The essay below is taken from an
English web site. The author name is not given, but what he writes has been on
my mind the past several years. I too have found email exchanges with Christians
to oft times be like dealing with the braindead. Read what he says. Maybe
if you're a Christian, maybe, just maybe, something might seep thru one of your
many cracks. If you're an Atheist, you'll catch yourself saying "Been there,
done that" as you read.
-----Mark Smith
It should be noted that I no
longer reply to, or even read emails written by Christians. The simple
reason for this is that after four years of running this website, I have
gained the unmistakable impression that Christians are unable to produce
anything which resembles a meaningful, objective and factual exegesis.
Samples of the emails received from Christians can be read through pages
Christian apologetics, and
Discussions with theists. These show, only too clearly, that those
Christians who write are ignorant of their own faith and scripture,
although, ironically, they are only too ready to accuse their opponents of
'ignorance'.
I seem to have spent much of my time correcting them of errors which
presumably only exist through their refusal to undertake proper study of the
subject and if they do undertake any study, this is confined to
fundamentalist literature and their preacher's ravings.
No less relevant is the fact that many are unable to engage in dialogue
without personal and slanderous remarks which of course demonstrates their
desperation and the lack of any basis to their myths-beliefs.
In addition to the ignorance displayed of the subject, it is also evident
that these Christians cannot be bothered to even read the content of the
website which reveals either an extraordinary arrogance and/or ignorance.
This becomes evident when, despite the fact that I have supplied more than
sufficient information to corroborate a point made, this is ignored and the
Christian will send an email raising issues which have been fully dealt with
on the website.
Two examples of this are: in
Discussion 8 where I have detailed how Jesus did not fulfill his
prediction of being buried for '3 days and 3 nights' and yet Christians
still write and say I am 'ignorant' of the fact that a part-day can be
treated as a day and the Jewish reckoning of time is different. However, if
they bothered to look at the website, they would see this is dealt with and,
if anything, their suggestions make their own position even less plausible.
This again confirms they have simply accepted what they have been told
without bothering to analyze this.
In respect of contradictions, it has been necessary to point out the
obvious, i.e., to show that the Bible is inerrant each and every
contradiction has to be resolved: there is no logic in trying to 'explain
away' the contradictions in just a few texts. Despite saying this countless
times, I still receive puerile attempts by Christians to resolve the
contradictions of a few Biblical texts. No less relevant is the fact that
(a)in most cases their 'solution' is by simply rewriting the text to provide
another meaning altogether, and/or (b)quoting large chunks of drivel from
fundamentalist writings.
I have said this so many
times but because Christians appear to be so doltish it seems that I have to
repeat it yet again:
|
At this stage it is also
worth noting that many Christians take it upon themselves to try and
show there are no contradictions in the Bible. They do this by selecting
a small number listed on this website (NB. this listing is not
exhaustive anyway) and then, by virtually rewriting the text, adding
various meanings and/or omitting the pertinent wording, they seek to
show that no contradiction arises.
Apart from the fact they can only do this by indulging in fanciful -
and dishonest - manipulation of the material, they fail to grasp the
obvious fact that the contradictions are listed to show that the Bible
is not inerrant. They appear unable to grasp that if only one
contradiction remains, then the Bible is revealed as something which is
not inerrant. Consequently, if they are intent on rejecting this view,
they obviously need to go through each and every contradiction listed
and show why there is no contradiction. There is, therefore, no logic in
just selecting a few of these. Only one contradiction is required to
prove the argument that the Bible is not inerrant.
The same really applies for unfulfilled prophecies: only one is needed
to show that the Bible is untrustworthy: as there are several of these
(e.g. Matt 10:23, Mark 9:1) which cannot be 'argued away', the assertion
that the Bible is unreliable is thereby proved. And this is despite
whatever fanciful arguments may be offered by Christians who appear to
enjoy being deceived.
|
A classic example of Christian ignorance and hypocrisy was
provided by an email in December 2002. In this a Christian wrote saying
that I 'couldn't read' as there is no contradiction between Genesis 1 and
2. However, if as the Christian argues, the contradiction is not there,
this also means a large number of academics have also made precisely the
same error. As shown in the latter part of
Discussion 7, Professor Ringgren, one such academic, who is also a
Christian, concedes the presence of the contradiction. The only difference
here is that Ringgren is an academic who undertakes objective research and
study whereas the Christian is disinterested in anything factual and
accurate.
