Why Christianity is 100 Percent Anti-Freedom and Pro-Tyranny

[Winston]

Christians may be shocked to know this: If you are a true loyal Christian, according to the Bible, then you are 100 percent pro-tyranny and anti-freedom. This is easily provable from the Bible itself. Face it. What you Christians are in denial about, is that clearly, the God depicted in your Bible is an evil tyrant who kills anyone who disobeys him, often for trivial reasons, and places ZERO value on freedom, freethought and rationality. His law demands 100 percent obedience and subservience, threatening death and damnation as a consequence for even one noncompliance, which is insane. That is crystal clear. NOTHING in the Bible supports human freedom, free choice, or liberty at all! Period.

Christianity and Fascism share the following core attributes:

a) You must obey or be punished.
b) No independent thoughts or free speech. Only conformity is allowed.
c) Your ruler is to be feared, for fear keeps you obedient to authority.
d) The use of fear and guilt as psychological control mechanisms.
e) The view that the individual is weak and powerless, and his/her life is without purpose unless aligned to serve a "higher power" or "collective." (e.g. God, state or dictator).

What this means is that you cannot be a devout Christian and believe in freedom or free choice at the same time. And if you do, then you are a hypocrite. Your religious doctrines and Bible clearly declare that anything less than complete obedience and subservience to God's will is sin and deserves nothing less than death and damnation, according to God's law. To do what you want rather than submit to God's will is seen as rebellion and sin against God. The Bible is clear on this. What this means that by being a Christian, you stand for ABSOLUTE TYRANNY, the murder of anyone who disobeys, and are totally AGAINST freedom, free choice, liberty, freethinking and reason. You can deny that all you want, but the fact is the fact.

Throughout the Bible, one simple message is consistent: OBEY GOD OR DIE! And in the New Testament, this has been modified as: Believe or be eternally damned! There are plenty of examples in the Bible where God killed people, often innocent (including women and children), for trivial reasons. For example, when Lot's wife looked back at Sodom and Gomorrah burning, disobeying God, she instantly turned to salt (Genesis 19). Now really, is looking at something really worth the death penalty? Well not really, but brainwashed Christians believe that God is 100 percent just and perfect (simply because they were told so), and therefore anything he does must be completely right. It's obvious circular reasoning. And in 2 Kings 2:23-24, God sent out bears to kill 42 children after they made fun of one of his prophets. Sometimes, God even kills innocent people to their leaders in the Bible. For example, in Exodus 12, he sent an angel to kill the firstborn children of Egypt, just to punish the Pharaoh. And in 1 Chronicles 21:14, God kills 70,000 people just to punish King David.

The BIGGEST HYPOCRISY in all this is that the Christian God gave as one of his Ten Commandments the law that says, "Thou shalt not kill." How can you respect a God who is such a big hypocrite? You can't, unless you are totally brainwashed and your sense of reason is hijacked. But of course, brainwashed people do not know that they are brainwashed, otherwise they would try to deprogram themselves.

Now, is killing innocent people (including women and children) for the disobedience of their leader a moral thing to do? I don't think so. But again, brainwashed Christians believe that God is 100 percent just and perfect (with no valid basis) and so will claim that whatever he does must be right. Again, complete circular reasoning, based on nothing more than what others have told them and what text in a book says, which is not real evidence at all. No one who does such things would be considered a decent person in the real world, but a monster. Yet a God who is claimed to be 100 percent perfect, good and just does such things?! WTF? Christians, seriously, how is your God any different than Hitler? Your God has killed far more people than Hitler has, according to your own Bible. He even wiped out a whole world full of people during the Flood of Noah (if you believe it that is). Have a look here at the tally sheet of the number of people God killed, according to the Bible: http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/Debunk ... Page22.htm

Now, if your God is worse than Hitler, then how could you think he is 100 percent flawless, just, righteous, and good?! Are you out of your mind?! Are you completely insane?! This just goes to show how badly your mind has been hijacked to believe whatever you are told, and how your reason has been completely shut off. Basically, you believe this insanity because you were TOLD to, which makes you really gullible and naive. As Atheists like to say, you don't have to be intelligent to be a Christian. Obviously, that's true.

