Forward:

This is a forum post I did for an academic forum in response to another forumites rather racist comment.

Reason for writing this post:

In a debate about basic human rights.. more specifically, ‘The right to free speech’. I was informed by Sam that because I was a white South African I don’t really have a leg to stand on in regards to matters of racial debate.

Sam was under the impression or trying to convey the impression that basically all the worlds problems and the worlds atrocities are the result of white males (she is an Indian Muslim). When debating the history of her country… India, one of her posts implied that India was a country of roses and bunnies for 800 years before the English came along and colonized the area. Sam has also implied that when other cultures attacked the Asian continent, they were not as destructive as that of European colonization. I understand both these points she made to be wrong.

I believe Sam lacks the perspective to debate this kind of topic with any authority so in writing this I hope her, and others like her will have more information to draw from so as to have an informed opinion.

Working out a date:

The first point of Sam’s I am going to debate is that the 800 years before colonization by the English… everything had being okay in India. I believe this point to be fabricated and distant from the truth. However to go 800 years back was not as simple as I thought it would be. First I had to establish the date with which to work back from.

To be fair on Sam I am not going to take the date of British rule from when the British Crown got control of India in 1858 (British Raj) from the British East India Company with the `Government of India Act 1858’. I am going to go back to 1757 to the Battle of Plassay where the British East India Company defeated Siraj Ud Daulah and a consignment of French troops, and use that to work out the ‘800 years before British colonization’.

So the time period I will be working with is from 957 through to 1757.

Before 957 :

I am going to try to keep this period of History as short as possible as it happened before the time period I was given to work with. In 712 CE Muhammad bin-Qasim lead 6000 cavalry into Hindu controlled territory to crush the Sindhi. In those days, when a town was besieged the capture of towns was usually accomplished by means of a treaty with a party from among his "enemy", who were then extended special privileges and material rewards.

However, Qasim’s superior Hajjaj objected to this method and had the following to say;

“It appears from your letter that all the rules made by you for the comfort and convenience of your men are strictly in accordance with religious law. But the way of granting pardon prescribed by the law is different from the one adopted by you, for you go on giving pardon to everybody, high or low, without any discretion between a friend and a foe. The great God says in the Koran [47.4]: "0 True believers, when you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads." The above command of the Great God is a great command and must be respected and followed. You should not be so fond of showing mercy, as to nullify the virtue of the act. Henceforth grant pardon to no one of the enemy and spare none of them, or else all will consider you a weak-minded man.”

So in a communication following the one above, Hajjaj reiterated that all able-bodied men were to be killed, and that their underage sons and daughters were to be imprisoned and retained as hostages.

Qasim obeyed, and on his arrival at the town of Brahminabad massacred between 6,000 and 16,000 of the defending forces

957 to 1757:

Mahmud of Ghazn was an Afgan Sultan who invaded the Indian subcontinent in the 11th century. He was well known for his iconoclasm (destruction of religious icons and symbols) and for the destruction of many Hindu temples such as Mathura. He saw the destruction of these temples and the slaughter of the Hindu’s as act of ‘Jihad’.

Pradyumna Prasad Karan describes Mahmuds invasion as one in which he put "thousands of Hindu's to the sword" and made a pastime of "raising pyramids of the skulls of the infidels"

Mahmud of Ghazni also sacked the second Somnath Temple in 1026, and looted it of gems and precious stones and the famous Shiva lingam of the temple was destroyed and it's fragments taken away to Ghazni where they were used as stepping stones for a mosque.

Shahab-ul-Din, King of Gazni who rules from 1170 to 1206, killed Prithwi Raj, King of Ajmer and Delhi in cold blood. He massacred thousands of the inhabitants of Ajmer who opposed him, keeping the remainder for slavery.

In the Taj-ul-Ma’asir by Hassn Nizam-i-Naishapuri, it is stated that when Qutb-ul- Din Aibak (who ruled from 1194 to 1210) conquered Meerat, he demolished all the Hindu temples of the city and erected mosques on their sites.

In the city of Aligarh, he converted Hindu inhabitants to Islam by the sword and beheaded all those who adhered to their own religion.

Abdulia Wassaf writes in his Tazjiyat-ul-Amsar wa Tajriyat ul Asar that when Alaul- Din Khilji captured the city of Kambayat, he killed the adult male Hindu inhabitants for the glory of Islam, set flowing rivers of blood, sent the women of the country with all their gold, silver, and jewels, to his own home, and made about twenty thousand maidens his private slaves.

Ala-ul-Din once asked his Qazi’, "what is the Mohammadan law prescribed for the Hindus?"

The Qazi replied, “Hindus are like the mud; if silver is demanded from them, they must with the greatest humility offer gold. If a Mohammadan desire to spit into a Hindu’s mouth, the Hindu should open it wide for the purpose. God created the Hindus to be slaves of the Mohammadans. The Prophet hath ordained that, if the Hindus do not accept Islam, they should be imprisoned, tortured, finally put to death, and their property confiscated.”

Sayad Mohammad Latif writes in his history of the Punjab, “Great jealousy and hatred existed those days between the Hindus and Mohammadans and the whole non-Muslim population was subject to persecution by the Mohammadan rulers.”

The first Muslim Empire of India, the Sultanate of Delhi, was established in 1210 CE by Turkic tribes that invaded the subcontinent from Afghanistan. Many temples were looted and destroyed. This includes the destruction of the Somnath.

Muhammad Ghori committed genocide against Hindus at Koi (Aligarh), Kalinjar and Varanasi, according to Hasan Nizami's Taj-ul-Maasir, 20,000 Hindu prisoners were slaughtered and their heads offered to crow

Timur bin Taraghay Barlas was a warlord of Turco-Mongol descent who ruled from 1336 to 1405. He was the founder of the Timurid Empire.

Timur crossed the Indus River at Attock. The capture of towns and villages was often followed by the massacre of their inhabitants and the raping of their women, as well as pillaging to support his massive army. Timur wrote many times in his memoirs of his specific disdain for the 'idolatrous' Hindus.

Timur himself recorded the invasions in his memoirs, collectively known as Tuzk-i-Timuri... and here are a couple of paragraphs out of it;

“In a short space of time all the people in the [New Delhi] fort were put to the sword, and in the course of one hour the heads of 10,000 infidels were cut off. The sword of Islam was washed in the blood of the infidels, and all the goods and effects, the treasure and the grain which for many a long year had been stored in the fort became the spoil of my soldiers. They set fire to the houses and reduced them to ashes, and they razed the buildings and the fort to the ground....All these infidel Hindus were slain, their women and children, and their property and goods became the spoil of the victors. I proclaimed throughout the camp that every man who had infidel prisoners should put them to death, and whoever neglected to do so should himself be executed and his property given to the informer. When this order became known to the ghazis of Islam, they drew their swords and put their prisoners to death.

