Monday, March 8, 2010

WTF Moment of the Month

[Thanks to PF at Forever in Hell for pointing this out...]

The following quotes are my favorite from the blog post titled “SLAVERY IS NOT WRONG.”

If slavery is wrong, then wives should not submit to their husbands, children should not obey parents, women should became equal to men and preach in churches ( which is forbidden in the bible by the way), and mostly no one should call Jesus their master or submit to the authority of God.


I do not believe slavery is wrong, because a) The bible does not condemn slavery and b) Slavery makes so much sense and to say slavery is wrong we rob the gospel off its meaning and even Election. The concept of total submission and slavery is at the very heart of Christ's gospel.
Any guesses on the demographics of the poster? If you guessed black female, you’re correct. You can read the whole post here.


  1. I guess I should have posted this when I came across it months ago. Then you could have had your WTF moment way back then. I've also had this woman's blog on my Christian blogroll for a long time. I check it out every once in a while to see what Christianity is capable of doing to a mind.

    She's right, though, Christianity IS slavery.

  2. Wow... I could not even finish that shit. That is all kinds of fucked.... So much fuckery, I would not know where to even start. So glad that you posted that. That is what happens when you are indoctrinated and you turn on culture and history. I think that her blog should be showed to everyone as a precautionary tale...

  3. Haha, I could not finish reading it either; but thanks for the link anyway, it was both entertaining and depressing...

  4. Random Commenter3/08/2010 9:51 PM

    Wow, just wow. This person is a mental health teacher. I feel bad for those being taught. Religion is a cancer to society, but what makes it worse is that most cannot detect and let it determine the world view.


    And I see a trend here. I couldn't finish reading it either lol.

  5. No, here is her background in her own words-

    I am a born again believer in the Lord Jesus Christ. I was a Mental Health Nurse before I got saved but now my profession at heart is being a wife to a wonderful man and mother to three children. I love the Lord so much, only because He loved me first.

    She was a psych nurse UNTIL she was saved, and now she serves the Lord by being a housewife and mother. Gave up a pretty good profession that most Americans would kill to do for the love of JC and a man. What else?

  6. Also makes me question if her being "saved" two years ago was the sudden onset of a latent schizophrenia or something like that. This woman very clearly is psychotic completely detached from reality. And, I posted this link to my friend on Facebook, and she could not finish it either. Definite trend.

  7. I could not resist, I read some of her more recent stuff. Her husband is not saved. So, she is the only loon in that house. Here is a great quote I pulled from her:

    In my own understanding, things happening in the world today have everything to do with the Lord’s return. Prophecy is being fulfilled today as we speak. People have slowly been manufactured into mind controlled robots, and they are well ripen for the New World Order that has already begun, which will swiftly move in during the tribulation period as prophesied in Scripture, Rev 13:7. I do believe most people of this generation have totally lost the ability to think for themselves. They are told what, when and how to think by their world leaders and the media, especially a device called Television. A lot is being said about the world having one currency in the near future, which would give way for people to receive the mark of the beast, Rev 13:17. Wickedness has abounded. Gluttony has reached a peak. People are so concerned with the cares of this life (Mathew 24:38), vacations, latest gadgets, houses, cars, health etc. There are wars and rumours of wars, earthquakes, famines. The bible teaches that when these things start happening, its time to look up, as our redemption draweth nigh, Luke 21:28.

  8. There are wars and rumours of wars, earthquakes, famines

    Oh my... she is so right, these all happen right now!! what a shock! Tectonic plates moving must be a sign that the doors of hell are slowly opening up right?

    Poor lady... too bad she is the role model of some kids... I hope they will be fine.

  9. Dear Everyone!

    Do you want to know how reprobate I am? Do you want to know how far I've fallen into the abyss of cynicism? Perhaps not. But I will tell you: I don't believe that "Jean's" blog is at all authentic, and I am shocked that you are not as skeptical as I am. You all actually believe that there is a woman named Jean living in England posting such essays as a Christian wife devoted to her husband and three children? Bullshit. She is probably a he, some cranky atheist having fun working out his anger at being raised in a fundamentalist home. Egads, the stereotypes could not be more obvious: She thinks the KJV is authoritative; she HATES FEMINISM; she BELIEVES IN THE RAPTURE; she thinks SLAVERY IS NOT WRONG. Again -- Bullshit!! You guys are falling for this? Shame on you, really!

