Advertisements

Final Thoughts on Wafergate

Rook Hawkins has taken me to task on calling for PZ Myers to get fired or to resign his position over desecration of the Eucharist.  Before I offer some much prayed-over changes to my position, I will clarify one thing: I have no intention of continuing the blog debate that I started.  The reason being that I’m out of my depth with historical data and Rook will continue to make me look foolish.  I’ll let the real (or amateur) historians take him on regarding a historical Christ.  I’m confident in a historical Christ based on what I’ve read, and that’s all that I need to say on the subject.

Now, let’s get back to PZ Myers.  I have not adjusted my position that he is a bad representative of the university for desecrating a wafer.  To millions of Catholics, that is the literal body of Jesus Christ.  I think that, as an educator, he should be respectful of his students’ beliefs, whether he agrees with them or not.  However, I’m not so sure that what he did was as a representative of the university; I think it was completely personal, as a private citizen of these United States.  As much as Bill Donahue is going to disagree with me, as much as I may offend Catholic readers (Dave Armstrong: admit, you still read my blog just like I still read yours), I’m going to have to say that what he did is free speech.

What I did was overreact.  I did exactly what Myers wanted me to do–I gave him publicity for something that I should have let slip quietly under the rug where it belongs.  Myers is, first and foremost, an attention whore.  I spoke where I should have been silent.  Calling for his resignation or termination was unwarranted.

I should note that there is a significance to the Lord’s Supper, and that I believe in Real Presence, though not the way that Catholics do.  I believe that the bread is a symbol of the body; the wine a symbol of the blood, and that we eat and drink it in memory of him, just as commanded in the Bible.  However, my brother-in-law Nate pointed out to me that a symbol ceases to represent anything when it is used in another way.  Just like a swastika used to represent good luck, but now represents a terrible regime that never should have happened, symbols change their meaning based on the context of their use.  In this case, when the host is desecrated in that fashion, it ceases to represent Christ’s body and becomes just what it is–a wafer.

In effect, Myers desecrated nothing.  I should have recognized this from the outset and kept my mouth shut.

Advertisements

About Cory Tucholski

I'm a born-again Christian, amateur apologist and philosopher, father of 3. Want to know more? Check the "About" page!

Posted on August 1, 2008, in Apologetics. Bookmark the permalink. 50 Comments.

  1. Seriously? Rook DID not take you to the shed on this.

    Myers’ target wasn’t “just a wafer”…if Myers thinks he was showing Catholics that their wafers have no significance and are merely bits of bread, he did it in a very symbolic way.

    Symbols are unavoidable, and Myers demonstrated that. If his point is to carry any weight, it must first mean nothing…which means it is a non-point.

    But we know his symbolic action meant something…so he is guilty of blasphemy…not against the wafer, but against the One to whom it directs our attention.

  2. Well, Craig we might disagree on that point, but I think that we can agree that God will judge PZ Myers for his actions, and that the Lord’s justice will be done. Why should we call for his resignation or termination? Check Romans 12:19. I commit the whole thing to God’s hands.

  3. Cory,

    I appreciate your honesty on this one. Although you and I disagree on a lot, we can find common ground. That is saying something. I will make note of this on my blog.

    Best regards,

    Rook

  4. I’m glad you’ve relaxed on this my friend. It’s like I said in my message to you. PZ Myers has every right in his free will to do what he did. And of course the wafer was taken out of context anyway… and it is just a wafer no matter what. It holds no power. Besides, you and I both know Catholic doctrine is seriously flawed… perhaps that’s why they were so offended ;). If I were to crunch the little cracker or dump the little cup of grape juice during my communion it wouldn’t mean anything… although my pastor might wonder what came over me LOL. The point is that the wafer is symbolic of Christ’s ordeal on the cross. Although the whole transubstantiation thing is kinda gross…
    PZ Myers proved nothing accept where he stands. Oh well. I don’t see why anybody is so shocked. Let him be, you’ve got bigger fish to fry… like those RRS folks.
    By the way my friend, I plan on backing you up here more often. I feel God pushing me to support you here. LOL I wish I was more awake right now cuz you know I’ve got A LOT to say hehehe. God bless…

  5. Caleb,

    It’s nice to see somebody new around here who wants to “fry” us bigger fish. 😉 Looking forward to you stopping by RRS once in a while and trying to do just that.

    Regards,

    Rook

  6. As the Lord leads me, Rook. Really I’m more into supporting current Christians in sound doctrine… apologetics is not my bag at this point…

    “neither cast ye your pearls before swine…”

    Besides, I find the debates between RRS and Christians to be largely worldy and intellectual anyway. It is very tough to convince the flesh of the spirit, especially when the flesh doesn’t want to hear it.

    In all of my studies, and believe me I’ve spent countless sleepless hours trying to disprove God, I’ve found that I can no more prove Him in the worldly sense than anybody else can disprove Him. He is a mystery. But I see Him in everything, at work in everything, and I know His presence. To those who choose not to receive Him, He is foolishness.

    Just know Rook, even though you don’t believe it, that God is using you for His purposes as well.

    in Christ,
    Caleb Ian

  7. Caleb,

    “neither cast ye your pearls before swine…”

    I’d like to ask you if you really hold to that perspective and thought about it’s meaning. Do you really liken me, or atheism, to swine? Do you really think of your position as a flawless pearl? If so, why? If you say you do liken me, and other atheists, to swine, know that I give to charity (not because I fear hell or because God tells me too) out of my own desire to do my part to rid the world of its pains and further human kind. I go to work, love my family, love a woman, and have lots of friends; probably just like you. If your only reasonable excuse for likening me to swine is that I lack belief in God, you may want to reconsider any position you hold on tolerance. Perhaps this was not the best metaphor?

