JCnot4me.com  

“Am I therefore become your enemy for telling you the truth?”

The Apostle Paul   Galatians 4:16

Notes to Christians Battling Atheists

 



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  JCnot4me.com  

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



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:


***************************



***************************


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.

 


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 single 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.

Email: bibleanalysis@yahoo.co.uk