"If it's provable we can kill it."
Or, you know you've found your God when It knocks you on your ass
Published on June 18, 2006 By EmperorofIceCream In Religion
I have insomnia right now... something that happens virtually every time I'm between jobs, hence the two articles in one day. I'm writing this one at the request of island_gurl12, who asked me to talk about my conversion experience(s).

A 'crisis conversion' is exactly what's implied by the term - some radical change (perhaps religious, usually 'spiritual') that occurs as a consequence of some stressful situation in life. My crisis conversion occurred when I was 24 and its immediate consequence, my becoming a 'Christian', lasted approximately fourteen years. I am no longer a 'Christian' and haven't identified myself as such for at least the last ten years - but I continue to live with the legacy of that event, and with the development of that legacy that occurred in response to another, eerily similar event, that took place a little over three years ago - just prior to my coming to America.

1984, the UK. At that time I'm once again living in Scunthorpe, my home town, lodging with my mother and sister in the house they then shared. At that time I was drowning in despair, without having a concrete reason for the misery I then felt. It seemed to me that I was 'out-of-joint' with everything in the world. Wherever I looked I saw no way forward for myself; only mere continuance, without purpose, in an endlessly grey world. I had been told, by those in the Social Services, that I was unemployable in their opinion and that I should resign myself to a life of dependency on the state. Within myself I felt entirely alone, isolated behind some impenetrable wall of my own devising, and permanently locked away from any kind of meaningful human contact. The voices in my head (not literal voices that I regarded as outside myself but the voices of my evil nature) that sang sweetly to me of suicide began to seem ever more seductive and rational and only my profound repugnance for such an act (a repugnance I take no credit for - to me the horror of suicide seems as natural as breathing) kept me from actually making the attempt.

I liked the idea of being dead - but not by my own hand. Never by my own hand.

Once every two weeks I got a check from the government. With it I paid my mother some small amount for my lodging with her; I paid installments on what other minor debts I then had; I made sure I had enough hand-rolling tobacco to last another two weeks - and the rest of the money I drank away, usually that same day. Had I had enough money I would have been an alcoholic - just like my father, and my father's brother.

I had a routine that I followed on my bi-weekly trips, involving drinking in certain pubs in the town in a set order. First stop, the Parkinson Arms. Then on to the Oswald Hotel - possibly the roughest pub in Scunthorpe and by far and away my favourite. From there to the Brumby, and finally back home by way of the Priory Hotel and the Beacon. Sometimes I'd vary the routine slightly, going to the Lincoln Imp for several pints of Old Tom, for example; or to a pub locally known as 'The Pig' but the actual name of which I've long since forgotten. In essence, though I sometimes changed the names on the list, these bi-weekly trips were exactly the same: disappear into a pint glass for as long as the money lasted, then stagger home to sleep in drunken stupefaction. Two weeks later I'd do it again.

That was what passed for my life, then: a pointless round of inebriation without hope or meaning, that did nothing but reinforce my sense of disconnection from the world and other people. During the rest of those two weeks I locked myself away in my bedroom, smoked countless hand-made cigarettes, and lived in a fantasy world fuelled and reinforced by endless reading of science fiction and 'sword and sorcery' novels. I lived a life as arid and empty as it's possible to imagine, hating it all the while, and myself, while seemingly utterly powerless to change.

Change eventually came to me, however, and from an unlikely source. One night, sat in the Oswald, watching the whores pair off with men fresh from the fishing-boats newly docked in Winterton, I fell into conversation with a young man who was almost supernaturally emaciated and possessed of the largest, most flamboyant ears I'd ever seen. In the middle of the Oswald, surrounded by whores, pimps, drug-dealers and drug users, this skinny bat-eared creature was reading a Bible while contemplatively drinking a pint. I found him utterly incongruous and therefore interesting and so did what I almost never did by choice - began a conversation with a stranger.

This young man was called Steve, and that conversation was the first of very many that took place over the next year. Steve, it soon transpired, was a recent and very militant convert to Christianity - the kind of Christianity then referred to as 'happy clappy': Pentecostal in origin, zealously evangelical in outlook, and 'charismatic' in nature - emphasising the gifts of the Spirit - in particular the gift of tongues.

