Atheist Intellectual Dishonesty 101

Here's another popular picture Village Atheists are posting all over the internet:

Now let's talk about what the author of this cute little pic failed to mention:

1. There are no original manuscripts for most of the works of ancient Western antiquity, including the Greek Philosophers and the Roman Historians.

2. Some of the oldest New Testament manuscripts are dated to the 2nd Century. A recently discovered fragment of the Gospel of Mark has been dated to the 1st Century (right after the Crucifixion).

3. 75% of the King James Edition of the Bible is actually based on the work of William Tyndale, who was one of the most gifted scholars that ever lived. 

3. The reason the King James Translation didn't use the most ancient texts and papyri is because most of them hadn't been discovered, yet. Modern comparisons of the King James version to these older manuscripts show that the Authorized Version is still one of the best English Bibles. The existing codexes that Tyndale, and later the King James team relied on, were good copies of the earlier texts.

4. There are more like 5700 ancient texts (not 8000), and the reason they're not all alike are due to differences in spelling some words, copyist errors in punctuation, or the omission of some words (because copyists usually duplicated texts that were in poor condition).

Dr. Craig Blomberg, Bible Scholar at the Denver Seminary, sums up the majority of the differences:

"The vast majority of these variants involve variant spellings of words that do not affect meaning whatsoever (and the largest percentage of spelling variants involve words with a movable nu at their end—i.e., they can be spelled with or without the Greek letter for the n sound).  Huge numbers of variants also involve the accidental omission of a letter or duplication of a letter or omission of a word or inversion of word order of two or three words or improvement of syntax, style, grammar or diction, where it is easy to determine what the original reading was."


Dr. Blomberg's blog post on this subject can be found here:

http://www.denverseminary.edu/craig-blombergs-blog-new-testament-musings/400000-textual-variants-in-the-new-testament-alone/

In fact, the large number of surviving texts means there are plenty to compare each other to, which makes it easier to weed out mistakes and determine what the originals most likely contained.

This is a far cry from being "contradictory". In fact, when you omit these known differences, the actual number of questionable variants between texts is surprisingly small, and no Orthodox Christian doctrinal issue is in question. Any good Study Bible makes note of these variants in the footnotes sections.

This little criticism from the Village Atheist crowd proves once more that ignorance is contagious, especially on the internet, where few Atheists contend the veracity of what other Atheists post online.

Yes, Hyberbole Can Be Fun!

....Especially if you're a Village Atheist. Here's what one posted online:


A scientist will read thousands of books in his lifetime but still think he has alot (sic) more to learn...

A religious person will barley read one book and think they know it all...


Gee, I wonder if this guy ever heard of a Christian book store? Christians encourage reading, in fact, Christians encourage a LOT of reading.

What would be really refreshing is if more Atheists actually READ the Bible before lecturing the rest of us on what is contained within it. Although Atheists love to claim that they are more familiar with the Bible than the rest of us, it's obvious through the ignorant comments they make that they really aren't.

More's the pity.

Pretzel Logic Debunked... Again

Here's what happens when a Village Atheist throws a bunch of non-related concepts into the intellectual blender:

Copied from the Craigslist Religion Forum:

Christianity debunked in 3 easy lessons:

1. What sort of good parent would punish their children the way God did for a simple act of disobedience encouraged by an older and wiser being (Satan). The other explanation is that they ate from the tree of knowledge and this made them mortal humans, But that is simply symbolic of the period when Apes' minds evolved into human minds. Nothing to do with Christianity.

Why would Genesis, a book that described the creation of man in a single one of God's days, allude to the evolution of apes to men? Adam and Eve were humans, not apes. There is nothing in the Genesis account that points to the evolution of thought. Eve was deceived by a serpent and then she convinced Adam to join her in disobedience. That's it. Nothing else is inferred.

2. What sort of good God would murder EVERY life form on the planet except the ones on Noah's ark? And even IF Noah was the only good man on Earth, why save his family? The Ark could have only housed 700 pairs of animals at most if they took the young and smallest. And the people would have had trouble keeping up with just cleaning and feeding of them. At LEAST 4000 pairs would have been need to produce the diversity we have now. Common sense tells us we are all not decendents of Noah.

Problem #1: killing an animal isn't murder unless you're some extremist animal rights activist.

