Sye Has ‘Answered’ Jesse’s Questions
Let’s have a look, taking each one in turn (Jesse’s questions are in bold, Sye’s ‘answers’ in italics) –
1. What do you specifically mean when you say God has revealed himself to you?
1. God has revealed His existence to everyone such that they are certain that He exists.
This is a non-answer. Jesse asked Sye what he meant when he said his god had revealed himself to Sye, not ‘who has your god revealed himself to?’. Sye has basically answered by saying that his god has ‘revealed’ himself to everyone, and that we all secretly know he exists, he hasn’t explained what it means to have had that ‘revelation’, or the form the ‘revelation’ has taken.
The lie that everyone is certain that Sye’s version of Sye’s particular god exists is merely a naked assertion, and one that is thoroughly debunked when I state, with absolute certainty, that no such god exists. It’s this ‘you believe but deny it!’ line that I find the most offensive about Sye and his clones, I find it insulting and the height of arrogance to be told what I think and believe by someone who isn’t me.
Let’s see if he does any better with question two –
2. How can you be epistemically certain that God has revealed himself to you?
2. Because He Has revealed Himself in such a way that we are certain of it.
Really?? Sye, you do realise you’ve ‘answered’ with ‘because he has’, don’t you? You do realise that it’s not an answer at all? Sye’s reliance on perfectly circular reasoning is graphically demonstrated here, his reply boils down to ‘I am certain that my god has revealed things to me because it was my god who revealed them to me’.
3. What is Satan’s relationship to the Atheist? Does Satan trick/reveal himself/possess us or are we ‘following in Satan’s footsteps'(ie, simply acting Satanic)?
3. Depends on whether you are of the elect or not.
Another non-answer! What does that mean, Sye? You can’t just throw out something like that and then sit back with a smug grin on your grizzled Canadian face as if you’ve silenced the opposition. Why does it ‘depend on whether you are of the elect or not’? How do you know whether someone is elect without knowing the mind of your god (remember, Matt Slick got into a bit of a mess with me last year on this one)? How does being elect or otherwise alter the way ‘Satan’ tricks/reveals himself to/possesses those who are atheists? Who is this ‘Satan’ anyway? Is he a being? Is he sentient? Is he bound by time? How tall is he? What species is he? Does he have a navel? Sye’s non-answer throws up more questions, and he’s no nearer to actually answering the original point.
4. How can we trust either the ESV or the NIV as accurate transmissions of the Gospels?
4. By reading them.
Eh???? That’s an answer of such vacuousness that Nide ‘Hezekiah Ahaz’ Corniell would be proud of it! Sye, what are we to look for when we read them? What if one says something the other one doesn’t? How would you decide which one was ‘right’? You remind me of a character in the sitcom ‘Nathan Barley’ who suggested the titular ‘hero’ should write two articles for a magazine, a good one and a bad one, and then you’d only read the good one – when questioned as to how one would know which the good one was he replied that you would read both of them, and then only read the good one. Your ‘answer’ is just as meaningless.
4a. The Gospels we have are translations of copies of copies. How can we be sure that the people doing the copying were true Christians?
4a. Irrelevant. One need not be a true Christian to do an accurate translation.
I think this is the nearest to actually giving an (almost) coherent answer, and still it’s piss weak. I’m guessing Sye is saying that his god will use any one he pleases to translate his work, it does now raise the question though – are all translations of the Bible ‘inspired’? Were the Cardinals who decided which books went into the Bible, and which went into the bonfire, ‘inspired’? Was the vote that led to the doctrine of the Trinity being adopted by the early church guided by god? Why was a vote needed at all? Was the text itself not clear enough? See, it’s another ‘answer’ that simply generates more questions.
4b. How can there be two different interpretations if there is only one Biblical truth?
4b. There is only one right interpretation.
Let me guess, it’s the one YOU’VE got, yeah? But wait a second! The Catholic church thinks THEY’VE got the ‘one right’ interpretation! As do the Protestants (of which your Calvinist sect is a spin-off), and they believe DIFFERENT things to those believed by the Catholics! It get’s worse, there are literally thousands upon thousands of Christian sects, all claiming that they are the ONLY holders of the ‘one right interpretation’, they are all as convinced as you, Sye, that they are right. How do you KNOW that you’ve got the ‘only one right interpretation’? The odds are that you haven’t, but you don’t want to know that, do you? In fact you’re so certain that you’re right that you find it incomprehensible that you might be wrong, you literally believe yourself to have ‘perfect’ knowledge….seems to me that you believe yourself to be ‘God’, Sye!
So, a handful of questions, and only one answer even merits the word being used to describe it. Typical of Sye.