For six months he talked to me about his newly-found God, and I asked him questions that I hoped he wouldn't be able to answer. I was drawn to him, and to what he had to say, and to the people he eventually introduced me to - a charismatic 'cell' of believers within a local Methodist chapel. And at the same time I was repulsed. I found the notion of being 'washed in the blood of the Lamb' deeply repugnant - not because blood was involved but because the blood in question belonged to a lamb, possibly the most pathetic and unimpressive of all creatures.

I found the passivity of Steve's Jesus repugnant: a passivity that led to the eager embrace of a death both revolting in itself, ignoble and completely fatuous. I found the notions of the Trinity and the perpetual virginity of Mary an insult to my intelligence; and the Christian's horror of sex (and the rampant paranoia it induced) an affront to my nature. And yet still: I talked, I listened, and I debated. Because behind these conversations there was something real - and in all the rest of what passed for my life there was no reality at all.

October 24th, 1984, 2.00am. That night I had attended, for the first time, a meeting of a 'house-church' - a gathering of believers in a private home, devoid of any of the trappings and rituals usually associated with Churches - except for the breaking of bread together and the drinking of wine. It was there that I heard people speaking in tongues for the first time (something I then found to be utterly freakish), witnessed ecstatic prayer for the first time, saw people collapse on the floor as they were 'slain in the Spirit' for the first time. And once again, but far more vividly, I experienced the sense of reality that haunted my conversations with Steve.

It didn't occur to me to question whether or not, or in what way, a connection existed between what these people said and did and this sense of reality. I simply assumed that there was, and that this connection was direct, straightforward and simple. And despite myself, I was impressed by what I saw, what I heard - and by the acceptance of each other that was evident between these people.

Disturbed, my thoughts and emotions in turmoil, I left early in order to walk home without being interrogated by Steve as to my impressions of the meeting. I wanted to think, not talk. As I left, a little old lady (very little and very old) presented me with a card on which was printed the parable of the Good Shepherd and the Lost Sheep. In the bitterness of my loneliness the thought of someone actively seeking me out because of concern for me touched me very deeply. "Do you know Jesus?" the little old lady said as I walked out the door. "I'm afraid not" I replied. She looked deeply and honestly saddened and replied in her turn "He's waiting for you, you know. All you have to do is ask." I had nothing to say to that, and left in silence.

So home I went, to an empty house, both my mother and sister being away, arriving there a little after midnight.

What I'd witnessed and felt had moved me deeply. I found myself actually wanting to believe.... but unable to do so. And then, at 2.00am precisely, that sense of profound reality swept over me - but now magnified into an actual presence. And with this sense of presence came communication. In the moments of consciousness that remained to me I was aware of being offered a choice - to remain as I was, or to follow whatever it was that confronted me. I remember my decision, I remember, quite clearly, making this decision - which was to follow, from that moment on, this presence which had come to me. And I remember nothing after that, for the next five hours. When I came back to myself I was in the shower, yelling 'hallelujah' as loudly as I could and grinning like a lunatic.

To this day I have no certain knowledge of what passed during those five hours. But I'm left with the very strong impression that negotiations were entered into and a bargain concluded. And it's in the shadow of this unknown bargain that I live even now.

And that should have been my first clue that what had happened to me was not what I thought (and was told many times over by the members of the house-church which I shortly thereafter entered) had happened to me since, so far as I know, Jesus doesn't make deals with those who believe in him. I hold to that bargain still, whatever it was, because it's fundamentally and inextricably associated in my mind with that overwhelming sense of reality that swept over and through me before I blacked out: which caused me to black out.

*********************
Jump forward almost twenty years, to another late winter's night, several years after my divorce (years I've spent in intense exploration of my sexuality and my beliefs) and not long after the ruin and loss of another deeply valued relationship. In the months before this night I've met Sabrina online and come to feel for her an affinity that dwarfs any I've felt before, which consoles me for the loss of that long term and real time relationship. She and I have talked at length about her beliefs, her experience as a Chaote, and about Magick generally. She's sent me the Book, and an obsidian dagger she had created especially for use in the Rituals I'm beginning to develop in conjunction with the lessons of the Book. And in consequence of those early ritual sessions I can already feel everything I thought I knew about 'religion' and 'spirituality' slipping away from me and turning to dust.