One hundred thousand infidels, impious idolators, were on that day slain. Maulana Nasiruddin Umar, a counselor and man of learning, who, in all his life, had never killed a sparrow, now, in execution of my order, slew with his sword fifteen idolatrous Hindus, who were his captives....on the great day of battle these 100,000 prisoners could not be left with the baggage, and that it would be entirely opposed to the rules of war to set these idolaters and enemies of Islam at liberty...no other course remained but that of making them all food for the sword.”

It should be noted that Timur had to use 90 captured elephants to take his spoils of precious stones and gems back to his capital Oxus.

Other notable Muslim leaders at the time Qutb-ud-din Aibak and Shams-ud-din Iltutmish were also both Islamic rulers who desecrated and destroyed Hindu holy sites and subsequently built mosque's over the sites.

Firuz Shah Tughluq was the third ruler of the Tughlaq dynasty of the Delhi Sultanate. The "Tarikh-i-Firuz Shah" is a historical record written during his reign that attests to the systematic persecution of Hindus under his rule.

In particular, it records atrocities committed against Hindu Brahmin priests who refused to convert to Islam;

"An order was accordingly given to the Brahman and was brought before Sultan. The true faith was declared to the Brahman and the right course pointed out. But he refused to accept it. A pile was risen on which the Kaffir with his hands and legs tied was thrown into and the wooden tablet on the top. The pile was lit at two places his head and his feet. The fire first reached him in the feet and drew from him a cry and then fire completely enveloped him. Behold Sultan for his strict adherence to law and rectitude"

Under his rule, Hindus who were forced to pay the mandatory Jizya tax were recorded as infidels, their communities monitored and, if they violated Imperial ordinances and built temples, they were destroyed. In particular, an incident in the village of Gohana in Haryana was recorded in the "Insha-i-Mahry" (another historical record written by Amud Din Abdullah bin Mahru) where Hindus had erected a deity and were arrested, brought to the palace and executed en-masse.

Vijayanagra was a city flourished between the 14th and 16th centuries, during the height of the Vijayanagar Empire. During this time, it was often in conflict with the kingdoms which rose in the Northern Deccan, and which are often collectively termed the Deccan Sultanates. The period saw brutalities committed by the Muslim Side. In 1565, the empire's armies suffered a massive and catastrophic defeat by an alliance of the Sultanates, and the capital was taken. The victorious armies then razed, depopulated and destroyed the city over a period of several months. The empire continued its slow decline, and its original capital was not re-occupied or rebuilt.

The Mughal Empire was marked by periods of tolerance of non-Muslims, such as Hindus, Christians and Sikhs, as well as periods of violent oppression and persecution of those people. The reign of Aurangzeb was particularly brutal. No aspect of Aurangzeb's reign is more cited - or more controversial - than the numerous desecrations and even the destruction of Hindu temples. Aurangzeb banned Diwali, placed a jizya on non-Muslims and martyred the ninth Sikh guru Tegh Bahadur. The confrontation with the Sikhs saw Aurangzeb and his henchmen commit an endless series of atrocities against Sikhs among them the tortuous execution of several Sikhs including the eight and ten year old sons of Guru Gobind Singh by live-burial.

During his reign, tens of thousands of temples were desecrated: their facades and interiors were defaced and their murtis (divine images) looted. In many cases, temples were destroyed entirely; in numerous instances mosques were built on their foundations, sometimes using the same stones. Among the temples Aurangzeb destroyed were two that are most sacred to Hindus, in Varanasi and Mathura. In both cases, he had large mosques built on the sites.

The Kesava Deo temple in Mathura, marked the place that Hindus believe was the birth place of Shri Krishna. In 1661 Aurangzeb ordered the demolition of the temple, and constructed the Katra Masjid mosque. Traces of the ancient Hindu temple can be seen from the back of the mosque. Aurangzeb also destroyed what was the most famous temple in Varanasi- the Vishwanath Temple. The temple had changed its location over the years, but in 1585 Akbar had authorized its location at Gyan Vapi. Aurangzeb ordered its demolition in 1669 and constructed a mosque on the site.

Aurangzeb also destroyed the Somnath temple in 1706 and Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, at the birthplace of the Hindu deity Rama.

Conclusion:

The Prof. K.S. Lal, suggests a calculation in his book 'Growth of Muslim Population in Medieval India' which estimates that between the years 1000 AD and 1500 AD the population of Hindus decreased by 80 million.

Will Durant debates in his 1935 book 'The Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage';

“The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. The Islamic historians and scholars have recorded with great glee and pride the slaughters of Hindus, forced conversions, abduction of Hindu women and children to slave markets and the destruction of temples carried out by the warriors of Islam during 800 AD to 1700 AD. Millions of Hindus were converted to Islam by sword during this period.”

Or as Braudel put it;

"The massacres perpetuated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese."

"The levies it had to pay were so crushing that one catastrophic harvest was enough to unleash famines and epidemics capable of killing a million people at a time. Appalling poverty was the constant counterpart of the conquerors' opulence"

There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Muslims. Estimates have stated that over 13 centuries and over the entire subcontinent, the number of Hindus who died at the hands of the Muslims goes up into the tens of millions. On several occasions, the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed around 80,000-100,000 Hindus in a short period of time, which they set as a minimum goal, during their anti-Hindu campaigns.

I would like to conclude by saying that the Islamic invasion of Hindu civilization was infinitely more bloody than the colonization of India by the British. If anything the colonization of India by the British mostly seemed to have stopped the constant genocide of the Hindus at the hands of the Muslims.

I therefore claim that Sams cultural ancestors decimated the Hindu population far greater than my own English ancestors and her point that everything was fine in the preceding 800 years to British occupation was a fabrication.

Sams point that the British colonization of India was more destructive than the civilizations that conquered India before also to be a fabrication.

The point of this post was two fold. One, to show Sam that the comments she made were incorrect by a long shot… and to show her that every single nation, of every single race, of every single religion is responsible for the most heinous of crimes against his and her fellow man, and that the destruction of civilization and the invasion of other people is not a “whites only” club. Her ancestors have just as much blood on their hands as mine.