    Imagine. Here's an alleged black woman (that's supposed to make this seem even more authentic), who DOES not read English VERY WELL but UNDERSTANDS the VERY DIFFICULT text of the KJV. Are you EFFING JOKING? And then, this English woman who LOVES the Lord writes in September 2008 a piece about ------ SARAH PALIN!!! Yeah, that's right: a black, ESL British woman is writing about John McCain's VP choice. And here is what she said [with my comments in brackets]:

    Titus 2:4 is one of my favorite scriptures in the bible. I love Paul's style of writing here, he gets straight to the point and does not beat around the bush. He is not afraid of offending anyone and the text is crystal clear, there are no interpretive challenges here. [F*uck yeah! Way to go, American atheist poser!]
    As some Christians go into a frenzy of excitement at John McCain picking mother and wife Sarah Palin as his running mate, I am saddened that she felt she had to choose career over her family. I have looked at five reasons why I think Sarah Palin is wrong. [SURE YOU HAVE, ASSBAG!]
    1) As a wife myself, I so treasure this privilege that the Lord has given me, I would rather be a hero to my husband than be a hero to the world. As my goal everyday is to be a virtuous woman - Proverbs 31, I want my husband to be known at the gates because of me, I do not want to be the one sitting amongst other men/elders at the gates, while my husband is at home keeping the house.
    2) I want to be under the leadership and protection of my husband, I want to do him good all the days of my life. I never want to tempt him to sin, by taking a position that would undermine his role as husband. So many times I question myself, if even having this blog is right. I have to first examine my motives, am I practising what I preach. If my husband is not happy, maybe its not a good idea to be posting on my blog. If my husband would read this blog, will he say my wife is telling the truth?

    (Continued below)

  10. 3) I love my children and every moment I care for them is precious to me. I can not believe God has made me a mother, one thing I do not deserve. My kids are lovely and so many times in difficult moments of my life, I only have to look at these beautiful children and weep. What a gracious God I serve, that He has trusted me to raise these kids. I never want my children to feel I chose a career over them, shame on me if I do that. They need me at home - every day. My greatest desire is that one day they will rise up, and call me blessed.
    4) I would rather be identified as a woman who fears the Lord first, secondly as a wife who loves her husband, and thirdly as a mother who is raising her children to be godly men and women. This to me is more important than to be identified as a great political leader or as a powerful woman. Sarah Palin is identified as a great political leader first, a wife and mother second, then as a Christian third, something is seriously wrong here and true Christians need to realise that and speak out that she is not in line with scripture.
    5) If I claim to be a christian and love the Lord, my claim is useless unless I live the life of a Christian. Only God has the power to transform a human heart. Jesus said you will know them by their fruits, Mathew 7:20. Being pro-life is not enough to qualify me into the kingdom of God. Being pro-life alone does not make anyone a Christian. Choosing not to abort a baby is not an extraordinary act that deserves applause, it should be the normal behaviour of every human being. So Sarah Palin is Pro- life, but is that all Christians should be rejoicing about. What she is doing is causing the name of God to be blasphemed [F*UCK, yeah! That's right!]. There is no consistency in her Christianity. [And you're all for Christian consistency!!] Feminism and Christianity do not meet in the middle. If she wants to make the world a better place, she should abandon her political dreams [Yes, yes, because she threatens to derail your favorite candidate's bid for the White House], go home and be a loving wife to her husband and be a mother to her children. That way she will have a far greater impact in the world by raising godly children and demonstrating her faith by her works. For people to be convinced that God can save a person from sin and transform their way of life, people need to see those who profess Christ live a holy life. When Christians claim to believe God's word and do not obey it, they bring reproach on the name of the Lord, which is exactly what Palin is doing.

