Pages

Tuesday, July 14, 2015

Rebuttal to Scott M. Sullivan's Claim that Atheist Don't Think Christians Should Evangelize (Objection #4)

Scott M. Sullivan claims in how to answer a Jesus Critic that atheists :
“ ...don’t care what Christians believe, they just don’t think they should try to evangelize others.”


As an Ignostic Atheist, I have no objection to evangelizing, as this is how I too, 'spread the word' of logical reasoning and knowledge.  I understand the Bible, so for example, when Jehovah's Witness's knock on my door, I invite them in and then illustrate to them just how nonsensical their beliefs are using logic and reasoning.  I find it very entertaining to hear them stutter over their words,  but I am sure 'Dr.' Sullivan probably would object to my form of 'evangelizing'. I use the same tactics when I see evangelists on the streets. It's very entertaining to watch them squirm when they cannot come up with a logical answer.

 'Dr.' Sullivan tells us that Christians believe that it is very important to help others come to know Christ and follow his teachings. I would argue it is very important to teach people knowledge, facts, science, philosophy, etc, and to present arguments for any hypothesis you may have.  In this manner, we are able to eliminate hypotheses which do not follow the H-D (scientific) method of reasoning. (Christianity as a whole fails this method)  Christians on the other hand, have argued against knowledge since the dawn of its origin. In fact, this is why the Dark Ages took place and the library of Alexandria was burned.  During that time, learning out of the scope of religious teachings was frowned upon. Gullible sheep are much more inclined to believe nonsense than those that have been taught logic, philosophy, science and the art of deductive reasoning, which Dr. Sullivan admits himself as he tells us 60-90 % of Christians who enter university, lose their faith.  Universities teach logic and how to apply the H-D method--which may be one of the main reasons why Christians lose their faith in droves while attending school. Why, it even states in the Bible that Yahweh would 'destroy wisdom'--a clear indication that wisdom is a threat to their belief system.

"For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." 1Cor. 1:19

'Dr.' Sullivan goes on to say that:

"If Christianity is true, then surely there is nothing wrong with helping others come to know this truth. If Christianity is true, then helping others to see this fact is the most loving thing one can do for them. So the issue is not really about evangelism, but whether or not Christianity is true."

Let's replace Christianity with science, and see how it reads:

"If science is true, then surely there is nothing wrong with helping others come to know this truth. If science is true, then helping others to see this fact is the most loving thing one can do for them. So the issue is not really about evangelism, but whether or not  science is true."

Scientific hypotheses have been shown to be true, as they follow the H-D method of deduction, however, Christianity has NOT been shown to be true using the H-D method.

Logic (I hope 'Dr.' Sullivan can grasp this.)

If scientific hypotheses have been shown to be true using the H-D method of deduction, then these scientific hypotheses are true.
Scientific hypotheses have been proven to be true using the H-D method of deduction.
Therefore these scientific hypotheses are true via the H-D method.

If Christianity has been shown to be true using the H-D method of deduction, then Christianity is true.
Christianity has not been proven to be true using the H-D method of deduction.
Therefore, Christianity has not been proven to be true via the H-D method.

See how simple that is. Christianity is faith based--not knowledge based.  Knowledge is power. Faith just creates sheeple who will follow the herd and do as their masters command without thinking, and to believe without question. My advice however, is to question EVERYTHING. That is the only way you will be able to catch a glimpse of the world for what it truly is. Evangelize TRUTH--not superstition.







Monday, July 13, 2015

A Christian Dared ask These Questions on Gay Marriage--so I Answered Them

Recently, I came upon this web page that asks Christians to ask themselves the hard questions (excuse the bad pun) concerning homosexual marriage, so I thought I would answer them from the viewpoint of someone that doesn't share their belief system. 

1. How long have you believed that gay marriage is something to be celebrated?
All unions between consenting loving adults should be celebrated. What loving, consenting adults do in private is none of my business.
2. What Bible verses led you to change your mind?

