The ‘Other Gospel’ was easier

Brad Chilcott who runs Activate, a church in Adelaide, Australia, confesses that it’s hard to be an authentic Christian.

He writes: “I must admit that I find the gospel of partnering with God for the healing of the world much, much harder than the gospel of God loves you and wants to give you a ticket to heaven. It’s harder emotionally, physically, financially, socially and culturally.

“It’s tiring. Without the Holy Spirit, without worship, without community I’d give up and go back to that old gospel. It was easier in those days, for sure. It was easier when it was about me and my blessing, my healing, my salvation and inviting other people to enjoy my amazing new life. It was much easier when it was about going to church. About finding a Sunday service that made me feel good and affirmed what I already believed. It was easier when I could modify some moral behaviours and then live for myself, my ambition, my convenience and my comfort around that. It was easier when, because I knew my eternity was sorted,…

“It was certainly easier when sharing the gospel meant telling people they could join me in all of the above because Jesus had died to make it possible. Much easier to get people on board with that agenda.

“What’s hard is realising that it’s never not going to be hard. All of us are hoping for, and trying to achieve, that day, when parenting isn’t so hard, work isn’t so hard, bills aren’t so hard to pay, our bodies aren’t so unruly and relationships aren’t so difficult. With all that hardness going on surely my faith can just be about me and what makes me feel good? Surely. It was easier when it was. When I found what was right for me and could lie back and soak in it.

“It was easier when the devastation of the earth, the exploitation of people, the racism, homophobia, sexism and hatred, the war, the poverty and other people’s problems weren’t my problem.”

Read more


68 thoughts on “The ‘Other Gospel’ was easier

  1. James 1:26-27
    The Message (MSG)

    Anyone who sets himself up as “religious” by talking a good game is self-deceived. This kind of religion is hot air and only hot air. Real religion, the kind that passes muster before God the Father, is this: Reach out to the homeless and loveless in their plight, and guard against corruption from the godless world.


    • I am all for mercy and reaching out but its actually, we are stuffed and its only by Gods Grace can we be saved, healed or even show love. God is love. Our yes to Him is His regeneration of our hearts. Its Him, Him alone and nothing else.


      • Still missing the point, Alexie?
        it’s NOT all about YOU…or whether YOU’RE “stuffed” or not.


      • ps. Your comment ~ as does the substance of Chilcott’s message ~ raises the age-old question:-
        Would you be willing to live in heaven if you knew there were others suffering in hell?


      • Don’t we do that already, though?? Most of us who have time and resources to blog and browse the Internet are in relative heaven here on earth, while so many are suffering hell on earth. We each could, if we chose, give up all money and material comfort and go live with those suffering in third world poverty, dying from neglect, abuse, and starvation.


      • That wouldn’t be a solution,Quackzalcoatl.
        Until we restrict the human population to something like a ‘natural’ number, need will ALWAYS far outstrip (at an ever-accelerating rate) resources.
        It’s a fact of life.
        …But not very ‘christian’.


    • ….or even from the ‘godly’ world, Mon.
      Treachery from those you trust is a lot more painful than treachery from an enemy.


  2. Authentic Christian. Admits faults, listens, shows Goids love, slow to anger and relies more and more on Christ. The more one dies to self the more God lives within you.


  3. These days, any form of the gospel is getting to be a tough sell. It amazes me. Christ is considered evil and God is condemned as a murderous evil tyrant. Salvation is frowned upon as egotistical and evil. I am condemned for even believing or considering such things as true, as an evil-minded hypocrit, when all I want to do is have a conversation or try to empathize with other points of view. After awhile, it begins to demoralize my soul. It’s like, why even bother anymore?

    Anyone who can go out there in such a hostile climate day after day in the name of God and give themselves selflessly as an instrument of His unconditional love for every single soul — wow, it overwhelms me with awe and respect. We live in such a dark and bitter world. The light of the Word and the love of our Redeemer is needed more than ever before. We have so much work to do….


