The Absurdity of John W. Loftus?
I titled this post the same as others (but with a question mark) so people can see my response to a video floating around about me by the same title .
This is a cut and paste job from an interview I had with the program The Things That Matter Most, along with Pastor Dave Schmelzer. Cut out is where Pastor Smeltzer responded to this segment immediately afterward that such a view as I stated is an intellectually respectfully held one. After this aired the director of that program emailed me and said she didn't think the hosts were fair to me, and many agreed...so typical of many Christians. I critiqued Pastor Schmelzer's book right here.
In any case, in the interview I said "seemingly absurd," as in beyond the range of what we can understand fully. But this does not allow Christians to drive a whole truckload of assumptions through that small crevice because of Ockham's Razor. Otherwise other religious people can do the same thing with their own opposing religious conceptions.
Christians who post this video act as if they are completely and utterly ignorant of existential literature or even the book of Ecclesiastes.
That anything exists at all “seems absurd.” I am at least honest enough to admit this. Christians parade through the streets like the naked Emperor claiming to know that an three-in-one God exited for all eternity who never learned anything new since he always knew everything, who never made a decision since all decisions were eternal ones, and who cannot think since thinking depends on temporally weighing alternatives. Honesty demands humility with regard to why we exist and they certainly cannot depend on an historically conditioned interpretation of a set of canonized texts called the Bible for the answers when they shared the same answers as all of the other religions of that time except that they had a different name for their deity.
We have three choices: 1) Something, anything, has always existed; 2) Something, anything, popped into existed out of nothing; or 3) the existentialists are right that our existence is fundamentally absurd.
The Christian conception of God is absurd. They just won’t admit it. They cannot harmonize the trinity within itself without denying orthodoxy by reducing it to tri-theism or to a unitary God, nor can they explain the incarnation, nor how the death of Jesus can possibly atone for sins. Several divine attributes like divine simplicity, omnipotence, omniscience and omnibenevolence are internally problematic and lacking evidence for them. Discussions of divine simplicity will bring them to an utter agnosticism regarding to what their God is like, or force them to accept some absurd consequences. Just try defining these divine attributes. I dare you. Then try to harmonize them when it comes to the problem of intense suffering around the globe. And even if this can be done to their own satisfaction they STILL have no epistemic right to be certain that the ancient barbaric superstitious set of canonized texts in the Bible have the final answers regarding their faith.
The simpler explanation is preferable, and science offers us clues. Paul Davies, Quentin Smith and Victor Stenger have all come up with scientifically acceptable answers.
This is a cut and paste job from an interview I had with the program The Things That Matter Most, along with Pastor Dave Schmelzer. Cut out is where Pastor Smeltzer responded to this segment immediately afterward that such a view as I stated is an intellectually respectfully held one. After this aired the director of that program emailed me and said she didn't think the hosts were fair to me, and many agreed...so typical of many Christians. I critiqued Pastor Schmelzer's book right here.
In any case, in the interview I said "seemingly absurd," as in beyond the range of what we can understand fully. But this does not allow Christians to drive a whole truckload of assumptions through that small crevice because of Ockham's Razor. Otherwise other religious people can do the same thing with their own opposing religious conceptions.
Christians who post this video act as if they are completely and utterly ignorant of existential literature or even the book of Ecclesiastes.
That anything exists at all “seems absurd.” I am at least honest enough to admit this. Christians parade through the streets like the naked Emperor claiming to know that an three-in-one God exited for all eternity who never learned anything new since he always knew everything, who never made a decision since all decisions were eternal ones, and who cannot think since thinking depends on temporally weighing alternatives. Honesty demands humility with regard to why we exist and they certainly cannot depend on an historically conditioned interpretation of a set of canonized texts called the Bible for the answers when they shared the same answers as all of the other religions of that time except that they had a different name for their deity.
We have three choices: 1) Something, anything, has always existed; 2) Something, anything, popped into existed out of nothing; or 3) the existentialists are right that our existence is fundamentally absurd.
The Christian conception of God is absurd. They just won’t admit it. They cannot harmonize the trinity within itself without denying orthodoxy by reducing it to tri-theism or to a unitary God, nor can they explain the incarnation, nor how the death of Jesus can possibly atone for sins. Several divine attributes like divine simplicity, omnipotence, omniscience and omnibenevolence are internally problematic and lacking evidence for them. Discussions of divine simplicity will bring them to an utter agnosticism regarding to what their God is like, or force them to accept some absurd consequences. Just try defining these divine attributes. I dare you. Then try to harmonize them when it comes to the problem of intense suffering around the globe. And even if this can be done to their own satisfaction they STILL have no epistemic right to be certain that the ancient barbaric superstitious set of canonized texts in the Bible have the final answers regarding their faith.
The simpler explanation is preferable, and science offers us clues. Paul Davies, Quentin Smith and Victor Stenger have all come up with scientifically acceptable answers.
47 comments:
I find it interesting that St. Paul seems to agree with you, John. In 1 Cor. 1:23 he calls [Christianity] a scandal and absurd. It makes me wonder why in defending faith so many try to call upon reason, evidence, or logic--i.e. try to make it not scandalous and/or not absurd.
