Masculine = misogynistic pig?

I recently stumbled along a horror-show of a website called returnofkings.com. The opinions it states are so vile and absurd I thought that it had to be a parody satire site. Sadly, the deeper I dug, I actually found that this site is 100% serious. It is really quite scary that people like this still exist... it really is. Let's take a look at their 'about' page to get the crazy rolling...

Return Of Kings is a blog for heterosexual, masculine men. It’s meant for a small but vocal collection of men in America today who believe men should be masculine and women should be feminine.

So forcing gender rolls then? This is already off to a bad start... What's wrong with a 'tom-boy' or a guy that doesn't aspire to be a lumberjack?

ROK aims to usher the return of the masculine man in a world where masculinity is being increasingly punished and shamed in favor of creating an androgynous and politically-correct society that allows women to assert superiority and control over men.

Huh? I assume they're talking about feminism... Feminism isn't about squashing out masculinity and asserting female control over men. It's simply about protecting women with the same rights as everyone else so they aren't discriminated against solely due to their gender, and affording them equally opportunity and treatment. Sounds like someone is feeling threatened by little old equality...

Sadly, yesterday’s masculinity is today’s misogyny.

No, yesterday's misogyny is today's misogyny. In the past it was just brushed off as 'guys being guys', but it was still misogyny back then as well. The problem is that in days gone by, misogyny was (wrongly) regarded as acceptable...

The site intends to be a safe space on the web for those men who don’t agree with the direction that Western culture is headed. Women and homosexuals are discouraged from commenting here.

Why would the straight (white?) male need a safe place on the web? Straight males are by far the most advantaged group of people on Earth. Women and homosexuals are discouraged? So they're jumping on board with censorship as well. Is it because girls have cooties, or is it because this site's feeble arguments can't stand up to even the slightest rational criticism?

And if they are so against homosexuals and men that aren't manly' enough, why have a website at all? The father of the internet was Alan Turing, a gay atheist. And most will be using Microsoft Windows on their computers, and Bill Gates hardly seems to fit these guy's picture of what a man should be. So them having the website at all is hypocritical.

ROK Community Beliefs:

This should be 'good'...

1. Men and women are genetically different, both physically and mentally. Sex roles evolved in all mammals. Humans are not exempt.

Are we physically different? Sure. But after that the line gets blurry. We are all our unique blend. All our differences make for a more interesting world. If they want to draw a hard line in the sand, there goes the girls who likes cars... the holy grail of car guys everywhere. 

Citing nature is also an odd example here, as nature is full of differences...

This unkempt, undesirable asshole is RooshV,
the face of ROK

•Lionesses do all the hunting while the male sits about.
•It's the female Hyena that rules the clan.
•The female Bonobos are in charge as well.
•The male Emperor Penguin is the one the sits on the egg.
•Some insect and arachnid females consume or kill their male counterpart after mating.
•When Anglerfish mate, the male bites the female, fuses with her, and they literally become one (with him now being a wholly dependent parasite)
•Then there are ducks. The male has a huge corkscrew shaped penis, and because rape is so prevalent among ducks, the female has evolved a reverse corkscrew vagina. But then again, a rapist duck may just appeal to ROK...

2. Men will opt out of monogamy and reproduction if there are no incentives to engage in them.

Nice victim blaming! So if a guy cheats it's her fault, but if she does ROK calls her a slut. Double-standard much?

3. Past traditions and rituals that evolved alongside humanity served a net benefit to the family unit.

And this is relevant how? Sure some past traditions are quite good, but there are also those that we've discarded due to them being quite terrible.

4. Testosterone is the biological cause for masculinity. Environmental changes that reduce the hormone’s concentration in men will cause them to be weaker and more feminine.

More or less, masculine depends of how you're defining masculinity. But so what if a guy has less testosterone than another? Who wants a world where all the guys are muscle-bound raging jocks? I'd wager that having a bit less testosterone can serve to be advantageous.

5. A woman’s value significantly depends on her fertility and beauty. A man’s value significantly depends on his resources, intellect, and character.

Reducing women to no more than a pretty picture and a baby factory? And they wonder why people call this site misogynistic. But hey, if a man's value is based on intellect and character that sounds pretty damning for the ROK crew because they are devoid of both.