Presumably, as so often happens, the Christian did not bother to read this
page before sending his puerile email, or considered himself better educated
than a professor of theology. Interestingly, the Christian entered 'What the
F*ck' as the subject title of his email (the '*' was however a 'u')
indicating he, as other Christians, has customized his faith and ignores any
Biblical injunctions which he does not like. In this case, Col 3:8.
The problem is also exacerbated by the fact that many of the writers appear
wholly incapable of producing succinct statements, but chose to submit a
long, rambling, disjointed tirade, lacking any empirical evidence and having
little which is directly relevant, but expect the recipient to read this:
secondly, many appear unable to write without the inclusion of numerous
misspellings and grammatical errors.
Christian writers also demonstrate their gullibility and lack of reading by
some of the arguments that they offer. For example one writer referred to
how a Christian worker had been financially supported in his work which
indicated miraculous intervention by God. In fact this type of claim was
shown to be absurd nearly three hundred years ago by the philosopher David
Hume who pointed out that miracles are claimed by adherents of all the
religions. Therefore, unless one adopts radical pluralism, i.e., God works
equally through all the different religions and belief-structures, the
argument that Christian belief is shown to be valid by God performing a
miracle in a Christian context, is clearly absurd. A minimal amount of
thought and consideration would make this evident but Christians seem to be
incapable of such activity.
It is noteworthy and significant that none of these Christians are able to
invalidate the view expressed on this website that the Jesus, as depicted in
the New Testament, never existed as a historical being: a viewpoint, which
if correct, invalidates the entire Christian belief in one stroke. As noted,
early Christian canonical writings (e.g. Paul's) say nothing about the life
of Jesus as depicted in the Gospels; furthermore, there are no non-canonical
writings, contemporary with the period in which Jesus is supposed to have
lived, which make any mention of him whatsoever and this is despite there
being historians active at the time. Consequently, any faith which is
dependent upon the New Testament Jesus is therefore both wholly absurd and
fanciful. This point, made elsewhere, is repeated here in the hope that some
Christians may at least take the time to actually read and consider what is
being asserted:
|
We are expected to believe
that Jesus was entirely ignored by all secular writers at the time that
he supposedly lived even though:
Special star appears
to signal his birth (Matt 2:2).
Massacre of infants in attempt to
kill him (Matt 2:16).
Goes about 'healing every disease and every
infirmity' (Matt 4:23).
Fame spreads throughout all Syria so 'all
the sick' are brought to him - who are then healed by him (Matt
4:24).
Followed by 'crowds' (Matt 5:1).
'Great crowds' follow
him (Matt 8:1).
Heals leper (Matt 8:3).
Heals paralysed
servant (Matt 8:13).
Heals Peter's mother-in-law (Matt 8:15).
'Many' afflicted brought to him: he heals 'all who were sick' (Matt
8:16).
Great crowds follow him (Matt 8;18).
Heals demoniacs
and kills some pigs (Matt 8:32).
Heals paralytic (Matt 9:7).
Crowds witness healing (Matt 9:8).
A ruler comes to him for help
with daughter (Matt 9:18).
Heals woman with hemorrhage (Matt
9:22).
Heals ruler's daughter (Matt 9:25).
'Report of this
went through all that district' (Matt 9:26).
Heals two blind men
(Matt 9:30).
They 'spread his fame through all that district'
(Matt 9:31).
Heals dumb demoniac (Matt 9:33).
Crowds marvel
(Matt 9:33).
Heals 'every disease and every infirmity' as he
travels about cities and villages (Matt 9:35).
Followed by crowds
(Matt 9:36).
Preaches in cities (Matt 11:1).
Speaks to crowds
(Matt 11:7).
Heals man with withered hand (Matt 12:13).
Many
follow him and 'he heals them all' (Matt 12:15).
Heals blind and
dumb demoniac (Matt 12:22).
'Great crowds gather' around him
(Matt 13:2).
Speaks to the crowds (Matt 13:34).