    • “We live in such a dark and bitter world. The light of the Word and the love of our Redeemer is needed more than ever before.”

      If that’s your opener then I think I might be able to see your problem


  4. I am guessing Bubba Ray has a talent. But this comment? I am not sure I live in a dark and bitter world. I live in a world created by the God I love and surrounded by so much beauty. I love a God who is love. And yes – there are days I am tired and cranky. We all are. And yes – there are times I wish it was all perfect. We all do. But when a brick comes a-flying, I am not sure throwing one back makes the world a better place. And Bubba Ray made me think that, and the comments here made me want to write this. Thank you all! 🙂


      • Well that’s a big compliment coming from you my Dabbles.
        I like him as well. A gentle man.


      • I don’t know about “gentle”; I could see him as a relentless fighter if it mattered.
        Strikes me as a man who, in thought and deed and very character, has nothing to fear from ‘Judgment’.
        ….and knows it.


    • But did the pope pay for medical treatment for this bloke? Did the pope sponsor medical research into curing this condition? Did the pope who calls himself the Vicar of Christ on earth actually cure this person of his illness? Or was this another photo opportunity?


      • Okay, so it’s wrong to insist that everyone is worthy of being treated with dignity and respect, and wrong to insist on a moral system of rights and wrongs… because we should be allowed to “be true to our own instincts”… so, you’re saying we SHOULD respect the dignity of our own instictive nature? I’m confused.


      • But dabbles, according to your anarchist beliefs, this is allowable as it represents anarchy against government regulations against animal cruelty! How many times have we heard you spout bile against governments. Yet when governments allow this sort of thing you kick and scream that it shouldn’t happen.
        My brother in law holds the view that this sort of behaviour is OK because his anarchist beliefs (which are extremely similar to yours) allow him to believe this. Yet if I say that any form of animal cruelty is wrong, I get shouted down without being able to get a word in edgeways by your club, because you believe that ethics are man made constructs.


    • I fell in love with the homeless veterans when I was on holidays in America. I love them to bits….and the native Americans. I wished I could have had more time with them. And it’s amazing, they can sense just by looking at you, that they are loved.

      They did more for me than I could ever do for them.


      • That is awesome. Selflessness is the most rewarding experience isn’t it? So easy to forget this sometimes. Unconditional love is the greatest gift of all. 🙂

        I often wonder if my life is wasted in living a typical suburban life in America. Seems like I should surrender my life to the needs of the many, all of the time.


      • I’d love to visit America. I’d also like to go to the border between America and Canada where they film all those slow moving films and series. Lots of pine trees and snow and small town folk.


  5. It’s edifying to see that in one small corner of the gargantuan Religious Institutions a penny has dropped.(or two: Pope Frank shows promise). Brad Chilcott’s well and truly on the right track ~ despite the few evident structural weaknesses. eg. While he denigrates “the systems of this world” he nevertheless wants to nurture another ‘system’ : “….the followers of christ”

    Our lives and our actions should not be motivated by external pressures or values, nor even because of ‘systems’ of ‘morality’ (because it’s ‘right’ to do so) ; but, because of being true to who and what we are, we have no options other than to follow that instinct.

    Our species wasn’t corrupted by the eating of a fruit: it was corrupted when we set up (or allowed the set-up of) so-called ‘Authorities’ over the sovereignty of the human individual. The individual who, at the end of the day, will judged and will stand or fall individually.

    Note that Jesus would never have become a member of the ‘christian flock’.

    Note also, that the jews have never since had it so good as before bloody Moses turned up and organised them.


    • “Note also, that the jews have never since had it so good as before bloody Moses turned up and organised them.”


      They were slaves to the Egyptians Dabs. Read your Bible!


