only way to correct them is to throw lawyers at them. Until we do that they will not respect us. Hit them where it counts- in their pocket book. If you can prove they are discriminating against you- sue them. I also know of others in ministry who have encountered this same thing but when people started making a stink about it they backed off. They are afraid! The gates of hell shall not prevail against the church of Jesus Christ! Call your state legislators as well as federal legislators and make a stink about this. If companies are going to operate like this- they need to be punished $$$$$$ fine them!!

    • Mensa Member

      >> The only way to correct them is to throw lawyers at them

      That sounds like a horrible idea.

      Then do liberals start suing Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and WorldNetDaily for equal time?

      Lawyers will love that!

  • Boris

    If you don’t want to be silenced Christians then stop lying about everything.//

  • JM

    the Left wants to silence truth. they want to keep people believing in lies. if anything the left was saying is true than there would be no reason to censor anything.

  • JM

    the Left wants to silence truth. they want to keep people believing in lies. if anything the left was saying is true than there would be no reason to censor anything.if someone was wrong about something wouldn’t you want to prove them wrong rather than censoring them? the only reason why the left wants to censor opposing speech because we are not wrong.

  • JM

    the Left wants to silence truth. they want to keep people believing in lies. if anything the left was saying is true than there would be no reason to censor anything. if someone was wrong about something wouldn’t you want every opportunity to show how that person is wrong instead of censoring them? the only reason why the left wants to censor different views is because we are not wrong. if we wrong about the whole LGBT thing than why do homosexuals want to censor us? if we wrong about Islam than why do Muslims want censor us? if we were wrong about how we got here and how the universe started than why do evolutionists want to censor us? because we have the truth and these people do not. there would be no reason to censor a group of people if that group is wrong. it is only truth that gets censored not lies. these people do not want truth getting out

    • Morduin00

      A very interesting take. And, I suspect you are 99% correct. (nobody’s perfect LOL)

  • Jonathan Fuller

    Oh please. The Google bro was not arguing about diversity. In fact, his manifesto specifically endorsed the idea. I mean, did you read it? His argument was that women, by their very nature, we’re.not as good at coding than men. You know, DNA and all that. Now imagine a similar argument about say, African Americans. I mean Jews are clearly better at money than Christians. It’s a genetic thing. When does the line get crossed from free speech to hate speech? Google’s call, maybe, was off. But this is not an intelligent discussion of it. This is a self pitying whine of victimhood.

    • RuthER

      I read Damore’s article. In no way did he ever describe women as being worse programmers than men. He said that fewer women have an interest in coding. He listed reasons and facts, and even solutions, to help more women be interested in pursuing coding. Some reasons: software engineering is highly stressful, it is done in isolation, requires devotion of time away from family and friends… Something left out of his article would be ways to encourage more men to pursue careers as nurses and elementary educators (female-dominated).

      • Jonathan Fuller

        And “women are different” because of…? Sorry, we have been through this before. Larry Summers was president of Harvard when he casually suggested that there weren’t more women professors in the sciences due to, maybe, the way their brains worked. The s### storm that followed was huge and very unfortunate. The president of MIT, just down the street did something odd. He asked the female professors for help. They said, get on campus day care. One shut dialogue down. One increased it. Censorship can occur in a lot of ways. Not just from the top, and not just formal. Hate speech is not free speech. It is stopping speech. As I said, the Google call may have been wrong, but when you start a dialogue with the idea that a lot of women just can’t handle it because they are different, you are pretty much stopping the dialogue right there.

        • RuthER

          Firstly, your statements are assuming what I think, and no one but me and God is inside my head. Next, you show much evidence of having not read Damore’s document. The entire premise of it is that theGoogle company is shutting down dialogue — a fact, not an opinion — and thinks it is “injustice” that there is not at least 50% women employed as coders, regardless of the available pool of women interested in coding. It has nothing to do with offspring. For example, how many women do you know who watch Sci-Fi for their own personal interest? Women tend to choose careers with lots of interpersonal interaction, or with working hours that allow them plenty of time for friends. Having a daycare onsite will not increase the percentage to 50%. There is nothing WRONG with being different.