Herod hears
about Jesus' fame (Matt 14:1).
Crowds follow him, he heals the
sick, and feeds 5000+ (Matt 14:13).
On entering Gennesaret, he is
recognized and all the sick are brought to him and all those who
touch him are healed (Matt 14:36).
Great crowds come to him with
the sick and they are healed (Matt 15:30).
'The thong' see 'the
dumb speaking, the maimed whole, the lame walking and the blind
seeing' (Matt 15:31). Feeds 4000+. Crowds are sent away (Matt
15:38).
Meets crowd and heals epileptic (Matt 17:14,18).
Large
crowds follow him in Judea and he heals them (Matt 19:2).
Great
crowd follows him on leaving Jericho (Matt 20:29).
Heals two
blind men (Matt 20:34).
Ejects Temple traders (Matt 21:12).
Heals blind and lame (Matt 21:14).
People call for his execution
(Matt 27:23).
All the people admit responsibility (Matt 27:25).
Darkness 'over all the land' (Matt 27:45).
Temple curtain torn
and earthquake (Matt 27:51).
Saints came out of their tombs and
appear in Jerusalem (Matt 27:52-53).
Resurrected from dead (Matt
28:1ff).
It is of course too
absurd for words for any rational person to suggest that anyone who was
involved in all of this (and the above is only from Matthew - John has
further miracles), and in just three years (John) or one year
(Synoptics), could go unnoticed by all the secular writers of the time,
and indeed anyone capable of writing.
|
As also stated elsewhere:
|
As far as I know, every
person who runs a website that challenges Christian belief receives
emails from Christians which have the following characteristics:
(1) Christians
seem unable to grasp the substance of the discussion because of
their limited reading
(2) There is
frustration of not being able to substantiate any of the claims made
and the Christian eventually makes statements which are both absurd
and cannot be verified ('I know that Jesus loves me', or 'God is
holy')
(3) They show
an absolute unwillingness to carefully and objectively consider the
evidence. This of course is not surprising as Christians needs their
faith to make sense of the world and to deal with their own
shortcomings.
In fact by virtue of what Christian belief is, some might consider it
impossible to have a meaningful dialogue simply because the Christian
will not concede anything that challenges
his/her faith. Possibly they choose to 'take on' the atheist in the hope
that this will strengthen their faith, and on seeing that this is
unsuccessful, have no option other than to resort to fanciful
generalizations and extravagant claims.
The Christian also cites
the Bible, or rather, gives his/her interpretation from those particular
carefully-selected parts of the Bible that suit his/her thinking but
cannot show why the text should be considered as authoritative. If I
cited the Upanishads
or the Koran or Das Kapital to assert a point, I am sure
the Christian would want evidence or sound reason for why these writings
are to be deemed authoritative and he/she cannot do this with their
citations. |
Consequently, I have come to the
inevitable conclusion that Christians are simply incapable of analyzing
the subject; it is of course bizarre that they
(a) Search out websites that challenge their faith
(b) Yet they do not bother to consider the content, but
(c) Send emails which fail to resolve anything of the
challenges made.
As Christians repeatedly assert that the reason for their faith is that
'Jesus saves them from their sin', this can only be recognized as an
admission that their faith is not based on empirical evidence, or logic, or
common sense, but it fulfils an emotion need or resolves a feeling of
inadequacy. In view of this it is hardly surprising that Christians are
incapable of reasoned debate.
Frequently I have been warned by Christian emailers that when I die, I will
be 'in
hell-fire'
- but these writers never explain how on the death of the body, 'I', without
body and brain (by which personhood/selfhood is realized), could still
exist. As all humans are a psycho-physical unity, a fact confirmed by an
overwhelming mass of scientific evidence, whereas there is no evidence for a
belief in body-soul distinction ('dualism'), the Christian writers are
clearly taking refuge in pure fantasy. They also fail to explain how, if I
survived death as a non-physical spirit/soul, I could therefore be tormented
by physical flames (and gnash my teeth!).
The Christian belief in hell is well-defined by George H. Smith in
Atheism: The Case Against God:
'Hell
stands as a constant reminder of the essence of Christianity: God is to
be obeyed because, in the final analysis, he is bigger and stronger than
we are. And in addition, he is incomparably more vicious. With the
warning of 'Obey God or burn in hell', we have a...revealing glimpse
into the core of Christianity' (p.301).