      • In the first place, Mon, even the jews don’t blindly accept ‘the bible’ yarn about the jews being enslaved in Egypt*. They’d been nomadic wanderers who made a good living there. If you were to actually read the relevant histories you’d clearly see that the jews deliberately fled TO Egypt to get relief from being attacked by other tribes who didn’t want them on their lands, and from starvation and hunger. (Not unlike the ‘Boat-People refugees today: looking for a batter life.) And they were made welcome ~ initially. (As they also were in Canaan, until they treacherously turned on their hosts.)

        Incidentally, the nonsense about Moses in the reeds and becoming a ‘Prince of Egypt’ etc., and the Great Escape across the Red Sea [never mind the parting of the waters!] is just that: nonsense.

        It’s only when they became a threat (real or perceived) to Egypt itself that they were hassled into leaving.
        (It’s the never-ending story of the jews and judaism: they eventually piss off everyone who makes them welcome or gives them a hand.)


        And anyway, in the second place, so-called ‘slavery’ has often in history been seen as a position much to be desired; slaves, generally, were fed, looked after and ~ like working animals today ~ valued.
        History records many famous slaves (including St Patrick) who became important members of the judiciary, civil service, educational institutions and the military. Often they were more accomplished and better-educated than their owners….who knew they couldn’t manage without them

        Check it out; it’s a whole new world for those mired in the ‘conventional wisdom’.


      • How often do you need to be reminded? (Depends on how raddled your memory is!)
        My qualifications as a historian are that I can read history, archeology and geography books. Try it sometime; y’might be surprised!

        ….and can do basic arithmetic which, extrapolating from the bible-figure of 600,000 fighting men, tells me that up to 2.5 MILLION jews (the commonly accepted number- and about HALF the population of Egypt at the time! ~ OR as many as the sand on the seashore, as the bible has it), 10 abreast, with a couple of metres between ranks (conservatively, since they were bringing their baggage, animals, carts, etc.) would’ve formed a column FIFTY kilometres long.

        Now then, since nobody will pinpoint WHERE the jews allegedly crossed the Red Sea, I’ll take the AVERAGE width (measurable by satellite down to ONE centimetre) of it as being 280 kilometrres.

        Moreover, on a flat landscape (such as a featureless desert ~ which I’ll accept for the sake of the argument), a six-foot-tall man can see about 4 km to the horizon.

        So… When the jews see the pursuing chariots, they had at most a 4km headstart when Moses parted the waters.

        Now how long does it take a 50km-long column to pass a given point?
        Humans, under extreme stress, can walk at up to 9 kmh for a short distance, and ‘genetically-preferred’ walking pace is about 5 kmh. Although it doesn’t account for the slowing-down of the column due to baggage, kids, animals, general milling-around, etc., I’m prepared to split the difference and call their rate of travel at 7.5 kmh. (More than generous I think.)

        At that rate, it would’ve taken the FIRST rank over 37 hours to get across.
        And the last rank about 43 hours and sixteen minutes. (of course they’d have taken MUCH longer, since top speed can’t be maintained for long, especially given the wet and sticky sea-bed.)

        In any case, war chariots travelling at, say, a comfortable 20 kmh, would’ve fallen upon the jews before the First rank had gotten even 1.5 kilometre into the sea…..and that doesn’t even take into account the other 48.5km of lined-up jews.

        I could go on…and on…and on..

        However, I don’t expect you to do the arithmetic, but rather to throw in ye olde double-shuffle about the jews not REALLY crossing at the Red Sea, but further North…or South…or…etc.

        In doing so, of course, you’ll confirm my argument that the bible is NOT to be taken as any sort of legitimate source of information. 😉


      • Incidentally, Mon, the bible itself suggests that the (alleged) slavery in Egypt wasn’t all THAT bad. viz: Exodus 14:12
        ” Didn’t we say to you in Egypt, ‘Leave us alone; let us serve the Egyptians’? ”


      • Just noticed the first (asterisked) link I posted isn’t highlighted.
        Paste it into your browser; it’ll bring up a search-page; the first entry from ‘Haaretz’ is the one I intended to post. (There are plenty of others that say the same thing.