People are people, they are all capable of the most insidious of evils and the greatest of kindness`s.

I woke up this morning to the headline, "Gareth accused of blasphemy", and I just shook my head and thought... poor Gareth. Gareth is on the receiving end of South Africa`s rather large dumb club. At first I thought that news report was going to deal with Gareth's reading of "The 9 Most Badass Bible Verses" that he did the other morning on 5FM. What I thought was so ironical about that show is that he was simply quoting from the Bible... and still the freaks in our society got upset about it... but more on that later. Here is one of the Biblical phrases that Gareth read out on air:

That show instantly mobilized all the Christians with no clue and within hours petitions were running around the Internet calling for him to be pulled off the air. Clearly those Christians think that their God is pretty useless and if offended by what Gareth had to say needed these plebeians to run around the Internet for it, because they seem to think that God is too weak to do anything about it himself. Seriously people.. what ARE you thinking?

Here's a perfect example of one of the many simpletons on the Internet. Her name is Gerda and she clearly thinks that praying does not help, so what she did was go and write a HelloPeter complaint about what Gareth had said on air. Does Gerda seem to think that HelloPeter is more powerful than a prayer to her God?

If you look at that first link I posted to the News24 story you will notice the Hitler Youth in our society had this to say about Gareth;

June Jousten,"What really gets to me, is that this seems to happen on a daily basis and that the South African Broadcasting Association does little to zero about it."

June... you are a hypocrite straight out of the starting block. The SABC regularly uses our tax money on Sunday morning SAFM shows to broadcast, "Songs of Praise" to everyone. Whether they want to listen to it or not. There are a lot of people (a real lot of people) out there who really don't wanna listen to that and I am sure more than a few are offended by it. However, we tolerate it. Now Gareth clearly has an opinion that differs to yours and just like you, Gareth is allowed to view his opinion and his beliefs. Tolerance is a two way street, but you only seem to get upset when its not going in your direction.

Tell you what, we can make a deal with you June. Remove all the religious propaganda that is on public radio and we will then promise not make comments on it, but as long as you are shoving religious dogma and your point of view down other peoples necks, expect there to be a balance of opinion.

The next comment was by someone called Gerda-Mari Povey who had this to say about Gareth, "You know what, Gareth, I love your show, but this morning u shocked me!!!! just wanted to say, God is not petty!!!!!

"I pray that something drastic will happen in your life, that will allow you to experience the loving kindness and mercy of God..."

"As a Christian, I really felt offended," she told News24. "He (Gareth) should have more respect for people's religion. He has offended many of his listeners."

"What if my children had heard his comments. It was very irresponsible of him. I'm normally the kind of person who just keeps quiet, but this time it was just too much."

Gerda, you are clearly the person who made the Hellopeter post and clearly confused. You ask what had would have happened if your kids had heard it? What about my kids having to listen to the religious rubbish spewed out on TV and radio waves? You are wanting to brainwash my kids into believing in your fairytale but are not happy if there is an opposing point of view. Since your God clearly didn't give a poo when you prayed to him you then took it a step further and asked called for Gareth to be pulled of the air. Have you ever heard the saying, "Ban a book today burn a person tomorrow"? Just because you don't like hearing something does not give you any permission to have it removed from the air.

South Africans... and I suppose other dumb people around the world have this weird Hitler fetish to want to ban anything they don't like listening to. They seem to think that they can instill their fascism onto you. Free speech doesn't work like that Gerda. The most important type of free speech to allow is that that you hate hearing the most. Take that pious carrot out of your ass Gerda and allow people to have different points of view to your own, because despite what you may think.. you don't know everything and your are NOT always right. The world is made up of many different people with many different points of view and if you had your neo-nazi way, you would like everyone to think and believe what you do.

People like you disgust me. You are the poster child for a lot of whats wrong in the world. If you don't like what Gareth is saying.. DONT LISTEN. Change the station or switch it off. There's no need to go instill your religious fanaticism on other people. Its like if you don't like what I am writing. DONT READ IT. Yeah.. a little self moderation will get you very far.

I totally agree with Gareth's comment;

"If God is great, why would he be so easily offended by what a mortal man says? If God has such an ego, then he must be petty."

Gerda and June.. if God has a problem with what Gareth said do you not think he is big enough to deal with it himself? Do you really think he is so weak that he needs people like you running around doing his chores for him? Do you understand the term "omnipotence"?

Its no wonder South Africa is in the mess it is with people like this running around. I am sure God would rather want Gerda and June to be out amongst the poorest of the poor.. trying to uplift people and ease their suffering.. instead.. they're think they have being given Gods baton to beat anyone into submission who has a different point of view. Gerda.. instead of starting useless petitions to stifle free speech and to take away basic human rights from people, why don't you go down to your local squatter camp and feed a starving poor kid? Oh wait.. its easier to sit on your ass, to pretend you know what God wants, and to start useless petition emails.

The nice thing about this is that people who wanna tell you what to think and say like Gerda... are in a minority. In a recent poll on one of South Africa`s most popular websites, over 88% of people thought that what Gareth had said was acceptable. That at least is a heartening sign that the sickness of censorship is not as wide spread as it used to be.

UPDATE:

This spam dropped into my inbox and for once it was not a Nigerian harvesting email address`s but something rather worse.

Hi everyone,

Can we please draw up a petition that Gareth Cliff publicly apologises for
offending listeners or resigns failing that we will stop supporting 5fm
and stop listening to the show completely.

If we managed to get the "Satanism promoter" to leave Rapport I am sure we
can get the desired effect with Gareth Cliff

Please put your name at the bottom of this e-mail and forward every 100
names to tanyal@firsttech.co.za

I will be sending all the names of all the listeners that feel the same to
Broad Casting Complaints SA

I attach my response to the reply he sent to Gerda-Mari Povey.

Let's show Gareth how "petty" God's people can be.

So feel free either to voice your support, or email your annoyance to that bolded email address.

A member of the MyAdsl forum has mentioned that you can use this as a template.

Dear Tanya,

Today I received an email petition, apparently co-ordinated by yourself, in an attempt to remove Gareth Cliff from the air because he has different beliefs to you.

I'm extremely concerned about people like yourself - you're clearly part of that increasingly vocal and beligerent minority of fundamentalists, predominantly Christians, in South Africa who have recenly co-ordinated a number of attempts to silence voices that do not conform to your world view.