Over these preceding months my mind has returned, again and again, to my original conversion experience. And a fundamental question has emerged: where and what, in that experience, was the definitively 'Christian' element? And in all honesty, I could not then and cannot now, find such a definitively 'Christian' element. Thinking as honestly and clearly as I can I realise, that night, that such an element was never present in my 'conversion'. Whatever of 'Christianity' was present that night was something I brought to the experience, something I attributed to it: not something which it brought to me.

Years before this night I had effectively ceased to practice my supposed 'Christianity'. The particular reasons for doing so are not relevant here; but in effect what had happened was that I had, slowly, returned to that sense of hopelessness and futility that had characterized my life prior to my conversion - only now my despair had a specifically religious quality. It was in that moment of final realisation that I was literally forced to my knees by the return of that overwhelming sense of the real that I had known once before and not felt again for years.

I found myself, once again, drowning in the attention of the real, and in the knowledge that it was my faltering first steps in Ritual practice that had drawn this attention to myself. This time there was no confusion as to whether or not this was a Christian experience. Though the presence that confronted me for the second time was in no way different to that I had met in my 'conversion', there was not the remotest suggestion that what looked at me, what recognised me, was in any sense a Lamb. It was, in some plainly obvious but incomprehensible way, far more dreadful, far more awesome, and far more dangerous than any Lamb could be. And in the last instants of consciousness left to me I was reminded, forcefully, of the Angels described by the prophet Ezekiel, and of his account of their effect upon him - which left him stunned for seven days.

Do I have a name for the presence I encountered that second time? Yes. A Name to which I've alluded in articles such as 'My Mother made me my own Jesus' and 'How to induce auto-erotic schizophrenia'.

Is there a connection between my supposed 'Christianity' and what I now worship? Yes, in the same way that there's a connection between the Old Testament and the New Testament.

Do I recognise my God in the words of the prophets? Yes. As in the Psalms and Proverbs, and in the Song of Solomon, and in Ecclesiastes. As also, but to a lesser degree, in the words of Hebrews, Romans, and Revelation.

Is there any trace of Jesus the Good Shepherd left in my spiritual life? No, not remotely. Sweet Jesus, meek Jesus, mild Jesus the Lamb, the Christ of God.... has withered away entirely in the flame of another revelation altogether.

Do I regret his passing? Occasionally, in the way an adult, in a moment of nostalgic weakness, might regret the passing of childhood into adulthood and with it the loss of innocence. But only rarely, and such moments become still rarer, as I contemplate the endless vistas of what I would once have called 'darkness' that have opened to me, beckoning me onward to things I would once have thought unimaginable.

Am I fearful now, as I was then during the years of my Christianity? No. I no longer fear the things that I did. Why?

1Jo 4:18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.

Comments (Page 3)
4 Pages1 2 3 4 
on Jun 21, 2006
Check the baptism records of the mafia. I'll bet they were all baptized.


HAHAHA.

Just so long as the Sopranos make it...then all will be well!
on Jun 22, 2006
Well, this was my first blog article that I've read on this site, and it made me think.
I thank you for that.
I now have to wonder if I'm ever going to have an enlightening experience with what could be 'my God' (who/that has eluded me thus far in life).

-me.
on Jun 22, 2006
To KFC:

Well, I begin to understand you at last. You are wilfully, deliberately obtuse - you make the most blatant errors, simply in the hope that you will eventually wear out anyone whom you cannot out argue; or whom you can't browbeat with scriptures you yourself don't understand; or whom you can'y bully into believing you are some sort of theological superstar.

For instance your response to a set of scriptures that quite clearly shows the necessity for water baptism before spirit baptism can occur, such spirit baptism being taken among Pentecostals as the only convincing sign of salvation, is to ignore the scriptural evidence and shift the ground to something else entirely - but something which appears quite similar to the original topic, similar enough to deceive the unwary into thinking that you are both still talking about the same thing.

Water Baptism saves no one. John the Baptist did not say that his baptism saves anyone.


There is a difference between water baptism and spiritual baptism. One is very necessary the other is not but is only an act of obedience.


you are right here but it's not water baptism, it's spiritual baptism. Read John 3:8 where it says you don't know when and where it will come, it will be like the wind. We can't know or see the wind but we see the effects of it. Like a sailboat moving along the water.


