Damned if you don’t and damned if you do

Posted on by Ark

A lengthy back and forth with David Robertson regarding that old christian chestnut about what evidence would convince me that his god was real finally resulted in me acceding to his whining and I offered what I thought was a genuine answer.

If Jesus materialised in the flesh today/within my lifetime: In appearance to that which he was claimed to have looked post-resurrection and using language and tools I would understand, demonstrate how he created the universe.
I will add that, a similar demonstration performed on a global scale would also help.

After all, we are talking about ”God”, yes?

I thought this seemed a fair response and although I’m sure I would have myriad more questions for his god, it wouldn’t mean I would fall on my face and worship him, but on this demonstration I would probably accept that he created the universe.

And yet, after all his whining for me to answer the question regarding ”what evidence” this was Robertson’s response:

 

If Jesus appeared in the flesh to you today – you would still not believe – you would be like the people in his own day. You have far too high an opinion of both your own cognitive abilities and your willingness to accept evidence.

I suggested he should have sex and travel. I doubt that comment will see the light of day. ‘Tis a cross I willingly bear.

 

Fundamentalist Christians. Arseholes the lot of them.

Well, Liverpool won this evening … again!

Oh, and Happy Valentines Day.

 

Ark

87 thoughts on “Damned if you don’t and damned if you do”

  2. In order for Robertson to take your answer seriously, it seems more like you need to bow before him than any possible/potential god that might appear.

    You do enjoy these ‘debates,” don’t you, Ark … even though you know most end up going nowhere and, in fact, generally circle back to the starting point.

    But we all need a hobby. 😁

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    1. I keep thinking I have plumbed the depths of just how disgusting he is, but he surprises me still.
      His latest keyboard dribbling is how he is convinced prayer caused his god to send the recent rains in Australia and it took no more than two comments before he was being a dick to someone who commented and disagreed.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. I think that at his core, he’s probably a very insecure person — and he uses religion to try and bolster himself into self-acceptance. Thus, when someone (like you) questions him, it brings up all that self-doubt (and many even self-loathing) to the surface … which then causes him to go into defense mode.

        And that’s my diagnostic contribution for today. Stay tuned for other grand insights. 🤣🤣🤣

        Liked by 3 people

        Reply

          1. I received no notification on Facebook?
            Oh, well, I’ll blow you a cyber kiss and wish you a very happy birthday/Valentines day, dear Nan and may you have many more.
            x

            Liked by 1 person

        2. Maybe?
          It seems that all his posts are hyper aggressive in nature, whether political or religious.
          He is condescending to everyone who dares to hold a different view, even fellow Christians are not spared his asinine tongue.

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

          1. He’s like the proverbial insecure, high-handed school teacher, who gets very put out if the students should question his authority, or — horrors — know something he doesn’t.

            But a lot of the best teachers will often credit their students with teaching them a thing or two.

            Liked by 2 people

          3. Oh, yes!
            His About info mentions his like for debate and politics and I told him on one occasion that he should have chosen politics as a vocation as he seem much better at it than he ever does at religion where his brand of smug condescension and disingenuity are ideal attributes.

            Like

  3. I think your challenge was a bit tongue-in-cheek, Ark. I mean (sheesh!) if He did so, where the hell would you put it?

    Could you afford to feed all them animals and things too; or would they not be part of the demonstration? Would you have time enough left of your allotted span to watch the evolutions unfold, or would you have to accept it all on (gulp!) … faith?

    But you don’t really want God to create it all again, and it was just a rhetorical thing, then I don’t have to worry about sharing the marital kennel with Spouse and another me?

    But if he does accept then please let me know, and I’ll see if I can pop over for the next crucifixion (if that’s part of it).

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. Don’t. She’s no doubt as fervently evangelical as Robertson is.

      Picture Robertson in drag — if you can stomach it — and you get the idea (It’s just as well he doesn’t trawl this site, he’d be most outraged. We’ll have to leave it to serial windbag John Kilpatrick, if he tunes in, to be suitably offended on Robertson’s behalf).

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. Perhaps not so surprisingly, I can quite easily see him in a Sunday-best floral dress, ribbons in his hair, knee-high socks, telling his wife (dressed as a Nazi prison guard) that he’s been naughty.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

          1. Actually, I kinda’ like the image. Although I never read his blog, your “take” on him definitely removes all respect so no. No nightmares.