    Second, I do not try to disprove God. I simply do not hold to the false presupposition that God exists. You do this with lots of creatures of the imagination. The easter bunny, trolls, fairies, unicorns, talking donkeys and Shreks are – I’m sure – more than happy in the “lack of belief” category with you. Do you actively seek to disprove these things? Or, conversely, do you not see any evidence for their existence, and thus have shrugged off any positive belief in them? This is how I view your God and the countless millions of other Gods that mankind has willfully invented to explain away vast nuances that they have not understood. So please do not presuppose my intent. I was once a God-fearing Christian (Catholic, specifically) just like you, on my way to Seminary to become a Priest. But, unlike you, through study, I didn’t lie to myself when I found errors or contradictions in logic or verse – I questioned it.

    Best of luck outside of apologists. Read my blog sometime.

    Regards,

    Rook

  8. It means the pearls of wisdom of course that are in the bible (this you know), and just as you rejected it, the swine will not see it for what it is, other than slop. So in that regard, YES, I am likening you to swine.

    And since when should I care so much about tolerance? Obviously God is not tolerant of much either.

    And obviously you were NOT a God-fearing Christian, or you would NOT have rejected His word. I used to be a God-hating atheist… just ask Cory.

    You simply choose not to believe it because you want to live for yourself. You want to find every loophole there is so that you can feel comfortable living in rebellion to God.

    And sincerely, I think it’s good that you give to charity and love and all of that. But of course that does not make you favorable in God’s eyes, only mens’ eyes.

    So, while you’re out wasting your time trying to explain everything without God, I’ll waste my time as a Berean, studying scripture to test the spirits, and pointing out the following:

    “…no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end.” Ecclesiastes 3:11

    “O Timothy, keep that which is commitetted to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith…” 1 Timothy 6:20,21

    All I know is that following His word works. Living for myself doesn’t. Not in the long run anyway. And I don’t care if I don’t understand everything under the sun, as much as my flesh may desire that knowledge.

    I really hope you come back to God, Rook, no doubt God would mold you into something amazing if you did. You know I’ll be praying 😉

    in Christ,
    Caleb Ian

  9. Caleb said:
    If I were to crunch the little cracker or dump the little cup of grape juice during my communion it wouldn’t mean anything…

    Unfortunately, Paul says that if anyone partakes of the Lord’s Supper in an unworthy manner (i.e. by not discerning the body of the Lord)…he is guilty against the body and blood of the Lord.

    I’m not sure which error is worse…transubstantiation, or the idea that symbols mean nothing when the Bible indicates these God-ordained means are so full of meaning that to partake unworthily is sin against the body and blood of Christ.

    The aim of PZ Meyers’ attack wasn’t a cracker…it was *the symbol*. That is why he chose to desecrate the symbol in a very symbolic action.

    It certainly does *mean something*.

  10. It means the pearls of wisdom of course that are in the bible (this you know), and just as you rejected it, the swine will not see it for what it is, other than slop. So in that regard, YES, I am likening you to swine.

    So then tolerance and turning the other cheek is only as good as when the person believes in God?

    And since when should I care so much about tolerance? Obviously God is not tolerant of much either.

    Well at least you know your God is not omnibenevolent. It is a shame that I have more moral fortitude than your God.

    And obviously you were NOT a God-fearing Christian, or you would NOT have rejected His word. I used to be a God-hating atheist… just ask Cory.

    I don’t care whether you delude yourself to believe this or not. I was a God fearing Christian. The difference between you and me is I reasoned through things instead of deluding myself. I came to the conclusion that any God that the Bible says is omnibenevolent, yet burns people for all eternity, can not be perfect because it is already inherently contradictory.

    You simply choose not to believe it because you want to live for yourself.

    Now you’re being dishonest by assuming my position and my intent. I lack belief in God because there is no evidence for his existence. I just told you that above. Do not sunder my will because you have so corrupted yours with false ideals and blind faith.

    You want to find every loophole there is so that you can feel comfortable living in rebellion to God.

    I don’t have to find every loophole. So far in this conversation it is you who have used loopholes, like this one, in an attempt to dissuade yourself from believing that a person can live their whole life without the belief in God. I’m sure to you, such a notion is impossible. So you have to continue to invent reasons for why such a thing would happen, and here you are. You are doing nothing more than lying to yourself and you’re not impressing me.

    And sincerely, I think it’s good that you give to charity and love and all of that. But of course that does not make you favorable in God’s eyes, only mens’ eyes.

    I could care less about both. (a) I don’t believe in any God or Goddess and (2) I give to charity because I want to benefit society in the long run, for a generation which doesn’t exist yet far in the future when suffering has been alleviated by science and medicine, not medieval belief and ancient dogma. Nobody will know who I am then, nor should they. If you asked the average man on the street who discovered Penicillin and antiseptics, they wouldn’t know the answer. I doubt you even do. Yet without them we would not be where we are today as a society.

    So, while you’re out wasting your time trying to explain everything without God,

    Why would you think it is a waste of time? Is this another attempt by you to lie to yourself about where I am in life? Saying things a million times will not make those things any more true in reality – only in your own mind.

    I’ll waste my time as a Berean, studying scripture to test the spirits, and pointing out the following:

    “…no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end.” Ecclesiastes 3:11

    Sounds to me like somebody making an excuse for lack of evidence of God’s existence. Although, I know from a historical perspective it is probably in relation to the exiled Jews, far from home, and no land to call their own. Feeling alone from God, as if he had abandoned them. This is obviously a verse which may have provided comfort to them. Although a beautiful verse, it doesn’t make it any more true.