In each of my responses so far I have shown you a schema of Biblical scripture (all from purely canonical books) which clearly demonstrates that water baptism is a necessary precursor to baptism in the Spirit. In no instance in the scriptures does baptism in the Spirit precede baptism in water. Nor can it, since its through baptism in water that the inner man (the Old Man as the tentmaker has it; the archetypal Adam) is transformed so making the believier fit for the in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit. You may choose to say in response that God's election precedes everything so that though water baptism appears to occur first transformation has already occurred and indwelling already begun. Which would be pure sophistry: a denial of free-will, and a complete failure to address the Biblical account which testifies with great clarity that, for Christians, water baptism always precedes spiritual baptism - as it did in my own case.

And each time your response has been to continue your own line of argument while simply ignoring everything that demonstrably contradics it, as if that contradiction had never been posted.

So, 'Christian': here is a challenge for you. I explicitly deny, on the basis of the scriptural schema already shown you, that baptism in the spirit precedes babtism in water as the sign that the Old Man has been transformed. Don't cite John 3:8 which deals with baptism in the Spirit because you are required to demonstrate not what spiritual baptism is (the indwelling of the Spirit), nor why it's desirable (for the flowering of the gifts of the Spirit and for the manifestation of the fruits of the Spirit) but that this indwelling is given as a first sign of salvation.

In other words, stop telling me what you want me to agree to and demonstrate that what you say is Biblically so.

As to my being unlearned and unstable (2Pe 3:16) - unlearned I'm not, and as to stability... I think I'm at least as stable as your average neurotic American housewife laboring with the terror that her faith is nonsense and her supposed salvation an illusion born out of her egregious vanity and self-satisfaction. But you're as entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. By all means think me unstable.

Even demons can quote scripture.


Thank you, nicest thing any one has said to me all day.

And finally... one more example of your wilful misunderstanding.

We don't save ourselves. Christ saves us from ourselves with the baptism of the HS. Our water baptism only is the outward show of whom we belong to and the start of our ministry just as Christ himself was baptized at the start of his. It's our first act of obedience.


Let me ask you a question, 'Christian': at the time of Jesus' baptism in water, when did the dove (another insipid image of God) descend upon him and when was the voice heard that testified that this was the Son of God? Before or after his baptism in water? And, in case you can't find the relevant verses, I'll save you the work of looking for them.

Mat 3:13 Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.
Mat 3:14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
Mat 3:15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer [it to be so] now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
Mat 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
Mat 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

After, as I think you can see. And if it was sufficient for Jesus that he be baptized in water first, to fulfil all righteousness, and then to be baptized in the Spirit, it ought really to be sufficient for you also.
on Jun 22, 2006
To I'mJustMe:

I now have to wonder if I'm ever going to have an enlightening experience with what could be 'my God' (who/that has eluded me thus far in life).


The more you want such an experience the less likely you are to receive it. The effect is called the 'lust for results'. Simply put, desire interfers with will. Stop wanting, start willing, and put all thought of what you want out of your mind. You'll be astonished at how quickly you'll be able to squeeze through the doors of the Throne Room and catch the eye of God.

But don't blame me if the attention you receive becomes more than you can bear.
on Jun 22, 2006
"Simon was the Penultimate, tongue-speaking, foot-stomping, slain-in-the-spirit Pentacostal for five years, and that was after He spent FOUR years as a Fire-Breathing Street Evangelist, accosting unsuspecting sinners wherever He could find them and telling them ALL about their condemned asses. One poor sap was cowed, teary eyed, into a corner after being the victim of His evangelistic derision for.....wearing a crucifix as an earring. (I'll leave Him to expound on why He found it so offensive at the time, as I have domestic drudgery to attend to before it gets too hot.)"

So he was a nut Christian and became a nut heretic. Scary.
And not to be an English major, but you're misusing penultimate unless you're trying to say he was a shitty Pentecostal.

"He was a zealots zealot, or at least He was until other zealots found Him too intimidating to associate with, he was you, KFC, magnified a thousand times, and He didn't waste His efforts hanging out in chat rooms and internet forums, He took it to the STREETS."

His efforts were wasted though if he was as much of a nut as you describe him to be.