The fulfillment passages of Matthew 5:17-20 states that all the laws must be obeyed until heaven and earth pass away. Nowhere does Jesus differentiate between dietary, moral, or legal laws, and he makes it clear that his followers are to follow ALL  of these laws if they want to see heaven. Christians twisted his words using Humpty Dumpty semantics to get out of that responsibility, but Jesus was clear. Jesus said ALL of them were to be obeyed by his followers until heaven and earth pass away, and if believers 'relax' on even the least of these laws--they are out of luck.  Therefore, Christians need to follow all of the laws, or abandon their religion altogether, because according to Jesus, a Christian won't likely go to heaven anyway if they eat shrimp or wear clothing made of various fibres, or lie with a man, etc,--interesting that it says nothing about women lying together in the OT. Note that Jesus said, "not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished".  This doesn't mean only some of laws --it means ALL of them.  According to the Bible, Christians can't pick and choose which laws to obey and which no long apply because their god told them ALL of them apply--even the least of them.

 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.  tTherefore whoever relaxes uone of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least vin the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great vin the kingdom of heaven.(Matt 5-18-19)
3. How would you make a positive case from Scripture that sexual activity between two persons of the same sex is a blessing to be celebrated?
Jesus did not condemn homosexuality, even when confronted by a Roman who asked him to heal his 'pais' (male slave). This is significant because pederasty was still practiced at that time, and men kept boys and spread their 'knowledge' via male on male sex. If he found anything wrong with this practice, I am sure he would have spoken against it. Perhaps, Jesus himself was a homosexual as passages of the Bible seem to indicate.  Polygamy was also practiced in Biblical times and long after. The 'rules' we practice today, came much later when church wanted to wrest more control over its flock. Before that, marriage was more of a civil union. See this post for details.
4. What verses would you use to show that a marriage between two persons of the same sex can adequately depict Christ and the church?
Luke 6:31 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.'
According to the Bible, Jesus doesn't differentiate between hetero and homosexual love. Any kind of love is good. Love is love.
5. Do you think Jesus would have been okay with homosexual behavior between consenting adults in a committed relationship?
Jesus said nothing against homosexual love, and I won't put words in his mouth. In fact, he may have been homosexual or bisexual himself as the Bible itself alludes to. Biblical references to Jesus being in the company of "naked boys"  appear in the scriptures of Mark when he is in the Garden of Gethsemane. It is in this Garden that Jesus is arrested by the Romans after supposedly being betrayed by Judas, and it is in this Garden that we also find a young, naked, unnamed boy. This boy was "a young man, wearing nothing but a linen garment," and “was following Jesus." When the Romans seized Jesus, the young boy "fled naked, leaving his garment behind" (Mark 14:51). Apologists attempt to claim that this boy was Mark himself, and elaborate on the shame he must have felt at abandoning his Lord, but this cannot be the case as Mark was not written by the apostle Mark. Mark's author is unknown. A better explanation via Ockham's razor, would be that Jesus could have been indulging in the practice of pederasty, and the unknown Greek who actually wrote the gospel thought nothing of it because pederasty was considered normal, so he included it in his narrative.
6. If so, why did he reassert the Genesis definition of marriage as being one man and one woman?
There was no mention of 'marriage' in the Garden of Eden. There is only a union joined by God, and if God is everywhere as Christians tell us, then he is with the gay couples that are being married as well. Marriage, after all, had always been a civil agreement, and not a religious one until about the 13th century. In fact, within the entire Old Testament polygamy was a normal practice all the way from Kings (said to be the oldest book of the Bible) to the New Testament and beyond. Marriage as an entity isn't spoken of very often in the Bible, and many times it is spoken of disparagingly (As when Paul mentions you should only get married if you can't control your own lust) In the New Testament (Matthew 19:1-12 ) Jesus was approached with a question concerning divorce, but these questions were in reference to the Old Testament, in which  polygamy was allowed. He did not condemn the practice of polygamy, just like he did not condemn the practice of homosexuality.