--Justin
I think we (maybe just me) are absurd creatures indeed. When I was a Christian, I believed whole heartedly without question because of my experiences with what I believed to be God. Early on I had no doubt and I was 100% convinced of my certainty. Later, despite my former certainty, experience lead me to doubt my certainty. Ultimately, for that which I was formally 100% certain of, I became quite certain that I was wrong. Yet, now I know that my certainty is very fallible, so rather than simply place blind faith in my own judgement, I try to be open to possibilities that are, rather than the way I want things to be. But still, we all are absurd.
I must say I was quite humored at the apparently prophetic "WORD VERIFICATION" that I got for my former post. It was remarkably similar to dumbass. :)
Your truly...
@delinquentminer
Paul said that Christianity was perceived as foolishness, not that it was foolish or absurd. Context please. I had to respond to this particular post at http://mmcelhaney.blogspot.com/2010/03/debunking-christianity-absurdity-of.html
The thing that is really absurd is how christians need to lie as a defense of absolute truth. observing that chronic by product of faith in myself and others helped to bring my faith to an end.
@Chuck
You know accusing Christians of lying and dishonesty is a constant drum beat of atheists. Four Points and supporting questions:
1. Can you point out an example and show why it showing deceit and dishonesty?
2. What criteria are you using to judge truth and honesty? I mean if morality is subject and truth a matter of preference how did you come to your conclusions? And what standard are you using to make your judgements? Where did that standard come from?
3. Accusing Christians of lying or deceit is accusing us of being sinners. So? The Bible says the same same thing. We know. We agree. That is why we trust Jesus and ride his coattails because we know we are not good enough on our own. We agree it is wrong to lie. Why do you say it's wrong to lie? I say it's wrong because it reflects poorly on God and it's disobedience.
4. How do Christian sinning invalidate or falsify the Bible?
Here is the problem...everyone disobeys God's standard in some way...invalidating any claim to righteousness or the right to judge anyone else. How do you deal with that?
Marcus,
"1. Can you point out an example and show why it showing deceit and dishonesty?
Ted Haggard operating as the President of the Evangelical Churches Association all the while snorting crystal meth and fucking men while demonizing homosexuals.
2. What criteria are you using to judge truth and honesty? A person says what they mean and they mean what they say. They don't demonize a minority while ingesting illegal drugs and paying men for sex.
I mean if morality is subject and truth a matter of preference how did you come to your conclusions? And what standard are you using to make your judgements? That is a strawman argument. I never said that.
Where did that standard come from? The standard comes from living in a democracy where respect for the individual, transparency of information and the rule of law win out.
3. Accusing Christians of lying or deceit is accusing us of being sinners. So?
I never accused you of being a sinner. I don't believe sin exists. It is a mythological concept that has no relevance outside of primitive justice customs. It is a byproduct custom of ancient religious people looking to create order in barbaric times.
The Bible says the same same thing.
The bible is a book of ancient myths.
We know. We agree. That is why we trust Jesus and ride his coattails because we know we are not good enough on our own. We agree it is wrong to lie. Why do you say it's wrong to lie?
I don't say it is only wrong to lie. I illustrate the lies of Christians to implicate their hypocrisy. They "ride the coat-tails" of the divine yet do not behave in an accountable way for their own behavior. Always blaming a mysterious supernatural "sin" state that allows them to absolve themselves without changing. It is your pretentiousness and that I judge.
I say it's wrong because it reflects poorly on God and it's disobedience.
How does the lies of a finite being impact an infinite omni-powerful character in any way at all? Your theology is incoherent.
4. How do Christian sinning invalidate or falsify the Bible?
Christians lying doesn't falsify the bible in any material sense it simply falsifies the claim christians have when they state an authority to revealed morality within. If the bible is magic it seems that its efficacy is variant and can't be seen as predictable or real.
One more thing Marcus. I was a lay-minister, missionary and evangelical christian for the past 7 years. I know the bible and your superficial theology. I practiced it.
@Chuck
here is my response:
http://mmcelhaney.blogspot.com/2010/03/debunking-christianity-absurdity-of_13.html
Marcus,
I won't be going to your blog. If you wish to dialogue we will do so here.
@ Chuck Well why not go to the blog? My comments are too long for the combo box. And I want to make the conversation as widely accessible as possible. And I quoted you accurately. I have no desire to misrepresent anyone. No fear necessary.
I am not afraid.
I'd prefer discussing here.
@Chuck...fair enough, but my comments won't fit so I'll just do it in multiple parts
I posed several questions to Chuck O'Connor that he was gracious enough to write answers of his own. I pasted his answers and making my own full responses. The points and has comments are in black and my remarks are in red.
Marcus,
"1. Can you point out an example and show why it showing deceit and dishonesty?
Ted Haggard operating as the President of the Evangelical Churches Association all the while snorting crystal meth and fucking men while demonizing homosexuals.
In asking for example, I wanted to bring up the question why does it matter. How does what Ted Haggard's sins - for that is what deceit and dishonesty are - sins - invalidate Christianity or bolster atheism? IT doesn't.
2. What criteria are you using to judge truth and honesty?
A person says what they mean and they mean what they say. They don't demonize a minority while ingesting illegal drugs and paying men for sex.
So? Agreed Haggard is wrong.. So what? How does that validate your atheism? It doesn't. If you could show that Haggard is only following the commands of the Bible instead of outright rebellion, you'd have a point. But the Bible condemns him just as much as it does the homosexual and all who practice sin.