"You won't win by quoting scripture with Him, He knows the bible (chapter and verse, entire huge tracts of it BY HEART) more intimately than any ordained minister I've ever met, His memory and retention is almost idiot-savant like in it's enormity, but where His true advantage lies (in any interaction with you, or people like you) is that He was once JUST like you, only to a much greater extreme."

I don't know KFC personally, but I doubt she is the Jack Chick wannabe your husband was. I do agree that she won't beat him in a Bible-quoting match. He does seem to be quite knowledgeable in that area, although I don't think his interpretations infallible (even though I agree with many of them). Regarding the necessity of baptism for salvation, from the Catechism: "For catechumens who die before their Baptism, their explicit desire to receive it, together with repentance for their sins, and charity, assures them the salvation that they were not able to receive through the sacrament." That said, I do agree that people who refuse to get baptized are not saved, because faith without works is dead and according to the Semitic Totality Concept, thoughts that don't lead to actions are vain, and if they truly loved the Lord, they would do what He asks. Perhaps EoIC was only talking about people who refuse to get baptized even though they can be and not those who intend to get baptized but cannot, so we might actually agree completely on this.
Anyway, off that tangent. Point is, he was not like KFC. Unless Christianity is only an outlet for some insane zealotry to her.
on Jun 22, 2006
I'm still reading.
on Jun 22, 2006
I'm still reading.

Me too.
on Jun 22, 2006
In no instance in the scriptures does baptism in the Spirit precede baptism in water. Nor can it,


OH REALLY? No instance? And you're the expert? Ok here we go. From Acts 10:44-48

While Peter yet spoke these words the Holy Spirit fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished as many as came with Peter because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost, for they heard them speak with the gift of tongues and magnify God. They answered Peter. Can any man forbid water that these shall not be baptized in the name of the Lord.

I will repeat. The HS is the only thing needed for Salvation. Water is not a requirement. Now if one refuses as SA wrote then I too would be suspicious of their salvation only because that is the first act of obedience.

Thank you SA. I am NOT anything like EOIC here. I do not force myself or my belief on no one. I like to debate but not if the other is not willing. I'm not a bully or a name caller. If someone says..back off....I'm gone. No problem. I've had that happen here on JU and I respect that. No problem.

It's by the hearing and believing HIS WORD we are saved, not by the water. Ps 119:9 says..

"How can a young man be cleansed? by taking care and heeding his word."

Jesus is the Word. He is the logos. The world started with his WORD "And God said..."Let there be light and there was light." Gen 1:3

and will end with it

Rev 19:15 "And out of his mouth came a sharp sword that with it he would smite the nations and he shall rule them with a rod of iron....

what is the sharp sword?

"For the word of God is quick and powerful and sharper than any twoedged sword piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit and of the joints and marrow and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart."
Heb 4:12

I am not about being right but all about pointing to the one who is. It's not about me. It's all about Jesus.

BTW LW...slain in the spirit? Would you like to explain that one? The only one in scripture I see slain in the spirit is Judas. He fell backwards so what you're saying is your husband followed after this example?
on Jun 22, 2006
Simon was the Penultimate, tongue-speaking, foot-stomping, slain-in-the-spirit Pentacostal for five years, and that was after He spent FOUR years as a Fire-Breathing Street Evangelist, accosting unsuspecting sinners wherever He could find them and telling them ALL about their condemned asses. One poor sap was cowed, teary eyed, into a corner after being the victim of His evangelistic derision for.....wearing a crucifix as an earring.


thanks for the info Lw but you're telling me what? How not to be like Christ here? Does this sound like Christ? How effective did this make him?

Let me ask you a question, 'Christian': at the time of Jesus' baptism in water, when did the dove (another insipid image of God) descend upon him and when was the voice heard that testified that this was the Son of God? Before or after his baptism in water? And, in case you can't find the relevant verses, I'll save you the work of looking for them.


Well if this is all you went by when reading the scriptures I'd agree with you. But we need to put all of the scriptures on the table and look a bit more closly.

First of all. Are you telling me that Jesus was not filled with the spirit before this? Hmmmm? Do you remember when he was still in the womb and John the Baptist lept in his mother's womb? What was that all about?

Also how about as a child, he was left behind in the temple teaching the learned Rabbis of the day. They were astonished at his doctrine. You know that scripture tells us it's the God's spirit that is the teacher of his word right? Well how'd this happen if he had no spirit in him before baptism?

