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.

Christians - Oblivious to their own Contradictions

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.

Christian Gobblydegook--Theologians are Full of It

What is written below is an excerpt from a book written by a Dutch Theologian named Herman Bavinck, titled, “The Doctrine of God”:

"Mystery is the vital element of Dogmatics. It is true that the term "mystery" in Scripture does not indicate abstract-supernatural truth in Romish sense; nevertheless, the idea that the believer would be able to understand and comprehend intellectually the revealed mysteries is equally unscriptural. On the contrary, the truth which God has revealed concerning himself in nature and in Scripture far surpasses human conception and comprehension. In that sense Dogmatics is concerned with nothing but mystery, for it does not deal with finite creatures, but from beginning to end raises itself above every creature to the Eternal and Endless One himself." p. 13

What was written above is a prime example of illogical gobblydegook written by, and promoted by many so-called “respected theologians.” So, what does it REALLY mean? Let's look at it logically to find out.

P1. If a mystery is revealed, then it would be understood.
P2 According to Bavinck, God's mysteries are “revealed.”
C. Therefore, God's mysteries are understood.

But that is not what Bavinck said. He said that what has been “revealed” surpasses human conception and comprehension, i.e., they CANNOT be understood. This then begs the question as to how a Christian can know ANYTHING about any so-called “mysteries,” if these mysteries surpasses their conception and comprehension. Again, let's look at it logically.

P1 If something surpasses human conception and comprehension, then it cannot be revealed to humans.
P2. God's mysteries surpass human conception and comprehension.
P3. Therefore, God's mysteries cannot be revealed to humans.
P4. If God's “mysteries” cannot be revealed to humans, then humans have no method of verifying God's “mysteries” as being true.
P5. God's mysteries cannot be revealed to humans.
C. Therefore, Christians have no justification for saying God's “mysteries” are true.”

Furthermore, if God's mysteries cannot be revealed to humans, as they surpass our conception and comprehension, then we have no way of knowing anything about this god. We have no way of knowing if he is what Christians claim he is, i.e., whether or not he is an all-loving, all-knowing, all-good god, or whether he is a sadistic tyrant, because the Bible indicates that the Christian god is capable of being all of these things.

So much for "revealing" the "mysteries" of God.   Instead, what I have "revealed" is just another Christian theologian spreading illogical gobbledygook as his own version of "truth."

Did Yahweh Create the Jews, or Did the Jews Create Yahweh?

Let me begin by paraphrasing Ludwig Feuerbach: "Yahweh has not created the Jews, but the Jews created Yahweh."  I will prove that this is the case, in that the attributes ascribed to Yahweh in the bible by Jews and Christians came from them, and are not based on the dispositions of an actual entity.

To "ascribe" something means to credit or assign, as to a cause or source; attribute; impute.

For example, the alphabet is usually ascribed to the Phoenicians. This however, does not necessarily mean that the Phoenicians are responsible for developing the alphabet, it just means that it has been ascribed to them as they are the most likely group to have first developed an alphabet. Another example would be ascribing the property of "brittleness" to chalk.  We know this to be true, as we have experienced the brittleness of chalk. 

Now let us examine the case of the Jews and Yahweh. Is their description of the attributes of Yahweh based on an actual entity with the attributes ascribed?  In other words, is there an actual entity named Yahweh with the attributes ascribed to him by the Jews?  Just as in the examples stated above, ascribed attributes do not necessarily mean that they are actual and real, based on an actual cause or source. I will prove using the best explanation argument, that they are not.

Let us assume for the sake or argument that the attributes ascribed to Yahweh are as stated in the bible by Jews and Christians.  In the OT he is described as an angry, vengeful, jealous god, whose love is conditional to obeying his laws and commandments.  In the NT, Yahweh is described as all-loving, and all-good.

I do not go just by definition, but by arguments as well.  Problems with the attribute theory arise when we apply scripture to the Christian god. For example, let's assume what the bible, Tom Gilson and other Christians say is true, in that Yahweh/Jesus is love.  The logic below tells us that he could not have the ascribed attributes of love and jealousy.  Although the Jews and Christians ascribe the attribute of "love" to their god, the scriptures themselves make it clear that god is NOT love:

"But anyone who does not love does not know God, for God is love." 1 John 4:8

"Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud " 1 Corinthians 13:4

"You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me,"  Exodus 20:5

In the logical form of Modus Tollens, the following is the conclusion drawn from the above passages:

IF god is love, THEN god is not jealous. God IS jealous.  Therefore god is NOT love.

The above illustrates clearly that the bible is contradictory, and inconsistent, and Yahweh cannot have the attributes of love and jealousy ascribed to him, as according to the bible, they are inconsistent and contradictory, or it leads to absurdity that Christians must accept the fact that the bible is wrong as the definition of love that I cited above comes from the bible!! Therefore, the best explanation is that the Jews ascribed the attributes to their god that they wanted him to have, or, the Bible is wrong!

A similar problem exists for ascribing the attribute of being "all good" to Yahweh, which I have already proven in the following post:  Christian Ethics Exposed

I reiterate my conclusion, "Yahweh has not created the Jews, but the Jews created Yahweh," or the bible is wrong, and the attributes ascribed to Yahweh in the bible by Jews and Christians came from them, and are not based on the dispositions of an actual entity. WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS IS FALSE! Otherwise, the Christian claim that Yahweh is "all-loving" is false, as he was jealous, and he can't be all-loving and jealous at the same time. Ahhhhh.......so either way, the bible is wrong!