            Like

  8. Wow, I can understand (a little) Ark why WeFleeFast Robertson surprises you still.

    If Jesus appeared in the flesh to you today – you would still not believe – you would be like the people in his own day.

    I am hilariously baffled by the sheer audacity and blatant fact Robertson implicitly means by even THAT accusation! 😲 Just off the top of my head I can think of these 4 problems/fallacies with it and I’m sure there’s more:

    • No one today knows exactly what Yeshua bar Yosef looked like in 30-33 CE and thousands of people, including Jews, were crucified… so the Roman nail-holes, bone-cuts, etc, would be unique to that individual victim. Ark, how could you be 100% sure it was really him UNLESS you asked a shitload of questions!!!!!!? Um, HELLO… just “like the people in his own day” that were not his closest followers/disciples. DUH Robertson!!!! Besides, according to Robertson’s Canonical New Testament at least two disciples doubted Yeshua/Jesus on more than one occasion! Doubts/Questions serve an excellent purpose! DUH Robertson, you moron!!!

    • Again, WHY does Robertson arrogantly presume his own critical-thinking and forensic skills are far superior to yours, or anyone else’s on the planet who is NOT a Christian or the specific type of Christian he is and thinks are the only TRUE Christians™ right now!? His audacity implies exclusivity of knowing, or Gnosis, or the “correct” Holy Spirit within—because there are bad, wrong, INCORRECT Holy Spirits floating around that deceive millions unlike him/Robertson. 🙄

    • Therefore, since there was doubters even amongst Yeshua’s/Jesus’ own disciples, then thousands more after Saul of Tarsus went outside of Judaism with his own versions of the Kingdom of God on Earth and some other new concepts, and then after those dudes were all dead and gone the Hellenic Roman Early (Catholic) Church revised many teachings & tenets of Yeshua’s teachings as well as Saul’s/Paul’s teachings between the 2nd- and 5th-century CE… and so a whole SHITLOAD of people around the Mediterranean Sea had a shitload MORE questions because there was a SHITLOAD of many different versions of Jesus/Yeshua—hence Constantine the Great with the Council of Nicaea, and eventually the Canonical New Testament! That is exactly why the “official version” of Jesus’ Gospels and the Epistles kept getting changed, mistranslated, and/or retro-graded due to constant questions/debates and controversy!! DUH Robertson!!!

    • To make matters worse… today, over 2/3rds of the world’s 7.8 billion humans who are not Christian™ STILL have many questions, doubts, and credible rebuttals to a tiny WeeFlea’s apologetics. And that number is only rising! DUH Robertson!!!

    This explicit and implicit suggestions of this man’s poor thinking begs the question, What planet do YOU live on Robertson!? 🤨🤔

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. Perhaps, as a former Christian you should ask him – and mention that you were in a similar boat as he is?
      I would be fascinated to read his response to you / if he allowed your comment out of moderation, of course.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. First of all Ark, I thought you were supposed to be asleep old man! Then I noticed the time here/there! HAH! Maybe I AM THE OLD MAN who should now be asleep. 😆 Goodness how time slips away when you’re having a good time on a Saturday night—which is still early here. 😉 😛

        But I might copy/paste this on his blog-post you’ve linked to. However, as you stated… he’ll keep it in Moderation far too long or likely delete it. He has done exactly that the last 3-5 times I tried to dialogue with him so I must ask myself Is dialoguing/debating with this irrational man worth my valuable time and energy—like Pastor Mel, Lander7, ColorfulSprinkles (CS), nurse BrainYawn, etc, etc? Ark, you have a way of substituting me (as a current Arsenal Gunner with pop-guns) into the match against Liverpool and their foreboding gargantuan quick-strike style and ball-movement where one is FREAKIN’ SUCKIN’ WIND after 20-30 mins of chasing the damn ball!!!! 🤣

        I don’t know mate. Let me think on it. 🙄

        Like

        Reply

        1. As I sent my reply to you last night the power went as Escom nailed us with another round of Load Shedding, (5 hours) so it was all candles and torches.
          I was up at 7 and went for a jog.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

      2. Oh! I think I have just thought of the perfect ‘entry’ beyond Robertson’s Moderation censorship protocol with one simple question for him!

