May 13, 2010

Areas that Atheists Are Right

Edited for wording and clarity.


"I might believe in the Redeemer
if His followers looked more Redeemed."

— Fredrick Nietzsche


Most of the time, my dealings with atheists are filled with their wild-eyed rants, insults, putting words in the mouths of others, outright slander, profanity, aloofness and other things in their efforts to dodge the truth. (After all, I can prove something until I'm blue in the nose, but that doesn't mean they will be persuaded.) No, we can offer things, but when it comes to actually accepting and believing, "Ya gotta wanna". Otherwise, they pretend to elevate reason and logic, but fail miserably.

Here's a hint: put on your big boy pants and deal with the subject instead of railing, mmmmkay?


One dodge that they use is to attack Christians. The problem is, some of these attacks are accurate observations.

"Why are there so many denominations?" Because we're people, not androids. There have been splits due to interpretations of scripture, maybe from misconduct, other things. Also, when immigrants came to America, they brought their own traditions and language; my great grandparents on my father's side went to a church that spoke Swedish. Of course, they did bother to learn English (unlike some people). At any rate, most denominations agree on the basics of the Bible. So atheists aren't entirely right on this point, but...

"You Christians invent God in your minds to soothe your fears!" You know, some of that is true. Especially when we don't bother to actually read our Bibles or attend a church that gives decent teaching. Then we tend to paint a picture of God in our minds for what we think (or usually want) him to be. Not good. We have to accept the real God, not the one in our imaginations.

"There is so much fighting". I can't argue with that! A while back, I was looking for something online and saw some vicious, venomous attacks on other Christians over a doctrinal issue: "He's a popular TV preacher causing millions to go to Hell!" Wow! Strong charges there, Eustace! No way the preacher in question will please that author, the preacher will have to convert to the other guy's way of thinking, or simply be silenced. (There are more examples, but no need for them, you get my point.) While truth does need to be defended, many Christians forget to practice the love of Christ in their zeal.

"Christians are hypocrites, and they don't act the way Christians should act". This one, I want to slap you for. First, the arrogant part. Second, for being right and I don't like it. The arrogant part is when someone who disbelieves thinks they know how we should act. So many have an idea that Christians should walk around with hands in a prayer position, head bowed, goofy smile, always soft spoken and sickeningly gentle, and if you squint just right, you can see a halo. Wrong! We're people.

Then the second part, about being hypocrites. I know many hypocrites, and many of them are not Christians. As singer Steve Taylor rapped, "Can't understand us Christians, so you type us all in stereo: 'They're hypocrites, they're such a bore!' Well, come on in, there's room for one more." Hypocrisy is not a unique fault of believers! I agree that there is hypocrisy among believers. The problem is, we are all "works in progress", and nobody has a right to expect us to be perfect — or to fit into an unbeliever's unrealistic expectation. The hypocrisy aggravates me, and many other are well aware of it. Chuck Swindoll ("Insight for Living") gave some great messages on the subject (like this one). The worst Christian hypocrites for me are the kind that use "God talk", carry their Bibles and essentially make a big show of it all. I've found that many of the showiest ones are not genuine, and they give real believers a black eye.

When unbelievers (and disbelievers) see these things, I get ashamed. The final truth there is to look at the actual head of the church (Jesus) as explained in the Bible. He is the faultless one, and the actions of his followers should not distract anyone from the ultimate truth. I know that it's a tough challenge, but give it a try. And remember, true followers of Christ, acting in love, have done a great deal of good in the world.

By the way. That quote at the top from ol' Freddie Nietzsche? Don't forget how the author of the "God is dead" philosophy ended up. He died, completely out of his mind, in a madhouse. Rom. 1.19-20 , and see Paul's attitude in Eph. 3.8 .

If there are any intellectually honest atheists reading this and you're not afraid of answers to your questions, I have some suggestions here. If you're sincere, you can also write to me. The address is in the profile.

To any Christians that are reading: Straighten up! 2 Cor. 5.20-21
  

May 12, 2010

Fear of State Religion

I want to leave these things alone, but I keep getting involved — and having a perverse joy with it.

Why aren't the few thoughtful atheists and agnostics embarrassed by the actions of the vast majority of arrogant atheists? I have to talk to and about that bigger group, and the more civil "live and let live" atheists think I'm going after them as well. But the majority of the time, the atheists are rude weasels begging for a good slapping down. If you're a "good" atheist, then
duck!

