6. "But doesn't God call on us to submit to His will?"
   
   
   
   But would His will necessarily be yours?
   
   Let me pose a hypothetical for you. Let us suppose that there was a wise and just king who ruled over a realm so vast that few of his subjects had ever seen his court and few if any of those who had, ever made the long trip home. Through a village came a number of men on horseback, each claiming to bring his commands to the villagers, but the men brought conflicting orders, some pretending to be messengers for their own gain, and some simply deluded.
   
   Who to believe? Some of the villagers simply believed the first horseman they heard from, and some let their parents decide for them which to believe, being unwilling to put any further effort into determining which truly were their sovereign's demands, saying that it wasn't their place to question his decrees. But others pored over the records of old decrees, questioned the horsemen at length, and put every bit of thought they could into determining which decrees were true, and which were not.
   
   Who served his king the most faithfully and who served no master higher than his own desire to not be bothered?
   
   The search for truth requires no apology.

7. "But what of the evil things that we have heard of others doing in the names of pagan gods?"
   
   
   
   But what of the evil things that I have heard of others doing in the name of the devil who is, after all, a figure from Christian literature, not Paganism? The fact that he shows up in Christian scripture does not imply that he is worshipped by Christians - and at least he is showing up in those scriptures. "Paganism" is a grab bag of religions that don't share the same theology, any more than do Christianity and Hinduism, and these religions do not share a common pantheon.

"Touchy, aren't we? You seem quite defensive."

This might have seemed to be a valid point if the question "are you and your friends devil worshippers?" had just been asked for the first time. But it has been asked, and having been answered, reasked a nauseum by people who have given no sign of actually caring about the truth. When the question is ignored, we hear the 'argument',

When we do keep answering the question, we get

So, in other words, if someone lodging an unfounded accusation is stubborn enough, under these 'rules' the accusation sticks no matter what the accused does. No actual facts are needed by the intolerant person lodging the accusation, just a bad attitude on the part of enough listeners. Under these standards, one can "prove" anything. Since not all things are true, obviously the standards are nonsensical.

A serious accusation justifies the use of a serious defense. Those who are persistently rude need to be taught the error of their ways, or at least have it revealed to those they would mislead. No honest man has cause to ask us to do any less.

I hope this answers your question. Henceforth, let us dispense with "arguments" based on fear, like "believe as we do, or the devil will get you", and focus instead on an examination of our own experiences, what has seemed true to us in life, and a reasonable dialogue about our thoughts about those experiences. To those who would enter with an open mind, and an honest heart, welcome. To those who would not, may your way out the door be a pleasant one. Blessed be.

Let's move on to better things.

If you would like to link to this article, please feel free to bookmark the link below. As long as the site stays put, this page should do the same.

About that threat ...