The issue is, the The Great Flood was a supernatural event ordered by a sueprnatural being. The purpose of The Flood was to destroy evil humans, not animals. If God is able to flood and teh dry out the Earth, then he's able to restore human and animal diversity. Also, Noah saved only land based creatures. Obviously most aquatic creatures had nothing to fear from The Flood. The only argument worth putting up is either that The Flood occurred or it didn't. mental wrangling is useless here and proves nothing.

3. Jesus was supposed to be the PERFECT sacrifice. Putting aside the concept that a blood sacrifice accomplishes nothing and is just an ancient superstition; IF the Jesus sacrifice were perfect, humanity would have been immediately returned to paradise. So either Jesus wasn't perfect or the mythological "carrot" of a future return was held out by preachers in order to gain a following.

The Atheist here needs to read the Bible before lecturing on it.

Jesus was the perfect sacrifice because He ended all need for animal sacrifice, which was only a shadow of the Ultimate Sacrifice of Jesus Christ. I f animal sacrifice was useless, then YHWH wouldn't have ordered it and set specific guidelines for sacrifices.

There is nothing in the Bible that even suggests that the Sacrifice of Jesus should return man to his immortal perfect state. before the fall of man, man had committed no sin. Only sinless beings can be perfect beings. Jesus died to save man from the sins men commit. As such, men are not perfect and perfection was not restored simply through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

Atheists need to read the Bible in whole passages, in context, and then argue against the Bible on its own merits, versus cherry-picking and throwing red herrings into the argument.

I always get a laugh when someone like this 'debunks' Christianity in 'easy steps', then trips over their own toes after making a condescending entry.

'Nuff said.

Hey, Didja Know Teaching Creationism Is Child Abuse?

The latest stupid argument fomented by the Atheist Thought Police can be found right here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/14/lawrence-krauss-physicist-creationism-taliban-child-abuse_n_2687808.html

The new spokesman for the Atheist Left is Theoretical Physicist Lawrence Krauss, who has decided that teaching anything that challenges scientific theory, based on who is making the challenge, is child abuse.

In fact, if you teach the basic tenets of your faith to your kids, and those tenets don't accept Mr. Krauss's ideas as fact, you're just like the Taliban... you know, those guys who hold public beheadings in soccer stadiums and sponsor worldwide terrorism.

Let's ignore that fact that there are college professors, doctors, scientists, and lawyers who believe in God. Atheists have decided if you teach your kids that anything in the Bible is fact, you've destined them to be drooling idiots, doomed to a life of janitorial or warehouse work. You don't believe me? Then believe the HuffPo article I linked to.

So what's next? Now that Atheists are calling creationism "child abuse", will there be attempts to have parents jailed for teaching their family's faith to their kids? Is your local Child Protective Services agent going to show up at your front door with a court order to place your kids in foster care (presumably with non-religious foster parents)? When an outspoken Atheist like Lawrence Krauss (an American who grew up in Canada) uses words like "child abuse", is he suggesting that the State circumvent the alienable fundamental right of everyone to practice their faith? Is this the kind of totalitarianism Atheists are willing to embrace in order to make their beliefs (and I do mean beliefs) the only beliefs shared in the public arena?

What do you expect when they liken Believers to terrorists?

Centuries ago, certain sects of the Church committed what people commonly know as The Inquisition. It was actually a means to gain and hold political power over the ignorant masses, as well as to control information and the arts and sciences. Atheists still compare modern day Christians to the Inquisitors, yet in suggesting that teaching Creationism is "child abuse", the Atheists themselves are becoming modern day counterparts to the people they ridicule.

Atheists have become the subject of the old adage, "We mock what we're to become."

Are Christians becoming the new pagans and Atheists the new Inquisitors? Just look at what Lawrence Krauss said in the interview that was cited by the HuffPo article:


“Sure, it is mild child abuse, but it is [child abuse],” Krauss said. “We need to encourage our children to question freely and try to think for themselves. Anything we do that counters that is unfair to them.”

Unless they choose to question science. After all, Creationism IS the challenge to Naturalism, and if you had your way, Professor Krauss, it would be completely squelched, the way Tomas de Torquemada tried to silence all dissidence against the Church.

While Atheists try to portray Christians as a danger to society, they think the rest of us are too stupid to see their brand of totalitarianism, masked as "science education".

