Oh for Gods’ sake. Evidence and other atheist fallacies

In my brief journey into the unguided and purposeless world of atheists, ….

Mel Wild

These are the opening  twelve  words of the latest post by professional senior Pastor, Mel Wild; a man apparently chosen by his god and ratified by fellow professionals to lead and guide not only the faithful but also the non-believers and those unfortunate backsliders who have fallen foul of bad theology, to bring them back to the fold and the loving arms of Jesus – Amen.

It takes very little expenditure of grey matter to recognise that Mel’s opening salvo is not written with any warm- hearted feelings  toward those unfortunates who are now almost exclusively the focus of his misguided ministrations – the  atheists who read and comment on his blog.

It is with a smile and the occasional bout of wry laughter seeing he is attracting several new atheist commenters, some of  whom seem to have been, in the past, heavily (indoctrinated?)  involved in Christianity and can respond to every one of Mel’s silly arguments in a manner that is beginning to rattle our erstwhile Pastor, and it shows.

I particularly enjoyed these two comments  from Ben, a former Christian. I’m sure he won’t mind if I share them.

 

I’m curious as to why God cannot be explained by scientific methods as he exists outside of such things, yet the Bible can be accepted using such methods? The Bible is a physical document that consists of actual parchments that have been studied since it’s inception. How is it that the Bible is verifiable by Christians as a true piece of history documenting God’s actual words, yet God himself is outside of that type of verification?

 

I see. So we should all read our Bibles to know God, but we need someone to interpret them for us because we don’t have the ability to interpret it for ourselves? This is the system God implemented for us? Only the religiously learned can know it and explain it to us? A book compiled of stories written over a thousand years is how God chose to communicate with us? A book he knew would be disputed and rejected by most? A God who grieves over the loss of even one of us is okay losing about 7 out of 10 people in the world? Yet, only about 30% or so of the world’s population is Christian. A book that is so confusing that only properly trained can understand is not the way to go if God wanted to save every last one of us. It has the power to save if we believe, yet Christians are leaving the faith in record numbers.

 

Indeed!

 

And Mel’s response ….

Mel Wild says:

Ben, this is because you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the Bible.

 

How can one not laugh at the arrogance?

Methinks that maybe our Pastor Mel is beginning to see a little daylight through the cracks in his faith.

 

Ark

 


120 thoughts on “Oh for Gods’ sake. Evidence and other atheist fallacies

  1. When I’ve decided to participate on a few of Mel’s blog-posts, 99% of the time I cannot even get past his opening sentence. They are too often loaded with preconceived notions, false statements, and incomplete or highly biased opinions of opposing views or challenges. It makes the majority of his blog-posts simply personal Op-Ed’s based on his OWN subjective, narrow knowledge with some common-place biblical commentary readers can easily find in any Christian website/bookstore.

    Ben, this is because you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the Bible.

    And where does Mel’s “authority” come from? This is a claim (Mel’s) that has been uttered by thousands and millions of men over the last 2,000 years and the vast majority of Bible-interpreters are wrong while the small minority (the claimant) is always right. Hahahahahahaha!!! That is the pure definition of hyper-egocentric. But I’m sure “God” gave Mel that personal message right from His own mouth. 🙄🤪

    Liked by 3 people

    1. “And where does Mel’s “authority” come from?” Me. He called me and asked, “Am I right about all this bible stuff, and is everyone else wrong?” And I said, “Sure. Whatever floats yer boat ya’ f**kin’ loon, ya’.”

      Liked by 4 people

  2. And where does Mel’s “authority” come from?

    As I noted in the post – Mel was chosen by god … oh, I am so sorry, God to be one of the earthly representatives to look after His interests, dontcha know?

    Liked by 2 people

      1. Yes! Exactly. This goes back to your discussing aspects of revelation with him, if memory serves?
        Faith/heart matter and not evidence, right?

        For the record, I note he has not once demonstrated how your ( or any former Christian’s ) understanding is wrong and his is correct.
        After all, he is a professional and should be able to explain it easily enough, right?
        Time he was asked to step up to the plate and tell us, methinks?