        But my gut/intuition tells me he will try his best to get me onto his crazy circus merry-go-round, Whack-a-Mole nonstop circles of nonsense before he’ll let me get to my point here.

        Hmmmmm. 🤔 I just might try this approach with him—bait him to hopefully not delete/moderate my comment-replies.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

          2. Well Ark, he allowed out of Moderation my opening question to him, granted very vaguely and NOT completely specific as I asked him. Surprise surprise. Which will probably/possibly begin the crazy circus merry-go-round, Whack-a-Mole nonstop circles of nonsense I mentioned. If he is forthright, genuine, and specific with his answers I am and will ask, then I’ll get into my above 4 problems/fallacies with his accusation on you.

            Again, Don’t hold your breath. 🙄

            Liked by 1 person

  9. You make it far too complicated. If Jesus were to step forward and offer any reasonable explanation for the botched job that was made of Creation, and its reason, meaning and purpose, that would do it. At the moment all we have is rather pathetic fairy stories.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  10. Now that is funny colonial.

    ‘Botched job of creation.’

    Maybe you need to read with comprehension: ‘He made the stars also……..’

    Yeah, those wonderful sources of light and heat are surely a catastrophe. Then again, Hawkins or Nye surely could have done a finer job of tuning the sun’s daily circuits.

    Like

    Reply

      1. Chris, though your physics, astronomy, and astrophysics are spot on, one must remember that the vast majority of Fundy-Evangy Christians like CS barely have a middle school level of science, MAYBE (but not demonstrated) some intermediary level of Earth Science and chemistry? And this assumes they’ve graduated from a PUBLIC school not a Xian private school. Therefore, when you use big, complicated words like Supernova, nuclear reactions, Sun vs. star, 😉 T-Tauri Phase, or Red Giant… you’re going way over their and CS’s head into an oblivion of outer (not inner) space.

        Just a friendly tip Chris as ColorfulSprinkles’ scientific ignorance—or any knowledge outside of his bible or church dogma—is well known here. Most of the time he doesn’t read with any comprehension what you’ve discussed with him or directly asked; he usually just wonders off on biblical zealotry, quotations and theology. Fair warning Sir. 😉

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

    2. Aside from our own star (aka “the Sun”), how much useful heat and light from those other stars actually reaches Earth? Seems like a wasted effort to locate them so far away — don’t you think?

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

      1. Yep- truly- THAT sun is made for THIS earth.

        The stars warm in so many other ways, such as my affections- but rest assured nothing is wasted.

        Like

        Reply

        1. Aside from your personal enjoyment – mine too for that matter -and a source for nursery rhymes and numerous loves songs, if the universe was made solely for us what was the purpose of all the other stars?

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          1. Well ark- it’s nice to see that we agree at least at a lower level.

            But I’m sure you have heard me say in times past, that the universe was not made Solely four us, for of a truth:

            ‘For His pleasure they are, and were created.’

            I love that: they are….

            Keep in mind God enjoyed His ACT of Creating, long before the first man arrived to enjoy it.

            But in effect, the firmament sheweth His handiwork.

            Like

          2. I don’t feel all that good today and your comments make my head hurt on top of everything else …

            You do have a talent for using lots of words yet saying nothing.

            Liked by 2 people

        2. Except for all those — apparently — lifeless exoplanets.

          On the other hand, all those stars is a good indication some kind of life can potentially emerge elsewhere in the cosmos. Hell, given the range of variables and the profligacy of the basic ingredients — and the fine-tuning that creationists love to point to — life is probably relatively common.

          No matter which way you turn, @ColostomyBag, you’re cut off at the pass by reality. And it doesn’t comport with the Holy Babble.

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

  11. The problem with christians is that they, like atheist dogs, are not Muslims. Only Muslims know the nature and will of the One, True God, Allah. Silly christians, Hell is for you. Have a pleasant day. $Allahu Akbar$

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  12. I think I’d push it beyond “Jesus appears in the flesh”, and add “and all of the Christians around the world accepted that it was Jesus. And if he cleared up all of the disagreements between the various churches, so that there was now only one denomination going forward instead of 40,000. And if he left one definitive gospel to replace the current four confusing ones, and magically made it so that everyone could read it without translators.”

    Because lots of people around the world have claimed to be the return of Jesus and not been believed. And all of that stuff would be a piece of cake for the real Jesus.