      • ….and for Bryan, who probablky wouldn’t bother:-
        And it came to pass: What is Passover?
        By Haaretz | Jul. 24, 2013 | 8:14 AM

        Here’s a question for you: what do actor Charlton Heston, DreamWorks animation studios and Former Prime Minister Menachem Begin all have in common? Well, they’ve all, at one time or another, perpetuated the myth that the Jews built the pyramids. And it is a myth, make no mistake. Even if we take the earliest possible date for Jewish slavery that the Bible suggests, the Jews were enslaved in Egypt a good three hundred years after the 1750 B.C. completion date of the pyramids. That is, of course, if they were ever slaves in Egypt at all.

        Subsrcibe to Haaretz Digital edition

        We are so quick to point out the obvious lies about Jews and Israel that come out in Egypt – the Sinai Governors claims that the Mossad released a shark into the Red Sea to kill Egyptians, or, as I once read in a newspaper whilst on holiday in Cairo, the tale of the magnetic belt buckles that Jews were selling cheap in Egypt that would sterilize men on contact – yet we so rarely examine our own misconceptions about the nature of our history with the Egyptian nation.

        We tend, in the midst of our disdain for Egyptian, anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, to overlook the fact that one of the biggest events of the Jewish calendar is predicated upon reminding the next generation every year of how the Egyptians were our cruel slave-masters, in a bondage that likely never happened. Is this really so different from Jaws the Mossad agent?

        The reality is that there is no evidence whatsoever that the Jews were ever enslaved in Egypt. Yes, there’s the story contained within the bible itself, but that’s not a remotely historically admissible source. I’m talking about real proof; archeological evidence, state records and primary sources. Of these, nothing exists.

        It is hard to believe that 600,000 families (which would mean about two million people) crossed the entire Sinai without leaving one shard of pottery (the archeologist’s best friend) with Hebrew writing on it. It is remarkable that Egyptian records make no mention of the sudden migration of what would have been nearly a quarter of their population, nor has any evidence been found for any of the expected effects of such an exodus; such as economic downturn or labor shortages. Furthermore, there is no evidence in Israel that shows a sudden influx of people from another culture at that time. No rapid departure from traditional pottery has been seen, no record or story of a surge in population.

        In fact, there’s absolutely no more evidence to suggest that the story is true than there is in support of any of the Arab world’s conspiracy theories and tall tales about Jews.

        So, as we come to Passover 2012 when, thanks to the “Arab Spring,” our relations with Egypt are at a nearly 40 year low, let us enjoy our Seder and read the story by all means, but also remind those at the table who may forget that it is just a metaphor, and that there is no ancient animosity between Israelites and Egyptians. Because, if we want to re-establish that elusive peace with Egypt that so many worked so hard to build, we’re all going to have to let go of our prejudices.

        Josh Mintz is completing his degree in International Relations and Middle Eastern studies and is the communications director at Friend a Soldier, an NGO that encourages dialogue with IDF soldiers.


      • Has the Exodus Really Been Disproven?


        By Lawrence H. Schiffman

        That there are people who do not believe the biblical accounts of the ancient history of the Israelites is not new. What is new in “Doubting the Story of the Exodus” (LA Times, April 13, 2001) is that doubt seems to have been turned into historical fact. Readers were told that there is a consensus of biblical historians and archaeologists that the Exodus did not happen. In reality, though, no such consensus actually exists.

        Many archaeologists, Bible scholars and historians continue to conclude from the evidence that the Exodus did indeed occur, among them the editor of Biblical Archaeology Review, Hershel Shanks (Ha’aretz Magazine, Nov. 5, 1999).

        Evidence for ancient events is very difficult to come by. Sometimes, to be sure, indications of an event’s historicity is uncovered but more often all that can be done is to see whether the event can plausibly fit into what is presently known about the historical period. Lack of direct evidence does not disprove an ancient event. Nor can the existence of evidence only in later literary texts be taken as an argument against their reliability; the discovery of ancient Troy came about on the evidence of the much later writings of Homer.