        Liked by 2 people

        1. Ark, you are absolutely spot on. What I think he doesn’t even realize is how utterly arrogant, egocentric, SUBJECTIVE he is being (biased?) with HIS OWN hermeneutics/exegesis of divine “Revelation” in the face of the reality of hundreds (thousands?) of other “Christian” churches/theology that DO NOT align with his FourSquare Church/PCCNA education and interpretations… SHOULD humble the man at all times, especially when talking to or dealing with the non-Xian world.

          What he and many Christian apologists lose sight of is that ULTIMATELY it should be their “God” who does all the arrogant arguing with us, not him!

          Liked by 2 people

  3. That comment thread was long. I do think Mel’s attempt to abandon the Bible is a move in the right direction. Too bad it’ll change again next week, but for now, he and brainyawn have moved toward worshipping an even more obscure entity, in this idea of classical theology, which is nothing more than worshipping your own ideas of the incomprehensible god of abstraction. He knows the Bible is crap, and is now trying to worship the “idea” of why there is a bible. They tossed in some codespeak and thought they were super smart, but all they are doing is moving yhwy’s goal post to an unobtainable, incomprehensibility. Is that a word? He really freaked out when I brought up Jacobs wrestle with the lord. If there was a god, he is not what they say, but a physical body, according to the Bible. Blowstheirmind!

    Liked by 5 people

    1. Mel seems to be trying to find a way of approaching his justification for remaining a pastor by using obscure terminology and rallying around the most obtuse arguments he can possibly find.
      He has already arrived at a place where he has become incoherent, which is now what he is calling others, of course.

      Branyan is simply too far gone to waste time over. Since most people stopped commenting on his blog he has begun to sound even more unhinged. If I were a member of his immediate family I’d be concerned about him in a way people were quite likely concerned about Robin Williams.

      Liked by 5 people

      1. He is not grasping even the simplest ideas that conflict his presups. I do believe from my past experience and my current observations of Mel, he is at a crossroad of doubt and is having a faith crisis. We’ll see if he’s man enough to make a change, or if he will hold his pride like a broken ripcord.

        Liked by 4 people

    2. @ JIm I forgot about that story in the bible. Yes if god is something that is outside of our universe, not in our physical reality, and not measurable by any science then how to heck did he have a body and wrestle with someone for a night? That puts All Mel’s claims of God is supernatural and the natural world can’t show / have evidence of him. Grand point. Hugs

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Scottie … God is omnipotent, right? So of course He can do anything.

        Anything~!

        (Sheesh, how long do I have to keep helping out all you dum disbelievers?)

        Liked by 3 people

          1. Oh … there’s no point in explaining, Scottie! You are just being contrary, refusing to believe and accept Jesus Crust as your Lord and Master and Ultimate Absolute.

            I saw a tv show hypnotist at work—he told the rube that he could see on the wall a ‘square circle’. Poor guy had a major trying to describe what he could so clearly see … Mel and his ilk, as ‘rubes’?

            Naaaaaahhhh …

            Liked by 2 people

          1. Of course he could! But even if He found a way to fail, it should keep Him occupied for the rest of eternity (and then some).

            Liked by 3 people

    3. Too bad it’ll change again next week

      Exactly. And so too does his description of “God” change to suit the day. Today it’s the classical theology god, yesterday it was the strong panentheism god, the week before the weak panentheism god, from time to time he appeals to a pantheistic god, a deistic god… and, of course, underpinning them all is the personal god who have a coffee with.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Mel is so conflicted. He is obviously a deist at this juncture. Atheism is the next step, so I suppose his posting days are limited as a follower of Jesus. He will join us. or fail to post soon. Any takers?

        Liked by 3 people

          1. I find his split-personality quite fascinating. I drew his attention to his previous god positions (panentheism in particular, which thoroughly contradicts his “classical theology” position today) when discussing evolution… Surprise, surprise, he ignored it completely.

            Like

          2. Yes, I noticed.
            If you read Branyan’s interaction with David K you will see how meaningless Mel’s posts truly are as Branyan reveals exactly what they believe in one particular response:
            (although I guess we already knew this to be the case)

            Essentially, the point of this article is that everything in the physical universe is being sustained by something other than itself at any moment in time. The philosophical term is a hierarchical causal chain. In order for you to be suspended over the water, you stand on a bridge, which is built on stones, which rest on the ground. Each part of the hierarchy is contingent on the other parts. The parts do not sustain themselves. God is the word used to describe the “base reality” upon which every contingent thing rests.