    This "Blog" by "Jean" is meant to make Christians look utterly ridiculous. That's all. It is not what it appears to be. Sorry. But that's my observation. And my other observation is this: There are hundreds of sites like "Jean's." In fact, I have noticed that atheists seem particularly enamored of creating personae, false websites, and bogus avatars. I am not suggesting this is restricted to atheists. But it is curiously common.

    Anyhow, you want to see skeptical: here's an example of a Christian who is more skeptical than you. FAR MORE SKEPTICAL. You've been duped.



  11. PS. Profanity is not my forté, really, as you can tell. Forgive me if I've offended anyone. I just thought I'd pretend to be, well, someone else, especially since authenticity has gone out the window.

    Again, peace.


  12. Dear Bill, it's the problem of Poe's Law, but still, I think it a real stretch to believe she is a parody. Read more of the posts carefully. The blog is genuine (and if it's not, than maybe you are a really an African-American woman atheist).

    Mentioning Sarah Palin is evidence it's not real? No, someone in Britain would never follow any news of a major American election that might effect Britain. Really, Bill, you have a habit of writing very silly things.

    Is the following paragraph a fake?

    "As an African I have learnt that most of my fellow people are very religious, they are thoroughly churched yet very blind and the hardest to reach with the gospel. The English people on the other hand are very hostile towards the gospel. The culture in Britain is very anti Christian, but having said that I find it easier to witness to the English than to Zimbabweans! So obviously the way I would speak to a Zimbabwean would be very different to the way I would speak to an English person. When talking to Africans I have to identify with our culture without violating my conscience, when speaking to the British I have to identify with them and be like one of them, as Paul said we have to became all things to all peoples that we may win more to Christ. Sometimes we have to let go the traditions of men, some say do it this way, others say do it that way, but I would rather be lead by the Spirit, so that I will have nothing else to glory in. Of course we should never compromise the gospel message or change it, but when witnessing it is important to remember that people are different so we can’t speak to everyone the exact same way, we have to be led by the Spirit. Now I realise that so many times I witness I never plan it, nor do I plan the words. I am usually a nervous wreck half the time, but it’s only when I reflect back afterwards when I see that in my weakness, the Spirit was at work mightily and so all I can do is thank God and glorify Him!"

  13. This "Blog" by "Jean" is meant to make Christians look utterly ridiculous.

    Right, no "real" Christians have ever done that.

  14. SE,

    Sorry. I find the Jean blog too perfect a caricature to be real. And there is NO way -- none -- that a woman who claims English is not her first language would say that not only does she completely understand the KJV, but that it is the only trustworthy translation. Egads! Do you know how few people in Britain believe such a thing?

    And do you think that a woman who believes the KJV is the supreme English translation and lives in England, belonging, as she must, to a tiny Christian subset, would know about John Piper, a Minnesota preacher who preaches from the NIV? Do you think she would write about Paul Washer, who preaches from the NASB and serves his church in Alabama? "Jean" also refers to the California preacher, James Macarthur, who is not a KJV user; she also cites Voddie Baucham, an A-A preacher from Texas, who is also not a KJV pastor. How, pray tell, would they find their way into an English blog written by someone who believes they are all using the wrong Bible?

    Sorry. The whole thing smells to me. I don't understand how you don't smell it, too. Besides, I have already run into this sort of fraud before with a well-known atheist and his/her attendant websites. Jean is a joke (and I note that she is not at all consistent about the use of KJV quotes on her blog).

    Lastly, do you for one second believe that a woman living in England whose first language is NOT English would have heard all about Sarah Palin's Christianity in less than a week of Palin's coming-out party to the world? Do you believe that likely? Do you believe this English woman is going to have ANY interest in some American governor's faith? Here's how she began her essay on Palin: "As some Christians go into a frenzy of excitement at John McCain picking mother and wife Sarah Palin as his running mate..." Come on, SE, are you shitting me? Do you believe this is possible? WHAT CHRISTIANS would this woman know who are in a frenzy? ONLY AN AMERICAN COULD WRITE THAT SENTENCE.