          • Jonathan Fuller

            I am sorry if I left you with the thought that I understood your mind/life. I certainly have no idea of what is going on in your interior world. I am confused as what I wrote that led you to believe that, but again, I am sorry. As for assumptions, please don’t make any in regard to my reading habits. The Harvard/MIT example may have been misinterpreted. My point, in praising MIT, was that they reached out and said, “How is what we are doing ineffective in attracting female faculty?” Having Google aim for 50% as an immediate goal is silly: the flow isn’t there. I am not saying that there are no “differences” between men and women, I suspect there are. But I am not sure what that has to do with math or coding. Maybe it has to do with how a lot of coding is done now, but that is an issue worth discussing.
            I do a lot of science, and quite a lot of history. Too many times over the past 150 years I have read and heard of reasons why group “X” can not do “Y” because of “Z”. (X=Blacks, Asians, women, Jews, Slavs, Italians, Muslims, gays; Y= vote, teach, be on school boards, be President, be in the army, get married, get a job; Z= genetics, culture, traditions, people aren’t ready for it, the Bible, morality, untrustworthy, too emotional). 648 permutations, and I bet you I can find a group that has existed to promote for at least 100 of those variations.
            Again, I am not saying Google was right. And frankly I wish they had been able to bring him into a discussion. But I am tired of people doing the XYZ when the question should be, “Can we do better?”

        • RuthER

          PS. I love Sci-Fi and it has nothing to do with a boyfriend, husband, or bruh. I am also interested in a career in coding. I am a friendly cheerful person so it’s not “expected” that I would enjoy such an isolated job, but it’s because I am excellent with patterns: languages, algebra, music theory, etc., and I enjoy problem-solving, along with all of its boring details. Those elementary teachers who are mostly women have the responsibility to teach math to the future generation, and so they obviously need to get with the program. It has nothing to do with intelligence or ability, only desire and choice. Again, there is nothing WRONG with this, and it is not *universally* true, just as expecting a 50/50 ratio dehumanizes males and females.

        • Kevin Quillen

          Wow, just Wow! And who determines what is “hate speech?” Your ignorance is amazing.
          “Hate speech is not free speech. It is stopping speech.” So you want to stop speech? Wow

          • Jonathan Fuller

            Dear Kevin,
            There is no need to refer to my “ignorance”. It is an ad hom. attack that degrades and deflects the argument. As for who determines “hate speech”, I don’t know. Part of the answer may be in the Supreme Court’s definition of the difference between bad art and good porn: you know it when you see it. Partly, it may be who runs the house. In my house, I get to do it. But mostly it is common sense, based on intent and effect. A black family moves in next door. That night, you put up a burning cross and a noose on the edge of your property. You just made a threat. I think the law has a right to step in here. Do you? As for the second question, No I do not want to stop speech. But I do think that in a community, where everyone is forced to work together, in a company such as Google, it is reasonable and right to expect that people wont be jerks.

    • RuthER

      P.S. This article was about censorship, not about “sexism in the workplace.”

  • eddiestardust

    Bravo, well said, sir!:)

  • Trilemma

    I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. – Voltaire

    Even though various websites aren’t required to be platforms for free speech, it would be nice if they valued free speech as much as the founders of America. Even though Voltaire was French and not one of the founders, I think he expressed the attitude our founders had towards free speech.

  • glenbo

    I have quoted a few statements from the above essay and I
    have posed 3 simple questions.

    I challenge anyone to please provide logical, rational and
    reasonable answers to my 3 questions.

    And I quote:

    >>”CEO of Mozilla in 2014 when employees learned that
    he had donated $1,000 to uphold natural marriage in California in 2008.”<>”We must expose bigotry, intolerance, and double
    standards whenever we see them.”<>”dissenting viewpoints can be expressed without fear
    of censorship”<>”Ironically, if you type in “define bigotry” on
    Google, you get this definition: “intolerance toward those who hold different
    opinions from oneself.””<>” This will also allow us to isolate those voices
    that are truly dangerous, like terrorists calling for the murder of innocent
    people.”<<

    Read Leviticus 20:13 and 1 Samuel 15:3 and tell me God
    himself does not call for the murder of innocent people.

    • Mark Bradshaw

      Answers to your 3 questions:
      1) Please explain what it means to “uphold natural marriage”
      and why it requires huge amounts of money to do so. —– It means defending what is referred to as “traditional” marriage. It is advocacy, legal defense and general education regarding marriage.
      It requires money for litigation to defend it.

      2) Please explain what “natural marriage” is. —– Natural marriage is a marriage between one man and one woman.