            Essentially that is it in a nutshell. They believe they have an evidence-based case which they can demonstrate through the statement: Creation must equal Creator.
            And naturally all other claims/claimants(gods) are dismissed out of hand.
            Of course they will point blank refuse to be drawn into a discussion regarding their personal god , Jesus-the-bloody-Nazarene, and although there is ample evidence – including 500 witnessess ( and a couple of billion witlessess) they know damn well they are on a hiding to nothing with this approach and this is where Mel when he is in a more lucid less dribbley frame of mind is honest enough to state that, bottom line, it is all about the heart and faith rather than evidence.

            Liked by 2 people

          3. Amusing to see how befuddled they get when I assign to the universe the exact qualities they dress their god in. Suddenly, that proposal is incoherent!

            Like

          4. They are being disingenuous, plain and simple. Or, more likely pig-ignorant,
            On the one hand they say it isn’t about a specific god, but are then emphatic there can only be one god – God.
            And who says there is only one god? Well, the bible, naturally.
            But their argument isn’t about the bible it is all to do with Classic Theology.

            Yet, surely we would not have any sort of (Christian ) theology if it were not for the bible?

            And how exactly do we arrive at the Christian god through logic and deduction?
            Would not the Hindus arrive at a similar conclusion for their god/s?

            Well we must comfort ourselves in the certain knowledge that both Branyan and Mel will be in Hell and Jesus you and I can look down on them from heaven and raise a glass or two and laugh.

            Liked by 2 people

          5. Actually, Ark, you’ve rather pinpointed the whole situation with this remark: “it is all about the heart and faith rather than evidence.”

            Ever noticed that when Mel is pushed into a corner, this is his “fall-back?” He’ll throw out his repertoire of “big words,” dance around the bush a few times, but when the heat becomes unbearable, he resorts to the above statement.

            Liked by 3 people

          6. This is why , in truth, his ”We can infer…” statements and everything else he puts forward as evidence inevitably crumbles to dust.
            Much as his rather silly statement ”What do you mean by evidence?”

            All I require is the evidence that convinced him ( and others like him), but this particular evidence he always seems reluctant to fully share or explore.
            At least someone like Francis Collins was honest enough to state it was his initial (death) anxieties surrounding terminally ill patients.

            Liked by 1 person

          7. lol… he claims he’s 62 and his kids are grown adults. Then again, he once remarked they couldn’t tell time on an analog watch, so maybe they still live at home. 🙂

            Liked by 1 person

        1. As I stated elsewhere, his sermons grant the impression he’s really trying hard to convince himself that the malevolent god of the OT is really the loving god he desires. For him preaching is a form of catharsis.

          Liked by 3 people

          1. Yes, because Christianity hitched itself to the wrong deity. The pastor in the attached video has abandoned the OT theology entirely. In other much lengthier videos he argues that Jesus condemned YHWH and believed in a kinder god. He’s Mel on steroids (on the God is lovey-dovey part), but has the philosophical chops to back up his claims.

            Like

          2. Obviously, as an atheist you cannot possibly know anything about Marcion!
            How dare you! You presumptuous little upstart!
            Lol .. he is farking certifiable.

            Like

          3. He just got mightily grumpy with me for reminding him that he has insisted in the past that panentheism is true, but that contradicts his flavour of theology today: classical theism.

            Oh the tangled web we weave…

            Liked by 2 people

      2. Are you saying that God is a moving target?
        Or does He simply set His sails to the wind?

        Defining God is a bit like grasping fog …

        Liked by 1 person

          1. Oh no, it all depends on what type of god you’re defining into existence. Strong Panentheism, for example, means the god can tinker in things like evolution. Can’t do that with weak panentheism. The thing with apologists like Mel, he dresses his god concept in whatever suit best suits his needs on the day.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. I dunno about panentheisms … all I know is that God is omnipotent and can do anything. Anyfing at all, Guv … and that means with no limits. So Mel has no need to dress his omnipotent God in anything—regardless of mortals attempting to classify Him.