    But my actual answer is that I don’t have to know what evidence would convince me. An all-knowing god would already know this better than I would myself. An all-powerful god would be able to send that evidence. And a benevolent god would care about whether I believed. Since this evidence has not appeared, god’s either not all-knowing, not all-powerful, a jackass, or, the most likely answer, fictional.

    Liked by 5 people

    Reply

    1. On other occasions my answer to Robertson has been along the lines of an omnipotent god would now exactly what would convince me.
      But he was being such a dick that I thought I’d give him an answer and a demonstration by his god how he created the universe seemed pretty comprehensive.
      But he simply brushed it aside, as you saw.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. which to me says he doesn’t know either. He’s just yanking your chain. I think the trick is to be the one who asks the question first, which puts the questionee on the defensive.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        2. “I think the trick is to be the one who asks the question first…”

          Judy, you would be typically correct in that instruction, HOWEVER, as that is a tactic/strategy I often employ with Christian apologists, there are still many that will intentionally avoid answering directly any direct question from non-Xians as you might see right now on Robertson’s blog-post with me and my first direct question to him. As you’ll notice, he intentionally gave me a very vague answer that really did NOT answer my question specifically about his education.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

  13. There are things I do not think are true. Other things I consider to be fact or at least likely. For me, proof or sufficient evidence of any god is like quality. I am flummoxed trying to define it for others, but I know it when I see it.
    So my answer is, ‘I don’t know. Try me. What ‘cha got? Show me something I can try.’
    My ego struggles when I’m wrong, but I find it happens regularly. As far as worshiping this, that, or any god, it is a completely different question than believing existence.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  14. Ark, carrying on from our above dialogue about WeeFlee’s blog-post and censorship of certain comments there…

    You’ll notice by his curt reply to me and my question(s), he like too many Xians, makes me do all his work, homework, legwork, etc, because THEY/HE is too damn lazy to do it IF it doesn’t directly concern and support his Jesus, his theology, his church, his teachings, and his own lifestyle/life-choices. Notice the pattern with he and many Xians and Xian apologists? 🙄

    I loathe having to push people to be clear and precise because then if any constructive facts, info, evidence, source-texts, etc, are achieved it becomes MY obligation to provoke it from them—which honestly I try NOT to do. Hence, my frequent open-ended questions. But for whatever useless reasons (or skirting the questions) it is an annoying habit (indoctrination) that Xians like him consciously or unconsciously do. It does indeed speak volumes about what they REALLY truly known and/or are ignorant about, if by implication or default. Ugh, the sloth-like laziness is too often at an epidemic condition among Christians and many self-proclaimed apologists.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. Robertson must secretly be a closet fan of the Cleese role in Python’s Argument sketch. No matter what Palin said, Cleese immediately contradicted it.

      There’s probably as much truth about human behaviour in that sketch alone to rival anything in Robertson’s Bumper Book of Bible Stories for Boys and Girls.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. Hahaha! Yes, thoroughly enjoy that sketch. Well, for that matter I enjoy 99% of all Monty Python sketches…and their films satirically mocking foolish tenets of Christianity. I like especially Ark’s favorite Life of Brian and because Ark is a HUGE music and opera fan and himself sings Soprano Coloratura beautifully, I give you this trailer Chris:

        Ark has sung this opera to me several times in his angelic high-pitched voice. He can give ya goose-bumps and make all your hairs stand up in envy I tell ya! 😉 🤭 You know why he can?

        “Because he’s a very naughty boy!“

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

    2. @ Prof
      Well, Mister D, you read his response after I tried to be clear and concise regarding what evidence would convince me.
      I think he doesn’t like you because he probably knows you are an Arsenal supporter. Good grounds in anybody’s book, but in context a bit mean.

      Whereas with Geoff, it’s obvious he is an erudite and well-schooled intellectually inclined bible scholar, all-round good guy and bon vivant who probably has a thing for rubber underwear and stilettos. and is in the closet about secretly supporting Everton ( and who in their right mind would admit to that, right?)
      In other words … a genuine Christian

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. Hahaha! I’m not JUST a Dunners (Gunners) fan. I am also, as you know Ark, a Barca fan, a Brasil fan, definitely a Fluminense fan, I’ll tolerate Liverpool fans 😉 and I am a US men’s & women’s fan! I spread myself around for world-class football Sir.