Don't get me wrong. I don't have a problem with teaching science.I have a problem with preaching dogma under duress, and punishing parents for exercising their 1st Amendment rights.

Atheists seem to have overlooked this, however, as their narcissism keeps getting in the way.

When Did Bill Maher Become a Religion Expert?

Gee, why is Bill Maher, a comedian by trade and host of "Real Time" on the HBO cable network,  now considered expert on religion?

Is it because he's an outspoken Atheist, and lots of Atheists consider themselves masters on the subject, especially where it concerns Christianity?

Let's see, he has a B.A. in English from Cornell... that qualifies him to be an authority on Religion, Philosophy and Ancient Languages, yep!

Bill Maher has most recently been noteworthy for his little pseudo-documentary called "Religulous", which, several years ago, played to partially packed movie houses for a couple of weeks.

A key point of his poking a finger at religion was his regurgitation of an old claim that Jesus is a mythological invention based on the Egyptian god, Horus. Let's examine where this actually came from:

The Egyptian God Horus was first discovered in modern times as hieroglyphics which were inscribed circa 2500 BC. The current claim about Jesus being Horus comes from the film "Zeitgeist" (a conspiracy film that is so bad it's been limited to running on YouTube and occasionally in art house theaters). "Zeitgeist's" section on Christainity relies almost exclusively on the work of pseudo-scholar Acharya S (whose real name is Donna Murdock. It's ironic that this supposed "expert" publishes her books under a pseudonym). Donna Murdock's claim about Jesus being Horus relies almost solely on the claims the of Gerald Massey, a 19th Century English poet and dabbler in mysticism.

Massey claimed to be an Egyptologist, and first pointed at Jesus being an imitation of Horus. Massey's work has been universally panned by modern Egyptologists. Ironically, Donna Murdock's books have also been panned by secular history scholars. The fact is, there is almost no resemblance between Jesus and the Egyptian god Horus. This popular myth has been floating around the internet and was once more popularized comedian Bill Maher.

A simple fact-check, which so many atheists seem unwilling to do, reveals the Jesus-Horus connection to be bogus.

Here is what is known about Horus: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horus

I guess Mr Maher's education at Cornell didn't include verifying sources before opening his mouth and making a fool of himself. Unfortunately, too many Atheists still believe this hogwash, because many of them also believe the rest of the spurious claims from "Zeitgeist", which is a Thanksgiving feast for deluded tinfoil hat conspiratards.

Ignorance is bliss, and people like Bill Maher seem to enjoy spreading it around to his uninformed audience.

Hilarious Anti-Christian Tract from Atheists:

Courtesy of a comical website called "Luciferian Liberation Front":

http://www.luciferianliberationfront.org/wwjd.html

Let's examine the claims of the tract:

1. Jesus is a bigot. Bible verses cited: Matthew 10: 5-6, Matthew 15:24

This is what happens when ignorant people cherry-pick the Bible with help from Google. They ignore the cultural and historical contexts from which the Bible was written.

Matthew 10: 5-6 Jesus instructed his disciples to go out among their own people first. Jesus' disciples were JEWS. How were new Galilean converts to the faith expected to go out and witness to people who didn't speak Aramaic? Did Jesus specifically "diss" the non-Jews? No.

Matthew 15:24 This is truly hilarious. The tract fails to mention that Jesus did help the woman in the passage because of her great faith. Racism claim debunked.

2. Jesus calls non-Jews names. Verses cited: Mathew 7:6, Matthew 15:26, Mark 7:26-27

Mathew 7:6 Jesus is telling His disciples not to give God's gifts to people that refuse to listen, or else they will turn on them and abuse their good will. This is in fact what happened many times to His Apostles as they spread the message of the Gospel. They were repeatedly attacked, arrested, tortured, and eventually martyred by non-believers. Jesus wasn't being a bigot, He was being prophetic.

Matthew 15:26 Jesus used the term "dogs" metaphorically as he was testing the faith of a gentile woman who had otherwise ignored God all her life. Remember, he healed the woman's daughter.

Mark 7:26-27 It's simply the same incident from Matthew, Chapter 15 as repeated in Mark's Gospel.