      3) Please define “natural. —– One where procreation is available an one supported by biology. And, for people who believe in God’s law – one sanctioned by God (one man/one woman).
      ———————–
      “Read Leviticus 20:13 and 1 Samuel 15:3 and tell me God himself does not call for the murder of innocent people.” —— God does NOT call for the murder of innocent people – In fact, He says that murder is WRONG (a sin). Leviticus 20:13 refers to the wages of sin – death (eternal death – a separation from God forever). 1 Samuel 15:3 is in reference to ONE SPECIFIC PEOPLE and ONE SPECIFIC INSTANCE.

      You do realize that the definition of bigotry you cited describes MOST PEOPLE in general – including you, right? YOU are intolerant of the views of others – especially Christians. YOUR words espouse hatred toward people that don’t believe as you do.

      • glenbo

        Defend against what?
        How is God “natural?’

        • Mark Bradshaw

          Defend against those that attempt to redefine marriage.
          God is the creator of the universe. Marriage as He has defined it is what is natural.

          • glenbo

            >>”Defend against those that attempt to redefine marriage.”<<
            What has YOUR marriage been "redefined" into?
            What is the definition of "natural?"

          • Mark Bradshaw

            “What has YOUR marriage been “redefined” into?” —– Marriage (in general) redefined to include non man/woman unions. My specific marriage hasn’t been redefined, and that is not my assertion.

            “What is the definition of “natural?”” —– Natural – as defined by God (in the case of marriage). Also, things that are supported by biology and nature. Homosexual marriage/unions are counter to biology. Human beings are biologically designed (at least in the sense of procreation) to male/female – NOT male/male or female/female.

          • glenbo

            >>” Marriage (in general) redefined to include non
            man/woman unions. My specific marriage hasn’t been redefined.”<>”that is not my assertion.”<>” Natural – as defined by God”<>” Human beings are biologically designed”<<

            How are intersex children “designed?”

            How is a two-headed child “designed?”

            Your definition of “nature” and natural “design” is grossly muddled.

          • Mark Bradshaw

            “Thank you for saying that gay people getting married has had NO effect on your marriage!” —– Rape has no effect on my marriage; theft has no effect on my marriage – Your assertion is a NON-SEQUITUR.

            “Then what makes gay marriage any of your business?” —— What makes ANYTHING anyone’s business. How does famine in any other country directly affect you, and why is it any of your business? How does rape of young women in Muslim countries directly affect you, and why should it be any of your business? Your question is POINTLESS.

            God IS natural.
            “Is slavery “natural” as defined by God?” —– Slavery was allowed by God during that particular time. Slavery is an ACT, carried out by human beings. So, NO, owning another human being is NOT natural and is NOT condoned by God.

            “How are intersex children “designed?”” —— They AREN’T. Their condition is a genetic abnormality. An abnormality/defect is not part of the design.

            “How is a two-headed child “designed?”” —– See above answer.

            Your assertion is a non-sequitur and completely unsubstantiated.

          • glenbo

            >>”God IS natural.”<>”Slavery was allowed by God during that particular time.”<>”owning another human being is NOT natural and is NOT condoned by God.”<>”Their condition is a genetic abnormality. An abnormality/defect is not part of the design.”<<
            If all humans are created in God's image, why did God create these anomalies?

          • Mark Bradshaw

            I am done with your asinine questions. If you want to know what natural means, then I suggest you look it up.

            Everything God did/does is moral.

            WAS allowed, but not any more – thanks to Jesus “taking one for the team” through His sacrifice.

            You misunderstand what it means by “God created”. Mankind is created in God’s image.

            Please research God and His word to better understand it – and to hopefully answer your questions.

          • glenbo

            >>”Everything God did/does is moral.”<>”WAS allowed, but not any more – thanks to Jesus “taking one for the team” through His sacrifice.”<<
            So God had it wrong? God made a mistake? God works on a learning curve…like man?
            Jesus NEVER corrected God's slavery blunder.
            Nowhere in the bible is slave ownership denounced.
            Sorry, but your bible is crap.
            And you are forced to cherry pick the parts you like and push out of your mind the garbage and fabricate a "reality" that suits your prejudices, bigotry and hate.
            Despicable!
            You are suffering from cognitive dissonance because you KNOW God is messed up and you KNOW the bible is full of immoral crap, but your hate for LGBT people forces you to override reasoned thinking…something you obviously gave up doing long ago.