But lets jump back to the animal kingdom real quick. They say that the females are the ones that are supposed to the pretty ones. But look at birds where the male and female differ. In these cases, the female is more muted in color, and the males are more colorful. The male may even have additional display plumage to add to his 'show'. Just look at the Peafowl. Only the Peacock has the large fan of tail feathers, while the Peahen is much more subdued.

6. Elimination of traditional sex roles and the promotion of unlimited mating choice in women unleashes their promiscuity and other negative behaviors that block family formation.

I see a claim, but that's all I see. Women not having to be eternally subservient to men hurts no-one. And so what if women can now acceptably ask guys out, make the first move, and don't have to wait for marriage to have sex? ROK has no problems with guys running about and having sex left, right and center. Yet if a woman even approaches half of what they deem to be awesome for guys, they will slut shame her. Disgraceful...

7. Socialism, feminism, cultural Marxism, and social justice warriorism aim to destroy the family unit, decrease the fertility rate, and impoverish the state through large welfare entitlements.

Isn't that sweet, he's spending time with his girlfriend.

Ooh!  I see we're playing 'randomly list some ism's and then blame them for something scary! My turn! Conservatism, Catholicism, Masculism, Vegetarianism, Nazism, and Racism cause kittens to cry, pizza to not taste good, and promote the adoption of the Bob's Big Boy mascot as the replacement for the Statue of Liberty because "She's a shady bitch."

This site is seriously ridiculous though. They have a blog that says that all women with piercings or tattoos are broken, sluts, cheaters in waiting, have no foresight, can't be trusted, are stupid, selfish, narcissistic, psychotic, disfigured, moody, unlikable, boring, mentally ill, depressed, bi-polar, racist, violent, masochistic cunts.

ROK even goes on to say...

The only good thing about tattoos and piercings is that they signal which girls you can bang with minimal effort.

Okay RooshV, lets see you effortlessly sweep Angelina Jolie off her feet then...

This is all very hateful to be sure. But what about the classic image of a guy with a 'sweet tat' being uber-masculine? ROK doesn't even try to reconcile this example of yet another glaring double-standard on their part.

They are also disgustingly attacking Malala Yousafzai by calling her a coward, hypocrite and undeserving of her Nobel Peace Prize. Seriously!? This girl is brave and an inspiration. All because after she was targeted for murder in Pakistan she decided to stay in the UK. They wanted to kill her for just being a student, and once she became an activist going home would have been suicide. Maybe ROK would feel right at home with the Taliban or in a country like Iran that oppresses women to the extreme. But Malala's choice to stay in the UK was a smart one. And she still remains a target no matter where she is, so her continuing to speak out is still amazingly brave. She is a deserving recipient.

The amazing thing is that almost every 'story' on Return of Kings is just as maddening, hateful, and clueless. So if you have an ounce of sense or empathy, avoid this tripe like the plague.


-Brain Hulk

Please share, subscribe, comment and follow us on your favorite social networking sites!
facebook | google+ | twitter

Godless colleague

God and work... Sometimes it just doesn't mix. That's something Mrs. MC found out.

QUESTION: Why are some people so hostile toward God? A man I work with is like this; if someone even mentions God or Jesus in his presence he gets upset. I asked him once why he reacts this way, but his answer didn’t make any sense to me. — Mrs. M.C.

Define upset. I have to wonder, because while some Christians are fine when they hear you don't believe, others react to this news as if you had just murdered their child. To these people, the slightest thing is considered as being upset, or attacking God. 

ANSWER: Perhaps the reason his answer didn’t make any sense to you is because it doesn’t make any sense!

Or maybe it doesn't make sense to her because she didn't understand the answer, or simply didn't like it. It would help if we were actually told what the answer was. But in my experience, a believer not understanding my explanation has always had nothing to do with anything but them simply refusing to consider it at all.

In other words, his hostility toward God or Jesus isn’t based on logic or reason, but simply comes from his emotions.

Hostility? We don't know what was actually said to even know if there was any hostility!

He would probably deny this, of course, perhaps thinking he’s being very logical when he reacts this way. But in reality, he isn’t. Instead, he has a deep-seated hatred toward God, and whenever anyone even mentions God or says something favorable about Jesus, he lashes out in anger and hostility. 

Again, without knowing what transpired, we don't know that there was any anger at play.

He even refuses to consider the possibility that he might be wrong, and his mind is completely closed.

What?! That actually sounds more like almost ever Christian ever! Every Christian who I've ever asked has said they would never even entertain the possibility of being wrong. But just about every atheist will tell you that their mind can be changed with evidence.

Why is your colleague like this? Only he knows the answer (if he’s ever really thought about it). He may, for example, be reacting against his parents’ faith, or perhaps he likes to think he’s smarter than people who believe in God.

MC mentions God at work and a colleague speaks out against it. But what do they do? Could it be that MC works at a public school? Perhaps MC is promoting Christianity in the classroom and her coworker has simply told her that she shouldn't do it and is breaking the law. Maybe that's why MC doesn't understand his explanation. Because I've found that believers that violate the separation of church and state usually don't understand the separation of church and state.

Pray for this person; only God can break through the hard shell he’s built around his mind and heart, and convince him of his need of Christ.

Or pray that Thor will break through your hard shell with his mighty hammer... maybe?


-Brain Hulk

Please share, subscribe, comment and follow us on your favorite social networking sites!
facebook | google+ | twitter

Every sin

Is every sin just as bad as another? Are some worse? In the messed up system of Christianity, being jealous of your neighbor's new car is just as bad as triple homicide. So it's natural that GMN would have questions...

QUESTION: I can understand why God says it’s wrong to do things that hurt others, but what about things that don’t hurt anyone? I don’t see why they ought to be labeled as sin. What I do privately doesn’t bother anyone else. — G.M.N.

No need to worry, since there is no 'sin' to begin with. And no, if something doesn't hurt or betray another in any way, it's not 'wrong'.

ANSWER: You’re right, up to a point; anything we do that hurts others is a sin in God’s eyes.

Except when he commands the murder of entire cities, allows his people to take women as prizes of war, commits global genocide, dictates that selling one's daughter as a sex slave is fine, that general slavery is permissible, that punishing rape victims is just and on, and on, and on...

If you look at what is forbidden by the Ten Commandments, for example, you’ll discover that most things on the list deal with sins that hurt others – murder, lying, stealing, adultery, and so forth.

Really? Most of them? You have got to be kidding me!

1) Other gods: No one is hurt here, unless you are counting God's oh so sensitive feelings... But he's supposed to be all-powerful and loving, so that shouldn't be a problem for him at all. Unless he's just a total egomaniac...

2) Idols: No one hurt here either. Well, unless there's a freak chisel accident, but that's not what this commandment is talking about.

3) God's name: Still no one hurt. And how can anyone even misuse God's name if he hasn't definitively shared it?! Some think it's Jehovah, some Yahweh, and others say it's I AM. But one thing certain is that the 'God' in "God damn it' is not his name.

4) Sabbath: Four down and no one harmed...

5) Honor you mother and father: What if they are terrible parents that don't care about you at all? If that is the case, you walking away or telling them to piss off doesn't harm anyone. Parents are not automatically deserving of respect. Respect is earned. Parents can take care of you and love you. But equally they can betray your trust or take advantage of you (Like Lot offering his daughters up to be gang raped). You have to treat each case separate of another. But since it can lead to harm, let's count the tally at 4 to 1.

But wait... Does the Bible even follow this rule? Jesus tells a man to disrespect his dead father, he
says that one must hate their mother and father to follow him, and that he has come to divide families. So here we have one commandment that God can't even keep.

6) Murder: Okay, this one certainly harms others. But as I've stated earlier, this is another straightforward commandant that God fails to follow.

7) Adultery: This only hurts another if your partner is not okay with it, orif they are married and their spouse is not okay with it. But this is a very strange commandment when Biblical marriage includes such things as polygamy and the keeping of concubines...

8) Stealing: This can harm another, but why is it that Jesus asks for one of his followers to steal him a donkey then?

9) Lie: Telling a lie can hurt someone, but it can also protect someone from hurt. But if one should never lie, why does God lie to Adam and Eve when he tells them they will both die the very same day they eat the apple?

10) Covet: And here we are with the final commandment. One that harms no one. So even if we are incredibly charitable, we are at a 5/5 tie. So not the 'most' Billy claims. What's more, the 'sins' that can hurt another are broken by the very god that supposedly set them.

But this isn’t true of all the Ten Commandments. The last, for example, forbids covetousness (that is, a deep yearning for something that belongs to someone else). But covetousness isn’t an outward action; it’s something that goes on only in our hearts and minds. Nor does it apparently hurt anyone else (unless it leads to something like cheating or stealing). And yet God still labels it a sin.

Sorry, but if you covet something and then steal it, it is the theft that is the sin, not the coveting.

Why is this? 

Because he is so terribly insecure that  he's worried that if you see someone enjoying their (other) god, that you might want to try it out as well?

But God loves you and doesn’t want you to be a slave to sin any longer.

Because he wants us to be his slave instead, and boy does he hate competition...


-Brain Hulk

Please share, subscribe, comment and follow us on your favorite social networking sites!
facebook | google+ | twitter

Big Band and Big Foot

I love a good study, but all too often I'm left at a loss as to the results. This time, I'm just dismayed...

Chapman University ran a study on fears, but also gauged respondents beliefs on paranormal and scientific questions. Sadly, what they found wasn't encouraging.

Believe that positive thought can influence the physical world: 69%

Sure, positive thought can drive one to do better and try harder. But actually cause things to happen on their own? I don't think so...

Believe in advanced civilizations like Atlantis: 63%

History does tell of actual civilizations that were quite ahead of their time, so I have no problems going that far. Maybe an advanced city of Atlantis did exist, but I would say that the popular stories of how advanced they supposedly were are quite embellished and exaggerated.

Believe that dreams foretell the future: 58%

Given how vague dreams can be, and how difficult they can be to remember clearly it's no surprise that a person's cognitive bias could lead them to believe that their dream actually did come true. But do dreams really predict the future? I know that none of mine have, and I've never heard of any convincing cases of it actually happening.

Believe in haunted houses/ghosts: 54%

With how many ghost shows are on TV I'm surprised this number isn't higher. That said, it's still far too high since there has still been no evidence uncovered that ghosts are actually real.

Confident that vaccines are safe and effective: 53%

Less people trust vaccines than believe in ghosts? That's just sad. The truth is that vaccines work. They have eradicated or devastated many sicknesses that were once common and also deadly. From my experience, those that side against the safety of vaccines are often misinformed, misunderstanding things, or relying on dangerously outdated info.

 Believe Satan causes most of the evil in the world: 47%

Guess these people didn't read the Bible, because God is far more evil. But seriously... Almost half of respondents are afraid of a boogie man that hasn't ever been shown to even exist? That's just sad. Even sadder... at least one Supreme Court justice is a member of that group.

Believe that UFO's are spaceships: 41%

Do I believe that there is probably extraterrestrial life out there somewhere? Sure. The sheer number of galaxies, stars and planets make it mathematically likely that there is more life somewhere. That said, I don't think aliens have ever come to Earth. Also, we shouldn't forget that the vast majority of UFO sightings/videos have been easily explained.

Confident that human activities are causing global warming: 33%

This is sad... The vast majority of scientific studies have come to the same conclusion. Climate change is real, and we are playing at least a big part. Those that side against the science are almost always funded by big oil, or dangerously misinformed. This is an important issue, because the very future of humanity may hang in the balance.

Confident that life evolved by way of evolution by natural selection: 31%

Even more dismaying than the global warming news is this. While the average person understanding evolution may not be as important to our continued survival, the overwhelming evidence that life did evolve by way of natural selection should make this a no-brainer. And we have known this fact for quite some time now. What's more, what's with 53% of people trusting in a flu shot when only 31% 'believe' in evolution? Evolution is why you need a new flu shot every year!

Confident the Big Bang theory is correct: 21%

This is far, far too low. Why? Because just like evolution, all the evidence shows us that the big bang happened. Sadly, far too many people choose to ignore the evidence and blindly accept a religion's claim to 'creation'. This is important because if they are willing to ignore these mountains of evidence in favor of theology, what won't they ignore.

Believe Big Foot is real: 21%

That's right... Just as many people 'believe' the Big Bang theory, a scientific explanation rooted in a huge mass of evidence as believe in Big Foot... a monster who has never been shown to exist, and every claim of a body has been found to be a fraud. 

Believe fortune tellers can tell the future: 17%

I'm actually surprised to see this so low, when future telling dreams rank so high on this list. This one is a positive though, because every person claiming psychic abilities has been shown to be a fraud when scientifically tested.

Believe in astrology: 13%

To tell the truth, I'm actually relieved to see so few people actually believe in astrology. Astrology is undeniably a laughable idea that has been shown to be bunk.

As you can see, there are some real problems here. Most stem from Americans being far too superstitious. But education also seems to be a real problem when acceptance of the Big Bang, evolution, climate change and vaccination rate as low as they do.


-Brain Hulk

Please share, subscribe, comment and follow us on your favorite social networking sites!
facebook | google+ | twitter

One holiday at a time...

As we all know Christmas seems to start earlier and earlier every year. But is it just me, or does it seem like the holiday season has been kicked into gear extra early this year?

It was early September when I first started seeing Christmas displays and item going up in some stores. As time has marched on these displays have only been growing larger and more prevalent. Thursday I actually started hearing Christmas commercials on the radio. Plus a house a couple blocks from me decked out their whole yard in Christmas decorations a week before Halloween.

Halloween passed and the very next day it has been madness! First there was all the people. Every store was packed. It was far busier than the average Saturday here. People fighting over parking spots like dogs vying for a scrap of meat. Pedestrians mindlessly wandering into traffic or cluelessly moving about the shops as if they were zombies left over from the night prior.

The Christmas displays? Not only where they larger, they exploded in size. The only thing missing was the incessant loop of Christmas music playing on a the store radio.

With all the people everywhere, I couldn't help but wonder if there were some big sales that I didn't know about. But a quick look didn't yield any signs of that going on. Then I heard a woman talking to another... "Oh, it's time for a break, I've been Christmas shopping all day."

With everything going on this weekend you'd think that Christmas was in a couple weeks, but in reality it's almost two months distant. Now, I don't fault people for liking Christmas; I enjoy it myself. But is it so much to ask that we take our holidays one at a time? Christmas is now hitting high gear earlier and earlier. Halloween, Veterans Day, and Thanksgiving are becoming more and more glossed over it would seem. Jon Stewart once jokingly said that Christmas is getting so big that it is eating other holidays. But those words ring true.

I remember a time that really wasn't so long ago when the end of Halloween signaled the coming of Thanksgiving, and the day after Thanksgiving was the very beginning of the Christmas season. Before 'Black Friday' not a Christmas display or ornament was to be seen. Thanksgiving was respected and given it's time before we jumped to the next holiday. But no more.

Instead big business intends to cash in and extend Christmas as much as they can. It's all money money money... But doesn't this just cheapen it all? The earlier Christmas starts, the more I can't wait for it to be over. For all the madness to end. To be able to leave my house without wading into a sea of dazed people that are walking and driving like they only come out once a year and aren't quite sure how cars and traffic patterns really work.

It's sad, because it takes a time that should be pleasant and magnifies all the worst aspects. And it has gotten to the point where it is almost unavoidable. To fight back my family has decided not to exchange gifts the last couple years, and the transformation has been wonderful. Venturing among the droves of shoppers is brought to a minimum. I can simply shop for wife (my sole gift recipient) and instead focus on what's really important... Having family over, eating great food and simply having a good time. Free from the unneeded stress that is waiting everywhere that time of year.

But this never-ending swelling of Christmas has got to stop. Because if it continues growing at the rate I've witnessed in my life, I'll live to see it become a constant year-long event. So lets all take a step back and slow down a little so we can appreciate everything in it's time and not hurry along the year any faster than it already seems to slip away..


-Brain Hulk

Please share, subscribe, comment and follow us on your favorite social networking sites!
facebook | google+ | twitter

Ten quick responses to atheist claims?

Christian Today posted an article that is supposed to offer quick responses to ten atheist claims. So let's take a look and see if it actually delivers...

1) You don't believe in Zeus, Thor and all the other gods. I just go one god more than you, and reject the Christian God.

Art by ryomablood

The problem with this idea is that 'gods' such as Zeus and Thor are not comparable with the biblical understanding of God.

"There is a vast distinction between all of the Ancient near eastern gods and the God of the Bible," said Prof Lennox. "They are products of the primeval mass and energy of the universe. The God of the Bible created the heavens and the earth".

The point that Lennox is missing or ignoring is that the god of the Bible, like all other gods, is an unproven entity that is supported by exactly zero evidence. The other point is that the Christian disbelieves in Zeus, Thor, and all other gods for the very same reason we also disbelieve in the Christian god.

2) Science has explained everything, and it doesn't include God.

Science cannot answer certain kinds of questions, such as 'what is ethical?' and 'what is beautiful?' Even when it comes to questions about the natural world, which science does explore and can sometimes answer, there are different types of explanations for different things.

"God no more competes with science as an explanation of the universe than Henry Ford competes with the law of internal combustion as an explanation of the motor car," says Prof Lennox.

First of all, no one is saying that science has explained everything. The beautiful thing about science is that it never stops. Lennox feels that there are things that science can't answer, and I would opine that science can delve into the realms that Lennox says that it can't. But even if it couldn't... So what?! Not having a scientific explanation doesn't mean that you can just plug in whatever story you favor.

Another important aspect is that science and religion are very much in conflict if you are going with a literal interpretation of the Bible. There are stories that are very much in contradiction with what science has shown to be the reality.

3) Science is opposed to God.

There are certain conceptions of a 'god' that might be opposed to science, but not the Christian God. There might be certain kinds of 'gods' that are invented to explain things we don't understand, but they're not Christian.

"If we're being offered a choice between science and god... it is not a biblical concept of god," said Prof Lennox. "The biblical God is not a god of the gaps, but a God of the whole show. The bits we do understand [through science] and the bits we don't.

"Among many leading thinkers, their idea of god is thoroughly pagan. If you define god to be a god of the gaps, then you have got to offer a choice between science and god."

Science is actually impartial to religion. It just so happens that God claims just happen to regularly fail scientific scrutiny. Lennox claims there is no conflict, but as I've said, the Bible makes claims that science have shown are false. Also, there is no proof of God, so there is no way he could be remotely scientific since evidence is what science runs on.

4) You can't prove that there is a God.

This kind of statement ignores that there are different kinds of 'proof'.

"Can you prove that there is a God?" asked Prof Lennox. "In the mathematical sense no, but proving anything is very difficult. The word proof has two meanings. There's the rigorous meaning in maths that is very difficult to do and rare. But then there's the other meaning – beyond reasonable doubt".

That's the kind of 'proof' we can present: arguments to bring someone beyond reasonable doubt. For example, rational arguments such as those from philosophers Alvin Plantinga and William Lane Craig, the personal experience of Christians, and the witness of the gospel accounts in the Bible.

Lennox fails to realize that his God fails on both accounts to an impartial party. If he feels that personal experiences are 'proof' of God, than the personal experiences of Hindus, Muslims, Satanists, Scientologists, Pastafarians, or Buddhists prove their respective deities to be real as well. Somehow I doubt Lennox would accept the personal experience of a Muslim.

5) Faith is believing without any evidence.

Christian belief has never been about having no evidence: the gospels were written to provide evidence, as the beginning of Luke's attests. The end of John's gospel says, "These are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name."

But believing without evidence is a common notion of 'faith' at present. "This definition is in the dictionary and believed by many," said Prof Lennox. "So, when we talk about faith in Christ, they think that's because there's no evidence. [John's gospel shows that] Christianity is an evidence-based faith."

The Bible is not evidence of anything. It's the claim and no more. If faith was belief with evidence, it would cease to be faith. Hebrews 11:1 also contradicts Lennox's claim when it says...

Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

6) Faith is a delusion. I'd no more believe in God than I would in the Easter Bunny, Father Christmas or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

These ideas have been made famous by people such as Prof Richard Dawkins. The only thing they are good for is mockery.

"Statements by scientists are not always statements of science," said Prof Lennox. "Stephen Hawking said, "religion is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark". I said, "atheism is a fairy story for people afraid of the light".

"Neither of those statements proves anything at all. They're all reversible. What lies behind all these delusion claims is the Freudian idea of wish fulfilment [that we believe what we hope to be true.] This works brilliantly providing there is no god. But if there is a god, then atheism is wish fulfilment."

It sounds as if Lennox is unduly taking 'delusion' as an insult, when it simply means 'a belief that is not true'. Also, the God/Easter Bunny/Flying Spaghetti Monster comparison is a valid one and not a joke as he believes. This is because there is no evidence for any of them existing. In this way, they are very much the same.

7) Christianity claims to be true, but there loads of denominations and they all disagree with each other, so it must be false.

Why does the existence of denominations imply Christianity is false? It might imply that Christians have very different personalities and cultures – or even that Christians aren't good at getting on with each other – but not that Christianity isn't true.

"There are all kinds of different kinds of teams in football, but they all play football," said Prof Lennox.

This smells like a straw-man because I've literally never heard an atheist cite the existence of different denominations as proof that Christianity is false. I've only heard denominations brought up for two reasons.

Two different denominations will claim that they are the only ones who have it right, and they will claim that the other is doing it wrong. They will often go as far as saying that the other is in danger of Hell while they are on the road to Heaven.

The existence of denominations does  alsothrow the Bible into question. The Bible is claimed to be the perfect word of God. If it is perfect, that would mean that it should be perfectly clear and not open to interpretation. Yet all these different interpretations is why we have so many denominations . Thus the Bible can't be fully perfect.

8) The Bible is immoral.

If you want to question the morality of the Bible, what basis does that morality have? There can be a serious contradiction within atheist criticisms. Dawkins wrote: "In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference."

If this is true, then why does he question the morality of anything? "Dawkins says faith is evil," said Prof Lennox. "But at the same time he abolishes the categories of good and evil. That doesn't make sense."

Believers just love to pull that quote and use it out of context don't they? That Dawkins quote was from a book on evolution, and is about evolution. What he's saying is that evolution is indifferent. But make no mistake, people aren't. As I've written before, morality easily arises without the need for a deity. Also, no matter which way you want to look at it. I also wrote about the shear evil on display in the Bible. Anyone who claims the Bible to be moral either hasn't read it all the way through, or possesses the ability to rationalize an amazing blood-lust that would make even the most prolific mass-murderers blush.

9) Surely you don't take the Bible literally?

Some atheists (and a few Christians) have a very black and white idea of how to interpret the Bible. You either have to take it 'literally' or chuck it away, they think. That ignores the reality of language and how it reflects truth.
"Jesus said 'I'm the door'," said Prof Lennox. "Is Jesus a door like a door over there? No. He is not a literal door, but he is a real door into a real experience of God. Metaphor stands for reality. The word 'literal' is useless."

Sorry, but 'metaphor' and 'literal' are not remotely interchangeable. I will opine that I feel that literally interpreting the Bible at all time is madness. The problem is if a believer claims that some parts are literal and others are metaphor, how do you tell when what it is saying is literal or not. Why is it assumed that Jesus making the blind see or coming back to life are literal and not metaphorical? Also, there is the bad habit where things will be considered literal until that interpretation has been shown to be false. Suddenly, it is claimed that it was a metaphor all along. Such an action is simply dishonest.

10) What is the evidence for God?

You can debate the existence of God until the cows come home. It can be very interesting, especially when you go into the detail and explore the subject in depth. But for an atheist, they might be missing the point or avoiding the real issue. Prof Lennox advises to ask them the most important question:
"Suppose I could give [evidence for God], would you be prepared right now, to repent and trust Christ?"

And the answer almost every atheist will give you is that yes, give me evidence and I'll believe. Actually, many of us want(ed) to believe, tried to believe, and at one point did believe.

So what we see here is ten examples of a believer missing the point, presenting a straw-man, or just not making sense.


-Brain Hulk

Please share, subscribe, comment and follow us on your favorite social networking sites!
facebook | google+ | twitter

Salvation lost

Once a believer always a believer? Can one be disowned by God? RJ wants to know and decided to ask Billy Graham about it...

Q: Can you lose your salvation once you've honestly committed your life to Jesus? A friend of mine says you can, and another says you can't. This bothers me, because I sincerely believe in Jesus, but I'm afraid I'll do something wrong and maybe lose it all. -- R.J

Salvation? Lose it? I haven't even seen proof that it exists yet... I'd be more concerned about that part of the equation first!

A: I don't doubt the sincerity of your friend who believes we can lose our salvation if we sin after we've given our lives to Christ, but I respectfully disagree. Jesus said, "All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away" (John 6:37).

Really? So that means that Billy is in favor of just letting the majority of American atheists be then?

Think of it this way. When a child is born, he or she becomes part of a family. Even if they rebel or do something wrong, they're still a member of that family, and nothing can ever end that relationship. And when we come to Christ, we become members of a new family -- the family of God. We are now His children, and just as an earthly child will always be part of their family, so we will always be part of Christ's family -- even if we sin and turn away from Him for a time.

Then why are so many believers concerned with converting or saving atheists then? You see I, like a great many atheists, once believed. There was once a time in my life when I had no doubts that my Bible studies were teaching me the truth. I'd pray every night, think about God, ask him for help... I well and truly believed. And I'm not alone. The atheist ranks are full of former believers, evangelists, missionaries, those studying to become clergy and even pastors.

When some believers find that an atheist once believed, we are usually met with accusations or attempts to convert us. But according to Billy there is no need. He claims that former believers like myself are still saved. To that I will now simply say to those knocking on my door, you can just skip our house and leave us alone.


-Brain Hulk

Please share, subscribe, comment and follow us on your favorite social networking sites!
facebook | google+ | twitter