3. Jesus encourages people to steal and be bums. Verses cited: Matthew 6: 25-34, Matthew 12:1-2, Mark 2:23, Luke 6: 1-2

Matthew 6: 25-34: Really BAD inference here. Jesus didn't tell people to become listless bums, He was teaching them that they needed to focus their lives on God vs. worldly things. I guess the people who wrote this silly tract think Jesus was an anarchist.

Matthew 12:1-2: The tract writers display their true ignorance of Bible history here. The Israelites were instructed by God to leave a portion of their fields unharvested as a donation to the needy. Ironically,  the following verse cited criticism from the Pharisees because the Disciples were working on the Sabbath, not that they were stealing.

Mark 2:23: Same as Matthew 12:1-2

Luke 6: 1-2 Same as Matthew 12:1-2

4. Jesus encourages selfishness. Verses cited: Mark 14:3-7

The tract authors took the passage completely out of context. Jesus reminded the woman's critics that any one of them could open his wallet any time and lay out the amount of that perfume if they were concerned about the poor. Jesus is the Son of God, God in the Flesh, and he was accepting a gift of worship from a believer who understood that better than any one of her critics.

5. Jesus came to destroy the family unit and cause hatred and division. Verses cited: Luke 14:26, Matthew 10:35-36, Luke 12:51-53

Luke 14:26: Jesus, the Son of God, says He is Number One, and you have to understand that if you are going to be a disciple. It is the antithesis of narcissism. Atheists hate this verse with a passion.

Matthew 10:35-36: Easily one of the most misunderstood verses in the Bible. Jesus wasn't going to water down right and wrong in favor of a feel-good khumbaya ministry, and He was prophesying that this would cause great divisions among people, even in their own homes. Jesus said it the way it was, and His detractors hate these words.

Luke 12:51-53: Same as Matthew 10:35-36

6. Jesus preached disrespect to one's parents. Verses cited: John 2:4, 19:26

In both cases, the tract authors are unaware of the cultural context of the use of the word "woman". without a qualifier it is either a noun, or in certain cases, a term of endearment. There is nothing in the context to indicate that Jesus was being a sexist. This claim is based on ignorance.

7. Jesus preached disrespect to fathers. Verse cited: Matthew 23:9

Once again taken completely out of context. Jesus is lecturing his disciples on the use of "father" as an honorary title to elevate themselves above other men.

8. Jesus is a hatemongering bigot who won't help anybody upon his Second Coming: Verses cited: Matthew 10:34-36, Luke 21:22-23, Isaiah 13: 9-16

Matthew 10:34-36: Redundantly redundant. See the above response to Matthew 10:35-36

Luke 21:22-23: Yes, in the end times, when people have repeatedly thumbed their noses at God after being warned of the consequences, ultimately people will get the punishment God warned them against. God is a Judge. Scofflaws will be judged for their actions. Without enforcement, laws are meaningless. I guess the tract writers don't relate to this.

Isaiah 13:9-16: Atheists really hate the Old Testament. What Isaiah prophesied was that God will let the disobedient suffer the consequences for ignoring God's laws. He will withdraw His protection from the people, which they didn't care about anyway, and then let their enemies do as they wish.

Remember, God has a long history of bending over backwards to save the innocent. Judgement only comes after God's patience with the people is exhausted.

9. Jesus gave hidden messages to keep unbelievers from being saved. Verses cited:  Mark 4:11-12

Jesus said that believers would understand His parables. If you wanted to understand the meanings of His teachings, you just needed to believe in Him. This is simple enough for a child to understand.

10. Jesus preached dishonesty. Verses cited: Luke 16:1-9

This is a PARABLE. It's metaphoric and its meaning transcends the worldly terminology. The fact that the tract authors misunderstood it as being a metaphor for salvation lends credence to what Jesus said about non-believers in Mark 4:11-12 above.

11. Jesus taught to nag your friends instead of trusting them. Verses cited: Luke 11:5-10

Another misunderstood PARABLE on being persistent in prayer. Once again, refer to the commentary on Mark 4:11-12

12. Jesus advocated slavery. Verses cited: Matthew 18:25-35

ANOTHER misunderstood parable... this one is about paying forward the forgiveness you receive from God. Yet these tract authors claim to know the 'truth" about the Bible.