    “O Timothy, keep that which is commitetted to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith…” 1 Timothy 6:20,21

    Yet you have profaned my name in this post by assuming intent and likening me to swine. You are not following your own books examples.

    All I know is that following His word works.

    Do you dash children against the walls? Do you stone disobedient children? Do you think it right that through his word two she-bears came out and mauled children to death for calling Elijah bald? Do you think it acceptable that a man is to marry the woman he rapes if discovered? What about the rape victims perspective? Following his word leads to bad decisions and I highly doubt you really follow everything the Bible orders you to do. If you did, you’d be in prison. The fact that you don’t follow every law and statute tells me that you see no value in those laws, and recognize them as folly and immoral laws. This also tells me that you live by a different moral code than the one laid out in His Word. Stop deluding yourself. I know you’re smarter than that.

    Living for myself doesn’t.

    But you already do if you reject even a handful of laws in the Bible. And don’t forget, Jesus said that one is not to abandon the old law, the 613 statutes in the Old Testament, and if anybody does or promotes such behavior they are in danger of hellfire!

    Not in the long run anyway.

    What you mean is you’re too afraid to Hell to think for yourself. You’re a living example of the sort of Christian terrorism that parents unknowingly teach their children. You were instilled fear of hell by this society, and have since been at gunpoint by what you think is God to never question his sovereignty. That is terrorism, sugarcoated with the word “free will”. There can never be freedom of choice if you are constantly told that eternal damnation awaits you if you choose what God doesn’t want you to choose.

    And I don’t care if I don’t understand everything under the sun, as much as my flesh may desire that knowledge.

    I appreciate the metaphorical language here. But you don’t have to understand everything under the sun to know that your God is a terrorist who is both intolerant and immoral, if such a God were to even exists.

    I really hope you come back to God, Rook, no doubt God would mold you into something amazing if you did. You know I’ll be praying 😉

    You can pray in one hand and…well…you know the rest. Which one will be filled first? (Hint: If you think prayer works, try hitting the submit comment button with only prayer – or, try the scientifically tested process of clicking the button. I promise you the fastest way will not be prayer. But give it a try for yourself! Remember, Jesus said you can move mountains with prayer so clicking a button with faith should be easy.)

    Hoping you start thinking more rationally,

    Rook

  11. Rook opines:
    Sounds to me like somebody making an excuse for lack of evidence of God’s existence.

    What would constitute evidence for God?

  12. Antipelagian,

    That is an interesting question. My answer will obviously not be the same as yours. I could say empirical, observable information would only suffice for me. If God was real, and was all knowing, he certainly would know just what it would take to convince me of his existence. If he didn’t want me to burn for all eternity (perhaps he should have just not created me in the first place, being all knowing and whatnot – but that is for another discussion perhaps) a perfect and omnibenevolent God at that would have no problem showing himself to me. After all, Jesus had no trouble showing his wounds to Thomas and the other disciples. Where are his wounds for me to see and touch? Why can’t everyone get this same experience so nobody doubts and everyone is saved? This to me is a little crooked, especially when Christians will claim that it is precisely that blind faith that saves – without realizing that blind faith also kills and maims and injures. I highly doubt most Christians would be willing to accept things on blind faith in other aspects of their lives (aside from religiously). Would a Christian use faith to start a car? Turn on the stove? Accept that a promiscuous lover is faithful? Believe a formerly guilty man of his innocence without any investigation? I doubt it. They would use scientifically tested, physical actions to do such things or investigate certain events. This is called compartmentalization. I hope that answers your question and then some. I have no problems elaborating.

  13. On another note (Sorry forgot to include this in the previous entry), to the Jew who would have been writing that passage (which my reply you quoted Antipelagian) evidence for God would have been the return of his homeland, the prevention of his homeland from being taken in the first place, the kingdoms of the world bowing to the Holy Land, and perhaps other things the author does not tell us. The constant reassurance in the Hebrew Bible of God being with the exiled Israelites seems to me to be a reassurance to those who have lost faith, or turned to other faiths, because of their plight. It is a response to the Jews who became atheists to their former God.

  14. Well. You’ve got me all figured out. Guess I’ve been rebuked. I guess I have no choice but to quit believing in God. LOL

    By the way Antipelagian… you are right about the communion. I stand corrected.

    And as for you Rook, what is your basis for morals? Where do your morals come from if no God tells you what the deal is? You just make them up as you go along?

    And I have doubted God. I have tried to rationalize Him away. It simply doesn’t, and won’t work for me. God is far from being a terrorist. He warns us. He tells us what He expects of us. If we choose not to be obedient, then shame on us. His ways are not our ways, His thoughts are not our thoughts. As far as I’m concerned, who am I to test Him that created me? Satan already tried that, and look at the mess we’re in. So trying to put him in the tiny box of our human thoughts and rational is pointless. It doesn’t matter what we think He should be.

    Wow, I’m still trying to get over you comparing your morals to God’s morals.

    in Christ,
    Caleb Ian

  15. Oh and in regards to why does God not make it obvious of His existence… simple… because if He made it blatantly clear to everybody, then we wouldn’t have free will anymore would we? We wouldn’t have a choice of believing Him. He expects US to seek HIM at this point. Like those acquaintences and close friends you have. The ones who seek you out and desire to know your character end up being lifelong friends. Those who only want to know you superficially or what you can do for them, end up being forgotten about. And since God is forever… well you get the picture.

  16. Well. You’ve got me all figured out. Guess I’ve been rebuked. I guess I have no choice but to quit believing in God. LOL

    You’re pretty cocky for a Christian who is supposed to be humble. Especially for somebody who has yet to make a valid point.