Here all 3 Persons of the Trinity are clearly delineated. This is the Father’s command to hear His Son and the Spirit’s vindication and empowerment officially inaugurated Christ’s ministry.


Also John was told in 1:33 "And I knew him not but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said to me, 'Upon whom you shall see the spirit descending and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.' And I saw and bare record that this is the Son of God."


This dove was more to bear witness and show the relationship of all three here than anything else. This is where the trinity is first seen.

That's what our water baptism does. it bears witness, it doesn't save us. It doesn't jive with the rest of scripture.

You may know the scriptures EOIC, but you haven't put them all together yet so they make sense. Your pieces are all jumbled. Maybe that's why you don't believe it?

You may want to read John 8 particulary pay attention to v30-31 and compare to v41-42. They believed all right. But it was all Head knowledge and the heart was left unaffected.
on Jun 22, 2006
He was a zealots zealot,


Judas was a zealot also. Look what happened to him.
on Jun 22, 2006
To KFC:

First of all. Are you telling me that Jesus was not filled with the spirit before this? Hmmmm? Do you remember when he was still in the womb and John the Baptist lept in his mother's womb? What was that all about?


This was the testimony of John's spirit concerning the presence of the Christ, vouchsafed to him by grace through the Holy Spirit as a special instance and testimony of the power of God, and having no relevance to what we have discussed. Your introduction of it here is no man than a diversion, a straw man.

Also how about as a child, he was left behind in the temple teaching the learned Rabbis of the day. They were astonished at his doctrine. You know that scripture tells us it's the God's spirit that is the teacher of his word right? Well how'd this happen if he had no spirit in him before baptism?


The fruits of the Spirit have nothing whatever to do with knowledge of the law - which, as the son of Joseph, a God-fearing man, he would have had taught to him day by day by his earthly father. In case you're unconvinced...

Galations 5:22-23 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

This is yet another staw man.

John 1:33 And I knew him not but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said to me, Upon whom you shall see the spirit descending and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And I saw and bare record that this is the Son of God.

These are the words of John bearing witness to his faith and attesting his experience. The dove, as any Sunday School kindergartner will tell you, is the Holy Ghost.

"This dove was more to bear witness and show the relationship of all three here than anything else. This is where the trinity is first seen."

And this is straightforward, knowing, corruption of the scriptures you profess faith in.You may read back into this your trinitarian nonsense, but to those who heard and saw the events concerned they were nothing of the sort. Deu 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God [is] one LORD. Have you forgotten that Jews were and are monotheists, and that it was to Jews that John, and Jesus, and all the ancient Prophets spoke? Four hundred years ago they'd have burnt you at the stake for this - a custom now lamentably out of fashion.

That's what our water baptism does. it bears witness, it doesn't save us. It doesn't jive with the rest of scripture.


What you think of it is irrelevant - if you really are a Christian. The message of the scriptures, as I've amply demonstrated, is that there is no salvation without Baptism. You think God cares what you like or dislike?

You may want to read John 8 particulary pay attention to v30-31 and compare to v41-42. They believed all right. But it was all Head knowledge and the heart was left unaffected.


So. You want to cast me in the role of an unbelieving Jew and a member of the Synagogue of Satan? And after I've already, readily and happily, announced to the world that I'm an Apostate and Heretic? I no more believe in your Jesus than I do in the spiritual powers of the Eternal Artichoke, or in the Unavoidable Return of Our Holy Moonbat, so telling me that if I was one of the children of your 'Father God' I would believe in his mewling milksop Son is hardly going to be the revelatory and shocking news to me you hoped it would be, is it?

You may know the scriptures EOIC, but you haven't put them all together yet so they make sense. Your pieces are all jumbled. Maybe that's why you don't believe it?


I don't believe it because it's untrue. The 'Christ' you think you worship derives, in the end, from a failure to undertstand ancient Hebrew and the role and meaning of vowel symbols within it. The name 'Jesus' is not a name at all, but the Pentagrammaton, a title. A title that can belong to any man or woman who has the courage to crown himself or herself with it. I am my own 'Jesus', just as I am my own 'Adam'. As to what I believe for myself? I am a Ritual Magickian and I give honor to all the gods; to all the gods that, though they be dead, yet live. And that's more than enough explanation of my faith for the likes of you, little 'Christian'.
on Jun 22, 2006
To KFC:

Judas was a zealot also. Look what happened to him.