I mean if morality is subject and truth a matter of preference how did you come to your conclusions? And what standard are you using to make your judgements? That is a strawman argument. I never said that.
So there is an objective, higher standard? Many atheist disagree. If you agree with me that morality and truth are objective, then where does it come from? I made an assumption not a straw man argument. If you don't agree other atheists than I apologize for my mistaken assumption. I should have given you more credit.
Where did that standard come from? The standard comes from living in a democracy where respect for the individual, transparency of information and the rule of law win out.
A standard that in no way can be said to be universal or perfect. Respect for the individual? Seriously? Yes, things are better but no where they ought to be. Rule of law? More like who can afford the most justice gets justice. These: "respect for the individual, transparency of information and the rule of law" are far from universal. This answer is far from answers the question. Nazi Germany would not accept your standard. What makes us right and them wrong? Communist China is beginning to agree more and more but what makes them wrong and us right? Saudi Arabia and whole bunch of nations disagree with our moral standards and lack of moral standards. What makes us right and what makes them wrong? As for those things that everyone almost universally agrees are right and wrong (adultery and theft for example), where did that come from
@ Chuck
3. Accusing Christians of lying or deceit is accusing us of being sinners. So?
I never accused you of being a sinner. I don't believe sin exists. It is a mythological concept that has no relevance outside of primitive justice customs. It is a byproduct custom of ancient religious people looking to create order in barbaric times.
Lying and deceit are defined in the Bible as sins. Sin is rebellion against God at the core - transgressing God's standard. It's just as valid today as it was when Adam disobeyed God because neither God or those standards change.
The Bible says the same same thing.
The bible is a book of ancient myths.
In order to assert this, you have to show that a story in the Bible did not happen...not that you don't believe it could happen. You are making a claim that the Bible says things happened but they didn't. Can you prove that? You could say that the burden of proof is on me to prove that it did happen, but if you are claiming it didn't you can't just say that without proof. The best you can say and be honest is that you don't know for sure.
We know. We agree. That is why we trust Jesus and ride his coattails because we know we are not good enough on our own. We agree it is wrong to lie. Why do you say it's wrong to lie?
I don't say it is only wrong to lie. I illustrate the lies of Christians to implicate their hypocrisy. They "ride the coat-tails" of the divine yet do not behave in an accountable way for their own behavior. Always blaming a mysterious supernatural "sin" state that allows them to absolve themselves without changing. It is your pretentiousness and that I judge.
See? I never said that you believe that lying is the only morally reprehensible behavior one can engage in. I used it because it's the most ubiquitous. Everyone lies and knows its wrong. "Sin" is not a scape goat to use to absolve yourself. It is name given to that part of all of us that fails to toe the standard that our conscience knows is there. Sin bring condemnation not absolution. The Bible challenges us to change not give us an out. When I talked of "riding Jesus' coattails", I was referring to the fact that none of us can do enough to balance the debt we owe because of our sins...not that you get to live any kind of way you want and get off scott free. If you continue sinning constantly in practice. that proves that you are in Christ. Chuck accused me of suggesting he believes something he doesn't, hasn't he done the same to me here? Yup. What kind of Christians does he talk to? What Bible is he reading if he thinks that is what Christians think?
I say it's wrong because it reflects poorly on God and it's disobedience.
How does the lies of a finite being impact an infinite omni-powerful character in any way at all? Your theology is incoherent.
This question means that Chuck does not understand who God is or what sin is. God is infinitely Holy. Anything that isn't Holy is an affront to God's being. Chuck's understanding of humanity and God is incoherent, not my theology. Look at it this way: When your children commit a crime, it reflects on you, your person, your teachings, and your character. It hurts you. This is exactly the same thing with us and God. God is personal and relates with us...like how a parent relates with their child.
@Chuck
. How do Christian sinning invalidate or falsify the Bible?
Christians lying doesn't falsify the bible in any material sense it simply falsifies the claim christians have when they state an authority to revealed morality within. If the bible is magic it seems that its efficacy is variant and can't be seen as predictable or real.
Christians are not claiming an "authority to revealed morality within." I am arguing that the revealed morality is written on our own hearts and seared into our consciouses and in the Bible. Even if a person does not have all of the revealed truth..we are responsible for what we do know - for what we do have. Where does Chuck get the idea that the Bible is magic when it says that we should have nothing to do with magic? Just because people cherry pick, twist, and subvert scripture does not mean that it's not predictable or real. It is consistent and makes sense if you let the text speak for itself and not read your own biases into it. One sure way to tell if you are applying bias is to see if you can find a passage that refutes what you just assumed the text is saying.
One more thing Marcus. I was a lay-minister, missionary and evangelical christian for the past 7 years. I know the bible and your superficial theology. I practiced it.
The last thing I have to say about Chuck's comments is that apostasy is proof that he doesn't understand the Bible, my understanding of, and that he did not live it consistently. If he was truly born again, God will reclaim him and if he was not, I hope he will be in the future. The way Chuck describes sin or salvation is not the way the Bible does. As for my authority to say such thing, another way is to ask the question: "Who died and elected me and other born-again Christians to the right and position to have salvation and proclaim the Gospel? Jesus! And He validated it with His resurrection!
@Chuck...'sides you can respond to my comments here and read them on my blog...nothing stopping you.