    And as for you Rook, what is your basis for morals? Where do your morals come from if no God tells you what the deal is? You just make them up as you go along?

    Is this an attempt at a clever dodge to avoid answering my point mentioned above? I’ll play your game, but I expect you give me an some form of acknowledgment. No, I do not make them up as I go along. I get my morals from several places, probably from the same places you get yours (as we have already determined you do not get them from the Bible): (1) My parents, (2) Evolutionary development, (3) Society through the same process (societal evolution), (4) Government, (5) My own reasonable conclusions based on how situations present themselves, finalized by my overall experience on this planet. If you need any of these clarified, I am more than happy to. So far, my reasons are better than any reason you could give outside of them. (Grace, determinism, faith, fear of hell, promise of reward in Heaven, because you think the BIble tells you too – all of which are morally depraved reasons for doing good)

    I would ask you another question; What is it you think you can do as a Christian that I can’t do as an atheist?

    And I have doubted God. I have tried to rationalize Him away.

    So you’ve tried deluding yourself out of your delusion? No wonder you’re all messed up with your beliefs.

    It simply doesn’t, and won’t work for me.

    Maybe because you’re being irrational about the whole process? You don’t “rationalize away” a non-evidenced thing. You don’t “rationalize away” the easter bunny, do you? What about all the millions of other Gods in existence–probably half of which are still worshiped in one form or another, many which predate Christianity and Judaism? Do you “rationalize away” these Gods or do you simply not believe in them because they lack evidence?

    God is far from being a terrorist. He warns us. He tells us what He expects of us.

    And if you don’t listen he throws you into a pit of hell for all eternity. How is that any different than a Muslim extremist holding a gun up to your head, telling you if you don’t do exactly as he says he’ll pull the trigger. You still have a choice there too – you can deny the Muslim and die or do what he says and live. God is no different.

    If we choose not to be obedient, then shame on us.

    You’re not showing me how God is not a terrorist. What you’re doing here is qualifying what sort of person you are. You are telling me you are a slave. So in essence, you’re a slave to a terrorist who has a gun to your head.

    His ways are not our ways, His thoughts are not our thoughts.

    So he didn’t create us with his same pattern (Genesis 1)? He didn’t create us to be from the same cloth?

    As far as I’m concerned, who am I to test Him that created me?

    A human being. You’re a person. Who were the african americans to question their white slave owners? Who were the Roman slaves to question their masters? Every slave deserves the right to not be slaves anymore. Either that, or your God once again fails to me more moral than I am. I would never be so arrogant as to believe that a child of mine has to do everything I say, to the letter – the child is an individual too. I don’t always know what is best for him/her. She/he may one day realize that what I want for them isn’t always going to be good for them. Why do you think children eventually become adults and move out of their parents’ house? In your rusty world of fallacious logic, every child would be under lock and key, with a gun to their heads, doing exactly what the parent orders them to do. If they don’t, they were warned…BANG!

    Satan already tried that, and look at the mess we’re in.

    So it is Satan’s fault for us being human? Or is it man’s fault? Get your conclusions right before you contradict yourself next time.

    So trying to put him in the tiny box of our human thoughts and rational is pointless.

    I don’t know what is more shameful about your reply here; the fact that you have no respect for human life or the fact that you have no hope for mankind. This religion has so poisoned your mind that you just don’t care about your own species. Sickening.

    It doesn’t matter what we think He should be.

    You have made a lot of baseless claims here, you haven’t even proved he exists yet!

    Wow, I’m still trying to get over you comparing your morals to God’s morals.

    Yeah, its a shame that I have a better moral standard than your God does. I don’t kill people out of spite, and if I did, you’d call me a murderer. But when God does it – its “his way.” How pathetic are you when you have to justify murder?

    Oh and in regards to why does God not make it obvious of His existence… simple… because if He made it blatantly clear to everybody, then we wouldn’t have free will anymore would we?

    According to your faith we already do not have free will. You are a robot to a God that doesn’t exist. But let’s pretend he does… Answer me these questions:

    (1) Is God all knowing?

    (2) Is God all powerful?

    (3) Is God all loving?

    When you answer theses questions we’ll continue with this dialog. Bring a little less attitude next time. I’m not the deluded one here – I’m trying to save you from looking so foolish.

  17. But see the big difference here Rook is that you base God on what YOU think he should be. And you’re not accepting of a God that doesn’t work the way YOU would like Him to work. You uphold man’s standards, and think them better than God’s.

    And to be completely honest, I don’t have all the education in the stuff you do, so it is hard for me to debate in your manner. I haven’t spent years doing what you do. All I can go by is the experiences in my life. I’ve tried it. It works.

    God created me. I accept that. That’s MY truth, and as far as I’m concerned, THE truth. I WANT there to be an all powerful all knowing all loving God. And I do believe He is all of those things. I accept that. Even if it doesn’t make sense to me. So be it. I CHOOSE of my own free will to obey Him. Of course you think I’m foolish. I care not. And of course I don’t like everything God has in plan, it’s part of my sinful nature not to. Do you think I like the idea of hell? Of course it scares me. But I choose to accept it. You choose to deny it. That’s fine. See, free will. I don’t love God because I’m scared of hell… that’s the incorrect way to be. That’s not love. I love Him because I feel complete knowing Him. Personally, He brings to me peace, joy, grace, compassion, mercy, love…

    So perhaps I did come off as cocky, and I do apologize for that… but I’m confident in my choice, just as you are in yours.