Funny how there are atheists on Twitter, Facebook, forums, "boards" and such that put "atheist" in their names. It puzzles me that someone would want to have their entire online identity (or possibly every aspect of their personhood as well) wrapped up in something so hostile, negative and antagonistic. But anyway, it helps me identify my opponents. (One actually goes by the name "gaytheist". Wow. Provoke much, Bubbles?) If you read their postings, you can see that their entire purpose in life seems to be to cause problems. Nice to have a purpose in life, innit?

So anyway. In 1934, the Veterans of Foreign Wars placed a huge cross in the Mojave Desert as a memorial to those who lost their lives in the First World War. Eventually, the slimeballs at the ACLU screamed, "That violates the separation of church and state!" A federal court ordered it covered up in 2002. The US Supreme Court refused to order that the cross should be torn down. Instead, they did the cowardly thing and referred it back down to a lower court for more review. That means, it's still in a box. Or was.

Roger Hedgecock posted a link in Twitter to an article about thieves stealing the cross, and asked why anyone would do that? I reposted his link and added that they're full of hate.

An antagonistic, arrogant atheist replied back to me that they're afraid of a state-sponsored religion. (I gave him the Twitter version of a "drive-by": A snotty remark followed by blocking him.) What, are you nuts? Things are going your way in this country. Besides that, do you have so little faith in the Constitution? After all, people can believe or disbelieve however they want, no federally established religion is allowed, for over two hundred years! More than that, Pinhead, you're essentially saying that "the end justifies the means" as an excuse for crime. And you people dare to refer to Christians as Nazis?

By the way, call an ambulance before you go reading the constitutions of individual states. All that God and stuff they talk about, it'll put you into shock.

Oh, wait, there is reason to be afraid. After all, your kind is "progressive". And Progressivism is the greatest threat to the Constitution that exists. Essentially, it means to "progress" away from what the Constitution originally meant, and towards statism. Atheists and "Progressives" have this in common: No anchor, no standard for ethics and morals. The Constitution should change with the times, according to Progressives. Morals are up to each person according to the atheist. That leads to Chaos, according to people with sense. Hey, atheist, you have a conflict because you won't be able to choose your own morals, they will be controlled by the state. Hahahaha!

The bottom line is that whoever stole that war memorial is a hateful piece of slime, and I hope they get put in jail for the longest possible prison term. Maybe we can hook them up with a couple of very lonely inmates, too.

May 11, 2010

Changes

Buon giorno. First of all, I want to mention how I fouled up the other day.

Whenever I make a posting, it gets announced via Twitter and also put on Facebook. Aside from the automatic thing, I will help it along and give it some extra wording to make the announcement sensible. Well, the announcements went out, and then I began tinkering with the layout here. I thought I had things cleared up, but a couple of atheists jumped on the blog posting that appeared on top of mine. They made comments on Twitter that caused me to go, "Huh?"

But they were so determined to find something to cry and badger me about that they did not read my own material (most of them did not spend any time on this Weblog at all.) Only one guy did keep going and read my work, the one that asked me for a clarification on something.

That just reinforces my belief that atheists do not want to deal with opposing points of view, they are more interested in throwing stones. After all, when all they read was a follow-up piece to this one, (which was an expansion of another) and none of the rest of my material on atheism, it reinforces my belief that they are intellectually dishonest.

Having read some other Weblogs by Christians that were directed to atheists, my belief is reaffirmed. They were acting like monkeys flinging poo, insulting the integrity of the authors as well as using profanity in their personal attacks. So it seems that I have gotten away easily in my own Weblog (but not in other places). I will be "getting mine", because I will not stop posting the truth.

I am recommending for those atheists that want to fight, if they don't know about them already, try Atheist Central and also Debunking Atheists. Since my Weblog is multi-purpose, I can't give you shiny things to play with every day. And since I'm a "cut through the crap" kind of guy, I don't have time to play "gotcha" philosophical games for very long.

*****
Some of the changes that I wanted to talk about are that I am going to have to be more willing to repeat myself. I recently learned that this is a Weblog, not a book. What I mean by that is people are coming and going, not reading from beginning to end; Weblogs are dynamic things. Also, it's almost three years old and I can't expect anyone to remember what I said on a topic before. All of this is because I'm reluctant to give someone an opening to say, "You said that before!" Well, I'm going to have to do it, anyway.

I have been going through some changes myself. Some of it I have to thank the atheists for! I have not darkened the doorway of a church for about fifteen years (another thing that will be changing), but I couldn't let them get away with bashing the truth while I was in certain forums or making comments on some Weblogs. That caused me to reach back into what I know and what I believe so that I can put up some kind of defense. Not that God needs my "help", but I had to do it.