7. As you think about the long history of the church and the near universal disapproval of same-sex sexual activity, what do you think you understand about the Bible that Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin, and Luther failed to grasp?
I think about the long history of persecution where homosexuals were tortured, killed, and their properties confiscated by the church. This is what was promulgated from the doctrines of Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin and Luther. This is also how the church became so extremely wealthy. This is not love. I don't think Jesus would approve.
8. What arguments would you use to explain to Christians in Africa, Asia, and South America that their understanding of homosexuality is biblically incorrect and your new understanding of homosexuality is not culturally conditioned?
I would argue that the changing doctrines of the Bible itself have been 'culturally conditioned' as the Biblical laws have been changed by  Christians over the centuries. Until only recently, women couldn't become pastors, or even vote because of how the Bible views women. Women of course, changed all of that, and at long last, we are now making changes that gives everyone equal rights under the law to be married regardless of their sexual orientation.  Christians claim they no longer have to follow the laws, as Jesus redeemed them from laws of the OT --which isn't true as stated above in the passages of Matthew 5:17-20.  According to these Christians however, all you need is love, and if two people love each other, that is all that matters. If they think otherwise, they would be hypocrites.
9. Should your brothers and sisters in Christ who disagree with homosexual practice be allowed to exercise their religious beliefs without fear of punishment, retribution, or coercion?
It's a free country. Christians have the right of free speech to voice their opinion and practice their religion--without fear of persecution and without persecuting others who do not share their beliefs. Other people who do not have those same beliefs should also have the right to exercise their beliefs without fear of persecution and without persecuting others. What Christians do NOT have however, is the right to tell two consenting adults how to live their life according to THEIR beliefs. As mentioned above, marriage was a civil arrangement until the church became involved in about the 13th century or so. Since there are thousands of different religions, and different customs associated with these religions-- legal marriage is a CIVIL practice. After all, church and state are SEPARATE entities--let's keep it that way.
10. Will you speak up for your fellow Christians when their jobs, their accreditation, their reputation, and their freedoms are threatened because of this issue?
As an Ignostic Atheist, I would speak up for anyone that is being persecuted for what they believe in--Christian, homosexuals, women, Muslims, etc. Everyone has a right to believe whatever they want to believe, but if those beliefs are shown to be contradictory, and causes harm, then believers would be wise to accept the valid arguments against them and change their beliefs. I see no harm in a loving homosexual marriage. 

Wednesday, July 8, 2015

On the Question of Whether or Not Christians are Hypocrites -- - A Response to Scott M Sullivan

In my previous post, I began with Sullivan's second counter to nonbelievers 'objections' to his religious beliefs. Now, I will start at the beginning of his little book titled "How to Answer a Jesus Critic" with the first objection that, "Christians are a bunch of hypocrites."

Definition of 'hypocrite - a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.

 The key word here is 'pretend' because that is what Christians MUST do if they claim to be virtuous and have morals, because their religion teaches them that all of humanity are BORN SINNERS. i.e., they are taught they can't help themselves from doing bad things.  They are going to do bad things  no matter what, because according to their teachings, their human nature is INNATELY BAD.  This means they are taught they have NO CHOICE-- i.e,. They have no free will to choose to do the right thing every time. Yes, I mean every single time. I'm happy to say I don't believe that philosophy, so I do choose to do what is right every time, but if I make a mistake, I own it. I do not consciously rape, murder, steal etc. and use the excuse that "I'm only human."  This is the domain of the Christians.  Their religion expects them to be bad so they will continue to come to the church seeking absolution. It's a vicious circle of sin, repent, sin, repent, repeat when necessary, which results in women being beaten to death, children being raped, and a host of other 'sins' being repeated over and over again--and churches lining their pockets with the guilt of these so-called 'sinners.'

That being said, these same Christians who profess to be virtuous, and moral while doing heinous acts are Christians because they believe Jesus supposedly took the blame for all their misdeeds on his shoulders. If this was true, this would be the most immoral action ever, as it absolves perpetrators of their crimes. No responsibility. 'Christians' do commit heinous acts--and are expected to. 

He goes on to say that, "A religion should be judged on what it professes, not on the failings of those who do not live in accord with its teachings."

My response to him is that I DO judge on what Christianity professes which results in heinous actions based on those teachings. I object to this philosophy as it promotes the notion of humanity being born innately flawed-- but it's ok, because Christians somehow don't have to take responsibility for their actions based on those flaws--unless, of course, the secular courts have anything to say about it.  I'm actually judging Christianity ON its teachings and the consequences of those teachings. As the ancient Christian saint and philosopher Pelagius said long ago, this philosophy leads to 'moral laxity.'  It teaches its followers to 'keep trying' to be good, but they are also taught the will continue to fail because, well, they're  'born sinners. As long as they say 'sorry to Jesus,' however, everything will be fine for them. Unfortunately, there is no compensation for the child that was raped, or the mother that was murdered by these same Christians. 