        The Exodus is dated by most of those who accept its veracity to about 1250 BCE. We know that for the previous few centuries, the period during which the Israelites are reported to have come down to Canaan from Egypt and to have become influential, there was indeed a rise in Semitic influence in Egypt, led by a group of western Semites known as the Hyksos, who were closely related to the Hebrews. At some point, ca. 1580 BCE, the native Egyptians rebelled against these foreigners, and this development can be taken to be reflected in the Bible’s description of the Pharaoh “who did not know Joseph.” As a result of this change, the Semites, including the Israelites, found themselves in the difficult position the Bible records, one which must have lasted for centuries. From this point of view, the story of the slavery and Exodus is perfectly plausible within the framework of Egyptian and Near Eastern history. Further, we have letters which describe the life of work gangs from Pharaonic Egypt and these seem to paint a picture very close to that of the biblical report.

        The Bible describes the period immediately after the Exodus as one of extended wandering in the desert. This wandering was said to result from the fear of the Israelites that a direct route to Canaan, along the Mediterranean coast toward what is now the Gaza Strip, would be dangerous because of the Egyptian armies stationed there. This circumstance has been confirmed as historical by the discovery of the remains of extensive Egyptian influence, habitation and fortification in the Gaza region in this period, especially at Deir al-Balakh. Again, the biblical record is confirmed.

        Further support for the historicity of the Exodus comes from a stele of the Egyptian ruler Merneptah (1224-1214 BCE). In reviewing his victories against the peoples of Canaan, he claimed, “Israel is laid waste; his seed is not.” Here the text designated the people of Israel, not the land, as can be shown from the Egyptian linguistic usage. Many scholars believe that this text refers to the people of Israel before they entered Canaan–that is, in the period of desert wandering. More likely, it is a reference to Israel after they have entered Canaan, but before they established themselves as a sedentary population in the hill country in today’s West Bank (Judea and Samaria). Since this view accords with the dating of the Exodus we suggested above, it seems that in this text, the only Egyptian document to mention Israel, we have a direct reference to the Israelites in the period of the Exodus and the conquest of Canaan.

        Assuming the biblical account to be unreliable, some scholars have substituted a Marxist theory of class revolution to explain the formation of ancient Israel. According to this approach, the masses revolted against their Canaanite overlords and, after taking control, forged for themselves the new collective identity and mythology of the Israelites. Other scholars have suggested a process of differentiation in which some Canaanites began to see themselves as a separate people, and created an identity and a sacred history from whole cloth, thus inventing the Exodus and conquest narratives. But who would invent a history of slavery and disgrace?

        Further, this theory must explain away the historical and archaeological evidence. Numerous cities from this period show a cultural change at precisely the point when the Israelites are said by the Bible to have appeared. Indeed, the newcomers, since they came from the desert, show a lower level of material culture than the Canaanites whom they displaced. This situation fits well the notion of Israelite conquest and infiltration. Second, the Israelites, throughout their history in the land, were concentrated in those areas easiest to defend against the superior arms of the Canaanites, a fact that supports the notion that they were invaders. Third, the doubters have claimed that few cities from this period show evidence of armed destruction. But careful consideration of the biblical narrative, with due attention to the account in Judges and the evidence that the Canaanites were never entirely displaced, eliminates this inconsistency fully. Indeed, the archaeological record supports a reconstruction of the historical events of the conquest when both Joshua and Judges are studied together. Finally, these scholars often claim that the Bible is the only source supporting the Exodus. But they forget that several different accounts of the Exodus exist in the Bible, in books written at different periods, thus providing corroborative evidence for the basic scheme of events.

        We may not possess, at least at present, conclusive proof that the Israelites left Egypt en masse as the Bible describes. What we do have, though, are several indications of the Exodus’ historicity, and ample evidence that the biblical account is entirely plausible.

        It is a simple matter to claim that lack of clear, decisive external confirmation of the biblical account is itself a disproof, but no rational person believes that what has not been proven is false. What can be stated with certainly, however, is that there is no consensus that the Exodus is a myth.