Anyway, the bottom line is that by worshipping a 100 percent tyrannical deity who kills and damns anyone who exercises freedom and disobeys him, it means that you yourself stand for absolute tyranny, the murder of those who do not follow your faith, and are totally anti-freedom, anti-free choice, anti-liberty, and anti-freethinking. Furthermore, the fact that you deem such a deity to be 100 percent flawless and perfect, reveals your insanity and the degree to which you've been utterly brainwashed to the extreme.

Ask yourself this: If you went into a typical Christian Bible-believing church and told the minister, "I am a born again Christian who loves Jesus, but I don't agree with everything God says in the Bible, nor do I think his actions were always right." do you think he would say, "That's ok. You don't have to agree with God on everything. Just love him and love others. That's all he wants you to do." HELL NO! The minister would give you a lecture and tell you that YOU ARE WRONG, because God is the definition of morality and whatever he does must be right, just and perfect, and that you have no right to question him because you are just a mere creation while he is the creator, blah blah blah.

All copouts again, of course, but you get the idea. To truly follow Christian teaching, you are NOT allowed to think for yourself, disagree with anything in the Bible, or have any dissenting opinion. Your opinions are worthless, according to Christianity, and you are WRONG if you don't agree with everything in the Bible and with the tenets of Christian teaching. This just goes to show exactly what I've said, that Christianity is completely anti-freethought and all about obedience, fear, tyranny and punishment. It's not something I would want to be a part of, and fortunately, I don't have to be, because there is no logical reason to believe that its extreme teachings are true, nevermind infallible.

Remember that just because someone or some book tells you something, doesn't mean it's true. See my other essay here for an elaboration on this: http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/Christian_Problems.htm

You Christian denialists ought to look up the teachings of forbidden religions such as Gnosticism, which place God and Satan in opposite but more sensible roles based on their actions. (See here for an overview: http://www.theforbiddenreligion.com/gnostic-book.htm) As an example, right from the start in Genesis, when Adam and Eve ate the fruit off the Tree of Life, they did not die, but their eyes were opened, knowing both good and evil, just as the Serpent said. What this means is that God's warning that they would "surely die" by eating the fruit off that tree was a lie, while Satan's prediction was true. So how could Satan, the epitome of evil, tell the truth, while God, the epitome of goodness, truth and perfection, tell a lie?! I know you have cop outs for this, but again, you are denying the obvious. The truth is often the opposite of what we are taught.

Also, remember that there are other versions of God (or Gods) too, that don't require him to be 100 percent flawless and perfect. The Greek Gods, for example, had all the positive qualities and negative vices that humans have. And the deities in Hinduism has a mixture of good and bad traits too. The concept that God is perfect is a Judeo-Christian and Muslim creation. No one has to be perfect, not even a God. Whatever the case, the evidence suggests that we make God in OUR own image, not the other way around. That's why we project our flawed traits and egos onto him, when a perfect being shouldn't be like that.

The lesson we can learn from that is that we need to look within ourselves, for that's where the answers lie. Religion is like fast food theology. But truth is not like fast food. You cannot get truth from a convenient package or book. It requires a lifelong process of searching, going through layers and layers - for once you discover a glimpse of a certain truth, there are more layers beyond it.

The choice is yours - Either think for yourself, or let someone else do the thinking for you.

[MrPeabody]

I grew up in a Conservative Christian home and would have been so much better off without all this nonsense. I tried to make sense of it for years and read plenty of the so-called intellectuals like C.S. Lewis who is suppose to clear up the confusion, but it didn't help. How could it when the greatest Christian theologian St. Thomas Aquinas after spending years contemplating the holy trinity said "It's upsurd therefore it must be true". The mysticism and theology feeds upon itself and just gets worse over time - like the fundamentalist Christians who actually believe Jews can act immorally and must be supported no matter what they do because they are the chosen people. This is bad theology corrupting morality and ethics.