Anyway, over the past few years, and then accelerating in recent months, I have been coming back to my faith in God through Jesus Christ. No, this won't turn into a preaching forum. But my beliefs will be a little less subtle. Who knows, perhaps I will have a spiritual application come out of an article on flash drives. Unlikely, but possible.

I'll get back to the political stuff eventually, but I have lost ground to make up, and I'm listening to Bible teachings and such. There is a great deal to re-learn, and God has a great deal to straighten out in me.

Yesterday, I installed a gadget that will let people see a Bible verse when I make a reference to it. All you nice people need do is hover over it. Try it, just bring your mouse pointer to Genesis 1.1, and you'll see what the verse says. You don't even need to click on it unless you want to read more of that passage. It saves me the trouble of putting the actual text in myself, and saves you the trouble of being distracted if you don't feel the need to read my reference.

OK, so I've rambled. I haven't been well lately. Have a good rest of the week. Click on the picture below for a larger version:

May 7, 2010

Amplification and Clarification

Genesis 1.1

Yesterday, I posted another of my famous articles questioning the intellectual honesty of atheists. Naturally, I took some heat for it. And that's a good thing. The problem is, the flak that I received helped prove my points!

But first, I was asked a question: "Do you believe all atheists fall into those categories?"

Nope. Do you think I'm stupid enough to try to box a group of people and a complex issue into just five areas? As I explained in that article, I have had my own experiences, plus reading, hearing interviews and having discussions with others regarding atheists, the whole thing was fresh in my mind.

One guy lashed out at me on Twitter. He wears "atheist" in his name as a badge of honor, and it appears that his whole purpose in Twitter is to bash Christians and the Bible. Some of his comments were so amazingly vapid and caustic, I wonder if he (and some others) are deliberately stupid!

In yesterday's article, I was using atheism as my primary illustration for a greater principle that I was trying to get across. Namely, that people will join a cause because others are doing it. That's a bad motive for something important.

Another thing that is fresh in my mind is the intellectual dishonesty of most of the atheists that I encounter, and I wanted to emphasize that as well.

Since atheists stirred me up, I'm going to focus on a bigger problem that they have: Pride. Yes, you heard me. They do not want to admit that God might be real after all. That would mean admitting that they were wrong. Worse, atheists would have to do something about it. And I really believe that they are afraid of becoming like Josh McDowell, Lee Strobel and others who set out to disprove the Bible and, when confronted with the truth, became Christians!

When claiming disbelief on the grounds of "lack of evidence" or "needing clarification", I have given references for books, sites and so on. Do they read the books or visit the sites? No! They continue hounding laymen instead of consulting with experts. For that matter, they are hit-and-miss on this Weblog; few of them bother with any of the links that I offer. (The guy that whined at me on Twitter spent about three and a half minutes here. Really serious about learning the truth, aren't you, Bubbles?)

By the way, this is a blog, not a series of doctoral dissertations. I try to keep them short because I want to entertain my readers as well as inform, capice?

There is something that atheists need to learn about Christians. We do not present our case with the attitude of Victorian gentlemen discussing Parliament in the club, intellectualizing and saying, "How droll, yes, quite". Rather, we are compelled by a greater motive, that we are concerned that you are on your way to a very unpleasant eternal destination. You could end up in Hell because you don't want to admit that Christians are right after all. Imagine...missing out on eternal life because of silly pride.

I've been going through a science fiction book that describes a group of people that want to improve the world by improving humans. To do that, they want to eliminate emotions and everything else, leaving just intellect. But humanity is not built that way! When it comes to discussing the Bible, atheists want humans to be pure intellect. That is ridiculous. Tell me, Mr. Atheist, when your vehicle gets damaged, do you simply say, "I cannot have emotion. Anger is simply a biochemical reaction..." Of course you don't.

Most of us believe that people are body, soul (or mind) and spirit. Yes, the distinctions get blurred. My point is that it is ridiculous to cut out part of the essence of your being. That is why I am saying to you now to listen to your heart. Think about what Jesus said. Click here if you want to honestly read a Gospel presentation. See the video (below) for comments about what happens after we die (are you ready for that?).

May 6, 2010

"Bandwagon Convictions" Revisited

About a year ago, I wrote a post about bandwagon convictions. That is, if your values and inner convictions are based on doing the popular thing, they are not worth a great deal.

I felt that it was time to try the subject again.

There are people I know who are atheists, but I suspect their motives as well as their ability to reason:
That is comrade Stalin in the picture. He was an atheist leader of the failed Soviet Union and killed millions of his own people.

I am using atheists for my main example because I have had many dealings with them. Also, I have listened to debates with them, where they act like children who have just been told that they cannot have candy before supper. Agonizing.