Finally, as a excellent example of the hypocrisy that pervades
Christianity, I find it remarkable that these people who consider
themselves Christians and are so confident of themselves that they seek
out atheistic websites to argue against atheism, and yet they do not even
satisfy the very conditions laid down in the Bible for Christian life. As
stated elsewhere:
|
Why do so many Christians
fail to comply with Biblical statements? For example, Christ is said to
have raised the dead, walked on water, fed many thousands with morsels
of food, cured all manner of illnesses, and in John 14:12, he is
reported to have said:
'He who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater
works than these will he do...'.
Consequently, Christians should be achieving not only all that Christ
is said to have done, but even more than this. And yet,
this is not so. Why not if they are Christians?
One of the most noticeable features of Christian behavior is how
Christians 'customize' their faith, i.e., any Biblical
teaching/instruction which they consider will restrict how they wish to
enjoy life is just conveniently forgotten about, or deemed 'symbolic',
or suchlike. For example, Christ is reported to have said:
'He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and
he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me' (Matt
10:37).
'He who does not take up his cross and follow me is not worthy of
me' (Matt 10:38).
'If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up
his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose
it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it' (Matt
16:24-25).
'If any one comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother
and wife and children...he cannot be my disciple' (Luke 14:26)
How many Christians now desert and hate their own families and adopt a
life of suffering and give up their life for their faith? Christ is also
reported to have said:
'Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth' (Matt 6:19).
'So therefore, whoever of you does not renounce all that he has
cannot be my disciple' (Luke 14:33).
'It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a
rich man to enter the kingdom of God' (Matt 19:24.)
Despite the frantic
attempts by Christians to give this a 'symbolic' or 'allegorical'
meaning, the statement is absolutely clear: the 'rich' cannot enter
heaven. 'Rich' in first century Palestine would have normally been
understood to refer to having wealth which far exceeded basic day-to-day
needs (Luke 16:19-23 which tells the story of the rich man and the
beggar emphasizes this point. The faith or lack of faith of either man
is not even mentioned: all we are told is that the rich man went to hell
and the poor man/beggar to paradise).
However, on looking at the lifestyle of most Christians in the West
(particularly fundamentalists), such people certainly satisfy the term
'rich' by owning their own home (or homes), the size of which far
exceeds their actual need, many owning a car, or several cars, and
having a plethora of material goods. The vast majority also have
savings, investment portfolios, pension schemes, and so on. How many, as
Christ instructs, have actually renounced 'all that they have'?
Therefore, according to Christ, they are destined for hell.
Furthermore, Christian behavior is also in complete contrast to Acts
2:44-45 which reports that the first believers 'had all things in
common; and they sold their possessions and goods and distributed them
to all, as any had need'. How many Christians do this?
In Matt 5:42, Jesus is reported to have instructed:
'Give to him who begs from you, and do not refuse him who would
borrow from you'.
And yet I have not
encountered a Christian who does this.
All of this of course
demonstrates that Christians 'customize' their faith, i.e., modify,
amend and manipulate it so it suits their own preferred lifestyle. It is
deemed to be fine if it resolves personal unresolved feelings of guilt,
inadequacy and isolation but at the same time, it does not cause too
much inconvenience and upset the desired lifestyle. And yet surely it is
only reasonable to expect Christians to comply with all the scriptural
instructions which apply to them before they begin preaching to others? |
After writing this, I know that
Christians will continue to send inane emails simply because Christian
belief requires ignorance, narrow-mindedness and a complete inability to
consider a differing viewpoint. Any Christians who do send emails will
simply be referred here.
|
Contact Information
Set Free!
Orange County,
CA
Email:
JCnot4me@aol.com Web
Page
JCnot4me.com
NOTICE: Any and all emails sent to SET FREE become the
property of SET FREE to be used or displayed upon the web site of
SET FREE however SET FREE decides, but don't worry, your email
address will probably be deleted. Views contained in SET FREE
represent the views of the authors. No implicit approval by SET FREE
is to be assumed. |
|
|