        Lawrence H. Schiffman is Ethel and Irvin A. Edelman Professor in Hebrew and Judaic Studies at New York University, where he serves as Chair of the Skirball Department of Hebrew and Judaic Studies. He is an internationally known scholar of the Dead Sea Scrolls and recently co-edited the Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Oxford, 2000).


      • Thanks for sharing that. I’ve read similar articles and have found plenty enough to satisfy my suspicions regarding those who seem way too confident that “Moses never existed.” I rarely respond, because it’s not even worth it, anymore so than someone who says “I banged your mom.”


      • um… I’m not a historian (What gave me away? 🙂 )
        Neither do I re-invent the wheel every time someone challenges the reality that wheels are round.

        Endless facts are available everywhere, but the bulk of the evidence lies in the omission of facts: eg there are NO military artifacts from the era (like chariots, armour, spears, at the bottom of the Red Sea, etc. etc. There is NO evidence no other record of Moses ever having been in Egypt (let alone being a ‘Prince of Egypt’.) ~ nor any evidence that Moses existed at all.
        ,,,,but read it all up for yourself. Y’could begin by checking out the the two links provided.


      • Indeed:- “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence Dabs. Surely you know that.”
        ……/Neither is it evidence of non-absence.

        But in legal terms, absence of evidence IS in fact evidence of no case being made out ~ or even proposed.
        I’m sure you’re aware of ‘corpus delicti’. The Prosecution MUST prove firstly that an event took place (ie a crime was committed); the Defense is NOT obligated to prove that no crime was committed –> no such event took place.

        And beyond such exotica is the ever-definitive ‘plausibility-test’.
        There is nothing plausible about the entire Exodus yarn. Its protagonists can even say when and where it supposedly occurred.

        In this case, apart from the irrelevance (and general scatter-brainedness) of the essay you posted, the bottom line is, as Schiffman himself ~ after admitting no evidence ~ says:- “What can be stated with certainly, however, is that there is no consensus that the Exodus is a myth.”

        …..and just as certainly no consensus that it ISN’T a myth.

        The difference is that defenders of an assertion of fact need to be able to prove the validity of their assertion.

        Lest we Forget!
        ….the Spaghetti-Monster.

        ps. Wish I had the time to pick apart Schiffman’s essay!


      • Although I believe it is important for Christians to know the arguments leveled against the cornerstones of their faith, and to investigate the “evidence” and the motivating factors of the “expert consensus” — there is absolutely nothing to be gained by “arguing” with people who constantly piss in your face and tell you it’s raining.

        As one who has investigated the matter thoroughly, rather than parrot Dawkins and Hitchens or regurgitate Zeitgeist, I can assure you there is more than enough historical support to separate the Scriptures from the realm of pure fiction. Hearing the same tired arguments over and over again as though they’re somehow some brilliantly conclusive debunking of the Bible and the entire history of a nation, after awhile, becomes no more substantial than a reverberating fart. Plus, it’s not even relevant to the topic of the post.


      • I have read that the exodus could really have been a lengthy procedure, with many small groups fleeing over many years. The Red Sea ‘parts’ naturally with tidal ebb and flow in the delta where they crossed. They may have then detoured south to the mines (Egyptian owned?) where many compatriots were already employed. This could account for the many years the exodus took


      • A ll well and good, Strewth, (“This could account for the many years the exodus took”)

        But any such scenario makes a nonsense of the biblical version.
        And that’s the point.


      • Quite so Quacksalcoatl:- “there is more than enough historical support to separate the Scriptures from the realm of pure fiction. ”

        …. but there’s an easier, more direct way of making such distinction.

        Pure fiction ~ to qualify ~ is, and must be feasible.
        The ‘scriptures’ mostly aren’t.

        ….and incidentally, why do you capitalise “Scriptures” when all it means is ‘writings’ and it is ~ according to the rules ~ UNgrammatical to do so?
        Do we need to suspend the rules of grammar, as well as the rules of credibility, in order to make more chewable the unpalatable?