Please understand that we live in an open, democratic society that enshrines in its constitution the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression. Historically, one of the first steps in a fascist state has always been to destroy voices of dissent. As soon as open discourse in a society is disallowed, the fundamental foundation of all personal freedoms is undermined. Also understand that the very constitution that enables people like Gareth Cliff to openly say what he believes is the same constitution that allows you to gather in fellowship with your Christian bretheren every Sunday.

In a multicultural society, all walks of life should be able to practise their own beliefs and voice thier own opinions. You may disagree with them, but frankly, as long as they're not inflicting harm on others, it's not up to you or anybody else to dictate how they live their lives. Please desist from your public bullying of those whom you deem unsavoury.

Have a lovely evening, I know I will - I'm off to watch The Golden Compass.

Regards

Carl

Please feel free to email this on to all your friends ask them to let Tanya know what they all feel.

I really wish Christian fundamentalists would try be more honest. The more I find out about these people, the more sick I get in my stomach at their just outright dishonesty and their method of using slimy dirty tactics to try push their point of view onto the unsuspecting.

Their latest form of deception involves buying Google ads on topics that they know nothing about. Let me give you an example. Go to http://www.google.com and start a search for the phrase, "evolution". Have a look at the sponsored links that pop up!

Clearly that tithe that God.. or more correctly... his "followers", tell you to pay (we all know how short on cash a God can be) ...is being terribly spent. Apparently paying out of Church coffers to push your own information dishonesty agenda is allowed in some circles in Christendom. How sick.

What is it with Christian fundamentalists and their lack of honesty? Surely such deception should also upset the intelligent and moderate Christians as much as it has upset me? One of the smartest people I know in the Christian world (also one of the smartest people I know all round) Francis Collins, said that people who push this type of information dishonesty... "make faith look foolish".(1)

It was people like these Christian fundamentalists that where the first to push me away from Christianity. I grew up with a pretty conservative background so I was dropped in the deep end, but being the person I am, I don't take "facts" at face value and usually end up researching things I am told. When I found out I was being lied to constantly by Christian fundamentalists I started loosing a lot of my faith. If they are lying about this simple concept to me.. what else are they lying to me about?

I could not accept that God wanted me to push a lie to make himself look better. It is also these Christian fundamentalists that are either by design or stupidity... upsetting a lot of intelligent people out there and forcing a schism between Christianity and secular society.

Since I am really annoyed at the moment by what these Christian fundamentalists are doing, I thought I would clear up a few things, so I would like to educate you on the most common lies and dirty tactics that Christian fundamentalists practice:

1) You cant believe in the theory of evolution and be a Christian.

Well that's a whopper of note but lets have a look at their reasoning to making a daft statement like that. Since they are absolutely convinced that the Bible is the infallible word of God, they believe that the theory of evolution contradicts the Moses books of Genesis, and step on Gods toes in the matter of Creation.

However to be more clear, Genesis conflicts with most modern science, including and not limited to; biology, geology, anthropology, archaeology, cosmology, astronomy and countless others. However, Genesis only conflicts with those areas of study if you have a literal interpretation of it. Yes, there are actually some people who believe that Genesis should be taken literally and not as the metaphorical explanation of Creation it is.

You can very much be a Christian and believe in evolution. As a matter of fact, more Christians believe in evolution than those who do not.

2) Evolution is a theory, not a fact.

When you hear this lie you should instantly know you are dealing with someone who has absolutely know idea on how science works and therefore should not pretend to debate it with any type of authority. As I have explained in previous posts, a theory does not become a fact. A theory explains a fact. Fact.. things fall, the theory of gravity explains how and why they fall. Fact.. life changes and is different, the theory of evolution tries to explain why life changes and why their is diversity.

Also, a theory in science is not used in the same way that the word theory is thrown around in normal day to day speak. So I have taken this bit of information straight out of wiki for you to digest:

"In common usage, people often use the word theory to signify a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements which would be true independently of what people think about them. In this usage, the word is synonymous with hypothesis.

In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theories commonly used to describe and explain this behaviour are Newton's theory of universal gravitation, and general relativity." (2)

Christian fundamentalists love warping the English language to suite their needs so watch out for this.

3) The theory of evolution can not be proved

There are many proofs to the theory of evolution. Since this is a pretty silly lie, I will give you a couple of links to research the proofs behind the theory of evolution yourself:

- http://www.mala.bc.ca/~johnstoi/essays/courtenay1.htm (The short proof of evolution)
- http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/ (29 evidences for evolution)

I would also like to counter this argument with the following statement. YOU CANT PROOVE THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION WRONG. Yup, and if you know someone who says they can, be sure to drop me an email so I can get them nominated for a Nobel Prize. They would surely rock the academic world and would definitely deserve it.

4) Darwin said we evolved from monkeys and chimps

Darwin said no such thing. If anyone could show me a single peer reviewed scientific article that says such a thing I will personally print out an apology on this side. The truth of the matter is Darwin did not say we evolved from monkeys. He said monkeys and humans evolved from the same ancestral primate. I believe our genetic lines split around seven million years ago.

5) Darwin recanted on his death bed (yes Rudy.. you told me this one.. I wont forget)

I'm going to quote directly from a source for this one as it deals with this lie pretty nicely;

"This is completely fabricated and has no foundation in truth whatsoever. A woman named “Lady Hope” spoke to a church group shortly after the death of Charles Darwin. She claimed that she was at Darwin’s bedside on the day of his death. She also claimed that Darwin recanted on evolution and accepted Jesus on his deathbed. Her claims are not only unsupported, but are directly opposed by Darwin’s daughter, Henrietta. Henrietta stated “I was present at his deathbed, Lady Hope was not present during his last illness, or any illness. I believe he never even saw her, but in any case she had no influence over him in any department of thought or belief. My father never recanted any of his scientific views, either then or earlier. I am upset that the U.S. Christians have fabricated this conversion nonsense. The whole story has no foundation whatever.” February 23, 1922."

6) Evolution is about the origins of life and the universe

This is about the biggest whopper of a misconception in the theory of evolution. Its also one of the favorite lies used by fundamentalists, because the whole "primordial ooze" concept is pretty hard for a lot of people to understand and get their heads around.. but this has nothing to do with the theory of evolution. The theory of evolution has NOTHING to do with either the origin of life.. or the creation of the universe.

The origin of life is covered by a hypothesis called abiogenesis. Evolution simply assumes that there was a life form, and from there it takes over. It does not cover the origin of life on any level.