Marcus McElhaney said - "If he was truly born again..."
That's just it Marcus, no one is "truly born again", not you, not Chuck, not the Apsotle Paul. For 25 years I thougt I was, but I wasn't. You believe you are, but you are not.
Marcus here are my answers:
You: "In asking for example, I wanted to bring up the question why does it matter. How does what Ted Haggard's sins - for that is what deceit and dishonesty are - sins - invalidate Christianity or bolster atheism? IT doesn't."
Me: Sin doesn't exist. There is no test for it. It is a metaphor in a book of legends and has no phenomenal veracity so, I have no clue what you are talking about here.
You: "So? Agreed Haggard is wrong.. So what? How does that validate your atheism? It doesn't. If you could show that Haggard is only following the commands of the Bible instead of outright rebellion, you'd have a point. But the Bible condemns him just as much as it does the homosexual and all who practice sin."
Me: This is a strawman you've constructed. The discussion is regarding the disingenuous nature of the holy based on their "quote-mining" John as a means to defending their "truth". The discussion has nothing to do with my atheism.
You: "A standard that in no way can be said to be universal or perfect. Respect for the individual? Seriously? Yes, things are better but no where they ought to be. Rule of law? More like who can afford the most justice gets justice. These: "respect for the individual, transparency of information and the rule of law" are far from universal. This answer is far from answers the question. Nazi Germany would not accept your standard. What makes us right and them wrong? Communist China is beginning to agree more and more but what makes them wrong and us right? Saudi Arabia and whole bunch of nations disagree with our moral standards and lack of moral standards. What makes us right and what makes them wrong? As for those things that everyone almost universally agrees are right and wrong (adultery and theft for example), where did that come from"
Me: This is another strawman. I never spoke of universal morality. You brought that up. I spoke of the continued practice of christians to lie as defense of their faith. You are doing it here suggesting I spoke of universal morality when that is not the subject I stated nor, something you could infer by my statements.
You: "Lying and deceit are defined in the Bible as sins. Sin is rebellion against God at the core - transgressing God's standard. It's just as valid today as it was when Adam disobeyed God because neither God or those standards change."
Me: This is circular reasoning and just poor logic.
You: "In order to assert this, you have to show that a story in the Bible did not happen...not that you don't believe it could happen. You are making a claim that the Bible says things happened but they didn't. Can you prove that? You could say that the burden of proof is on me to prove that it did happen, but if you are claiming it didn't you can't just say that without proof. The best you can say and be honest is that you don't know for sure."
Me: No I don't Marcus. The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate why the bible is trust-worthy otherwise your entire argument is an appeal to authority - a logical fallacy.
You: "See? I never said that you believe that lying is the only morally reprehensible behavior one can engage in. I used it because it's the most ubiquitous. Everyone lies and knows its wrong. "Sin" is not a scape goat to use to absolve yourself. It is name given to that part of all of us that fails to toe the standard that our conscience knows is there. Sin bring condemnation not absolution. The Bible challenges us to change not give us an out. When I talked of "riding Jesus' coattails", I was referring to the fact that none of us can do enough to balance the debt we owe because of our sins...not that you get to live any kind of way you want and get off scott free. If you continue sinning constantly in practice. that proves that you are in Christ. Chuck accused me of suggesting he believes something he doesn't, hasn't he done the same to me here? Yup. What kind of Christians does he talk to? What Bible is he reading if he thinks that is what Christians think?"
Me: A thought experiment. My pregnant wife is the back bedroom of our condo when masked burglars come in looking for her to rape her. I lie to them and tell then she is not there. They leave disgruntled. I don't feel my lie is wrong at all. Marcus you continue to lie (or simply are ignorant) when you talk of sin like it is an objective condition one can measure and verify. It isn't. It is a metaphor in a book. All I see is a garden-variety wannabe preacher using very unoriginal arguments (and tortured logic) to prop himself up with superstition and fantasy.
You: "This question means that Chuck does not understand who God is or what sin is. God is infinitely Holy. Anything that isn't Holy is an affront to God's being. Chuck's understanding of humanity and God is incoherent, not my theology. Look at it this way: When your children commit a crime, it reflects on you, your person, your teachings, and your character. It hurts you. This is exactly the same thing with us and God. God is personal and relates with us...like how a parent relates with their child."
Me: No Marcus, if my children commit a crime it is their's to own and, how can my actions "hurt" an all-powerful being? How can that be a reality while you simultaneously assert this being is "perfect". Logic demands non-contradiction. You haven't satisfied that. Your theology is still incoherent.
You: "Christians are not claiming an "authority to revealed morality within." I am arguing that the revealed morality is written on our own hearts and seared into our consciouses and in the Bible."
Me: More circular reasoning.
You: "Just because people cherry pick, twist, and subvert scripture does not mean that it's not predictable or real. It is consistent and makes sense if you let the text speak for itself and not read your own biases into it. One sure way to tell if you are applying bias is to see if you can find a passage that refutes what you just assumed the text is saying."
Me: More circular reasoning.
You: "The last thing I have to say about Chuck's comments is that apostasy is proof that he doesn't understand the Bible, my understanding of, and that he did not live it consistently. If he was truly born again, God will reclaim him and if he was not, I hope he will be in the future. The way Chuck describes sin or salvation is not the way the Bible does. As for my authority to say such thing, another way is to ask the question: "Who died and elected me and other born-again Christians to the right and position to have salvation and proclaim the Gospel? Jesus! And He validated it with His resurrection!"