For this reason, in a world dominated with people who are Christian, we are subjected to a planet inundated with rapists, murderers, thieves,wife beaters, etc., who believe they can't help themselves from being rapists, murderers, thieves, wife beaters, etc.

Christians must believe that they ARE virtuous and at the same that it is IMPOSSIBLE to be virtuous which goes against the law of non-contradiction.  This means Christians can conclude ANYTHING from the teachings of the Bible. They are hypocrites and they are not hypocrites at the same time. More to follow on this subject at a later time.



Monday, July 6, 2015

Christians - Oblivious to their own Contradictions

Scot M Sullivan refuted
How to Answer a Jesus Critic
I recently read something that I found quite amusing that I would like to share. I downloaded this little gem titled "How to Answer a Jesus Critic" by Scott Sullivan PhD.  for free, so I took a glance, and in no time at all I found a blatant contraction in BOLD lettering--in his second argument no less!!

 The so-called 'scholars' are attempting to 'shock and awe' the gullible into believing their propaganda, but it doesn't take long for anyone with a basic understanding of logic to see through their BS, which is quite evident these days. (Thank God for that!!)   Christians you see, are becoming anxious in the United States as their numbers are dwindling quite rapidly. Even they admit that once so-called 'Christians' enter college, 60-90% of them become unbelievers. Why, this is exactly what happened to me as well a long time ago, and I am quite pleased that the trend continues.

Despite that fact, the die hard Christian believers still think they can prove their god with logic, when they have no grasp of it themselves. Even the PhD's. How sad...:(  For them--not me. I find it quite amusing actually.

Here's an example of what I am talking about.

Below was cut and pasted directly from this book. See if you can spot the contradiction:
____________________________

 “God doesn’t care which religion you believe.”
   Response: First of all, how do you know what God cares about? Has he told you? He didn’t
tell me. Where did you get this idea?
Secondly: it is impossible that all religions can be true, since they make contradictory
claims.
       So if one religion is true, then it follows that any other religion which contradicts the true one 
       must be false.        
       God being all-wise and loving, prefers that you believe truth over error.
   So if there is a true religion, clearly that is the one that God wants you to believe.
 
Finally, the God of the Bible certainly cares about which religion you believe.
     In the Old Testament the Jewish people were constantly warned not to worship
the gods of the pagans. Moreover, Jesus thinks it matters what religion you believe
     and said so on numerous occasions. For example, in Mark 16:15-16 Jesus said,
“Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.
    Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be    
    condemned.  ”So Jesus certainly thinks it matters what you believe. 
_____________________________

 If you haven't spotted it yet, let me help you out.  In the first line of his response he tells us, how do you know what God cares about? Has he told you? He didn't me. Where did you get this idea?  To which I say, EXACTLY.  But that's not the point. The point I am making here is about what he says next.  Go down a few more lines and he tells us that:

...THE GOD OF THE BIBLE CERTAINLY CARES ABOUT WHICH RELIGION YOU BELIEVE.

So I would ask this so-called 'Christian scholar' exactly how he knows the god of the Bible cares about which religion I believe. How do you know what God cares about? Has he told you? He didn't tell me. Where did you get this idea?

It's bad enough that he is begging the question (a fallacy) when he concludes his religion is the one true religion without evidence and therefore argues that since his is the one true religion, all the others must be false--but to put such a blatant contradiction on the same page and expect no one to notice.--priceless.

I forgot just how much fun this is...  See you soon. I think I might just go over the entire book and give my 'review'. I can't stop laughing......

Addendum: I've taken a photo of that page with the link address and downloaded the book in case Mr. Sullivan realizes his errors and just eliminates the document and tries to pretend it never existed--which would be my advice...:).  And please, please DO NOT order the so-called 'logic' courses this non-expert is offering, as if this little book is any indication of the type of 'logic' he has to offer, you will be wasting your hard earned money.