The confusion finally lifted when I started meditating and studying Buddhism. The Western religions focus outwardly and create theologies and Gods. In contrast, Buddha realized from the start the it's all about the mind and that is where we should be looking. The Buddha clearly states the premise of his philosophy right from the beginning - life is suffering and there is a path to end suffering. There is nothing mystical shmistical about his basic teachings. Mysticism is part of ignorance and a hindrance to a clear mind. He further teaches that we are all responsible for our own salvation and there is nobody that can do it for us. Buddha wisely rejected the idea of sacrifice (common in his time with the Brahmin priests) and stated that Gods cannot help a man, but rather that he must help himself. From this perspective, it becomes immediately obvious the absurdity that a God can come to earth and sacrifice himself in order to save others. The whole idea of sacrifice in all its forms is barbarism and a false view. I believe that if the world is going to continue, people are going to have to change to a rational religion like Buddhism which actually addresses the real issue - the human mind. The Abrahamic religions - Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have brought us to the brink of war in a nuclear age.

[ErikHeaven]

You have discovered the teachings of Mani. He taught about the lie of the apple. I found him and i became an atheist.

[gsjackson]

A few counterpoints. The vengeful, wrathful god is the god of the Hebrews, of the Old Testament. Christianity developed precisely to counter this tyranny of morality, the idea that sin leads inevitably to the death of the soul. However mystical the idea of Christ taking on the burden of the sins of the world may be, it provides an avenue of psychological escape for millions of people who otherwise wouldn't find a way out from under the burden. There are lots of different kinds of personalities, and for some a human peronality representing selfless love and complete forgiveness is the only avenue out of self-condemnation.

As for nothing in the Bible about freedom: How about "know the truth and it will make you free?" Suposedly that's the premise of this website. Jesus was all about standing the conventional wisdom on its head, again supposedly what we're up top here. As Robert Frost said, "freedom is riding easy in the harness." Any adult with a truthful bone in his body knows this is true. It's just what harness you choose to strap yourself into. Jesus said his yoke is easy. I agree -- it's one that leaves plenty of leeway for genuine thought and truth-seeking, properly understood.

On the point of there being all different types of people in the world, many are just not cut out to contemplate their navels ....err...minds. Some see beautiful temples to the transcendent in their minds, and build them. Travel around what was once known as Christendom and you will see one monument to beauty after another built by people looking out beyond themselves to a posterity they wouldn't even live to see. Has Buddhism ever created anything like that?

And contrary to the prevailing propaganda in the US, religon has not been the cause of wars in the last couple hundred years. That would be, imo, the greedheads and megalomaniacs who profit from those wars.

Winston, your points on subjects like this are what one would expect from a ten year old. Acquaint yourself with some sophisticated Christian apologetics before making yourself look juvenile. The best book for pointing out the virtues in all religions is The Religions of Man by Huston Smith.

[odbo]

Winston, your points on subjects like this are what one would expect from a ten year old.

Don't feed the troll. Winston obviously prefers the freedom of the Talmud. Everyone knows Jesus was the worst thing ever to happen to the world. Do not lie, do not steal, do not kill!? How's a Jew supposed to enslave the world with that shit.

[MrPeabody]

Winston, your points on subjects like this are what one would expect from a ten year old.

Don't feed the troll. Winston obviously prefers the freedom of the Talmud. Everyone knows Jesus was the worst thing ever to happen to the world. Do not lie, do not steal, do not kill!? How's a Jew supposed to enslave the world with that shit.

Jesus wasn’t a Christian. Read Thomas Jefferson, who created the Jefferson Bible by cutting out the Pauline speculation which he referred to as dung and including only the words of Jesus. The core teachings of Jesus never included theology and were said using other words 600 years before by the Buddha, like the golden rule:

"Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful"
The Buddha —Udanavarga 5:18

[AmericanInMexico]

God as found in the Old Testament is not the same God of Christianity. The God in the Old Testament is the Jewish distortion of what the true God was all about.

I am a Roman Catholic and view the Old Testament as good for historical purposes, but bad for religious purposes. Everything you need to know about God can be found in the New Testament. The teachings of Jesus actually make sense when compared to the nonsense found in the Old Testament.

Jesus himself even said that the two most important commandments are to love God and love your neighbor, and that everything else was based on these two commandments. In light of this, most of the Old Testament teachings make no sense whatsoever.

[odbo]

Winston, your points on subjects like this are what one would expect from a ten year old.

Don't feed the troll. Winston obviously prefers the freedom of the Talmud. Everyone knows Jesus was the worst thing ever to happen to the world. Do not lie, do not steal, do not kill!? How's a Jew supposed to enslave the world with that shit.