        Like

        Reply

      2. Anyway, I will give Robertson 1 maybe 2 days more to further clarify his curt and incomplete answer. Then I will try to provoke him one last time to reply fully, honestly, and with reasonable promptness. My question(s) to him did not require a Ph.D. in Quantum Mechanics to answer! This final attempt assumes of course my 3rd comment ever gets pass his Moderation/Censorship. But this next attempt will contain assumptions (specifically about him & his education) that he could EASILY answer and not draw this simple dialogue Q&A out till Xmas 2020. 🙄

        But do these tactics he uses against non-Xians really surprise us/you? Pfffft.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. 1. I wonder if he recognizes how much time he could save (and use to spread his propaganda) if he quit “moderating”
          comments.
          2. Also, moderating if a clear illustration how unsure he is of his own faith. (His) God forbid! that there might be a question or comment that might make sense to his followers.

          Liked by 3 people

          Reply

          1. Two excellent points Nan. 👍🏻 Sensible moderating can easily be done AFTER the fact, or a person’s comment(s). Not for every single comment submitted, no matter who the person, troll, or bot might be. Seems to me WeeFlee Robertson is this little boy in the video trying way too hard to manage his non-stop workload. 😉

            Your 2nd point Nan is a bulls-eye! Hyper-censorship and hyper-moderating also kills the productive, efficient flow of dialogue and debate. It also hints of the antithesis of a vital concept we non-religious, non-radical teachers in PUBLIC education and curriculums learned and taught to our students:

            Teach them HOW to think, not what to think.

            Clearly Robertson is not interested in equitable, critical-thinking and analysis by a diverse panel or peers. Imagine that. 🙄

            Liked by 3 people

          2. Clearly Robertson is not interested in equitable, critical-thinking and analysis by a diverse panel or peers.

            @ Prof
            Neither was Jesus, and look where that got him!

            Liked by 1 person

          3. Why in tha HELL won’t he just answer fully my initial question(s) about his seminary education!!!!!!? Why that F*CK’s sake does it need to be like pulling teeth with this dense numskull!!!!!???? And I have NO PATIENCE whatsoever to deal with any other of his echo-chambering robots/minions on his blog!!!!

            See Ark!!!! THIS is why I don’t waste my time with WeeFlee-All-the-Time and his idiotic, mythological mumbo-jumbo blog-posts because I can’t get an answer from him to any simple questions!!!!! 😠

            Liked by 1 person

          4. Have you read his (FINALLY!) response? He STILL did not fully answer my simple, quite polite—or damn sure not rude—-question(s)! Instead he accused me of “asking a leading question.” 😆 HAH!

            Umm, when I last checked how humans communicate between each other, many ask the other questions! They answer, hopefully truthfully or at least to help the possible confusion. We advanced species do that in order to, oh… I don’t know… understand each other!? Or TRY to understand? (I’m scratching my head on this one) Or perhaps to NOT waste each other’s valuable time by asking erroneous or irrelevant questions? 😵🧐 Then he FINALLY addresses the other half of my first question as such:

            I have no interest whatsoever in giving you a list of seminaries I consider to be heretical – why would I waste my time?

            And yet, I already anticipated that very response by him by already divulging to a person called “Geoff” WHY I was asking it in the first place! WeeFlee allowed that Q&A thru his snail’s pace Moderation. 😡 Why was I asking? Because of the clear warning Saul/Paul gives (1 Corinthians 3:1-4) and the writer of the Epistle Hebrews, i.e. Hebrews 5:11-14 specifically, and what those two passages mean—among others in their New Testament—to Believers, particularly Gentile Christian Believers, facing opponents in the world AND among fellow “new” Christians• believers not well-versed in the exegesis of Scripture. Ark, this is just basic Faith-theology 101 for ministers or veterans in the Faith bringing into the fold, as it were.

            But Ark, what will not happen over on his blog is all this I’ve conveyed to you here: A) the man is a fake and B) he refuses to engage with non-Christians, or at least does so HORRIBLY!!! He also seems to be very paranoid about and scared of the World out there/here full of non-Christians! 😆

            After all this, I would’ve been better off getting 10 root-canals done and stung 10-times by a Tarantula Hawk (Wasp)!!! Geeezzzz us H Chrissymas!!! 🙄

            Like

          6. He once claimed he gets bundles of ”hate mail”, or something similar.
            He thinks a little too highly of himself that so many people would even bother.

