Atheism Leads to Brain Damage - Continued 3

Buona sera. I think I'm done. This is being written a few days ahead of time, so something else may come up to write about in the series. Nah. This will be too boring, so if something comes along that is actually interesting, I'll write about it later. Edit: Some of the remarks may appear baffling because I have now turned off subsequent comments entirely.

I have a pet troll who is either demon possessed or insane (possibly both). You may recall that back in November, 2010, I tagged him with the name "Norman". Of course, he is also a "type", because there are other "Normans" around who insist that almost everything a Christian says is a lie. He has been browbeating me to give him some attention. I have been the subject of, I think, twenty of his boring personal attacks in less than a year. He has made the remark that he is trying to improve or help me. When you see this material, you'll scoff at the concept that this hateful beast would want to help.

OK, Norman. Here you go, you're getting attention and links!

He goes under the name "Pvblivs". It's cute how he chose the Roman look, innit? (He was also tagged with "PVboy", because when he has been proven wrong, he will not "man up".) His comments are the ones in urine yellow.
By the way, he does not actively admit to being an atheist. Rather, he is a "skeptic". But this "skeptic" is a caricature of healthy skepticism, because he does not believe anything. Or at least, believe it consistently. The only thing consistent is his hatred of God and Christians.

"I have visited the web sites of apologists. And I have seen a remarkable shortage of evidence. They generally use bible quotes in lieu of evidence. I don't already believe the bible. It's not going to convince me. I have also been banned outright by apologist bloggers who said that people might think my replies were convincing and that they didn't want to deal with them. (I have no reason to believe that this is unique to christians. It is not uncommon for people to want to cripple opposing perspectives.)" Appeal to motive fallacy.

Not only is he astonishingly full of himself, but he is so full of hate, he refuses to use capitalization rules! Of course, it does not occur to him that he was banned from their sites for the same reason he was banned from mine: Personal attacks, self-righteousness, narcissism, a victim mentality and always right in his own tiny mind.

"When I look for honesty, I don't look to his blog. I have yet to see him be honest." Like Paul Baird, the accusation is as good as the evidence. Abnorman here cannot differentiate between disagreement and dishonesty; if you say something he does not like, you are lying, period. No need for evidence. "Has anybody seen an example of this [civil responses]? Admittedly, I would be surprised to find him civil in response to anyone that was not worshipping the ground on which he walks. But that is only because it is so out of character with his actual responses." He cannot see the civil responses when he does not look for them. And when someone gets snotty at Stormbringer's Thunder, they should not expect to be invited over for tea and crumpets, with a rousing chorus of "Kum Ba Yah" and group hugs, capice?

"As I recall, one of the signs that you are in a cult is that your information is filtered. Is Stormbringer really that scared of the thought of his readers hearing what his detractors have to say? It would explain why he pre-screens comments. There might be something thought-provoking before he gets a chance to delete it. Now, I admit that I have standards by which I will delete comments. But I'm not worried if someone happens to see them before I get to them. And if my readers check the (rather few) comments I actually get, they will find that agreeing with every word I say is not one of my requirements for keeping a comment."  

You didn't join anything, Norman. As I have told you many times, this is not a democracy, it is my Weblog. I moderate comments, like many others. And I wanted to not only keep this to a "PG-13" rating (if this were an American movie), but I want to see comments that need a response so I do not forget them. If someone has something intelligent to say, fine, agree or not. What I think is really going on here is that he is pouting because I barred him from commenting. Can  you feel the angst? But I do not need to tolerate abuse, profanity, obscenity or prolonged stupidity. Duh. I'll give him this, he does not use profanity. Why, I have no idea, since he has not shown a belief in moral absolutes.

"Stormbringer, himself, has assigned to myself and other dissenters the motive of "being filled with hate." When he sees others assign motives, he announces it as lying." No, I believe that you and other atheists assign motives for words and actions, and now my readers can waste their time reading your boring drivel to see for themselves that you assign motives to me. What gives you insight into my mental and spiritual processes, hmm? Godlike powers, but you do not believe in God. "Now, for me, it's a harder call. Someone is only lying if he does not believe his own claims." Did I read that correctly, Norman? You are insane. Someone look up "sociopath", that may fit. I do have a simple definition of lying, though: The intent to deceive. That's a good starting place. "If he really believes what he says (which I do not think is the case with Stormbringer) he is only mistaken -- or, if correct, telling the truth." Ummmmmmmm...yeah. Did anyone else understand that?

Let's jump ahead, because Norman the Attack Boy is boring as well as baffling. He got angry because I tagged him with the name of "Norman". So, like any mature adult, he decided to call me Norman right back. Sheer genius! But I moved beyond that level of immaturity by the time I was eight years old.

"Norman boasts that he gave "internet atheists" a lesson in logic on Twitter. Now, I haven't seen him on Twitter because I don't use the service. But I would expect that, if he had the capacity for coherent thought, he would demonstrate it in one of the places I have seen him." What do you want to discuss first, the hate or the selective citing? Skip it.

By the way, his "logic" uses "false dilemma": "I posed this question [Does Jesus command his followers to lie and kill?] to Rhomphaia (queenqueequeg.blogspot.com) in a way that will secure her honest appraisal. If she deletes the comment, or any others of mine, it will indicate that she agrees that that is what followers of Jesus do. If she does not, then she does not agree that that is what followers of Jesus do. Norman (aka cowboybob, soldierforjesus, stormbringer, etc., etc.) already agrees with that because that's what he does. But then, we already knew that from the "soldier" moniker. What does a soldier do? He kills people he perceives as the 'enemy'."

See not only the hatred of me (including the implication that I am a killer and his missing the point of the "Soldier for Jesus" title of that Weblog), and his hatred of God, but the "either/or" fallacy? The answer is: You are dead wrong, Norman. Oh, too bad you left out my fun name, Piltdown Superman, the one that enrages evolutionists by reminding them how they believed a fraudulent "missing link" for decades. But never mind about that now.

Norman is a lost soul. He hates God and Christians, pretending that he simply does not believe that there is a God. The evidence is there, but he refuses to pay any attention to it. Also, he is so insane, that even other atheists think he is off his bird. I do not have hope for him. Rhomphaia does. Well, God does work miracles and has turned the most stubborn hearts. But I do not know if they were demonically influenced and also insane. We'll see.

So, I hope these articles illustrate that there are not only many illogical people out there, but they are full of themselves and always right — just ask them. But keep your wits about you, pay attention and do not fall for what passes for "reasoning" in the brain-damaged mind of a recalcitrant atheist. If they would only humble themselves before almighty God, there would be hope.

You see, I say that they are "brain damaged" for a few reasons, not the least of which is their failure of critical thinking skills. I believe that when God "gave them over" (or "gave them up"), it is a judgment from God against their unrighteousness; God will not fight them for themselves forever. Then their morality degrades, and I believe their minds degrade as well. This also lends to my suspicion that many of them really do not believe that they are lying, and they believe their own lies; they "create reality" simply by speaking it. Except that reality itself does not accept their self-created reality. Really.

People who are honestly searching for answers but lean towards atheism can start here.


Things would be very different if this Terrible Trio would humble themselves and give their lives to the living God. Some of the best and brightest apologists are former atheists. It's sad, really. They're making their choices for their eternal destination.