    Rook if you needed food, shelter, clothing, whatever, I would do what I could to accomodate. And I mean that. You don’t know me (I’m faaar from perfect), and I don’t know you. I try to have agape for anybody who comes my way, but by no means does that mean I should tolerate sinfulness… God forbid! If we took the time to get to know each other, it would be different… guaranteed. But I see you leading people to hell, and it makes me angry. You see me leading people to ignorance, and it must anger you. So be it. Equally passionate, but opposite ends of the spectrum.

    I am gladly a slave to Christ. Gladly a servant of God. You may mock me, think I’m crazy… but of course Jesus did say we would be hated for His namesake.

    And as for the compartmentalization point you mentioned above (I think that was the one you were alluding to me dodging)…
    I’ve made it clear I don’t understand everything about God. I don’t claim to know how He works. But don’t lump me in with your “typical” Christian. I guarantee I’m a lot more deeper than the average backslidden American Christian who claims to be saved. I know the path to heaven is NARROW, just as the gate. And I do my best not to stray. He says if we love Him, we are to obey. And that’s fine with me. He hasn’t done me wrong yet. God is a spirit, and works in the spiritual. The physical stuff, while He created it, doesn’t really interest Him. He seems to let man do what man does in that regards. He’s more interested in purifying our hearts and minds to be completely reliant on Him. The things of the physical and flesh act as a workout session for the soul. This is my observation, again and again, in scripture and my life. I know I frustrate you… I hold a biblical view. You frustrate me too, you seem to hold a humanist point of view (correct me if I’m wrong).

    And for the heck of it… here’s something from Oswald Chambers that REALLY helped me not be so critical of myself or others… and at the same time lit a fire under me bum:

    “The initiative of the saint is not towards self-realization, but towards knowing Jesus Christ. The spiritual saint never believes circumstances to be haphazard, or thinks of his life as secular and sacred; he sees everything he is dumped down in as the means of securing the knowledge of Jesus Christ. There is a reckless abandonment about him. The Holy Spirit is determined that we shall realize Jesus Christ in every domain of life, and He will bring us back to the same point again and again until we do. Self-realization leeds to the enthronement of work; whereas the saint enthrones Jesus Christ in his work.”

    BRAVO! Couldn’t have said it better myself.

    in Christ,
    Caleb Ian

  18. But see the big difference here Rook is that you base God on what YOU think he should be. And you’re not accepting of a God that doesn’t work the way YOU would like Him to work. You uphold man’s standards, and think them better than God’s.

    Are you really this deluded? Fine, I dare you to go live one day under God’s standards. Go kill gays, kill anybody who works on the sabbath. Kill disobedient children. Anybody wear polyester-cotton blends? DEATH to the INFIDEL! Don’t be clueless – there is nothing moral or just about God’s judgments or his laws. You know this just as well as I do because you don’t follow them all. If you did, you would be found guilty of more crimes than some of the toughest serial killers. You are just dodging this fact by pretending to know something unknowable (God is above our standards). How can you even be sure? Once more, we’re supposedly cut from the same cloth (Genesis). God gives us laws (kill innocent women and children) and you would not say that is immoral? You’re a psycho if that is the case and should do the world a favor and lock yourself away.

    And to be completely honest, I don’t have all the education in the stuff you do, so it is hard for me to debate in your manner. I haven’t spent years doing what you do. All I can go by is the experiences in my life. I’ve tried it. It works.

    Oh I certainly agree that life experience teaches us things key to our survival. That has absolutely nothing to do with God.

    God created me. I accept that. That’s MY truth, and as far as I’m concerned, THE truth.

    That is just silly. A sperm and an egg created you when conception occurred in your mothers womb. Your mother and father “created” (conceived) you. No God Necessary.

    I WANT there to be an all powerful all knowing all loving God.

    That is really what this is all about, Caleb. Evidence and reality are not important to you. What is important is your delusion. You WANT there to be a God, so you will believe in a close-minded fashion regardless of what other people give you as evidence contrary. You’re like a stubborn 6 year old who has just been told that Santa Claus doesn’t exist. “But I get presents from him every Christmas and it says from Santa! Life has taught me he HAS to exist! I WANT Santa Claus to exist! That is truth to me! I want Magic!” – This is the same tirade I read when I read your responses.

    And look, Caleb, that’s fine. I’m down with you believing in whatever you want because that is your right as a human being. If you want to believe that you are so lowly and worthless that you want to rate as low as a slave to a terrorist God, that is your damn right! And I will fight for you to have that right. Just do us all a favor, and never confuse your ‘wants’ with ‘fact’. Because that pesky logic that you never want to hear is going to show you over and over again why your God is not a ‘fact’.

    And I do believe He is all of those things. I accept that. Even if it doesn’t make sense to me. So be it. I CHOOSE of my own free will to obey Him.

    Here are more pesky facts for you Caleb. If God is all knowing, he knew before he even created the world, before you were even conceived by your parents, exactly what decisions you would make. Your whole life is already known to him. Your reactions to this post, how you’re going to respond, my response to that, he already knows it all. He has known it all forever. YET, he created you, and you are living that exact life. Every decision you will ever make is already predetermined because it has been determined in *time* and *space* which God is already privy to. In other words, Free Will is an illusion. You really don’t have free will at all. Because nothing you do or say, even if to *you* it appears random, will already be known to God, and would have been known to God billions and billions of years ago. Savvy?

    Also known to God are the billions of children who have died before ever reaching the age of 4, from diseases or hunger or neglect, things out of their control. He allows them to come into existence (or in your world of poor logic – he “created them”) to die. He allowed them to come into existence, suffer excruciatingly horrible short lives, and die alone, in a ditch, on a rock bed. This is not omnibenevolence. This is sadism. This is sickening.