    Did you notice that Jean makes NO reference to English culture? No, you didn't. Accept she does mention it once: she talks about schools in England, about their indoctrinating kids with humanistic principles. That is why Jean is -- hold on to your effing brains!!! -- a homeschooler!! Ahhhhaaahhhaahha!

  15. SE,

    Oh, and thanks for the kind words. I had no idea I have a habit of writing silly things. I do wish you had told me sooner. I could have spared you the nuisance, the waste of your time. Maybe you were just too skeptical about me, about my ability to discern; to learn from my betters.


  16. SE,

    Just one more thing: Thanks for pointing me toward Poe's Law. I had never heard of it. It's exquisite. Exact. Perfect. The best thing I've read online all day.

  17. I did consider the fact that she might be an atheist baiting people, but that would make her one dedicated troll.

    I find it far more likely that it's just another mind-bogglingly stupid person, one no more foolish than several other I have met in my life.

  18. And there is NO way -- none -- that a woman who claims English is not her first language would say that not only does she completely understand the KJV, but that it is the only trustworthy translation

    Bill... let me tell you just one little thing.

    Being someone who does NOT have English as his first language, I can fully understand why the KJV version of the Bible is the best one according to that lady.

    Oh, and, unlike her, I do not even live in a country (province I should say) where English is the first language. Heck, I do not even speak English on a regular basis...

    So for you to claim that there is NO way "a woman who claims English is not her first language would say that not only does she completely understand the KJV, but that it is the only trustworthy translation" is utterly ridiculous.

    You have no clue...

  19. It's a common game of denial played by all Christians. They have to tell themselves that all these awful interpretations of their most sacred beliefs are inaccurate, falsified, or just practiced by crazy people who can be written off.

    Ahh... cognitive dissonance...

  20. That is why Jean is -- hold on to your effing brains!!! -- a homeschooler!! Ahhhhaaahhhaahha!

    Bill, Jean doesn't say she is a homeschooler, only that she wanted to home school. And yes, there is homeschooling in the UK.

  21. Oh, and thanks for the kind words. I had no idea I have a habit of writing silly things.

    You're welcome, Bill. People who make a habit of writing silly things should be aware of it. Glad I was able to inform you of your silliness tendencies.

  22. Give me a break, gentlemen. You have hardly, not even remotely, mounted a serious reply to my challenges. Hugo, come on. That's pathetic. And Ginx, I expect better from you. She's a fake. You claim she's dedicated? Did you see the date stamps on "her" blog? She's hardly posted at all (averaging about 12 posts a year). And then there's her shifting avatars that, to me, don't look at all similar one to the other.

    "Jean" did not say the KJV was the best translation. She said it was the only reliable one and that she "fully understands it (without a commentary)". That "without a commentary" should be a clue that she's a plant. No one would honestly say this; nor would anyone say this and then paste scripture passages on his or her blog template (and as headers on a few posts) that were not from the KJV.

    And I don't see a single anglicism in her writing. Do you? And there's not a single reference to a living English pastor/preacher/evangelist.

    I think a strong case has been made, though not absolute, that you all have been duped. That, really, is cognitive dissonance, Ginx, and it affirms, I think, not only that you're not skeptical enough, but that you and your peers have an a priori belief about Christians, and then you look for confirmation to reinforce that belief. Jean, even if she is real, is not one whit orthodox; if you were once a Catholic, as I believe you claim, you would know this INSTANTLY. But Jean's a joke, and an ironic one at that, which means that the WTF Moment of the Month is not what you think it is.

  23. Oh, one more thing: Everyone here blogs. Some of us have blogged for a really long time. I ask: in less than 40 posts (in more than two years), did any of you attract enough attention to collect 536 comments in just one post? I've written some pretty controversial stuff -- stuff that people actually might enjoy reading -- and I've NEVER had such traffic. How did this happen for little ol' Jean? And, I ask, if you did get such traffic, wouldn't you be posting like mad?