            Liked by 1 person

          8. I have only visited his blog on one or two occasions … mostly out of curiosity based on your intense posts about him. If I remember correctly, I may have commented once (maybe twice) but like you have aptly expressed, it was a pure waste of time since his responses are nothing but “fluff.” To think this time would be any different would be like expecting ColorStorm to offer a rational and well-informed comment. Sorry.

            Liked by 1 person

          9. This was in moderation too.
            The word Colorstorm is a ”naughty ” word.

            You could use code.
            ”Moth-Eaten Neurologically Toady Arsehat Lion.”
            You can figure out the acronym, I’m sure?

            Liked by 3 people

  15. Here Ark. This was my response back to Sir WeeFleeFast’s crappy response 3-4 days late. I’m sure he will NOT allow it thru Moderation, but delete it…

    ——————————————————-

    I have no interest whatsoever in giving you a list of seminaries I consider to be heretical – why would I waste my time?

    Because as I’ve already explained to Geoff above, Saul/Paul and the author(s) of the Epistle Hebrews—along with other passages found in your New Testament as well—WARNS new Followers, new Believers naive and innocent in faith, as Geoff and others here have pointed out… their “Good News”… is vulnerable, susceptible to many errors. They must have milk, digesting it well, before understanding the deeper (Gnosis?) meanings of meat, e.g. the complexities (confusions?) of the Trinity as one example. There are many False Teachers out in the pagan Gentile world. There are over 45 various extant testaments and Gospels on Jesus/Yeshua and his teachings. Which ones are true? Who has the authority to Canonize all 45+ Gospels and testaments, or not? Just like during and after Jesus’ life (the Dead Sea Scrolls of Qumran) many of those false teachers out there come from a whole plethora of universities and seminaries around the world! Which ones are legitimate WeeFlee Robertson? On what authority do YOU have to distinguish between them all? These are reasonable questions.

    See sir, my “hamfisted attempts at interrogation” and my “smug, keyboard warrior-like” comments and my “cut above everyone” with my “pomposity” …IS ACTUALLY Scripturally based: 1 Corinthians 3:1-4 and Hebrews 5:11-14. And then some! It isn’t enough in this world—as Paul teaches and Hebrew’s teaches—to just be familiar with baby’s milk. An entire Library-of-Congress volumes of education is required Sir Robertson, and NOT just your own individual beliefs/faith, but many MANY others too that are also “Christian•” in name. This is wise, this is shrewd for a Believer.

    Ah, but like you for example, I too am very well-versed in the Westminster Catechism and certainly the Shorter Catechism as it seems University of Edinburgh—or is it their Seminary(?)—is familiar and teaches them too. Those Catechisms are high protein-energized milk-to-meats if you will. I was curious about your thoughts on knowing inside and out these aids for new, but naive Believers since YOUR university (maybe?) is very similar if not identical to my seminary-university. It appears (maybe?) they are! Hence, my first question(s) to you. 🙂

    Sadly, your responses and tone have been nothing similar to Christ-like nor warranted, and you know that full well. But I forgive you. However, your God the Father might be a different bear to tackle now. 😉

    Regards and take care WeeFlee… or as Geoff likes to keep repeating, “Every blessing in Christ Jesus.”

    ———————————————————–

    Ark, I do TRY to word my replies to him in such a way that he MIGHT let it pass thru, but my own points get made nonetheless. LOL 😁 We’ll see.

    Like

    Reply

      1. 😄 Maybe. But look how long their “God-breathed” Bible is… it covers a period of very small geo-regional history of 1-3 cultures between 800 BCE up to c. 150 CE. How does one even cover that amount of time and thousands of assumed (faith-based) history and/or verified history?

        But I know what you are hinting at Nan. 😉 ❤

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. Yes, Ark, you do have a talent for being very pointed in your comments. I don’t think I’ve ever read a “rambling” remark from you. However … you must admit you are occasionally, how shall I put it … a wee bit caustic in what you write? 😘

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          2. As per my mention on your earlier blog Ark, this was your reply (abbreviated) to me on Robertson’s blog…

            @Prof.
            The irony of course is the fact that, Christians are commanded to witness to the non-believer or adherents of other faiths yet when asked to do so they balk at the first hurdle – evidence.