    Further, you believe God is all perfect, yet why couldn’t God create man who still had “free-will” (even though an illusion) and not known murder? After all, your “free-will” is already limited – you cannot do anything you wish because your body has limitations, your mind has limitations – so your free-will is not so free. So why couldn’t God create a human who would not sin and still have free will? After all, if you didn’t know what “murder” or “sin” was, even conceptually, you would never, ever know it wasn’t there. You just wouldn’t ever figure on it.

    Lastly, if God loves us all so much, why did he allow for the events in the Garden to happen? Again, he knows everything – he knew that Adam was going to sin (or he isn’t all knowing). So why did he let man sin? You can say, as I’m sure you will, that he wanted man to choose, but that is silly! God would have allowed man to be immortally damned, not to mention the whole hell thing, when he could have simply created us differently where such an event couldn’t have happened. Why didn’t he just destroy Satan and be done with it? Why all the long waiting? Why, if he knew Satan would tempt man (who was not so perfect after all if they were tempted by a talking snake) just never create him to start with? Why create a being who will ultimately be your arch nemesis and will destroy your one true creation? Sounds sort of sticky to me.

    Of course you think I’m foolish. I care not.

    I don’t think you’re foolish, I think you’re brainwashed.

    And of course I don’t like everything God has in plan,

    You also do not like all of Gods laws. You ignore most of them and pick and choose which ones to follow, and then have the absurdity to suggest that “God’s word works!” Yeah, the parts of God’s word which relate best to human values (those pesky human values you despise and think are lowlier than Gods, by the way) are the exact morality you cling to and follow. It is God’s plan, which includes all of his laws, that you ignore! Why are you living for yourself! Sinner!

    Do you think I like the idea of hell? Of course it scares me. But I choose to accept it. You choose to deny it. That’s fine.

    That doesn’t change the unjust nature of it all, Caleb. You’re glossing over this fact by putting your fingers in your ears and singing “Lalalalalalala! I’m not listening! Santa Claus is real!”

    See, free will. I don’t love God because I’m scared of hell… that’s the incorrect way to be. That’s not love. I love Him because I feel complete knowing Him. Personally, He brings to me peace, joy, grace, compassion, mercy, love…

    Bull. You just said Hell scares you and you choose to accept going there or not. Hell most certainly is a deciding factor in it. You don’t “love” god any more than a 6 year old “loves” Santa Claus at the local mall on Christmas.

    So perhaps I did come off as cocky, and I do apologize for that… but I’m confident in my choice, just as you are in yours.

    Here is the thing, Caleb. I’m confident because I consider what is most reasonable and apply logic and observable data to it. You do this, I’m sure, in every other aspect of your life without realizing it. You go to the grocery store and check price tags to see what is cheaper. You read fine print on coupons to make sure you’re not being cheated or scammed. You probably change the channel when a crappy product is displayed on an infomercial at 3am. This is you recognizing things through reason. I apply that same reason to every aspect of my life – you still stop short at God. Your only reason for this so far is that you want to stop short of it. What if you replaced “god” with “Heroine”? That is another way I view your reaction to my posts so far. You’re like a heroine addict who cannot get off a drug because it makes them feel good. I can give you a million drug facts about why heroine is bad and can kill you, and you–as the drug addict–will plug your ears and sing…

    Rook if you needed food, shelter, clothing, whatever, I would do what I could to accomodate. And I mean that. You don’t know me (I’m faaar from perfect), and I don’t know you. I try to have agape for anybody who comes my way, but by no means does that mean I should tolerate sinfulness… God forbid!

    I can’t sin, I don’t accept your God. Further, I haven’t sinned – as I still abide by the so-called Noahide laws that your religion actually has in place (See the New Testament for more details). I live my life better than most of your Christian brethren. And, let me tell you, if you think I’m a sinner because I deny your Santa Claus and Heroine Addiction, perhaps you need to pluck the thorn out of your own eye…

    If we took the time to get to know each other, it would be different… guaranteed. But I see you leading people to hell, and it makes me angry.

    Hell doesn’t exist. Neither does your God. What makes me angry is when people believe the sort of degrading, self-depraving, antihumanist dogma that you feed them. You are a scar on the face of humanity because you do not believe enough in humanity to accept what you are and where you are in this world. You look up when you should be looking forward.

    I am gladly a slave to Christ. Gladly a servant of God. You may mock me, think I’m crazy… but of course Jesus did say we would be hated for His namesake.

    Jesus never uttered a sentence. Perhaps you mean the Gospel authors who created the words Jesus speaks in their compositions? In any event, that is only evidence to me that Christians have been deluded for as long as there have been Christians. It is no more evidence for your God’s existence or the factuality of your God’s son than the same utterances that came out of the mouths of Delphi priests about Zeus and Apollo.

    And as for the compartmentalization point you mentioned above (I think that was the one you were alluding to me dodging)…
    I’ve made it clear I don’t understand everything about God. I don’t claim to know how He works.

    Actually, that is exactly what you have been claiming. You actually claim to assume to know that Gods moral compass is different than ours, when you can’t know that. It may be just the same for all you know.

    But don’t lump me in with your “typical” Christian. I guarantee I’m a lot more deeper than the average backslidden American Christian who claims to be saved.

    So far, not really.

    I know the path to heaven is NARROW, just as the gate. And I do my best not to stray. He says if we love Him, we are to obey.

    Be a good robot.

    And that’s fine with me. He hasn’t done me wrong yet.

    No, but you have no trouble with the millions of babies who die each year from disease. Stop being so selfish and think about the rest of humanity. Your place in time and space is not where time and space begin and end.

    God is a spirit, and works in the spiritual.