Me: And, more circular reasoning.
@bob.
Well, Jesus says different. So who should I believe. You? Or the one who created the Universe?
Marcus McElhaney said..."@bob.
Well, Jesus says different. So who should I believe. You? Or the one who created the Universe?"
Marcus, Jesus is just another person from a long line of ancient faithful folk.Silly faithful folk who once even used to tell people silly things, like they maybe needed to sacrifice the blood of their animals or even humans,to help escape such things as drought or sickness etc.
Its often been suggested Benny Hinn does miracles, he`s supposedly some modern day messiah also so they try telling us.Quite likely his supposed feats will also be recorded in future history,and many complete walleys will simply swallow it all hook line and sinker too.
Why your great need for being a follower of "faith" in either Bob or books written about Jesus?.
Marcus McElhaney said..."As for those things that everyone almost universally agrees are right and wrong (adultery and theft for example), where did that come from"
Marcus please explain why we should likely have reason to ever expect any group of humans might likely find adultery or theft to be considered such a good thing ?.
Do you honestly think it ever very likely any group of humans would ever be found considering these actions as being such a pleasing asset to their society?.
Marcus Marcus ....PLEASE throw away your silly bible that obviously seems to teach many people to follow such childlike ignorance,and for once in your life just stick to doing some simple maths.You will find it quite enlightening!
These things are universal because humans are universal,and humans being humans simply are not so very likely to ever find adultery or theft as being so beneficial in the long run.Its really all about use of some plain simple common sense Marcus,thats all.
Marcus can you not see how ignorant it tends to make faithful folk look,when their followers keep bringing up such stupid things as these arguments of not understanding why these things should be seen to be so universal.It like faithful folks are trying to convince us humans dont even possess half a brain that could be made use of.
Do faithful folk really think humans lack a brain and use of their own reasoning and common sense?.
Marcus please do tell ?,why do you suppose humans might actually lack the ability, to ever figure out for themselves that maybe adultery and theft might not actually be such a great asset
Marcus McElhaney said...
@bob.
Well, Jesus says different. So who should I believe. You? Or the one who created the Universe?
I don't think you believe Jesus Marcus. If you care to prove your faith..."Sell everything you have and give to the poor". Until you do that, well, you really shouldn't claim to be a believer in Jesus.
Prove that you are "born again".
Claiming that you are "born again" is just empty words - over and over again.
@Gandolf
No where does the Bible asks for a human sacrifice to expatiate sins. And calling Jesus "just another person" means that you have no idea who Jesus is. I'd agree with you that Hinn is far from a messiah. And in no way would put him or any televangelist anywhere near Jesus.
And although people agree that adultery and theft are bad, people still do it. How do you explain that? It's stupid. I will not throw away the Bible because it explains why people do such stupid things. Adultery and theft are not against human nature but a byproduct of it. Not common sense at all. That is why we must learn not to lie or to cheat or to steal. We would not know these were wrong if we could get away with it and no one told us it was wrong. Your argument does not answer the questions. If you can't stop me from taking anything from you I want and neither you nor anyone could stop me, why shouldn't I. Europeans colonized the Americas and Africas and brutally raped and pillaged. Were they wrong? Should they be forced to give an account? Why? We believers don't think people have a half a brain, but we know people are enslaved to their sinful natures and cannot be free on their own no matter how much they might like to be free. People are so enslaved they don't even know it in most cases. Go ahead...given the right circumstances you will steal. You will lie. All the while justifying yourself. That is why believers know that we need salvation. I know that humans lack the ability to know right and wrong because I have seen the depth of darkness in my own heart and know I need a savior. If you look into your own heart and compare your attitudes and actions with the standard of Morality of the Bible you have to know that you don't even come close. That is one way the Bible is useful - insight into what God calls holy.
@Bob
That is one of the most silly arguments ever. Of course I have heard it before. That is not what Jesus commanded. He told one man who loved his possessions more than he loved anything else to do that...not all of his followers. Read Matthew 19:16-30;Mark 10:17-31 Your point is pointless. I can prove thatr I am born-again because I agree that Jesus is God and that God's word is completely true. I agree that I am a sinner in need of saving. I am the worse sinner that I know. And In Christ there is no Condemnation! God has taken my heart of stone and replaced it with a heart of flesh. I want to please God in all I say and do....that is how I know I am Born-Again. The next comment you make...make it a better one.
@Chuck here are my answers:
Me: "In asking for example, I wanted to bring up the question why does it matter. How does what Ted Haggard's sins - for that is what deceit and dishonesty are - sins - invalidate Christianity or bolster atheism? IT doesn't."
You: Sin doesn't exist. There is no test for it. It is a metaphor in a book of legends and has no phenomenal veracity so, I have no clue what you are talking about here.
Me:Proverbs 4:19
Me: "So? Agreed Haggard is wrong.. So what? How does that validate your atheism? It doesn't. If you could show that Haggard is only following the commands of the Bible instead of outright rebellion, you'd have a point. But the Bible condemns him just as much as it does the homosexual and all who practice sin."
You: This is a strawman you've constructed. The discussion is regarding the disingenuous nature of the holy based on their "quote-mining" John as a means to defending their "truth". The discussion has nothing to do with my atheism.