            One might dare to venture to offer to suggest that God wasn’t looking ahead (and He goofed) when he created us, no? But who are we to attempt to fathom the infinite … and anyway, being omniscient He knew what He was doing all along; and regardless of our ignorance He knows damn’ well how it will all turn out in the end.

            Ye gods, it’s tough explaining God to all you blasted atheists …

            Liked by 3 people

          3. You’re right, stopping at omnipotence would have been wise… but then people started thinking about it. Really thinking, and saw problems. “Solving” those problems led down this rabbit hole of attributes and places where “God” actually resides, but as these often contradicted each other they demanded further “solutions” or else the entire house of cards would collapse. Mel is at the tail end of that 2,500 year old brain fart. He sits in his room with his Yhwh doll, and laid out on the ground before him is an entire wardrobe of outfits that he can dress that doll in. Of course, the contradictions from one outfit to another hasn’t changed, so as he walks Barbie… sorry… as he walks Yhwh up to a cocktail party dressed in her… sorry… dressed in his best horse riding outfit he hopes and prays no one (meaning annoying bastards like me) notices.

            Liked by 2 people

          4. Which is why when discussing the Trinity there is a fourth component – The Mystery.
            It is a mystery, and this is why you (noone) cannot understand it.
            God’s will, you see?
            Even though it was invented and refined by humans (inspired by God) and does not feature in the bible.
            Another reason why the make-believe disciples would have responded ,”You’re shitting us, right?” if anyone had ever suggested JC was Yahweh in disguise.

            Liked by 2 people

          5. JZ:

            a head scratcher? Hardly … it’s the predictable product of moddin edjercation. Kids should be taught how ter fink … instead, in New Zealand they get certificates of education for saying “Ugga boo” and wearing grass skirts.
            (They haven’t gone as far as teaching the kids a most excellent substitute protein but I dare say it will come one day—as yet the topic is still tapu. Taboo. Bugger, unmentionable.)

            Like

          6. But annoying bastards like you are simply proof of concept, that The Devil is alive and well.
            He has you as evidence to prove it. Anyone who casts asparagus upon the Holy Goa— (oops) Ghost is a tool of the devil.

            He has You, Sir, covered.
            From all angles: saying nice things about his pet Spook = God is good;
            saying nasty mean rotten BS lies about beloved God = the Devil’s work.

            It’s not God the Good Guy we should be wary of, nor the Holy Devil … it’s the good guy’s servile sycophantic servile psycho servile servants that are the threat (especially on social occasions; stake and chips, anyone?).

            Liked by 1 person

          7. I dunno about panentheisms … all I know is that God is omnipotent and can do anything.

            If you watch enough Christians, you come to realize that “omnipotent” is just a misspelling of “impotent”. God is not capable of doing anything. And that’s why Christians so often try to act on behalf of their impotent God — to do what they know their God will never do.

            Liked by 4 people

          8. NEIL: it’s simply common-sense. Everyone drives carefully where the road is CCTV monitored, if the cops are visible, no?
            But get ‘er out on the open road you can open ‘er up~! Boom boom!

            Which is why God is everywhere and invisible—even inside your own head. Ouch. That’s why you are aware 24/7 that you cannot be naughty, God is Big Brother universally with neither escape nor privacy.

            Well done, you Goddists~! Got it covered …

            Liked by 2 people

  4. Come on now, you’re making me blush. I’m flattered my words are being shared. Thank you.

    I’ve commented on Mel’s blog before and received something equally frustrating. He said, “You’ve made a coherent argument. We can discuss it further another time.” Of course that meant he had no rebuttal and so brushed me aside. He had no intention of speaking with me again.

    He is like other diehard Christians I’ve spoken with on here. They have all of the answers. The rest of us are misguided or are just trying to waste their time. Funny how a believer feels it’s beneath them to answer when an unbeliever asks them for the reasons they have faith.

    “This is the truth.”
    Okay, I’m confused because the Bible says…
    “You misunderstand the Bible.”
    Okay, then teach me so that I may understand.
    “You’re making category errors now and you’re wasting my time.”

    *sigh* If only I had a fundamental understanding of the Bible.

    Jesus would roll over in his grave if he heard the things being said in his name….err….Heaven. I meant Jesus is in Heaven. The Bible says so.