    This is a cop-out. Especially because, had you bothered to read the Bible, you would note that God interacts (supposedly) with the physical constantly. If God has a plan that effects you, it has to be a physical plan or it cannot effect you. “Spiritual” is a useless term, undefined and unspecified. Using it does not make you philosophically resilient.

    The physical stuff, while He created it, doesn’t really interest Him.

    Like those millions of babies who starve to death. Like those physical things?

    You’ve only shown me that you are sick, twisted, perverted individual who cares only about his own salvation.

    I’m sorry, but until you start thinking with your head instead of not thinking at all, I don’t know if I have the fortitude to continue this dialog with you. It sickens me too much.

  19. Caleb said:
    Oh and in regards to why does God not make it obvious of His existence… simple… because if He made it blatantly clear to everybody, then we wouldn’t have free will anymore would we?

    I don’t mean to be always correcting people…but I think it would do you well to hear this

    This comment you made is a philosophical assumption that doesn’t agree with the Bible. Paul tells us in Romans 1 that God made His eternal qualities evident in the world…not evidence that needs to be looked for and researched then reaching a conclusion after monotonous scientific inquiries…Paul says God has not only made Himself evident, but that God has even *shown* this to unbelievers.

    Rook’s problem is not an intellectual problem for “lack” of evidence that his free will just can’t seem to find. That would give him an excuse before God, would it not? And Paul says the *complete opposite* of what you did.

    Further, your appeal to your own subjective desires and beliefs does a disservice to our Lord. Appeal to God’s Word, and make your arguments comply with God’s Word, my friend.

    Rook, you said:
    My answer will obviously not be the same as yours. I could say empirical, observable information would only suffice for me.

    *Could* you say empirical observable info…or *do* you? I’d like to make sure I understand you clearly. From the way you continued your comment, I’m assuming you *do* say proof of God’s existence must be empirical and observable.

  20. Antipelagian…

    I understand what you’re saying. I know that passage. I was referring to something like a physical humanoid manifestation of God for all those who can’t observe the natural universe and see the awe of God…

    He’s evident to me anyway…

    That’s fine Rook. I don’t have the fortitude to keep going with you either. Cuz yeah, you vex me just as much. To me you sound just as deluded as you claim I am.

    in Christ,
    Caleb Ian

  21. Antipelagian; Yes, that is what I am saying. You have read me right. I could experience something personally (and have previously), but such experiences are not testable, nor are they observable to everyone in a way which would alleviate all doubt–UFO abductions are personal experiences, but they do not remove doubt from skeptics. Nor should they. Ghost hauntings as well are personal experiences, but certainly they cannot be verified either. The right chemical reaction in the brain can trigger illusions which may seem real. That is why I would need observable, empirical evidence that could be tested for authenticity. The easiest way to have this happen is for God to stop the rotation of the earth and hold everyone in place, appear to everyone at once, block out the sun, and for God this would be as simple as snapping a finger, and no body would ever doubt again. Hell, to be honest there are a thousand different things he could do, all just as simple for an all powerful being.

    Caleb, delusion means you force yourself to believe in things without evidence. Who do you really think is on that side of the fence? Especially since I’ve been waiting on your to provide such observable evidence. You continually dodge my points and understandably so-you have to in order to remain deluded. See where you and I differ yet?

  22. Rook
    I could experience something personally (and have previously), but such experiences are not testable.

    To be clear, I am not here to discuss my experience…we’re talking about God and if belief in the Christian God is rational.

    such experiences are not testable, nor are they observable to everyone in a way which would alleviate all doubt

    On what basis do you assume proving God’s existence must be done empirically?

  23. **WARNING: Irony ahead!**

    Using the same standards that skeptics apply to the Bible, I have concluded that Canadian singer Bryan Adams is a cannibal. There is no other plausible answer to the dilemma skeptics’ standards.

    This shocking truth dawned on me today when I was at work, and I heard the song “Have You Ever Loved a Woman.” Here is a snippet from the foul, disgusting lyrics:

    To really love a woman,
    Let her hold you,
    Till you know how she needs to be touched.
    You’ve got to breathe her, really taste her,
    Till you can feel her in your blood.
    And when you see your unborn children in her eyes …
    You know you really love a woman.

    Notice the boldfaced portions–ignore the rest of the context. The only way to truly understand something is to isolate it from its context and read it hyper-literally with no regard to accepted literary devices. Doing that, there is only one way to understand “tast[ing] her” and “feeling her in blood”–Mr. Adams must be referring to eating her.

    Since this line appears in a romantic love song, one can only conclude that Mr. Adams finds this practice loving and romantic. Therefore, the only way that a man can show love to a woman–in Mr. Adams’s sick and twisted world–is to eat her.

    Some people will argue that Mr. Adams is speaking metaphorically. But I see no reason to conclude that. And even if he is, he is still hinting at cannibalism, which is disgusting any way you slice it.

    Some may further object that I’ve used circular reasoning. First, I ignore context, then I place the snippet into its broad context. But that doesn’t matter much, either. This is the same way that skeptics read the Bible, so it must be correct. Just look at the disgusting John 6–this verse also talks about the same wretched practice of cannibalism.

    It is only fair. If you apply one standard to the Bible, you should be able to apply it to everything. So the conclusion is absolutely inescapable: Bryan Adams is a cannibal. We must organize a boycott of his music immediately until he renounces this horrid practice

  24. Caleb said
    Using the same standards that skeptics apply to the Bible, I have concluded that Canadian singer Bryan Adams is a cannibal. There is no other plausible answer to the dilemma skeptics’ standards.

    Ha ha! I’m going to steal that for the next time an atheist butchers the bible in order to “disprove” it…I hope you donzt mind.