        Are you trying to convince us, or yourself, that they’re somehow significant beyond the benchmark set for any other scripts?


      • One might suggest (” there is absolutely nothing to be gained by “arguing” with people who constantly piss in your face and tell you it’s raining.”) that you should shift your face..
        ….. unless you’re kinky (apparently a prerequisition for the advocation of religious belief generally).


    • “Our lives and our actions should not be motivated by external pressures or values, nor even because of ‘systems’ of ‘morality’ (because it’s ‘right’ to do so) ; but, because of being true to who and what we are, we have no options other than to follow that instinct.”

      Be careful here. Those animal slaughterers and serial killers are all following that instinct which drives them. Some of us are simply bad people with harmful instincts to kill and destroy. Nothing drives us to it but the sheer enjoyment of doing it.


      • Hear Hear! I get the same argument from my brother in law who believes torturing animals is normal.


      • Yes…and no.
        In the broader, evolutionary, picture the motivations of “animal slaughterers and serial killers”, along with paedophiles, and lots of other (often accepted and lauded) human activities aren’t ‘instincts’, but the result of social training, engineering or failure. ie. the corruption of long-embedded ‘instincts’.

        No other creature of which I’m aware indulges in the sort of activities we’re discussing.
        But if, due to some incidental or accidental cause, a member of any other animal grouping were to develop/demonstrate such proclivities they’d be cast out ~ or culled ~ in very short order.
        Our species, until relatively recently practised the same form of censure (and in some cases still do), and it’s there, over countless millennia, that out instincts were shaped.

        But then along came ‘Authoritative’ social-engineering influences (eg like christianity, and more recently ‘leftie-politics and PC), etc. and corrupted a system that’d served our species and communities well for a couple of million years.

        For example: Reg Isaacs, who’d raped and tortured and killed a little boy was killed in Pentridge.
        The ‘corrupted instincts’ of the modern penal-system sentenced Isaacs to imprisonment for HIS corrupted instincts.

        The native animal instincts of his killers motivated a hatred for Isaacs’ disregard for those long-instilled native instincts, and the failure of the corrupted instincts of the ‘system’ to properly deal with him. So he was killed because such a creature had no ‘right’ to life; deep down it felt as though his existence tainted everyone of the same species.

        That, and he’d never have the chance to do it again. Isaacs had served a handful of sentences for doing terrible things to kids in less time than others had served one sentence for a more ‘legitimate’ offence.

        It’s a broad and murky ~ if interesting ~ subject.


      • Any sort of a man would do something about the mongrel, davinci. (Haven’t you retained any military mementoes, like most others have?)
        Or at least get some evidence (phone-video would be good) and report him.
        Or post his activities and details ~name/address/phone number/etc. ~ all over the internet.
        I’ve got a large dog that’d be pleased to say g’day to him some night.
        Otherwise stop pretending you’re a godbotherer.
        Or even human.


      • I agree,

        Stop telling us about your brother-in-law. He is a sickening excuse for a human being.


      • Sins of the fathers….. An alteration in genes, caused by trauma, can be passed down for three generations.

        Prenatal trauma caused by the parent’s drink or drugs habit, or trauma in infancy up to two years old, disrupts proper brain formation. The ability to trust can’t develop. Everyone becomes the enemy.

        There are only two ways to deal with these humans when trauma has made them so bad, even evil. The easiest is removal.

        The hardest and longest, most wearing, is to teach them to trust. Religion can do this.


