Saturday, March 5, 2011

The "New Atheism"

So I just wanted to highlight this comment, which was on a post entirely unrelated to its content, for instructive purposes and for the lulz.

kilo papa said...
Just wondering when you might do a post on how the central doctrine of your religion-the offering of blood from a barbaric human sacrifice up to the invisible man in the sky-is not the single most disgusting,
revolting,sickening,evil,Stone Age,Cro-Magnon,absurd,immoral bunch of lunacy that the human mind has ever concocted in the entire history of mankinds existence on this earth?

Did the multitude of cultures that practiced this inane garbage long before your Jesus appeared have the right idea but just had the wrong guy?

If there is a god somewhere, s/he is surely either astoundingly embarrassed or else laughing her/his ass off at deluded morons like yourself.

Is is truly possible that your deluded mind really doesn't realize how stupefyingly ridiculous that your religious belief is?


leftycapuchin said...

Yeah, Kilo Papa clearly creates a false dilemma. If there is a god somewhere, it might also be totally unaware of our existence, among other things, assuming it exists.

bossmanham said...

I don't really see a dilemma here at all, but perhaps you could tell me what it is you're referring to?

All I see is him asserting that the Christian doctrine of the atonement is morally abhorrent and is the product of stone age thinking. That doesn't really create a dilemma. It's just ignorance.

kilo papa said...

"All i see is him asserting that the Christian doctrine of the atonement is morally abhorrent and is the product of stone age thinking...It's just ignorance."

Please enlighten me to the vault of knowledge that would allow someone to see clearly how the doctrine of blood for mercy is not the vile,immoral,monkey brained level of intelligence that it seems to be to members of the human population who managed to grow up and separate "Mother Goose" from actual reality.

Christian doctrine makes L. Ron Hubbard look sane.

Just finished a terrific book titled "Why I Believed: Reflections of a Former Missionary" by Kenneth Daniels.
Do yourself a favor and read this book. Let a little light into your Jesus brain. You might like it.

bossmanham said...

All a rational person can do is but laugh at your silliness, my friend. Your attitude displays a high probability that it would be useless to engage you in conversation or to try to explain anything to you. I have answered the question elsewhere on my blog. You're welcome do dig for it.

Also, why someone believes something really says nothing about the truth value of what they believe. To argue otherwise is to employ the genetic fallacy. I suspect that's what Mr. Daniel's book's thesis boils down to.

Anonymous said...

It seems, kilo pappa has incorporated logic of the does-not-follow sort, into his comment.

kilo, whether or not you think the doctrine of the atonement is disgusting, has nothing to do with whether the atonement actually happened / is a part of historical reality.

John said...

Can anyone suggest any reading material about this doctrine of atonement thing? I sure would like to learn about it more.

bossmanham said...

That's a whole issue in itself, lol. The Cross of Christ by John Stott is very good.

John said...

Great! I'll try to get my hands on that book!