Similarly, I know someone who is opposed to the recent Arizona immigration law. It suddenly occurred to me, "Of course! She is dating someone from south of the border. Naturally, she will form her viewpoints to please him." If she actually looked at the evidence of the damage that illegals are doing to the economy and to safety, she would probably change her mind.

People make decisions because "Oprah said so". I don't care what she says, believes, recommends. If someone is doing things to please her, or someone else on TV, they are loony. News flash, Skippy: Oprah doesn't care, or even know, what you do. She won't pay your bills or die to save you. Why should she? Time to get real.

Back when B. Hussein Obama was elected, many people voted for "the (half) black guy" for the novelty, and also because they believed the leftist propaganda. Look at the damage being done to the country by their stupidity!

I know people who "have their religion", but do not really know anything about the Bible and Jesus Christ. They are content to do whatever it is they do that passes for their religion, but do not wish to possibly make a change because they would have to explain themselves to friends and family.

It is a dangerous thing to go with a herd mentality or be trendy. It is bad enough to spend money on trendy clothing or music, but to vote in ways that affect the nation, or to gamble with your eternal destiny... not worth it.

I'm asking you to think before you act. Get information before you make your final decision. Don't follow the herd and be a mindless sheep.

The Devil You Say!

This video from the 1980s by the great DeGarmo and Key band is startling in several ways, not the least of which is the change in technology between then and now (dot matrix printer, 5-1/4 inch floppy disks, Apple computer, etc.). Also, if you're familiar with videos like ZZ Top's "Sharp Dressed Man", you'll notice a similarity in the production style. I can't prove it, and spent a lot of time trying to do just that, but if memory serves, a producer and/or director of ZZ Top material was involved in making DeGarmo and Key's "Six Six Six".


If you can't see the video, it is also embedded at the mirror posting. Addendum: Google fouled up a bit, some of the sound is muddled here. I suggest the other version at the mirror site.

May 3, 2010

That Pesky Separation Thing

Buon giorno. No, I'm not filing for separation from anyone. This "separation" thing is the alleged "separation of church and state". What I have to say seems contradictory at first glance, so I have to lay some groundwork.

While listening to a debate between apologetics expert Matt Slick at CARM (any relation to John Slick who played keyboards for Petra, Matt? Addendum: "No", he told me.) and an atheist he had to take a position that seemed contradictory to the atheist. (But that's typical of atheists, they want things their way, and do word games so they can play "gotcha!") The question was whether or not atheism is intellectually feasible. The "Infidel Guy" was obviously squirming and getting antagonistic, so he tried to box Mr. Slick in because he would not give a standard "yes or no" response. But to give that kind of response would have been dishonest. Yes, it's feasible only on the same level as pink unicorns are feasible; his "yes" was qualified. When explored further, we see that atheism is intellectually absurd. After all, they really have no philosophy, they simply attack the Bible and belief in God.

In another broadcast, Matt had an expert on in American history, William Federer. He pointed out that all state constitutions mention God, and that many actually had taxes to support religion. Also, it was originally mandatory to declare that you believed in God in order to hold public office.

"Do you have a point to all this, Cowboy Bob?"

Funny you should ask that, just when I'm getting to the point.

Do I believe in the separation of church and state? No — and yes. The "no" part is the constitution: "The church shall be separate from the state, and the school from the church". Yep, it's right there! Problem is, this is not a quote from the American Constitution. Look up the USSR constitution, or click here. There is no "separation" in the "establishment" clause in the US Constitution.

Here's my "yes" part: You should know that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." That means, no federal law shall establish a state religion; you can believe or disbelieve what you want to, capice? Not only do I detest the idea of a state-run religion, but I do not want people being forced to proclaim faith when they have none in order to get political power.

That's where corruption comes in.

When a religious institution is the repository of political power, people will say and do whatever it takes to get that power. Say that you believe in God, Jesus, the Resurrection, whatever, and you can be in the office you're seeking. People who do not believe will say that they do believe.

Let me simplify this, I'm getting in too deep. I don't want anyone teaching the Bible to kids in school because he has to, even though he does not believe it. Can you imagine what kind of garbage he can put into their heads?

I cannot end this without saying something else, that there is no "freedom from religion" in this imagined "separation" clause. The push by groups like the ACLU or Freedom From Religion to eradicate all expressions of faith from public life is nothing less than the rule of the many by the few. That is tyranny.

"As the Supreme Court has stated, "The First Amendment was never intended to insulate our public institutions from any mention of God, the Bible or religion. When such insulation occurs, another religion, such as secular humanism, is effectively established."
— Lee County decision

Subscribe in a reader