    Liked by 7 people

    1. Your comments are generally simple and straightforward, which I thoroughly relate to, and thus tend to bamboozle an apologist such as Mel. So keep going!

      Therefore his only recourse is to reply along the lines of how ”interesting” your comment is ( but not respond beyond this ) or that you have a fundamental misunderstanding, which is about as snide and condescending as one could possibly get.
      However, you are of course still ”saved” … or you were never a proper Christian in the first place. Much like the Cathars of old or the Christadelphians. Or even Catholics, according to some.
      In other words: ”Tough titty for you, Fishface!”

      It’s been remarked upon before that it is doubtful Mel expected to come under fire from so many non-believers and especially those who were, like you, firmly entrenched for years in Christianity.
      He truly is floundering and his approach is becoming more disingenuous by the post.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. In any other setting, Mel’s responses would not be tolerated. If he were a math teacher in a school and a student asked him about a problem, would he respond the same way?

        “Mr. Wild, this problem is really hard. It doesn’t make any sense to me. Can you show me how you came up with your answer?”

        “You are misunderstanding the problem.”

        “I know. That’s why I asked you to explain it to me.”

        “You were never a real math student. You’ll never get it. The way I understand math is not something I can explain to someone like you. You’re wasting my time.”

        Not sure a teacher like that would be able to keep a job. It’s amazing they think they are equipped to preach to others about their eternal destination. Name calling and withholding of information seems like a bad approach if you are trying to teach someone. Maybe I’m just misunderstanding again.

        Liked by 9 people

        1. Guys like you and Scottie, and all of us really, just want to have answers and do the right thing, get treated like sh;t because that’s who he is for now. I think he’ll be better after his deconversion, if he’ll ever admit it. Most people dive into apologetics because of doubt, and I can see a little panic in the brotha. Nice work yesterday. btw

          Liked by 5 people

          1. Thanks Jim. I wasn’t trying to goad him into an argument. I genuinely wanted his answers to my questions. If I could only understand the Bible and stay on topic, maybe he would have answered them. Oh well. We’ll see how he changes in the future or if just ignores us completely. I doubt it though. He seems to enjoy all of the attention.

            Liked by 5 people

          2. His movements to obscurity shows his waning. Now he’s worshippers why we have a bible, and he’s headed to conundrum land, because the why, still has never been answered.

            Liked by 3 people

          3. Is it just me or does he get more “farout” the more direct and constant you ask a question? I was reading the JZ comments and how Mel got using words I didn’t even know ( I looked them up ) They did not relate to giving any king od answer that was understandable and not circular. I basically got out of it he was saying “I know god because god is what I want to think god is and you don’t know the god I think is”. I am not an educated person but that made my head hurt. I just want to know if something is not able to be in or affect or be measured in our reality in any way, how is that different from it not existing at all? Thanks guys.

            Liked by 5 people

          4. All of this conjecture is an attempt to explain god in a way that cannot be refuted. Mel has switched yet again, and this is even more obscure than the Bible’s origins. Ha! Now prove I’m not right! If he keeps this up he might as well become a Buddhist.

            Liked by 2 people

          5. Jim I have another question. If you do not follow / believe in the bible how can you claim you are a christian and follow the God of the bible. When I asked Mel that question he claimed he was not a christian but a follower of Jesus. Mel said he followed the idea of Jesus not the wrong things attributed to him. But we get all our information of Jesus from the bible. So if you throw that out, don’t you have to throw out Jesus and then the father god right from the beginning. Or am I missing something that theist know, a branch of religion I have not heard of? Thanks. Hugs

            Liked by 3 people

          6. He is trying to reconstruct the ideas of the messianic culture prior to the Bible, with the idea that they had it right. But like Nan’s book pointed out, it was corrupted and Hellenistic from its’ origins. There never was a church like he is hoping to find, unless he can go clear back to Abraham, and that is shrouded in craziness and obscurity too. A lot of guessing and piecing together Paul Bunyan type stories. I mentioned to you months ago, the more you search, the crazier and more elusive this gets. There are no answers, only hopes to explain faith, which in itself is a backward ideology. Knowledge could lead to faith, but it doesn’t work the other way around. You just chase your tail your entire life.