Jesus wasn’t a Christian. Read Thomas Jefferson, who created the Jefferson Bible by cutting out the Pauline speculation which he referred to as dung and including only the words of Jesus. The core teachings of Jesus never included theology and were said using other words 600 years before by the Buddha.

Sorry I made no distinction between Jesus and Churchianity because to Winston it's all the same. I wasn't trying to quote Jesus literally and my interpretation of his teachings might be different from yours. It's all about a person's perception. Would man live by his conscience if he wasn't manipulated? Would man partake in sodomy if he wasn't conforming to some degenerate culture? Was the Bible recognizing theft, murder as a sin made to limit man's freedom, or was it made to free man from Jewish mind control? If some isolated group of people weren't exposed to evil and lived happily for thousands of years, would they need wisdom from people like Buddha?

Jesus was against the system, religion, whatever you want to call it but the text not attributed to him doesn't necessarily contradict his intentions. To me its about recognizing evil to get immunity from it, it's not about living worrying about what not to do.

[Winston]

A few counterpoints. The vengeful, wrathful god is the god of the Hebrews, of the Old Testament. Christianity developed precisely to counter this tyranny of morality, the idea that sin leads inevitably to the death of the soul. However mystical the idea of Christ taking on the burden of the sins of the world may be, it provides an avenue of psychological escape for millions of people who otherwise wouldn't find a way out from under the burden. There are lots of different kinds of personalities, and for some a human peronality representing selfless love and complete forgiveness is the only avenue out of self-condemnation.

As for nothing in the Bible about freedom: How about "know the truth and it will make you free?" Suposedly that's the premise of this website. Jesus was all about standing the conventional wisdom on its head, again supposedly what we're up top here. As Robert Frost said, "freedom is riding easy in the harness." Any adult with a truthful bone in his body knows this is true. It's just what harness you choose to strap yourself into. Jesus said his yoke is easy. I agree -- it's one that leaves plenty of leeway for genuine thought and truth-seeking, properly understood.

On the point of there being all different types of people in the world, many are just not cut out to contemplate their navels ....err...minds. Some see beautiful temples to the transcendent in their minds, and build them. Travel around what was once known as Christendom and you will see one monument to beauty after another built by people looking out beyond themselves to a posterity they wouldn't even live to see. Has Buddhism ever created anything like that?

And contrary to the prevailing propaganda in the US, religon has not been the cause of wars in the last couple hundred years. That would be, imo, the greedheads and megalomaniacs who profit from those wars.

Winston, your points on subjects like this are what one would expect from a ten year old. Acquaint yourself with some sophisticated Christian apologetics before making yourself look juvenile. The best book for pointing out the virtues in all religions is The Religions of Man by Huston Smith.

How is what I said inaccurate? What verses in the Bible place value on freedom, freethought or free choice? Show me some.

If you can't, then my point was accurate. The Bible does not support freedom or free choice. It commands total obedience. It's obvious. What are you arguing about? What are you disputing? Where am I wrong? Point it out logically please.

[Winston]

God as found in the Old Testament is not the same God of Christianity. The God in the Old Testament is the Jewish distortion of what the true God was all about.

I am a Roman Catholic and view the Old Testament as good for historical purposes, but bad for religious purposes. Everything you need to know about God can be found in the New Testament. The teachings of Jesus actually make sense when compared to the nonsense found in the Old Testament.

Jesus himself even said that the two most important commandments are to love God and love your neighbor, and that everything else was based on these two commandments. In light of this, most of the Old Testament teachings make no sense whatsoever.

It depends on which Jesus you are referring to. The theology of the Bible evolved. In Matthew, Mark and Luke, Jesus says to just love God and your neighbors. But in John, he says that you have to believe in him to go to Heaven, or else you will go to Hell. The Gospel of John contains the verses that modern Christian fundamentalism is based on. Why do you think Christian Gospel tracts usually quote verses from the Gospel of John rather than the other three Gospels? Cause it's the basis of their beliefs.

See this chapter I wrote:
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/Debunk ... Page25.htm

Here are some verses in John that says that you have to BELIEVE in Jesus to be saved.

John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.�
John 3:18 “He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.�
John 3:36 “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.�
John 8:24 “I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.�
John 11:25 “Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:�

In the other three Gospels, Jesus doesn't say that you have to believe in him to be saved.