Me: It has everything to do with your atheism. You argued that Christians lie about being righteous undermines their authority to proclaim what morality is.
Me: "A standard that in no way can be said to be universal or perfect. Respect for the individual? Seriously? Yes, things are better but no where they ought to be. Rule of law? More like who can afford the most justice gets justice. These: "respect for the individual, transparency of information and the rule of law" are far from universal. This answer is far from answers the question. Nazi Germany would not accept your standard. What makes us right and them wrong? Communist China is beginning to agree more and more but what makes them wrong and us right? Saudi Arabia and whole bunch of nations disagree with our moral standards and lack of moral standards. What makes us right and what makes them wrong? As for those things that everyone almost universally agrees are right and wrong (adultery and theft for example), where did that come from"
You: This is another strawman. I never spoke of universal morality. You brought that up. I spoke of the continued practice of christians to lie as defense of their faith. You are doing it here suggesting I spoke of universal morality when that is not the subject I stated nor, something you could infer by my statements
Me: I agree I brought it up because I wanted to know how you answer it? I didn't insinuate that you brought it up. I chose to push you on it and you caved - giving no answer. You are the one who gave an answer for where your moral standards came from. If you feel trapped without an answer...that's a fault in your worldview not in my character.
@Chuck
ME: "Lying and deceit are defined in the Bible as sins. Sin is rebellion against God at the core - transgressing God's standard. It's just as valid today as it was when Adam disobeyed God because neither God or those standards change.
You: This is circular reasoning and just poor logic.
Me: Prove that. Why is that wrong?
ME: "In order to assert this, you have to show that a story in the Bible did not happen...not that you don't believe it could happen. You are making a claim that the Bible says things happened but they didn't. Can you prove that? You could say that the burden of proof is on me to prove that it did happen, but if you are claiming it didn't you can't just say that without proof. The best you can say and be honest is that you don't know for sure."
You: No I don't Marcus. The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate why the bible is trust-worthy otherwise your entire argument is an appeal to authority - a logical fallacy.
Me: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4J5tU2Zyvw&feature=player_embedded
Me: "See? I never said that you believe that lying is the only morally reprehensible behavior one can engage in. I used it because it's the most ubiquitous. Everyone lies and knows its wrong. "Sin" is not a scape goat to use to absolve yourself. It is name given to that part of all of us that fails to toe the standard that our conscience knows is there. Sin bring condemnation not absolution. The Bible challenges us to change not give us an out. When I talked of "riding Jesus' coattails", I was referring to the fact that none of us can do enough to balance the debt we owe because of our sins...not that you get to live any kind of way you want and get off scott free. If you continue sinning constantly in practice. that proves that you are in Christ. Chuck accused me of suggesting he believes something he doesn't, hasn't he done the same to me here? Yup. What kind of Christians does he talk to? What Bible is he reading if he thinks that is what Christians think?"
You: A thought experiment. My pregnant wife is the back bedroom of our condo when masked burglars come in looking for her to rape her. I lie to them and tell then she is not there. They leave disgruntled. I don't feel my lie is wrong at all. Marcus you continue to lie (or simply are ignorant) when you talk of sin like it is an objective condition one can measure and verify. It isn't. It is a metaphor in a book. All I see is a garden-variety wannabe preacher using very unoriginal arguments (and tortured logic) to prop himself up with superstition and fantasy.
You: That's really funny. Because what would be more than likely such people who would want to rape your wife would kill you not leave disgruntled. Sin is not a lie...it's rebelling against God. It can be measured and quantified. The Bible has a standard...whether you agree with them or not. If you are not following that standard - you are sinning. Fact! How often do you get to tell a lie to save a life or help another person? I have never been in that situation. Every opportunity I have ever had to lie has been in my own self-interest. Be honest. The same is true of yourself. You have never been in the Hebrew midwives' position Exodus 1:15-22 (unless you have counseled women on abortion) or Rahab's situation Joshua 2
@Chuck
Me: "This question means that Chuck does not understand who God is or what sin is. God is infinitely Holy. Anything that isn't Holy is an affront to God's being. Chuck's understanding of humanity and God is incoherent, not my theology. Look at it this way: When your children commit a crime, it reflects on you, your person, your teachings, and your character. It hurts you. This is exactly the same thing with us and God. God is personal and relates with us...like how a parent relates with their child."
You: No Marcus, if my children commit a crime it is their's to own and, how can my actions "hurt" an all-powerful being? How can that be a reality while you simultaneously assert this being is "perfect". Logic demands non-contradiction. You haven't satisfied that. Your theology is still incoherent.
Me: This statement makes me think that you don't have children. I'm not saying that God needs anything, but that doesn't mean that God can't be grieved by our actions. It's not a contradiction to point out that God can hold us accountable for anything good or bad that we say or do. We belong to him Read Jeremiah 18.
ME: "Christians are not claiming an "authority to revealed morality within." I am arguing that the revealed morality is written on our own hearts and seared into our consciouses and in the Bible."
You: More circular reasoning. The fact that there are universal moral standards prove this.
ME: Asserting circular reasoning does not make for circular reasoning.
ME: "Just because people cherry pick, twist, and subvert scripture does not mean that it's not predictable or real. It is consistent and makes sense if you let the text speak for itself and not read your own biases into it. One sure way to tell if you are applying bias is to see if you can find a passage that refutes what you just assumed the text is saying."