13: Jesus was a judgmental narcissist. Verses cited: Luke 11:50-51, Matthew 11:22-24, Luke 10:13-15

Luke 11:50-51: Jesus was ranting against the religious elitists who misused their authority for personal power, claimed to know the Scriptures, and yet were blind to the prophecies they contained.

Matthew 11:22-24: Jesus was prophesying against the people that saw Him, witnessed His miracles, experienced His Grace, yet still denied Him, even though he was the fulfillment of the Scriptures. The judgement came from God the Father.

Luke 10:13-15 Redundant. See the above commentary.

14: Jesus promoted gluttony and drunkenness. Verses cited: Matthew 11:19, Luke 7:34

Matthew 11:19: Completely out of context. Jesus was remarking on what others were accusing Him of, because He had the gall to actually fellowship with the people He was trying to save.

Luke 7:34: Redundant. See the above comment.

15. Jesus advocates mistreating animals. Verses cited: Matthew 5:18-20, Matthew 8: 31-32


Matthew 5:18-20: The tract authors are drawing an inference while ignoring the point Jesus was trying to make. He was faulting the religious elites for stressing religious rules over true worship.

Matthew 8: 31-32: Jesus lets demons possess pigs and the pigs drown themselves. I don't see this as a common practice in present day Christianity. This dumb argument may only impress PETA (People for Ethical Treatment of Animals).

15. Jesus mistreated plants, too! Verses cited: Matthew 21:18-20, Mark 11:12-14

Gee, do plants have feelings, too? Is cursing a fig tree worse than taking all its fruit, chopping it down and burning the wood? How much more nit-picking can these tract authors do?

16. Jesus wants most people to go to Hell. Verses cited: John 1:1-3

The straw-grabbing is getting more ridiculous. The tract accuses God of being a tyrant who created Hell and demanded an innocent man be tortured to death. The verses from John are used to claim God made Hell and therefore He's evil. Once again, the tract authors have only proven their ignorance of the Bible in citing this shopworn argument. If God hates everyone, why sacrifice Himself in their place?

17. Jesus said we should blind ourselves or cut off our hands for looking lustfully at other women or men who aren't our spouses. Verses cited: Matthew 5:28-30, Matthew 18:8-9, Mark 9:47

Give me a break. Any Sunday schooler knows that Jesus was speaking in exaggerated terms to point out the real origin of sin, which comes from the mind and heart. I don't see any Christians walking around with an eye patch, a hook for a hand, or a peg leg. Those kinds of people are generally known for robbing ships in the Caribbean Sea.

The tract page was concluded with this statement:

"When confronted with difficult decisions in their lives, many people ask themselves, “What Would Jesus Do?” Fortunately (I think these poor guys meant UN-fortunately. Proofread much?), they think of Jesus as a gentle, loving and morally upright character. While in reality, the Bible paints a different picture about the nature of Jesus and the things he supposedly did. In truth, no one needs the poor example of morality that Jesus provided us. The time has come to stop blindly believing what others say about the Bible and Jesus and look at the truth for yourself."

What an ironic conclusion. The tract writers accuse others of "blindly believing what others say about the Bible", yet they expect the rest of us to blindly believe what THEY say about the Bible. What a pity.

Even sadder is the artwork for the tract, which basically plagiarized 'Beavis and Butt-Head' in its design of the images used for the Christian and for the Lord. B&B are well-known for being insulting, ignorant, puerile and potty-mouthed. They stand out as symbolic of the comments that so many atheists have posted in this blog over the years.

More's the pity.

How To Make An Atheist Really Mad

Tell him/her to logically defend his/her comments.

For example, when an Atheist calls a believers fools and informs you that "there is no evidence for God", tell the atheist to show proof that there is no evidence.

If an Atheist makes a statement like the one I just posted, the  Atheist  should be ready to present data supporting the argument.

A truly ignorant person will holler back you: "You can't prove a negative!" Ask that person how they know for sure that no evidence exists.

What I find to be a common thread among anti-theistic antagonists is that they think they have all the answers and they're not compelled to support them with facts.

Or, in some cases, they'll just throw links to websites like evilbible or jesusneverexisted.

I have found that most Atheists on the internet want to lecture. They seldom want to discuss. When you press them to logically support their opinions, and you point out their illogic, they get nasty and eventually go ballistic.

Remember, these guys are supposed to be the adults in the room.

 Remind them to act like adults.