            Liked by 4 people

          7. He is so sure there is something outside of himself, that he has lost his own self. His compass is as a Christian particle bouncing around trying to find an electron to bond to, and is disconnected from the source.

            Liked by 2 people

          8. Scottie, there’s a parable somewhere in the gospels (I think?) that talks about/alludes to a child’s mentality — that THEY have the level of blind faith to enter the kingdom of God, not ask difficult questions, just go along with feelings and the crowd — basically stating… just be DUMB and don’t rock the boat. Those are the type of robots God loves and warmly welcomes into His kingdom. LOL 😇

            That’s what Mel wants on his blog — just pat him on the back and praise him. 🤭

            Liked by 2 people

          9. Actually, Prof … I think their ideal/s is more along the line of those who kneel, stand, mutter, sing etc on command, never gainsay, always praise … and always cough up the shekels. (Even Peter’s Pence, every little helps aid the poor’.)

            Liked by 2 people

          10. @ Professor do me a favor. If I ever get that way, where I don’t want to learn anything and think I know it all, kick me right in the ass until I learn the lesson. I think that must be a horrible way to be to just want empty praise and know you did not earn it. When I get a well done, I want to know I worked for it the best I could. Hugs

            Liked by 1 person

          11. Outclassed in the company of Mel and Branyan? Are you SHITTING me, Scottie?
            A fly on a dog turd outclasses Mel and the turd itself outclasses Branyan.

            Liked by 2 people

      1. New picture. Same bald head. The old pic was black and white so it may have been hard to see. If I wasn’t bald already, I’m sure pirate Mel and his parrot Branyan would have me pulling it all out. 🙂

        Liked by 2 people

          1. Do me a favour. You alluded to it in your recent comment at Mel’s spot, but see if you can get him to state what was the specific reason/evidence he had for converting.
            As far as I am aware he has never explained exactly hat caused his ”change.”

            Like

          2. I don’t think he’s open to answering that, as we’ve all seen. The funny thing is, if you go to his “About” page, he claims his passion is teaching. How can you love teaching but avoid the opportunity to teach when it presents itself over and over again?

            I thought maybe he’d offer something up as to why he believes or what made him change. Nope. My experience has always been, if you are a teacher and you have the opportunity to teach, you teach. When you don’t know the answer is when you dodge and deflect. I see a lot of dodging and not a lot of teaching. When a teacher is asked a very direct question and they completely avoid it, it’s probably time to find a new teacher. Ones who ignore or insult you are ones who never cared for you to learn in the first place.

            Liked by 3 people

          3. His ego has gotten the better of him I reckon.
            But would still like to hear his answer to what caused his conversion.
            Alas you may be right, that confession will not likely be forthcoming.

            Liked by 1 person

    1. Unfortunately, the next apologist in line will very likely also patiently explain (sic) you have a fundamental misunderstanding so the chances are you are going to get screwed every which way until the rapture.
      Even then, the odds are high you will have followed incorrect doctrine and Jesus will send you to Hell simply because you are a sects maniac.

      Liked by 3 people

  5. On my Thor! Did you read the latest comment by “Anthony Paul”? Sheesh!

    Partial quote: your opponents here are clearly not up to the task of sustaining a coherent and logical argument for their belief system, and so the whole exercise appears to be little more than crass argumentation.

    Of course Mel-baby just LOVED this comment

    Liked by 3 people

      1. Your generosity is overwhelming and it pains my heart to say … “thank, but no thanks.” I’ll just remain (for the most part anyway) an observer. I mean, really! I’m just learning sooooo much about the incomparable and magnificent entity that exists in the minds of Mel and BrainYawn.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. I read Paul’s comment and Mel’s response.
          Both exemplify the hubris, and more to the point sheer ignorance of their position.
          I can to a point understand this from a religious lay person, but to read this sort of puffed-up, sanctimonious Tosser-Twaddle from a professional pastor makes one want to spray paint images of his god on the walls of his church. 😉

          I am truly surprised that someone from his church has not reported him to whatever constitutes an earthly hierarchy.

          Liked by 2 people

  6. Ark: it’s not so much Mel’s ignorance but his total desperation. I think he recognises that his Titanic is going down and there is no lifeboat for him, but instead of raiding the bar in First Class he he keeps berating the radio operators.