You: More circular reasoning.
ME: Prove me wrong.
ME: "The last thing I have to say about Chuck's comments is that apostasy is proof that he doesn't understand the Bible, my understanding of, and that he did not live it consistently. If he was truly born again, God will reclaim him and if he was not, I hope he will be in the future. The way Chuck describes sin or salvation is not the way the Bible does. As for my authority to say such thing, another way is to ask the question: "Who died and elected me and other born-again Christians to the right and position to have salvation and proclaim the Gospel? Jesus! And He validated it with His resurrection!"
You: And, more circular reasoning.
ME: Is that the best comeback you have...ROFL
Marcus
Let's cut to the chase shall we? Your entire argument is nothing more than the childish doggrel, "Jesus loves me this I know for the bible tells me so." I'd suggest a book on basic logic so you can better understand the essence of a tautology. Your certainty is wrapped up in creating many of them. You have the establishment clause of the 1st amendment. That's about as much I will reasonably grant you. Beyond that, you have the intellectual worth of any other superstitous loon.
@Chuck
Name Calling and disrespect is the first sign of a failed argument.
Marcus
Identifying "magical thinking" is a sign of intellectual honesty. Your entire cas consists of "I know the bible is true, because the bible is true." Why should I offer your superstitions respect? Do you respect astrology? Mormonism? Ancestor worship? When you honestly admit why you reject other gods you will see why I reject yours.
Whimpering is the first sign one may not be as strong as he imagines.
@Chuck
I didn't say that the Bible was true because it says so. You did. I didn't even bring magic up. You did. Showing that dishonest and fallacious name calling without proof as being a failed argument is not whimpering. It is an observation. You have no real refutation for anything I have said other than claiming that you don't have to. Just surrender. Tell the truth. You have no evidence than the Bible is false but you choose to disbelieve if's clear teaching and have decided to stand on your own righteousness if ever called to account for your life. If that is what you think...fine. But don't say that is your position because the Bible is false. I can provide all kinds of Biblical evidence. They are on the blog you refuse to read, but in the end it's not because there isn't enough evidence but because you love your sin more than you love the truth...just like the Bible says.
So Marcus
You can provide biblical evidence that the bible is true? How is that not the argument I stated you have been making? Are you ignorant or a liar? And I don't need to read your blog, your comments here show the lack of intellectual integrity you hold.
And Marcus,
I put you in the same category as Tom Cruise when he sells Scientology or, that midget woman from Poltergeist when she told Carol Ann to run towards the light, or my little niece when she describes her imaginary friend.
The commitment to the fiction is cute but if taken too far can be disturbing.
Marcus - "That is one of the most silly arguments ever."
Oh yea...stick around :)
Now, watch how Marcus attempts to justify his frivolous and selfish spending - "That is not what Jesus commanded. He told one man who loved his possessions more than he loved anything else to do that...not all of his followers."
OK wiseguy, who was Jesus talking to here - "Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you..."
Since Jesus was talking ONLY to the 11 disciples then the Great Commission ONLY applies to the 11...correct? Of course I'm correct because I am using the very same reasoning you just used.
Marcus - "Your point is pointless. I can prove thatr I am born-again because I agree that Jesus is God and that God's word is completely true. I agree that I am a sinner in need of saving. I am the worse sinner that I know. And In Christ there is no Condemnation! God has taken my heart of stone and replaced it with a heart of flesh. I want to please God in all I say and do....that is how I know I am Born-Again.
Marcus, Marcus...I didn't tell you to convince YOURSELF you were born again. Of course you believe you are. My challenge was for you to PROVE it (to me, to us). By simply stating that you agree with a bunch of ancient religious dictates found in the bible, that in no way bolsters your claim of some spiritual new birth. It may help you believe, but of course what you believe is "pointless" with regard to our debate?
@Chuck...no, I never said that the Bible is true because it says so. You said I did. The intellectual dishonesty is yours not mine. If I said such a thing, where? All I've said is that there is evidence of the validity of the Bible and i have numerous posts about that if you really cared about if the Bible was true or not. You have made up your mind and don't want to to look at any contrary facts. Smells like fear. "You may learn something."
Marcus,
Your words, "But don't say that is your position because the Bible is false. I can provide all kinds of Biblical evidence."
I say the Bible is legend (not necessarily "false" but also definitely not documentary history) and your response is to say that you can provide all kinds of biblical evidence to prove the bible is not false (e.g. "true").
Therefore the two sentences above indicate you insist that the bible is true because biblical evidence says the bible is true.
Do you want to clarify your position or do you still hold to the fact you aren't employing a tautology?
Marcus,
It isn't fear by the way.
Frankly, I am not convinced you are all that intelligent.
I'd prefer to get my biblical criticism from guys like Dr. Bart Ehrman and Dr. Ken Pulliam.
I've read your blog. It is the same old re-hashed superstition I heard from small-minded christians when I attended church.
It does not have any critical analysis hygiene and presupposes the christian myths as validated history.
True biblical criticism (like the kind practiced in an historical manner by Dr. Ehrman and a contextual manner by Dr. Pulliam) offer humble scholarship not, ignorant (albeit impassioned) polemic.