Here is what a freethinker in the 19th Century named Robert Ingersoll wrote about this:

http://www.infidels.org/library/histori ... chism.html

QUESTION. How is it that Matthew says nothing about "salvation

by faith," but simply says that God will be merciful to the

merciful, that he will forgive the forgiving, and says not one word

about the necessity of believing anything?



ANSWER. But you will remember that Mark says, in the last

chapter of his gospel, that "whoso believeth not shall be damned."



QUESTION. Do you admit that Matthew says nothing on the

subject?



ANSWER. yes, I suppose I must.



QUESTION. Is not that passage in Mark generally admitted to be

an interpolation?



ANSWER. Some biblical scholars say that it is.



QUESTION. Is that portion of the last chapter of Mark found in

the Syriac version of the Bible?



ANSWER. It is not.



QUESTION. If it was necessary to believe on Jesus Christ, in

order to be saved, how is it that Matthew failed to say so?



ANSWER. "There are more copies of the Bible printed to-day,

than of any other book in the world, and it is printed in more

languages than any other book."



QUESTION. Do you consider it necessary to be "regenerated" --

to be "born again" -- in order to be saved?



ANSWER. Certainly.



QUESTION. Did Matthew say anything on the subject of

"regeneration"?



ANSWER. No.



QUESTION. Did Mark?



ANSWER. No.



QUESTION. Did Luke?



ANSWER. No.



QUESTION. Is Saint John the only one who speaks of the

necessity of being "born again"?



ANSWER. He is.



QUESTION. Do you think that Matthew, Mark and Luke knew

anything about the necessity of "regeneration"?



ANSWER. Of course they did.



QUESTION. Why did they fail to speak of it?



ANSWER. There is no civilization without the Bible. The moment

you throw away the sacred Scriptures, you are all at sea -- you are

without an anchor and without a compass.



QUESTION. You will remember that, according to Mark, Christ

said to his disciples: "Go ye into all the world. and preach the

gospel to every creature." Did he refer to the gospel set forth by

Mark?



ANSWER. Of course he did.



QUESTION. Well, in the gospel set forth by Mark, there is not

a word about "regeneration," and no word about the necessity of

believing anything -- except in an interpolated passage. Would it

not seem from this, that "regeneration" and a "belief in the Lord

Jesus Christ," are no part of the gospel?



ANSWER. Nothing can exceed in horror the last moments of the

infidel; nothing can he more terrible than the death of the

doubter. When the glories of this world fade from the vision; when

ambition becomes an empty name; when wealth turns to dust in the

palsied hand of death, of what use is philosophy then? Who cares

then for the pride of intellect? In that dread moment, man needs

something to rely on, whether it is true or not.



QUESTION. Would it not have been more convincing if Christ,

after his resurrection, had shown himself to his enemies as well as

to his friends? Would it not have greatly strengthened the evidence

in the case, if he had visited Pilate; had presented himself before

Caiaphas, the high priest; if he had again entered the temple, and

again walked the streets of Jerusalem?



ANSWER. If the evidence had been complete and overwhelming,

there would have been no praiseworthiness in belief; even publicans

and sinners would have believed, if the evidence had been

sufficient. The amount of evidence required is the test of the true

Christian spirit.



QUESTION. Would it not also have been better had the ascension

taken place in the presence of unbelieving thousands; it seems such

a pity to have wasted such a demonstration upon those already

convinced?



ANSWER. These questions are the natural fruit of the carnal

mind, and can be accounted for only by the doctrine of total

depravity. Nothing has given the church more trouble than just such

questions. Unholy curiosity, a disposition to pry into the divine

mysteries, a desire to know, to investigate, to explain -- in

short, to understand, are all evidences of a reprobate mind.

[gsjackson]

Your "logic" is the logic of a mindless computer. Anyone who reads the New Testament with the slightest degree of human understanding can see a character concerned almost entirely with liberating people from various tyrannies -- such as the tyranny of morality (you can't escape sin, even to look lustfully is adultery, so you need a superseding emotion such as love to escape -- a Pauline doctrine that may have escaped Jefferson's appreciation); and the tyranny of conventional wisdom, e.g., it's what you put in your mind that makes you impure, not what you put in your body, the last shall be first, etc.

