Posts

Christian Gaslighting. Their vs Our Views About Sin

Image
Today, I read a post where a Christian fundamentalist  tried to negate a valid criticism. That criticism can be found here: [ link ]  He attempted this by misrepresenting that criticism and also by misrepresenting his own theology.  He said this: "Think this through. Try to see how there might not be a contradiction at all. There are two people, both of whom are sinners. One struggles against his tendency to sin by appealing to Christ's mercy, forgiveness, and strength so that he may overcome and manage sin. But the other simply enjoys sin and turns against God, claiming that her sin is not sin.  She persistently declares that the God Who convicts of sin does not exist. All are sinners, but one turned from God because she wanted to sin. No contradiction, and we see here, yet again, the defect in public schools, wherein logic and critical thinking are no longer taught." -------- Here, I respond:   Problems I have with this include: * If "sin" means to fall sh
Post a Comment
Read more

The Double-Standard Of Defending Christianity Against Hate

Image
 In a "Private" Facebook group titled " THE LIES IN THE BIBLE "  (a group with 1 million members),  someone posted this meme: Personally, I find it mildly amusing. It goes a bit too far. But I see it as harmless venting from people are currently still pissed off at how Christian fundamentalist parents and churches GAS LIT and SABOTAGED their minds and their lives. However, In reply to that meme, someone said this: "interesting , a person posting about what is inexistent and using the pretext to insult other people. You are very sick my friend. Well , I am not used to post "There is no Mary Poppins" .. hmm "There is no Blipop Bot"... There are no flying sharks... etc . 😃 Gaz lighting , insulting, enjoying hate , and putting down your ancestors , and logic. You need a psychiatrist for sure" ===== Here, I respond. [Note: I'm responding as a blog, so that I can "save my work". This way, I can can just copy/paste these
Post a Comment
Read more

Apologetics, Integrity, and Credibility

Image
[My reply to this video is, here, written from the narrative perspective of: Me responding directly to Randal. However, it is primarily written for the benefit of myself as a mental exercise. This is secondarily for the benefit to anyone willing to consider my perspective on these issues. As always,  I welcome divergent constructive points of view]  Again, Randal, like always, I agree with much of what you say. However, again, you're missing the elephant in the room; the obvious thing that's bigger than the game you're focused on. Think about this. Cameron only has YOU (and maybe some few other easily-ignored human voices) offering to help Cameron SIMULATE the effect of spending time at a God-Beach, catching God-Rays. You've noticed. Cameron claims to have spent every day at the God-beach. But he never comes home with a God-tan. And yet, you keep misunderstanding the fact that you aren't in the same religion. And you do NOT have the same "God"
Post a Comment
Read more

Why Frank Turek's Opinions Are Facts

Image
  Responding to a comment under the above-linked video. The comment was: "Frank Turek complains a lot about paying people to give their opinion for someone who makes a living giving people his opinions." --- My reply to that comment is:  Great point. Although, ... Frank is trying to market his opinions as "facts" given to him by the Creator Of The Universe. In part, it's meant to appeal to black and white thinkers and anxious people who seek the comforts of "certainty" and "clarity" provided by simple absolutes; backed by the "perfect" and "unquestionable" authority of: the only "Being" who can really "know" anything. Effectively, that also makes it wrong to question Frank. Because when we hear him speak, we are hearing "God" speak. Although, Frank didn't invent that game. He got it from other Christian pastors, priests, and apologists. Going back even further, they got it from the ra
Post a Comment
Read more

Bibles, Bible-Based Faiths, And Apologists Get Literally Everything Wrong About Humanity.

Image
 I like starting from Randal's releases, because he's one of the closest-to-reasonable and closest-to-decent apologists out there. Here is a short list of things Randal cannot un-fact with apologetic SPIN.  The ONLY way to clear "God" of SOME responsibility for the Bible's evil bullshit, is to denounce the Bible as: not from God and not accurately even ABOUT God. There's no other way. Although, if you want to clear him of ALL responsibility for the evils promoted in Bibles, you'd need to say he's: * too WEAK to prevent people saying and doing bad things, AND * too inept to make a better universe. Alternatively, you could just say he doesn't exist as a real person. That would certainly be the cleanest and most effective defense available. -- -- To make sure we're on the same page about this, first, ... "The Bible", in this context, is: A formalized collection of religious texts, divided into 66 parts that people
Post a Comment
Read more