I will stop at those for now, there are a real lot more, but those are by far the most common Christian fundamentalist lies I have come across while researching and talking about the theory of evolution. Before I leave the topic of Darwin and evolution though I thought I would just share this bit of trivia with you. Darwin did not use the word, "evolution" once in his book on natural selection called, "Origin of the species". The theory had being around long before Darwin got onto the scene and was even being discussed back in the days of ancient Greece. Darwin was able to identify and document the important process of natural selection.

To the Christian fundamentalists who read this I would like to close off with the ninth commandment:

Exodus 20:16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

Now I am sure that if you are a Christian fundamentalist, and have a literal interpretation of the Bible (I really hope you truly do follow ALL the laws in Leviticus and Deuteronomy), that at the very least.. you can obey God and those all important commandments. Otherwise you are simply just your every day bigot and hypocrite.

1 - http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1553986-1,00.html
2- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory

I was busy watching episode 1 of season 10 of South Park called, "The return of chef" when I noticed (very quickly) that there was something different about this episode. The first thing that was out of place was that it featured the South Park character "Chef" who had recently quit the show because of the South Park episode on the cult Scientology called "Trapped in the closet". The next thing I noticed was the analogy between the "Super Adventure Club" featured in 'The return of Chef' and Scientology. The third thing that grabbed my attention was the strange sounding Chef, and it quickly dawned on my that they had spliced various audio recordings and put them together to make it look like Chef was in the episode... however they also made it pretty clear that it was spliced sound.

I am not going to go into too many details about the episode "The return of Chef", but a quick look on wikipedia should bring up any relevant spoiler information you might want to look up. To get a better idea of where I am going with this article I am going to first write about the episode, "Trapped in the closet". In this episode Matt and Trey show what Scientologists actually believe and have a good go at John Travolta and Tom Cruise's alleged homosexual tendencies. It also shows what Scientologists really believe:

Most of you out there may not have watched this episode as the cult Scientology was very very quick to move on it. After the first episode was aired the Scientologists managed to bribe/blackmail *cough* sorry.. bad choice of words... managed to convince a judge to throw the American constitution and the all important right of free speech out the window. The episode was never aired again publicly but luckily the Internet is the one place that free speech truly exists and bootleg copies are very easily available to download.

Since the 1990`s Isaac Hayes the man who is the voice of the South Park character Chef has been involved with episodes that have insulted Jews, Mormons, Christians and just about every other religious group you can think of. When the episode "Trapped in the closet" aired he suddenly found the need to try take the moral high-ground and quit the show, claiming that South Park was to "intolerant and bigoted".... strangely he never felt that way with the other religious groups that were being ragged.

Now at this point I want to clarify the term bigot. Saying, "all religions are terrible and wrong" is not bigotry. Saying, "Your religion is wrong and mine is right" is bigotry. So Isaac Hayes had no problem at all with the South Park episodes that dealt with other religions, but all of a sudden was offended when it involved his own cult religious group. I am sorry Isaac...Matt and Trey are not bigots, like me they are equal opportunity offenders. You sir on the other hand are the real Mccoy.. a bottom of the barrel hypocritical bigot. If you are going on about intolerance, how about your own intolerance? Such as not been able to tolerate that South Park episode?

Now that I have got my opinion out the way of the silly Mr Hayes I am going to move onto the wife beating junkie known as L. Ron Hubbard who started up this stupidity. Where do I start? This guy has such a terrible record it would take an entire book to scratch the surface of his depravity, however I will go through a couple of the highlights just to give you a better perspective on what I mean and how I came to my reasoning, but first, lets talk about the man L. Ron Hubbard.

L. Ron Hubbard was born on the March 13, 1911 in Nebraska and it became clear from an early age that he had some serious problems. He was quickly reconised as a pathological liar and sociopath and when researching his life I felt like I was wading through a pond of scum where I couldn't quite get my footing. There was just so much information to deal with and as I mentioned before, it would take a book to cover it all. So for the sake of saving you time and my website space I am going to give you a couple of highlights.

Its pretty clear that L. Ron Hubbard himself recognised he was not a functional member of society and when he was in still in school he mailed the Veteran's Administration and begged for psychiatric help. He was unable to afford the help and in his letter to the Veteran's Administration he pleaded for free treatment. It can be safely assumed that the rejection for not been treated for free by the Veteran's Administration lead to his misguided hate towards all psychiatrists.

L. Ron Hubbard was a con-artist and a thief. He was arrested several times by both the local law agencies and the FBI for fraud and petty theft while trying to rip people off for his ever growing consumption of dangerous narcotics. It would be a drug habit that he would never throw off for the rest of his life. L. Ron Hubbard was an admitted racist and he often praised the old South African government for its Apartheid policies. If you have a look through his journal you will be able to clearly see his racist tendencies. Here is a quote taken from his personal journal while on a trip to China:

""As a Chinaman can not live up to a thing, he always drags it down." and "They smell of all the baths they didnt [sic] take. The trouble with China is, there are too many chinks here.""

Being a racist, a pathological liar, a thief and a drug junkie was not enough for L. Ron Hubbard, it appears there were still many laws and basic human rights that he still had to break. Ron seemed to have a sincere fetish for the occult and satanism and regularly practiced satanic rights with a "Black Magician" by the name of Jack Parsons.

A couple of years earlier Ron had married a lady by the name of Margaret Grubb but seemed to forget her and his children when he went galavanting around the world. So much so that while staying with Jack Parson and participating in "sex magick" he married Jack`s girlfriend Sara Northup. This bigamous relationship certainly did not last long and rather than file for a divorce he drove Sara to suicide with the use of regular torture and brutal beatings. Sara's divorce papers also accused Hubbard of kidnapping their baby daughter Alexis, and of conducting "systematic torture, beatings, strangulations and scientific torture experiments." It was suggested by the divorce court that Ron stay at a private sanitarium for psychiatric observation and treatment for paranoid schizophrenia.

Nothing I could find on L. Ron Hubbard could lead me to believe he was a decent human being. He lied about everything and to everyone. If he claimed to have a doctorate, my research would who show that he did not even finish university. If he claimed to be a nuclear physicist my research would show that he attended one semester on nuclear physics which he failed.