Saturday, July 4, 2015

Happy Independence Day (What a Farce)

This weekend, I like to watch movies, and some of my favorites are 'V for Vendetta' and the Matrix series. I love the Matrix because it succinctly illustrates the FACT that life is basically an illusion--but of whose design?  This is something I have been contemplating for a long time now.

Society as it is structured likes to 'pigeonhole' everyone as if somehow someone or something else has the right to tell us what kind of people we are. i.e., if I am black that must mean i am lazy and a gangster; if I am white, I must be an intelligent business person; if I'm a woman, I'm just not as smart as a man, etc., etc. All of this conveniently alienates humanity from each other and is an illusion created by...who exactly?  The media? Your neighbors? The government? The church??  Try all of the above.

I have fought against Christianity for reasons that have NOTHING to do with worshiping a god. I really don't care if you worship one god, two gods, or multiple gods--all I care about is the CONSEQUENCES of those beliefs. I have fought against Christianity for many reasons, most which stem from what I mentioned in the second paragraph. Christianity alienates people from each other by pointing out that if you are not with them, you are against them. (Check out the history--you'll understand this to be true. Multiple wars, and even slavery were sanctioned through the church, and now it's Christianity against Islam, etc. etc.) Furthermore, misogyny was also sanctioned by the church by their 'belief' that men are to rule the household, and women are to 'be quiet in church.' Women were also deemed less valuable according to the bible as they were not counted in the census Moses took in Numbers, and as slaves were not considered as valuable as men. Hmm...

That being said, the trend to pigeonhole people and alienate them from one another continues as war rages on in the Middle East, and the police state in the United States rages against its own citizens. How is this allowed to continue??  I'll tell you why. The church tells its followers to obey government because, according to the Bible, all governments are put in place by God.  Again, hmmm...  Pretty convenient I'd say. It's a great way to keep the sheeple in their place.

So, all governments that sanction wars that result in the murder of civilians due to 'collateral damage' the rape of women and children by soldiers obeying the government as they destroy the 'enemy'--are sanctioned by this god.  Hmm...

Then we come to the United States itself whose citizens are being terrorized by police who, according to recent developments, can run you over and kill you, rape you, steal your money, and invade your home--WITHOUT  CONSEQUENCE. This happens more often than you think.  But here's the thing. THIS IS EXACTLY THE DOCTRINE CHRISTIANITY TEACHES.  According to Christianity, Christians can rape you, kill you, steal your money and your home, and still go heaven--WITHOUT CONSEQUENCE. All they have to do is say sorry to Jesus. Pretty sweet from a Christian's perspective, I am sure, but for society, it is HELL ON EARTH. Christians will tell us that 'real Christians' don't do that, and at the same time they tell us that we are all 'born sinners.' See the contradiction??  Born sinners, are the ones raping, stealing, killing, etc. etc. Ugh...it makes me sick. I, on the other hand believe that I am perfect, and any bad thing I might do is nothing but a CHOICE made by ME. If I was innately bad as Christians claim, that would mean I have NO FREE WILL to do the right thing. Again, see the contradiction?  Ridiculous...

Unfortunately, this pervasive Christian mentality that promotes evil without consequences has been the downfall of our civilization, and I'm not sure if there is any way to reverse the process before it's too late--but we have to try. It's time for everyone to climb out of their boxes and recognize humanity for what we are--HUMANS.  We MUST work towards a system that is to the benefit of ALL--and not just the 1%. We, the 99%ers MUST reclaim our true roles on this planet if it is to survive. You can count on that. The only way we'll every be truly independent is if we become critical thinkers and are free of the shackles governments and churches have us tethered to.  Only THEN could we be truly independent--because NOTHING is more powerful than our humanity working together to make this planet heaven on earth for us all.  Churches and governments want none of that, as it takes power away from them and puts it in OUR hands where it belongs. Think about that as you enjoy that chemical laden hot dog, produced by factory farms that lobby the government to allow them add known carcinogens to their products and feed their animals GMO laden feed that includes discarded animal parts... i.e.-them cows/pigs are cannibals.  Yeah, God Bless America! What a farce...