  24. WHAT CHRISTIANS would this woman know who are in a frenzy? ONLY AN AMERICAN COULD WRITE THAT SENTENCE.

    Right Bill, they don't have the Internet in England. I don't know any Christians that got excited about Palin, but I read about them.

    By the way, Bill, your efforts at a new "style" need a little work to be really convincing. There's still too much of the old, familiar Bill in your comments.

    Jean, even if she is real, is not one whit orthodox;

    She is (or may be) to very conservative, fundamentalist Protestants. One person's orthodox is another's heterodox and vice-versa.

    You have hardly, not even remotely, mounted a serious reply to my challenges.

    You need to provide a serious challenge first.

    No one would honestly say this; nor would anyone say this and then paste scripture passages on his or her blog template (and as headers on a few posts) that were not from the KJV.

    Just curious, Bill. Maybe I missed it, but could you point out the non-KJV passages on Jean's blog you're referring to. I didn't see them.

  25. I did find one. The link to the verse is KJV, but the verse as used itself is not.

    1 Timothy 2:12:
    But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

    While she uses as the header for the post: "I do no permit a woman to teach or have authority over a man, but to be in silence".

    She may have felt that while she understands the word "suffer" in the KJV context, readers of her blog may not have.

    Not a very convincing argument, Bill.

    All her links to scripture verses seem to be ONLY the King James.

    I see the template one you refer to as well. But a Christian can believe the KJV is the best and perhaps only truly reliable translation (due to not watering down certain passages or taking things out; that's the perception of some KJV enthusiasts of modern translations) without believing you can't quote verses that simply modernize the language a bit. There is no contradiction there at all.

  26. Bill: Hugo, come on. That's pathetic.

    Perhaps you're right concerning that lady; I was only pointing out that your claim that "there is NO way -- none -- that a woman who claims English is not her first language would say that not only does she completely understand the KJV, but that it is the only trustworthy translation" is RIDICULOUS, or perhaps I should use your own words? That is a PATHETIC remark. And I stand by that. If you have not learned English as a second language, how can you comment on how people who have done so feel about the different translations themselves, and especially what they think of the general perceptions of these translations?

    Plus, for you to think that we have a pre-conception regarding believers that make it easier for us to be fooled by fake bloggers is just as ridiculous. Not that I pretend that I cannot be fooled, no, it's just that I could not care less and it is anything but confirmation bias. What does it change if it's an Atheist pretending to be a Christian making a fool of herself? I know enough genuine Theists who already do that on their own... Dan from Debunking Atheist is just one example of these people concerning who I would have written the exact same thing:
    Poor [guy]... too bad [he] is the role model of some kids... I hope they will be fine.

  27. I just posted a link to an article on David J. Stewart's site on another thread here.

    But look at the home page of If any site makes Christians look "ridiculous", as Bill puts it, it has to be that one. David Stewart, however, is very, very real (though I'm sure Bill will be perusing his pages in search of clues he is really an atheist in disguise).

  28. SE,

    I don't know why you're writing about me with snark and even contempt. I don't CARE about these people; I am NOT going to peruse David Stewart's pages. If you do not know by now, I am an Anglo-Catholic; I am not a fundamentalist or even an evangelical. So I've little interest in such matters. Besides, I don't get why so many atheists are obsessed with Christian fundamentalism; my guess is that such atheists were raised in these traditions. Why would anyone bother to read what "Jean" has to say? She's not got any influence; she's not one whit persuasive. Atheists visiting her site -- and LINKING TO IT -- only reinforce such things (assuming, of course, that Jean is real, which I deny).

    Why, for the love of no god, would you (I mean this generically) LINK to a blog like Jean's, or one you not only oppose, but one you believe is utterly and completely absurd? What attracts you to it? Good godlessness, delve into the good stuff; swim in the deep end; ski in the untracked powder that lies off piste. Get the helllessness out of the crap, the shallows, the crud.