Its at this point I have to leave the life of L. Ron Hubbard otherwise this article would never come to an end. I just want you to consider this quote from L. Ron Hubbard Jr, "I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." For those of you who do not believe any of the above claims I have made about Lafayette Ronald Hubbard (With a first name like that I can see why he went around calling himself Ron) and think I am making any of it up, I will be supplying a link at the end of this article which contains ORIGNAL court transcripts, police records, navy records and doctor reports all pertaining to Lafayette Ronald Hubbard. Do the research yourself.

So now I would like to get back to Isaac Hayes formerly from South Park. I have to assume that Isaac Hayes left South Park for his respect and belief in Hubbard so I therefore have to assume that Isaac Hayes approves of all of L. Ron Hubbard's actions. Its very strange for me to think that Isaac Hayes ( a black man ) would have so much reverence for someone who clearly thought that anyone who was not a white male was inferior. To drive the point home lets take another quote out of Hubbard's personal journals,

""Unlike the yellow and brown people, the white does not usually believe he can get attention from matter or objects. The yellow and brown believe for the most part ... that rocks, trees, walls, etc., can give them attention" and "...so we see the African tribesman, with his complete contempt for the truth, and his emphasis on brutality and savagery...""

And how about Ron's comment about the forced relocation of black people in South Africa during Apartheid;

"Having viewed slum clearance projects in most major cities of the world may I state that you have conceived and created in the Johannesburg townships what is probably the most impressive and adequate resettlement activity in existence."

Clearly Isaac, you are more dumber than I thought... You do realize you are black and that Hubbard hated your people? I honestly can not imagine what kind of stupid you have to be, to follow the teachings of L. Ron Hubbard. If you want to find the most idiotic and gullible group of people in the world simply head over to your local Scientology office and have a look around. It should be dead easy to convince them to hand over their money if the Scientologists have not taken it all already.

L. Ron Hubbard makes Muhammad the prophet look like Jesus Christ, and I seriously can not respect anyone idiotic enough to follow his teachings. If Isaac Hayes is going to insist on following his current course of action then I can only say, "good riddance to bad rubbish" . There is still so much about Scientology that I want to share with you, and as soon as I have a moment I will write an article about what really goes on behind the Scientological iron curtain. To finish this article off I would just like to say something to Tom Cruise, "Its okay to come out of the closet Tom!"

Links for your own research:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L._Ron_Hubbard
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Hayes
http://www.ronthenut.org/ (contains original court transcripts and FBI files)
http://www.lermanet.com (contains original navy records and police records)

And in the immoral words of Trey Parker and Matt Stone, servants of the dark lord Xenu;

""So, Scientology, you may have won THIS battle, but the million-year war for earth has just begun! Temporarily anozinizing our episode will NOT stop us from keeping Thetans forever trapped in your pitiful man-bodies. Curses and drat! You have obstructed us for now, but your feeble bid to save humanity will fail! Hail Xenu!!!""

Is the Bible the word of God?

I hear it all the time, "The Bible is the word of God", and "the only way to God is through the Bible", so this got me thinking about Gods word and how fickle it is. To put my thinking into perspective lets got way back in Christianity to the time just after Jesus died. As an early Christian God decided you did not need a Bible. Jesus certainly did not have one, and neither did any of his disciples.

It was a pretty hard following all the Biblical codex`s back in time, but I have tried to be as accurate as possible.

The first Christian "Bible" I could find was a Greek translation of the Old Testament called the Septuagint. It was different to the Hebrew canon in that it contained books called, "anagignoskomena" (that's a mouthful!). It was only a couple of hundred years later that the Old Testament and the New Testament were put into the same book. However it was very different to the Bible we know of today. It included books like the Book of Nehemiah, Esdras and the Book of Esther. This early Bible was called the Codex Vaticanus.

I will quote what Tertullian had to say about the early versions of the the this Bible, "This may be understood to be the Divine Word, who is doubly edged with the two testaments of the law and the gospel"

A couple of years later another version of the "Word of God" was written called the Codex Sinaiticus. It too based its Old Testament content on the Greek Orthodox Septuagint. It was to be called the Codex Sinaiticus. Codex Sinaiticus is written in Greek like the Codex Vaticanus and included such books as the Epistle of Barnabas, and The Shepherd of Hermas .

Now things go pretty well for another 200 years and then God decides new revisions to His Word need to be done, so he contacts this bloke called Jerome (who at the time is a womaniser in Pope Damasus's court), and asks Jerome to translate the Bible from Greek into Latin. However God has a change of mind and decides to deviate from tradition and instructs Jerome not to use the Greek Septuagint as his source for the Old Testament but rather to use Hebrew Tanakh. The oldest known copy of the Vulgate Bible is known as the Codex Amiatinus.

Not many changes happened after this as the Church consolidated its power and everyone became religious. We call this time period the Dark Age. A time when human ingenuity was regarded as sacrilege and anyone who defied or questioned "the Word of God" was often tortured to death.

It was not until 1388 when John Wycliffe created the first English version of the Bible (based on Vulgate), that the common English world got to read the Bible, but God was not finished changing His Word yet.

In 1546 God got involved in Catholic / Protestant Church politics and called together the Council of Trent whereby through the "guidance of God", the Catholics came to the conclusion that the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed was still right and that the deuterocanonical books really should be in the Bible. Gods Word got revisions in both 1563 with the Anglican Thirty-Nine Articles and the Westminster Confession of Faith of 1647 for Calvinism.

Even today the Bible is still being revised. A couple of weeks ago they found an ancient papyrus of the book Relevations. It was discovered in that Book of Revelations that the "Mark of the Beast" is not "666" but rather, "616".

If the Bible really is the "Word of God" then God word appears to be as fickle as that of man and man's politics. I also got to asking myself, If the Bible has changed so often in its history, who is to say that it is not going to change in the future? Do Christians assume the Word of God to be static and therefore will not investigate further or do they understand there are more changes to come?

While researching this topic I came to the conclusion that a subject as vast and complex of the origins of Biblical scripts and how they came to be in the Bible could not be covered in a simple blog post. I have done my best to give you quick run down on the basic development of the Bible but in truth there is a lot more information and many more factors that contributed towards its evolution.

Over the next couple of weeks I am going to be looking into more specific events on the Biblical Highway. There are some very interesting events in the History of Christianity that I would like to introduce to you as the months go on such as Apocrypha, the Council of Nicea and how the Bishop Irenaeus decided to use only 4 of the 12 Gospels.

Today I read how some teachers in the United Kingdom are taking their political beliefs of political correctness too far. They have stopped teaching their students about the Holocaust because it might offend the more ignorant Muslim students in their classrooms, who due to indoctrination are in Holocaust Denial.