          • Boris

            >>”Everything God did/does is moral.”<<
            That is moral relativism at its starkest. If God told you to kill your neighbor and your child would you do it? It would be good to kill your neighbor and your child because God commanded it. If it were not for the rise of secular humanism, atheism, deism, skepticism in the West you Christians would be no different than you were just a few hundred years ago. Just like ISIS is today. You're no different than the most violent Muslims.

          • Mark Bradshaw

            No. It is called fixed morality – as morality should be. God established what is moral and what is not.

            God commands that we are not to murder, so God would NOT “tell” me to kill anyone. Your question is absurd.

            “You’re no different than the most violent Muslims.” —– NONSENSE!!!! You assume all religions have similar tenants. The tenants of Christianity are diametrically OPPOSITE of Islam. Christianity teaches love, whereas Islam teaches submission (or death). Christianity teaches one to love thy neighbor, whereas Islam instructs its followers to kill those that besmirch their prophet or refuse to convert to Islam. Mohamed was a pedophile, a thief and a murderer. Jesus (the person upon which Christianity is based) killed nobody, harmed nobody (actually healed the sick) and led a completely moral and righteous life – even sacrificing Himself for mankind.

          • Boris

            “No. It is called fixed morality – as morality should be. God established what is moral and what is not.”
            This is why the Christian superstition is obsolete. Human morals have evolved way past when our ancestors cut the heads off animals and sprayed blood around an altar to ward off evil spirits as the primitives who wrote the Bible did. Even Christians find the acts of the Bible God repulsive which is proof that morals do not come from your God. If Jesus could return he’d be tried for war crimes and put to death in a much more humane way this time.

            God commands that we are not to murder, so God would NOT “tell” me to kill anyone. Your question is absurd.

            In the Bible God ordered the slaughter of entire people groups including men, women and children. God supposedly ordered an old man to sacrifice his son. My question isn’t absurd but your answer certainly is.

          • Mark Bradshaw

            “This is why the Christian superstition is obsolete.” —– Christianity is not a “superstition”. It is a faith in God and His word.

            “Human morals have evolved way past when our ancestors cut the heads off animals and sprayed blood around an altar to ward off evil spirits as the primitives who wrote the Bible did.” —– People’s actions are completely independent from what God commands and His laws. Humans have IGNORED God’s laws in favor of their own immorality and narcissism. Mankind has abandoned what God has commanded and have instead chose to do what they want and believe is good. The people who wrote the Bible were NOT “primitives” – they were teachers, physicians, farmers, herders, scholars, etc. Again, you REALLY SHOULD research the thing on which you choose to comment and make assertions.

            “Even Christians find the acts of the Bible God repulsive which is proof that morals do not come from your God.” —– OF COURSE there are repulsive acts in the Bible, because it is an account of history. There are repulsive things in recent history, but that doesn’t make them false or untrue.

            “If Jesus could return he’d be tried for war crimes and put to death in a much more humane way this time.” —– Sorry, but Jesus NEVER killed anyone, nor would He ever – It is not who He is. And Jesus will return, and you (and everyone, will be judged for your (our) actions. The only path to heaven and eternal fellowship with God is through a relationship with Jesus (“I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me.” (John 14: 6, NLT)). SO I pray you have a relationship with Jesus before it is too late.

            AGAIN, your accusations and assertions are fallacious and your views of God and the Bible are INACCURATE. Please better educate yourself.

          • Boris

            I know a lot more about the Bible and ancient literature than you do. What can you tell me about neuter plural nouns in Koine Greek? I know how to tell the difference between fiction writing and history writing. Historical narratives do not contain dialog, people all speaking to each other in complete sentences. Historical narratives do not contain tales of the supernatural, sticks turning into snakes, talking animals, angelic visitations or any of the other mindless religious claptrap like what we find in religious texts. I have also taken the time to find out that none of the stories in the Bible could ever be verified nor could the existence of any of the major figures from Adam to Jesus ever be verified. Christianity is a superstition in every sense of the word. There’s no reason to believe any of its claims, dogmas or doctrines. Christianity proves it has no evidence for its claims by having to use threats to induce belief. Christianity only appeals to the base human emotion of cowardice. You believe because OTHER PEOPLE frightened you into it. If only you could be honest enough to admit it.

  • Boris

    If Christians hadn’t engaged in a mass censorship which destroyed almost all pagan literature everybody today would know Christianity is a copycat religion that stole all of its dogmas and doctrines from other pagan religions and cults.

Inspiration
St. Paul Takes a Knee
Dudley Hall
More from The Stream
Connect with Us