I stepped away the superstition you embrace risking most of my social standing and friendships so, until you do the same, dial down the talk of fear.
@Chuck
Circular reasoning would mean that my evidence would be in the Bible. I didn't say that. I mean that the evidence is "Biblical" meaning that is supports the Bible.
@Chuck...You do fear because you haven't offered any argument at all other than what I've said is wrong. Prove it...if you can. Ehrman has been refuted quite a bit. Why is he right and his critics wrong? I'm waiting. Come get it.
Marcus,
You're right. I'm terrified of you and can't bear to face your Holy Spirit power. I mean if I go to your blog my ability to reason and to think and to apply logic will just melt away and the superstitions of 1st Century primitives will become ripe with insight.
You're right Marcus. I'm scared.
@Cnuck...make an argument that shows you can "reason"...i need a laugh.
Marcus
I told you I was scared of you. Isn't that a reasonable argument?
@Chuck...fear is a reasonable argument if you wanna wimp out or admit that God is right and throw yourself onto God's mercy.
Marcus McElhaney said..."No where does the Bible asks for a human sacrifice to expatiate sins."
No i never said that.But ignorant faithful folks did suggest sacrifice,that it maybe was before Jesus time, is beside the point.My point is about how ignorant faith can often make folks.
M said...."And in no way would put him or any televangelist anywhere near Jesus. "
Thats your personal choice,but it dont prove Jesus any more of a messiah than the likes of Benny Hinn.Nor does it disprove that the ministry of Benny Hinn could likely get exaggerated,like maybe the ministry of Jesus was.
M said...."And although people agree that adultery and theft are bad, people still do it. How do you explain that? It's stupid"
No its human nature Marcus,humans simply are not perfect! .Were you under some silly ignorant notion that maybe they was?.
Do i really need to explain this?.Can you not use some common sense?
Look my friend the imperfection of humanity is even plainly displayed within the bible also,faithful humans once thought torturing folks to death by stoning was even quite ok.We do make mistakes,the best we can hope for is that we learn.
M said..."I will not throw away the Bible because it explains why people do such stupid things."
Well i dont think its explaining much for you Marcus,seems to me its indoctrinating you into being ignorant.Seems your faith is making you caste aside simple use of your brain.You have become so faithfully blissful,it seems you think humans should have reason to be perfect?.Where you got that silly idea,can only be through the blindness gained through reading religious books to much.
M said...."Adultery and theft are not against human nature but a byproduct of it. Not common sense at all. "
These things are against human nature in the sense they do not allow for humans to coexist with any ease.
Surely you can see that Marcus?.Adultery can cause jealosy and anger and sometimes murder.Promotion of theft sooner or later comes full circle,and a thief can become a victim.
How do you suppose this is not against the nature of social humans, trying to coexist in groups Marcus ? ...Please do explain !!....We look forward to the enlightened thoughts, of how faithful feel theft and adultery is not against human nature.
M said....."That is why we must learn not to lie or to cheat or to steal. We would not know these were wrong if we could get away with it and no one told us it was wrong."
Marcus look my friend when people lie cheat or steal from us,we can learn the effects of the outcome for ourselves.
Please explain why we need some gods to tell us this isnt so great? ...Please enlighten us with your bright christian mind, why we would ever have real need for some Jesus to explain these things?
M said....."Your argument does not answer the questions. If you can't stop me from taking anything from you I want and neither you nor anyone could stop me, why shouldn't I. Europeans colonized the Americas and Africas and brutally raped and pillaged. Were they wrong?"
No Marcus its your silly faithful argument which does not have realistic answers.
You can steal from me sure,but will you find it so great when the same happens to you?.Will your world be so great when everyone is running around all the time ripping each other off?.If a rapist finds himself getting raped,does he really need some bloody Jesus to explain maybe rape wasnt such a great thing after all?.
Come on Marcus ,please use your head! not some silly old ancient book.
Marcus
Are you suggesting if I succumb to your badgering I will succumb to god? Are you suggesting you are god? Hmmmmm . . .
M said ...."We believers don't think people have a half a brain, but we know people are enslaved to their sinful natures and cannot be free on their own no matter how much they might like to be free. People are so enslaved they don't even know it in most cases. Go ahead...given the right circumstances you will steal. You will lie. All the while justifying yourself."
Oh i see ...So are you suggesting those who are non believers all run around lieing stealing and raping folks ?
Look Marcus you need to wake up! ...Priests even lie steal and sexually molest people.
The presense of god makes little difference .
Humans are simply not perfect!
M said....."If you look into your own heart and compare your attitudes and actions with the standard of Morality of the Bible you have to know that you don't even come close. That is one way the Bible is useful - insight into what God calls holy."
What kind of utter rubbish you have been indoctrinated with Marcus.
Look i know im not perfect ....But im not bigoted like your stinking bible is that suggests shunning of people.That suggests its stinking messiah came like a sword to split and divide families like it has,as being kind of ok?.That suggests women as being lower order than men.That talks about dashing babies against the rocks.
Marcus im glad i cant compare my morals with morals written within your beloved bible ...If i could then id know im real piece of nasty scum
Your bible is a outdated book from a time when many humans were ignorant bigoted thoughtless barbarians.
If i looked into my heart and found i could compare it with all the thinking of the bible.
Then id have good reason to really feel kind of disgusted in myself.
Post a Comment