I am no longer a zealot (save when it comes to chastising unmitigated ignorance, overweening vanity and bloated ego on the part of self-proclaimed 'Christians who don't know the most basic principles of the faith they profess) - so the comparison is hardly apt, is it?

on Jun 22, 2006
To KFC:

While Peter yet spoke these words the Holy Spirit fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished as many as came with Peter because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost, for they heard them speak with the gift of tongues and magnify God. They answered Peter. Can any man forbid water that these shall not be baptized in the name of the Lord.


OK, so I gave in to irritation and got one wrong. Which hardly detracts from the main argument, but feel free to enjoy the sensation of being right - for once.

BTW LW...slain in the spirit? Would you like to explain that one? The only one in scripture I see slain in the spirit is Judas. He fell backwards so what you're saying is your husband followed after this example?


'Slain in the Spirit' is common nomenclature among Pentecostals for the rapture that descends on individual believers when they are possessed by the Holy Spirit in worship, usually causing the legs of the believer to collapse and he or she to pass into a quiet, trance-like state. If you aren't a Pentecostal it's not a term you are likely to recognise.
on Jun 22, 2006
If you aren't a Pentecostal it's not a term you are likely to recognise.


oh I recognize it all right. I don't think being slain in anything is a good thing. I beieve it's really coming from the occult. Possessed is an intersting term you used. It's not a "God thing." I don't think you've made a huge leap from one group to another as much as you think you did. Same thing...different name.


So. You want to cast me in the role of an unbelieving Jew and a member of the Synagogue of Satan? And after I've already, readily and happily, announced to the world that I'm an Apostate and Heretic? I no more believe in your Jesus than I do in the spiritual powers of the Eternal Artichoke, or in the Unavoidable Return of Our Holy Moonbat, so telling me that if I was one of the children of your 'Father God' I would believe in his mewling milksop Son is hardly going to be the revelatory and shocking news to me you hoped it would be, is it?


now you're making sense. This I agree with. Then why do you quote scripture all the time if you don't believe it?

oh and BTW it's not a contradiction to believe in one God and believe in the trinity as well. It's ONE God revealed in three persons. You see all in the OT as well. Browsw thru Isaiah sometime.

As always, EOIC...I enjoy chatting with you...but wish you'd leave some of the drama behind.
on Jun 22, 2006
"What you think of it is irrelevant - if you really are a Christian. The message of the scriptures, as I've amply demonstrated, is that there is no salvation without Baptism. You think God cares what you like or dislike?"

And what you think of it is irrelevant - if you are wrong. But then, you're of such arrogance that I guess you must be right, eh? Even when you're wrong, eh?

I have to admit though I was wrong when I said that KFC wouldn't beat you in a Bible-quoting match (and I hope to clarify that I did not mean that in an insulting way because I'm sure you would beat me in a Bible-quoting match because I don't have as much of the Bible memorized as you probably do). I think Acts 10:44-48 proves you wrong enough. It's clear that the Spirit preceded the baptism in this case. I see you didn't respond to that.

"And this is straightforward, knowing, corruption of the scriptures you profess faith in.You may read back into this your trinitarian nonsense, but to those who heard and saw the events concerned they were nothing of the sort. Deu 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God [is] one LORD. Have you forgotten that Jews were and are monotheists, and that it was to Jews that John, and Jesus, and all the ancient Prophets spoke?"

It should be clear to even the most naive apostate that Jesus believed in the trinity. He didn't speak of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost for nothing! And, I'll admit this is a bit of an assumption, I'm going to take John's reverence of Christ and his submission to Him as a sign that he did too. I even see signs of trinitarianism in the OT: Genesis 1, the three men who met with Abraham, the Angel of the Lord who was God and was sent by God). As for Deuteronomy 6:4, note the word used for one (echad). Also note that the verse was a declaration of allegiance and not a declaration of monotheism. You should've known that already, super theologian. To say that the OT doesn't speak of God as a composite unity because of one single verse that merely has the Israelites vowing allegiance only to YHWH is quite silly.
4 Pages1 2 3 4