  25. actually that post is from Cory’s humor section… I just found it appropriate here

  26. So you’re likening a metaphorical song from Bryan Adams to a LAW which God commands you to follow, and was followed by Jews, for thousands of years? And you think you actually have an argument? Are you insane?

    Let’s see…love song by Bryan Adams – not literal. Not commanded by God to follow.

    God commanding you to follow his laws, which include stoning disobedient children or killing people who work on the sabbath – literal. THIS IS A LAW YOU ARE COMMANDED BY GOD TO FOLLOW.

    You are so clueless, Caleb, it is not even funny. It’s sickening that you and I are a part of the same species.

  27. “But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together. Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” Matthew 22:34-40

  28. …”ye are not under the law, but under grace.” Romans 6:14

  29. Rook said:
    So you’re likening a metaphorical song from Bryan Adams to a LAW which God commands you to follow, and was followed by Jews, for thousands of years? And you think you actually have an argument? Are you insane?

    I may have missed something, but with this comment of yours this is the first time the Law of God was mentioned on this thread.

    God commanding you to follow his laws, which include stoning disobedient children or killing people who work on the sabbath – literal. THIS IS A LAW YOU ARE COMMANDED BY GOD TO FOLLOW.

    Where in the Bible are *all* believers commanded to stone their children? When you study Biblical Law, you’ll see that the ones who carried out Judicial law (ie stoning violators of civil law) involved the *civil leaders*. Of course, when it comes to Biblical Law discussions with atheists tend to get murky because most Christians do not grasp that Biblical Law is composed of:

    Judicial (Civil), Ceremonial, Moral

    These sets of laws were carried out by those God placed in authority (Judicial = civil authority Ceremonial = Priests Moral = Priests and parents)…so parents didn’t just up and stone their disobedient children…they presented them to the civil authorities instituted by God (which they didn’t have to do, btw…they could just endure disobedient children). Likewise, not just anybody served in the Temple offering sacrifice and entering the Holy of Holies. When it comes to the Moral Law, then that is a forever binding aspect of the Law with only minor alterations…for instance, the Sabbath was moved to the Lord’s Day (Sunday) by apostolic authority. The teaching of the moral law is done through the family and the church. Discipline is administered within the family and also the church.

    Believe it or not, there was a sort of “separation of Church and state” in the Old Testament: God-ordained authority within these different spheres carried out the obligations within those spheres.

    Long answer to a comment that honestly had nothing to do with the topic at hand.

    If you have the opportunity, I’d welcome your answers to the questions I raised on comment #23

  30. best prescription diet pills

  31. So when shopping to get a GPS be sure you may well avoid the hassle of having to determine which waypoints tend to be important and get a lot
    of memory to your deer hunting GPS. Garmin states they are two from the lightest, thinnest,
    most advanced offerings for runners from Garmin.

    GPS’s accurate time facilitates everyday activity such as banking,
    cellular phone operations as well as the control
    of power grids by getting well synchronized hand-off switching.

    The Nextar GPS is a brand of GPS (gps system) units which can be manufactured by Celestron, a firm known for his or her telescopes
    and binoculars. Garmin golf gps s4 Garmin have a good
    deal of products that are listed on Amazon online top selling and many
    in-demand databases.

  32. Thanks in favor of sharing such a pleasant thinking,
    paragraph is nice, thats why i have read it entirely

  33. Good answer back in return of this difficulty with
    genuine arguments and explaining the whole thing on the topic of that.

  34. I am regular reader, how are you everybody? This post posted
    at this website is in fact nice.

  35. Je vaiѕ termmineг de voir toit ça ce sօir

  36. Paragraph writing is also a fun, if you know afterward you can write otherwise it is difficult to write.

  37. I blog frequently and I truly appreciate your information. The article has really peaked my interest.
    I’m going to bookmark your blog and keep checking for new information about once per week.
    I subscribed to your Feed too.

  38. I’m not that much of a internet reader to be honest but your sites
    really nice, keep it up! I’ll go ahead and bookmark your site to come back down the road.
    Many thanks

  39. Its not my first time to pay a visit this site,
    i am visiting this site dailly annd obtain good information from here everty day.

  40. Thankfulness to my father who informed me regarding this blog,
    this blog is in fact amazing.

  41. Je peսx dire que c’est véritablement du plaisir de pawsser sur votre blog

  42. Currently it seems like Drupal is the preferred blogging platform available right now.
    (from what I’ve read) Is that what you’re using on your blog?

  43. I feel this is among the so much important information for me. And i am satisfied studying your article. However want to commentary on some basic things, The web site style is wonderful, the articles is truly nice : D. Excellent activity, cheers

  44. Hey there! This is my first visit to your blog! We are a team of volunteers and starting a new project in a community in the same niche. Your blog provided us beneficial information to work on. You have done a wonderful job!

  45. The corporation may possibly unhappy with the OS Windows
    Vista’s existing type. The newer OS, that is Windows-7, is potent stable, and quicker
    thus improving the firm’s output. Windows Vista’s UAC was puzzling for the customers as well as in the Windows 7 OS, it
    is less unpleasant.

  46. whoah this weblog is wonderful i really like studying your posts.
    Keep up the great work! You understand, lots of people
    are hunting round for this information, you can aid
    them greatly.

  47. I was suggested this web site by means of my cousin. I’m now not sure whether this publish is written by way of him as no one else understand such distinct approximately my difficulty. You are incredible! Thank you!

  48. Vaikka bluffaa ,pallo pelaaja on katettava hänen käyttäytymistä , joka voisi tulla ilmeinen at
    jossain vaiheessa .

  49. I couldn’t refrain from commenting. Exceptionally well written!

  1. Pingback: Reasonable Critique of Dave Armstrong « Josiah Concept Ministries

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: