It gets better….
I am a poor speller myself, but man there is a thing called spell check…
I suck at spelling myself, but geez….I’ve never had to have it explicitly explained to me like that. And that’s the idiot who, when I pointed out/a> some biblical problems, said that I was not qualified to quote the bible.
Note that he never goes on to explain just how I was wrong with those verses.
Sure I messed up that last comment but at least :
1) the link still works
2) I didn’t have to have my bugger-up pointed out to me.
Myself, I’ve always been able to spell well, and that’s meant spelling errors really stand out for me.
Still, I try to make sure not to dismiss a person’s ideas simply because they make spelling mistakes. I make an exception to this when I’m not afforded the same courtesy, or when my intelligence is being insulted.
Hezekiah falls into the latter category.
Reynold, Whateverman, Alex, and Steve,
I wonder how Hezekiah, and Christians like him, account for their intellectual dishonesty?
I wonder how Hezekiah, and Christians like him, account for their apparent lack of self-respect?
I wonder how Hezekiah, and Christians like him, account for their inability to produce their god for us to inspect?
How does Hezekiah account for the fact that he shows all the characteristics of someone who has been brainwashed?
I wonder how he accounts for not making his case for Christ?
I wonder how he justifies imagining in a vicious circle in his attempts to defend his belief?
How does he account for the fact that Christianity and rationality are inherently incompatible?
I wonder how he justifies defending a non-value?
How does he justify his view that all knowledge need not come from nor be knowledge of reality?
I wonder how he accounts for being ignorant?
I wonder how he accounts for the fact that not a single prayer of his has been answered?
I wonder how he justifies believing in something that has no nature?
I wonder how he justifies being a stumbling block to those who may be open to a belief in Christ?
I wonder how he justifies his ill thought-out comments being an incentive to those who want to embrace reason?
I wonder how he accounts for being so misinformed?
How does he account for an entity that has no measurement and is fundamentally no different than nothing at all?
I wonder how he justifies his denial that human beings identify things by means of concepts?
I wonder how he justifies his unwillingness to recognize that the human mind integrates concepts into the larger sum of our knowledge?
How does he account for his misidentifying the objects of his awareness?
According to the world view he subscribes to, I wonder how he justifies the notion that “to exist” means to be something “non-specific”?
I wonder how he justifies writing “nobody seeks after God” when even his own Bible states otherwise?
How does he justify rejecting the Law of Identity?
I wonder how he accounts for “hope making it so” when hoping does not, in fact, make anything so?
How does he account for his flawed thinking?
How does he justify appealing to that which is non-biological, undetectable, invisible, and imperceptible, when such an appeal doesn’t even come anywhere close to accounting for the concept “presuppose,” let alone anything else?
How does he justify appealing to the product of imagination as a starting point for knowledge?
How does he justify exhibiting characteristics of someone who does not care about science?
I wonder how he accounts for the fact that Christianity does not in anyway serve as a “roof to methods that would be scientific”? (Van Til, Christian Theistic Evidences, p. 56).
How does he account for misidentifying the facts of reality?
How does he account for his unreasonableness?
How does he account for placing a form of awareness prior to something to be aware of?
How does he account for his subjectivism?
How does he account for his engaging in deception?
How does he justify asking for proof of the self-evident when he himself has stated that “the self-evident needs no proof?”
How does Hezekiah account for being wrong?
These are just a few of the questions that I thought I’d post; there are many more waiting in the wings. I refuse to post them over on his blog, but I am thoroughly enjoying reading all of your responses to his continued nonsense — which is something else he needs to account for.
Looks like maybe Dan is borrowing from your worldview or at least one of your catchphrases.
Interesting. Thanks for the heads up, Reynold.
Whether Dan has borrowed from me or not, I don’t know. But it wouldn’t come as too much of a surprise if he has. Christians seem fond of co-opting anything they can, just so long as they think it helps them prop up their belief in the imaginary — be they concepts, ideas, Winter Solstice Celebrations, pagan symbols and rituals, etc. Look how much Hezekiah has taken from Dawson!
For the the most part, Christians really have no other choice but to borrow from others to prop up their belief — they need some reality-based concepts to give the illusion that their Storybook and their defense of it and their belief in it, makes sense.
Additionally, since they believe that everything is working in accordance with their invisible magic beings plan, they feel a sense of entitlement that anything under the sun is theirs for the taking. And take they do, thus demonstrating how parasitic their own belief system truly is.
Oooh! Ooh! Wait, I know the answer to those questions! I learned it from HA!
Repeat until your opponent gets bored, frustrated, or just goes away. 😉
I wonder how Hezekiah, and Christians like him, account for their intellectual dishonesty?
I think I know…
There are several components. The first is animosity at those who’ve called the believer’s faith into serious doubt.
The second is a persecution complex, such that the believer feels almost any action (re. comments in a blog) is justified. This kind of person will see lying as more of a defense mechanism rather than something that truly endangers their salvation.
A final component, varying according to theology, rests on the idea that any behavior by the believer is excusable as long as the proper atonement is made. They can lie by day and ask for forgiveness by night.
You, Whateverman, Alex, Justin, Robert, Reynold, Paul and Dawson and others I know I’m failing to mention — in all of your interactions with Hezekiah — were what inspired most of those questions.
I like reading how others approach this problem as well, Ydemoc. Right back atcha.
Wow. After reading the comments over on Hezekiah’s blog, its becoming more and more apparent that he has no escape from the corner(s) all of you have painted him into.
All he ends up doing is resorting to some nonsensical or imaginary lifeline.
If you really want to send him into a tizzy, ask him — given that he maintains Jesus was fully man and fully god — if he thinks Jesus ever had an erection. He’s refused to answer that one for me.
If he refuses to answer the question, ask him how he accounts for not answering it.
If he answers it in the affirmative, ask him how he knows and how he accounts for the erection, and for god having one.
If he answers in the negative, ask him the same things.
I would ask him again myself, but I won’t engage him anymore unless it’s outside of his blog.
Maybe he will even make it the title of one of his blog entries. (I highly doubt it, though.)
He’s threatening to delete my comments, and seems disinclined to answer the question.
That’s hilarious! And he won’t answer it. He’s not averse to rationalizing and/or discussing genocide, slavery, infant genocide, blood being spilled, tortured souls in hell for eternity, stoning, etc., but he has a hang-up about discussing an (un)godly erection!
I’ve noticed that this is a common trait among theists: They have no qualms about violence; but utter an obscenity or display any kind of sexuality, and they get quite squeamish.
That says a lot his (and theists like him) identification of reality.
I’ll be interested to see how that thread plays out.
Thing is, Jesus was supposed to have come to earth to live a “sinless” life, so that his “sacrifice” would be worth something…he’d be “tempted” but he’d never according to their story, never “give in”.
So: Jesus having an erection: Mabye.
Jesus masterbating: No.
You bring up an interesting point. Is masturbation a sin? If it is, how does Hezekiah justify doing it himself. (I’m presupposing he does, since that’s what seems to be in vogue these days — presupposing, I mean)
And, as Dawson once asked, what about nocturnal emissions? Did Jesus have those? Why doesn’t Hezekiah address this?
By the way, hasn’t he bragged in the past about *not* deleting comments? Well, if he does delete yours, I guess we can chalk it up as just another example of dishonesty from Hezekiah Ahaz.
And if he does delete it, I would ask him how he justifies deleting it, given his previous policy.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.