            It is natural and expected…

            ========================================

            @ Ark

            I hope this reply does not get Moderated and deleted by WeeFlee because this reality is very important for people who are afraid to speak up. Here goes…

            That there is an organisation called The Clergy Project, set up specifically for professional members of the clergy who have lost faith and have deconverted or are hiding their lack of belief tells its own story.

            Indeed. And Ark there have been many organizations popping up in the U.S. over the last 15-20 years to help frightened, doubting Believers EXIT and ESCAPE Christology utilizing many formats/mediums to help these people get through/past the ostracizing they and their family receive from unloving, hard-line Christologists that utilize fear to control. For example, Voices of Deconversion, The Reason Center in Sacramento, CA, and Recovering From Religion in Kansas City, KS, just to name three. In my years of working in the field of Psych/A&D rehab and therapy (inpatient) there were regular admissions of children, adolescents, and mentally, emotionally, or physically abused/battered women (wives) from well-known or well-established Christian churches, ministers, and church staff-members. Some cases involved rampant adultery; I have two personal testimonies myself of explicit behavior behind closed doors while at one of my own former Christian churches my wife loved—it was non-denominational evangelical charismatic… a branch of Christianity that many Baptists, Presbyterians, Pentecostals, Lutherans, and Episcopalians despise or frown heavily on. For good reasons too. And should I mention what is currently going on in the Mormon or LDS churches?

            Nonetheless, the medical and mental health detriments of being in religion or Christology, or leaving it are well documented in medical-scientific journals and studies—one popular one is at Penn State University. Psychological problems arise and manifest as depression, social isolation, anorexia, PTSD or a form of it diagnosed as RTS (religious trauma syndrome), and ironically sexual distortions and relations, with a spouse or otherwise. It is very sad Ark, but all quite real. 😦 And these acute conditions, their sources, causes, treatment programs, and wide-spread awareness SHOULD or must be known for anyone in the general public, not just for religious/faith-followers!

            Yet Ark, how do we disseminate this type of rehabilitation resources for those who badly need them when Faiths, churches, and radical Believers frequently censor, moderate, and/or destroy or eliminate this valuable, life-saving(?) information?
            ==========================================

            So let’s see just how “FAIR” and unbiased(?) — HAH! 😄 — Robertson can be. 😈

            Liked by 2 people

    2. Ah, he has replied again. Seems I must push his buttons in order to make him do his childish burdensome work of non-stop Moderating everything and respond. LOL You can see his reply there. Here’s my reply to back again to him:

      By default WeeFleeingMore, that argument goes both ways if YOU truly want to be fair about this. What is glaringly apparent regarding the FULL contextual history of Yeshua’s/Jesus’ confirmed history and Jewish background is that modern Christians do not want to look at ALL of the facts, evidence, etc., the independent sources.

      Do you even know what specific dialects Yeshua/Jesus spoke and taught? And think hard about your answer WeeFlee. It is well over three different dialects and Koine Greek was NOT his native language. There were a number of SPECIFIC dialects of Arabic and Hebrew. This is critical to grasp because it obviously speaks to WHAT exactly he was teaching… and… how Gentile Greeks translated (very poorly) what he was saying and what the erroneous GREEK copyists scribed or changed.

      But I suspect you’ll have another rude, lazy remark about this too—or you may censor this response all together as you’ve done numerous times before.

      Have a nice evening WeeFlee.

      ———————————————

      I post it here Ark for… well obvious reasons: his heavy-handed, slow Moderation and Censorship of non-Xian comments. Perhaps you might want to think twice about asking ME to go over there and get involved. 😄 😉 Otherwise, I end up obesely overloading your comment section here with what Robertson may not ever post. HAH!

      Like

      Reply

  16. “A wee bit caustic in what you write.” Noo, Nan say it ain’t true, not our dear Ark. LOL (((Ark))) Who is this “wee flea?” This is his name, Flea? 🙂

    Like

    Reply

    1. It’s the David that Ark talks about at the beginning.of this post. The guy calls himself wee flea. And for many, it’s an apt description as he is exceptionally irritating and unpleasant.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    2. @ Becky
      Pastor David Robertson.
      He is a disingenuous Arsehat, and an excellent ambassador for atheism.
      However, I wouldn’t pee on him if his shoes were on fire.
      He is currently in Australia where it seems there is a very good chance he will soon be included on the list of invasive alien species.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

Leave a comment