    And still claims to believe that the ship is as unsinkable as touted.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. Apart from the entertainment value of winding the twat up I don’t know why you guys bother with this ‘pastor’ I had a quick shufty at his blog he will argue black is white, will never be wrong, sticks his fingers in his ears and goes la la la. Will probably take his little flock of brain dead to some remote town and give ’em all a little drink. Now the pope has said there’s no hell got nothing to look forward to sigh….

    Liked by 3 people

    1. @ blhphotoblog. I am glad that this group does respond to people like him. I read along and I learn a lot of stuff. I get to understand the arguments and where they fail. Simply put there are a lot of people that read and do not comment that gain a lot from hearing the rebuttals to the religious apologist and their assumption. That is why I pay attention and hope the others are willing to share their knowledge. Hugs

      Liked by 5 people

    2. You got it in one—there is indeed entertainment value in winding the guy up.
      It’s only when you realise that—

      (a) you are merely having innocent fun, but
      (b) the guy is deadly serious, and
      (c) has a following and established funding …

      —that the Eeeeek! reflex kicks in.

      Brrrrr

      Liked by 3 people

    3. It’s really more about the lurkers than Mel or JB. Someone is reading the comments and the manner in which they ‘defend the gospel’ and they will think… “something just isn’t right”. They are the ones that make responding the Mel, and the rest worth the trouble

      Liked by 6 people

    4. To Scottie, glad you’re learning, yes the guys on here are very , very intelligent and knowledgeable but to really learn you need answers, you will never get them from the ‘pastor’ or his ilk.
      To Argus, totally agree, morons like him with power and money are very dangerous. Hopefully he will ‘burn’ himself out (not been a good Waco for sometime)
      To Kia, I would hope that anyone reading his drivel and the comments then questioning it has just ‘seen the light’ and won’t bother returning. His followers, his flock, are just that, sheep, no that is being rude to sheep they have more intelligence.
      These idiots who sometimes answer on Ark’s blog will never be changed, you could stick a nuke up their arse and they will still ‘praise the lord , amen’ The worst was the one who hides behind the lion gravatar, now his blog really upset/scared/worried me a very sick person that.
      That all said keep it up it’s fun to read.

      Liked by 3 people

  8. I bet his ego is all puffed up after all the responses he got to this last post — even though very few of them agreed with him. But he had BrainYawn to bolster him up! And what more could you possibly ask for?.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. I think ol’ Blake got it in one—

    Mock on, mock on, Voltaire, Rousseau;
    Mock on, mock on, ’tis all in vain.
    You throw the sand against the wind,
    And the wind blows it back again.

    —but I has me doubts about him from other perspectives (did a good God, thought).

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Again, it’s not a rational thing—it’s emotional.

    You’ll get nowhere rationalising with Mel and his ilk (facts and reasonables are entirely meaningless). They’ve been knocked senseless by the concept of their ever loving living God; and with the Devil highly visible on your shoulder they are even more alerted to the facts that Satan still moves in the field.

    The point isn’t to dissuade Mel and that comedian guy, or their ilk. Lost cause.

    If you want to ‘win’ you have to head ’em off at the fount; if you cannot get to the kids first then try to educate them in thinking for themselves—it’s your only hope.
    The occasional de-convert from Christ’s holy hairless arms isn’t a sign that you are winning.
    I doubt very much that anything we can come up with makes one iota of difference, fun though it may be. (Do you remember “The Emperor’s New Clothes’? It was a kid that spotted the flaw—and it was the kid who had the guts to laugh.)

    Arguing with Mel is mental masturbation: fun but fruitless; nothing is (or will be) achieved.

    For God’s sake: educate the young!

    Beat Mel and company to their minds. Teach them simply how to rationalise.

    Like

    1. There has never been any intention of converting people like Mel but simply to show up their disingenuity and maybe someone reading along may read something they had not previously considered.
      And I like to think we all learn things along the way – including big words, and jografy ie … where Yehawsville USA is located.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Boom boom~!

        But the real effect will be seen after giving the young the tools of thought and the freedom to use them. (That last is the hard part …)

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s