Firstly to deny the Holocaust you have to be a complete idiot not willing to find the out the real truth, so in that regard I have absolutely no tolerance towards Holocaust Denial. Millions of Jewish people died in the Holocaust and the mountain of evidence (including eyewitness testimony still available today), there is no valid reason to deny the Holocaust.

To deny such a tragic event in our history is laying the road to repeat it again. A wise man once said that those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it.

Those people in the Muslim countries who are being taught that the Holocaust did not happen should be questioning those beliefs. As mentioned the evidence is overwhelming and it is pretty easy to find more truthful information. If you are still in denial after understanding the evidence then you honestly are a waste of humanity. I have not time for you or your religious and politically based lies.

Denying the Holocaust is not limited to some dumb Muslim, I know a fair amount of dumb Christians in the extremist Adventist camp who also deny the holocaust happened. When you discuss theology with these christian extremists you will find the sound of their dogma is very similar to that of the misguided Muslim. Kill the unbeliever and all that toss.

There are certain limits to my tolerance of religious which is actually pretty liberal, but there are certain places I will make a stand. If you tell me God is actually the Flying Spaghetti Monster I would look at you, nod my head and ponder how you came to that conclusion, however if you tell me the holocaust did not happen and I certainly know it did, I am going to tell you, that you are lying and if you do not learn or understand I am going to tell others that you are lying.

When Muslims deny the Holocaust, the first thought that comes through my mind is the word, "liar". Anything you say after that expect me to treat with equal skepticism. I see the Holocaust denialist in the same light I see the African rural man who believes sleeping with a virgin will cure his AIDS.

Holocaust denial comes directly from ignorance and racism. When you deny the Holocaust you do to Islam what the Evolutionary denialists do to Christianity, and make faith look foolish.

I do not have a problem with freedom of religion, but just sometimes there should be freedom from religion.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=445979&in_page_id=1770

*EDIT:I have stated this before but I better do it again. Where I refer to the term African, I use it in the context of "someone from Africa". I am an African. Thanks.

When researching information out there in regards to certain scientific theories I came across a lot of pseudoscience websites that try pass themselves off as real science. A lot of the information contained in these sites is false. These sites seem to appear to push their own religious agenda's as real science as to try pull more ignorant people into their clutches.

I found the following websites to have false and misleading information that more than bordered on the fraudulent:

www.creationism.org
www.creationscience.com
www.icr.org
www.answersingenesis.org
www.drdino.com
www.sixdaycreation.com
www.nwcreation.net
www.answersincreation.org
www.natcenscied.org
www.csfpittsburgh.org
www.csm.org.uk
www.creationresearch.org
www.creationdefense.org
www.worldbydesign.org
www.bhcsa.org
www.halos.com
www.trueorigin.org
www.creationscience.net
www.highschoolscience.com
www.evidenceofcreation.com
www.creationdigest.com
www.creationscienceoc.org
www.ecreationscience.com
www.antievolution.org
www.reviewevolution.com

(satire)Protect your kids from this type of dishonesty by adding the above list to Net Nanny or another such child protective monitoring software. Stop the insanity and make sure your children get a real education that will help them succeed in our global village.

If you know of any other such websites that are trying to pass themselves off as real science please email me or leave a comment here, and I will continue to update the list(/satire). Lets teach our kids responsibility to truth over blind obedience to myth.

Edit, included satire tags.

Yup folks, sorry to bring this up again, but the simple folk on the Internet need a bit of a clue. While I am sure a lot of you think your pastor knows more about life than Dawkins, us us in the real world actually need to know the truth. Now I know if your pastor has a child with his sister he may deny the theory of evolution, but luckily the pastors work is to promote a cult that glorifies death and not to figure out how to keep life alive. Otherwise we would all be stuffed.

Evolution is pretty simple.. here it is; evolution is the change in a population's inherited traits from generation to generation.

The theory of evolution explains how this happens through different mechanics such as mutation, gene drift, speciation and others.

So this is a challenge to all those religious folk there to prove science and evolution wrong. If you can prove evolution wrong I will personally with every possible resource available to me, get you nominated for a Nobel Prize in science... because honestly, thats the least you deserve if you can prove evolution wrong.

So preachers, priests, domines, clerics, rabbi`s, pastors and other people of the fraud, sorry I mean cloth, who deny evolution are welcome to "put their money where their mouth is.". Lets see if they have the ability to be honest.

For those of you who do not want to prove it because you see no value in the Nobel Prize, think of the large amount of cash you get with it. Im sure your mega-church could use the money to buy another SUV.

When I wrote up my last piece on the Shofar Christan cult I never perceived that it would receive as much attention as it has. I received numerous emails in my inbox from many different people from many different walks of life with more information on this cult.

Firstly, I wish to address the use of the word 'cult' in this article and in my previous one. Wikipedia defines the definition of the word cult, as the following:

"In religion and sociology, a cult is a term designating a cohesive group of people (generally, but not exclusively a relatively small and recently founded religious movement[1]) devoted to beliefs or practices that the surrounding culture or society considers to be outside the mainstream."

By the above accepted definition of the word cult, I believe it is safe to refer to this 'cohesive' Stellenbosch Christian group going by the name of Shofar Christian Church as a cult.

To ratify my above on conclusion, lets look at the second part of that definition, "devoted to beliefs or practices that the surrounding culture or society considers to be outside the mainstream.". Off the top of my head I can think of two points that would qualify that point:

1) Their Creationist stance on evolution and naive belief that the Theory of Evolution is false is outside of mainstream beliefs. For instance it is almost completely accepted in the real science world (outside of a few nutters), and is even accepted by the Vatican and the Catholic Church (the largest organization of the Christian faith)

2) Preaching in pubs and clubs. I know this one is pretty trivial, but darn Shofar people..., "Have you NO clue?" I have a suggestion to those of you who get haunted by these strange people when you are looking for a little R&R. Two words. Water balloons.

Now, I suppose Shofar Christian Church could try do to me what they did to jeeva.net, and send a letter from a lawyer complaining about 'defamation of business', but if they do that.. and if they are a business... What happens to all those tax breaks they get for being a "Church"?

Now that I have got the word cult of the way I want to move onto information more relevant to Shofar Christian Church. One of the more interesting emails I got was from Al Lovejoy, the author of the book Acid Alex (I will supply a link to where you can purchase this brilliant piece of work in my linkblog). My girlfriend was the one who heard excellent reviews about this book a couple of months ago and purchased a copy for us to read.