  6. Hmm, saving the world by preaching. That’s hard labour. People don’t listen to fiery preachers anymore. And to change the world is impossible. Christ never pointed to that.
    If one changes oneself, amazing thing happens, the world changes also. We not here to change anything else but ourselves. That in the process makes one an example, which is visible and offers to follow. Did Jesus go around preaching? He manifested what it is like when we become, remember who we are. Christ like (which is by the way the meaning of the word christian). He was a living example, so far ahead of the rest, that he was to be disposed of because his presence created offense in the ordinary people. They could not handle the huge difference between themselves and the manifestation of perfection, which we all striving for. The church should stop saving the world and rather change each personality to align with the example of Christ left behind for us to follow.
    The church (of all religions) always placed god outside of human being. In that it deceived man kind, because god is not outside but inside of man. (Isn’t god all present?) The aim is to free the presence of god within to manifest in the world. We all are magnificent beings, suffering from self imposed amnesia. But now the time is rife for man kind to remember and to awaken to our divinity. A good sign of this is the interest of the opposing voices here on this blog and elsewhere. They here because they searching. If they were not interested they would simply ignore this forum. So welcome them in our discussion, they are mostly voicing their honest opinions. Do not be offended, for offense is always taken, not given. The Christians among you, seek the masters example, he never dismissed anyone for an opinion.
    Unconditional love come from knowing oneself. Without that we can’t love unconditionally. In the subjective world we live in, we subjected to the influences of dualism. Either black or white, up or down, hot or cold and so on. Only when we awake to the divine, to the absolute within us, we able to truly love without reservations, without the need to be loved back.


    • Absolutely! We are called to be witnesses. The best witness is to allow the divine light to shine through us and share God’s infinite love to the world one person at a time, so that they too can allow the Spirit to flow through their hearts.

      I wouldn’t say preaching doesn’t work anymore — depends where you go. Some cultures are a lot more receptive than others. And when the Spirit moves, sometimes preaching can break through in the most unlikely of venues!


      • …and you know THIS ” And God is infinite.” how ~ since god himself says he’s the ‘alpha and omega’?

        Or this:- “Because it comes from God.” ~since WE are instructed to ‘Love thy neighbour”.

        In any case, I’ve not seen you weigh in on the ‘what IS love’ discussion


  7. Something that came up on Facebook, interesting.
    Church Members Mistreat Homeless Man in Church, Unaware It Is Their Pastor in Disguise.
    “Pastor Jeremiah Steepek transformed himself into a homeless person and went to the 10,000 member church that he was to be introduced as the head pastor at that morning.
    He walked around his soon to be church for 30 minutes while it was filling with people for service, only 3 people out of the 7-10,000 people said hello to him.
    He asked people for change to buy food – no one in the church gave him change. He went into the sanctuary to sit down in the front of the church and was asked by the ushers if he would please sit in the back.
    He greeted people to be greeted back with stares and dirty looks, with people looking down on him and judging him.
    As he sat in the back of the church, he listened to the church announcements and such.
    When all that was done, the elders went up and were excited to introduce the new pastor of the church to the congregation.
    “We would like to introduce to you Pastor Jeremiah Steepek.” The congregation looked around clapping with joy and anticipation.
    The homeless man sitting in the back stood up and started walking down the aisle. The clapping stopped with all eyes on him.
    He walked up the altar and took the microphone from the elders (who were in on this) and paused for a moment then he recited,
    “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world.
    “For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
    “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
    ‘The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
    After he recited this, he looked towards the congregation and told them all what he had experienced that morning. Many began to cry and many heads were bowed in shame.
    He then said, “Today I see a gathering of people, not a church of Jesus Christ. The world has enough people, but not enough disciples. When will YOU decide to become disciples?”
    He then dismissed service until next week.
    Following in the footsteps of Jesus Christ should be more than just talk. It ought to be a lifestyle that others around you can love about you and share in.”
    Be a Christian all you want, but at least follow the teachings of Christ if you’re going to claim the title.

    ~ Tom Retterbush


  8. dabbles on November 9, 2013 at 10:02 said:

    Pennies dropping all over the place!
    Looking good!

    You make me laugh dabbles, seriously. Good on you.


    • Thanks. But an interesting thought is that this little story will have the desired effect whether it’s a hoax or not.
      It’s a good technique for bringing Jesus into the real world, isn’t it?.


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s