If you want text from the Bible to feed into the computer, once again: "know the truth and it shall make you free." That certainly implies a lively conception of freedom. But freedom is not a simple-minded and self-evident concept, as suggested by the ongoing dialogue here between your assertions that freedom is doing whatever you want to do, and your critics who urge you to embrace a greater sense of responsibility. You may have Nietszche on your side (though I doubt it, if he were interpreted accurately), but no other prominent thinkers who come to mind. Well, maybe Hugh Hefner.

I don't know how many times on this forum you have to be told the distinction between the god of the old and new testaments, and between American fundmentalist/evangelical Protestantism and other variants of Christianity. The fundamentalism you immersed yourself in is probably vulnerable to the criticisms you raised, but it is a very small and isolated form of Christianity that has taken root only in the US in conjunction with other social pathologies. Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and liberal Protestantism, which flourished in the US until about 40 years ago, are all very intellectual faiths, for those who want to pursue the path of intellect..

[MrPeabody]

What is this difference between the god of the New Testament and the god of the Old Testament? Last time I checked, every Christian Church has a bible that includes both the Old Testament and the New Testament. That is because Christians believe it is the same god who revealed his truth in both collections. Christians come up with some of the strangest arguments to justify their past. The people for whom Christianity work typically have a simple faith and don't think about it too much. The intellectuals torture themselves and live lives of confusion and doubt which they periodically prop up using tortured logic.

[ErikHeaven]

Think not that i am come to destroy the LAW or the Prophets". Jesus fully agreed with Old Testament law. The same law that says it is "Righteous" to stone someone for working on the Sabbath. Or the same law that allows for Slavery. Jesus was a anti-freedom Jew through and through and the bible contradicts itself constantly.
There is nothing good in that so called good book. That book is evil.

[ErikHeaven]

The same Law that states you can stone your child for being a drunkard and glutton. Now i am pissed off at my son now for being a drunkard that he is, though i would never kill him for it. The bible is sick and i am glad i woke up from it.

[Winston]

Your "logic" is the logic of a mindless computer. Anyone who reads the New Testament with the slightest degree of human understanding can see a character concerned almost entirely with liberating people from various tyrannies -- such as the tyranny of morality (you can't escape sin, even to look lustfully is adultery, so you need a superseding emotion such as love to escape -- a Pauline doctrine that may have escaped Jefferson's appreciation); and the tyranny of conventional wisdom, e.g., it's what you put in your mind that makes you impure, not what you put in your body, the last shall be first, etc.

If you want text from the Bible to feed into the computer, once again: "know the truth and it shall make you free." That certainly implies a lively conception of freedom. But freedom is not a simple-minded and self-evident concept, as suggested by the ongoing dialogue here between your assertions that freedom is doing whatever you want to do, and your critics who urge you to embrace a greater sense of responsibility. You may have Nietszche on your side (though I doubt it, if he were interpreted accurately), but no other prominent thinkers who come to mind. Well, maybe Hugh Hefner.

I don't know how many times on this forum you have to be told the distinction between the god of the old and new testaments, and between American fundmentalist/evangelical Protestantism and other variants of Christianity. The fundamentalism you immersed yourself in is probably vulnerable to the criticisms you raised, but it is a very small and isolated form of Christianity that has taken root only in the US in conjunction with other social pathologies. Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and liberal Protestantism, which flourished in the US until about 40 years ago, are all very intellectual faiths, for those who want to pursue the path of intellect..

I don't understand what you're trying to say. Most Christians I know hold the beliefs I describe, both offline and online. The tenets are pretty consistent. Anyone can say "know the truth and it shall make you free." But everyone's truth is different. Christianity's truth is that you become free from sin and slaves to righteousness. It's a mind control play on words, telling you that if you lose your freedom, you free yourself from sin, and if you become obedient to God, then you become free to pursue righteousness.

It's pure spin. Don't you see it? Sheesh. It's telling you that freedom is slavery and slavery is freedom. Anyone can spin words. Anyone can claim to have the truth.

I still don't see your point. Where in the Bible does it defend freedom or liberty or free choice? NOWHERE. So my point stands. So what are you arguing? Do you have a bias here?