The book Acid Alex is a wonderfully honest look at certain South African cultures during some very difficult times in South Africa. The author of the book is frank and honest, and pretty much lays his story out in such a way that leaves you humbled.

When I read the book I remember reading about a possibly dangerous cult in South Africa and about some of the more darker aspects of the 7th Day Adventists (who are still waiting ;)), and other dubious religious people Al Lovejoy came across.

I received an email from Al Lovejoy pointing me to have a look at his book in reference to my last article on Shofar Christian Church. Then it all clicked. The book that I had read several months before was linked in a way to this cult and a whole lot more became clear.

First, lets look at a little at the history regarding Shofar Christian Church and how it came to be. A businessman by the name of Fred May and his wife Lucille May started the campus cult in 1992 in Stellenbosch (South Africa).

A little bit about Mr Fred May. Fred May has never been ordained through an established church, Fred May has no degree in theology and his highest level of tertiary education is a B.A. Fred May appears to use American Creationist ("praise the lord and pass the loot Bible Belt heroes") Rhema style preaching.

Mr Fred May has a deep contempt of the Roman Catholic Church as well as the NG Kerk and regularly has a go at them from his pulpit.

Fred May is almost like South Africa's own Ted Haggard in the hypocrisy of his belief and teachings... however there is currently no evidence that he has taken Crystal Meths or that he is hiring a male prostitute.

Al Lovejoy had the following to say about Fred May and his organization,

"These are the voices of very, very angry and defensive - so called "Charismatic Christians" who belong to a campus cult called Shofar here in Stellenbosch. The other is "His People" who now call themselves "Every Nation". I called out their founder leader, a self appointed man named Fred May through Die Matie, the University of Stellenbosch's newspaper - on the straight fact that he and his new associates in Rhema finance their businesses by means of committing Biblical fraud and extortion - thus committing heresy and financial theft. Fred May is the worst of them because he isn't just illegally stripping working people of 10% of their monthly earnings - he's stripping the students of 10% of their study loans, inheritances, bursaries, scholarships, parent's salaries, waitressing tips and pocket money…in other words - their tertiary education funds."

A Tithe is not a Christian law or required in Christianity, but rather old Jewish Mosaic Law. Biblical teachings appear to indicate that although tithing was practised extensively in the Old Testament it was never practised nor taught within the first-century Church. Instead the New Testament scriptures seem to teach the concept of "freewill offerings" as a means of supporting the church (I Corinthians 16:2 and II Corinthians 9:7).

In fact the earliest groups sold everything they had and held it in common to be used for the furtherance of the Gospel (Acts 2:44-47). Such practices are testified to in the Acts of the Apostles. Also in Acts one can find a narrative relating to a man and wife who promised to sell a piece of property and donate it to the Church. Instead they only brought part of the selling price before the Lord and were struck dead for lying to a prophet of God, one of the Apostles.

These were clear examples that the first-century Church did not establish nor insist on a 10% (or tithe) rule but instead emphasized freewill giving. Clearly the Church believed in making offerings of money or goods to God dependent upon the conscience of its members.

Denominations and sects view tithing differently. As tithing was only a requirement found in the Old Testament, some consider it to be a practice that has no place in modern Christianity.

However, that does not stop the modern pulpit pushers from fleecing their gullible flock for as much money as they can.

Someone wrote into the Sunday Times with the following letter regarding the off spin sequel cult called, "Every Nation";

"I have been a faithful member of Every Nation Stellenbosch Church where the accused Fred Van Der Vyfer also attends. Coming from a very poor background I still had to commit to paying monthly tithes with my student loan and weekly offerings. I was told to commit my time to disciple students but when I needed someone no-one was there for me. The church expected me to be in meetings even when my studies and family life were not going too well. The pastors only made time for the wealthy students and never had time for the poorer students. They invite the wealthy students to their homes for lunches and supper but the poor students often don’t even have enough money for food. The pastors also make contact with the parents of the wealthy students and visit their homes but the poor students’ parents are never contacted.

I see this church as merely exploiting the poor to make a name for itself. They want to show they have all kinds of people in the church but it’s not real. They don’t show any compassion towards the poor. They don’t have any black or coloured pastor in Stellenbosch, and only white pastors preach who can relate to the white students. Whites go into the full-time ministry and get paid by the church. They don’t work but disciple the wealthy students on Stellenbosch campus.

Paul Daniel was the founder of His People (now Every Nation) and he fell into sexual immorality with many females in the church. The church has a history of oppressing the poor and rejecting them when they need help. The church has expanded to Somerset West where they serve the wealthy people and no poor people. They don’t have any projects in the poor areas like Kayamandi or Cloetesville to give food, clothes with the money as they believe it’s about God and themselves. They are not committed to the poor. The poor students in the church tithe but the money is not used to help any poor community."

Since we are on the topic of money, lets have a look at the testimony of Al Lovejoy and his book Acid Alex. Some of you may be thinking that he is just bad mouthing Shofar Christian Church and Every Nation for his own personal financial gains from the sale of his book. To set the story straight I am quoting directly from Al Lovejoy himself,

"On the 28 February 2007 I donated 100% of the current and future proceeds from the sale of Acid Alex, including international distribution rights and the movie rights (less 15% agent's fees) to an NGO children's foundation that is mostly my brainchild but in reality will eventually become a more lucid entity via the efforts of a number of people both here and internationally."

I can tell you right now Al Lovejoy is doing more good for the people of this world than the Mr Fred May. I wonder if Fred May donates a 100% of his profits to charities? Nope, he does not give 100% of his profits to children charities..his "church" and his "God" need the money. Of course.

There is a real lot of information coming out about these dangerous cults that masquerade as 'Christianity', if you are one of your loved ones have fallen victim to one of these Christian Cults, please leave a comment or email pb@pickledbushman.com with the information so your story can be shared.

Source information:
- http://thechiz.co.za/archive/2006/10/17/The-real-deal-with-al-lovejoy.aspx
- http://www.acidalex.com
- http://www.sundaytimes.co.za/PrintEdition/Lifestyle/Article.aspx?id=456264
- http://www.sundaytimes.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=466838
- Previous Shofar article by pickledbushman

UPDATE EDIT: http://prometheusongebonde.wordpress.com/2007/02/23/when-ignorance-is-called-god/#comment-2237