    It seems as if atheists need to reinforce their decision to leave theism by daily, even hourly, going to the most absurd Christian blogs to look for some new justification that they've made the right choice. Are atheists so insecure they have to gather and snicker at the effing idiots who are writing childishly about God? Why would you waste the freaking time? Does this help atheists feel smart?

    Seriously, I don't get it. And yes, one could hurl the same sort of charge my way. My response is simple: I don't venture off my blog all that often, and I rarely, if ever, link to something I find utterly infantile and absurd. If you want to make the case that you're battling deception, then that's fine. But don't tell me that ANYONE has to go correct the incredibly seductive arguments presented by someone who believes slavery is good. There is no seduction there; nor is there anything intellectually interesting. (Excepting, of course, the fact that the site is a fraud.)

    Be truly skeptical. That's all I pray.


  29. Hugo,

    Egads, man, get critical! You seem to be only trying to save face here; you really think it DOES NOT MATTER whether the person running the blog is FAKING being a whacked out Christian? Come on! Look, you're stinking anonymous here -- ANONYMOUS!! That means you have all the room in the world to be HONEST; you've nothing to fear. You've literally got no face to save. You'd think you'd say something utterly simple, like "You know, Gnade. You've got a good point. It probably is a scam. I hate that shit. I will be more reflective, less gullible; more truly critical and skeptical. Thanks for taking the time to shed some light on what is clearly ridiculous."

    Instead, even though your anonymity protects your reputation, you posit the ABSURD argument that it does not matter if the blog in question is a fraud. THAT, I am sorry to say, is probably the WTF Moment of the Month, though, of course, there is ample time for you to change your mind.

    [As for my assertion that "Jean" would NOT argue that the KJV is the ONLY reliable translation is obviously debatable. If you want to win this point, go ahead. I've offered ample reason why you should not trust the site; I believe her language is utterly stereotyped by someone who seeks to create a caricature. I DOUBT that some ESL woman is going to PRONOUNCE with certainty that the KJV is the authoritative translation for all English speaking people (and then mention she achieves clairvoyance without the help of a "commentary"). That's all poseur language, Hugo. She doesn't even REMOTELY reflect the King or Queen's English in her prose; there is not one hint of KJV influence in her diction. She is lying. And she is probably not even a she.

    And she ain't no British subject, either.]

    You know what: I've done something NONE of you have done here. I have put MY reputation on the line. I have made a bold claim; I have defended my thesis, and I could be embarrassedly wrong. But I have at least ENGAGED THE MATERIAL AS A SKEPTIC. I have applied reason; I have applied my exegetical skills; I have played the editor and thinker. And I have -- with my real name -- made myself vulnerable to you all.

    And ALL of you are safe.

    Meanwhile, some fraud is laughing at you. And he might even be on your side.

  30. Hey Bill,

    You seem to be taking this way more seriously than I am, so I will try to put more effort in my reply to show you some respect.

    First, you said that I "have all the room in the world to be HONEST", which seems to imply that I am NOT honest. I hope I misunderstand you... because isn't that a bit ironic coming from a person who claims to know with great certainty that the pro-slavery blogger is fake. In other words, you know she is dishonest, and you seem to know that I am too. Let me tell you right away; I don't know if she is genuine or not, but I do know that I am honest.

    I need to make a side note here. You don't know me Bill, and you don't know anybody here, and we don't know you. However, you seem to know the way we think, what we believe, how we feel, why we write what we write, what we find amusing or not, what we find credible or not, what we find intelligent or not... should I continue? It will be really hard for me to explain why I am honest. There are so many background facts that I would need to share to give a precise picture; it won't happen tonight.

    So this leads to what I said previously, it's "[n]ot that I pretend that I cannot be fooled, no, it's just that I could not care less". And yes, I am being honest when saying this. Obviously, I need to explain because your answer to that is that I "posit the ABSURD argument that it does not matter if the blog in question is a fraud".

    Personally, no I don't think it matters. The first reason being that I do not judge people really; I mostly judge their ideas. So what we have here is a blogger who claims that slavery is good. Obviously this idea is absurd, so that's why I call it for what it is. Should I say something like, "poor kids" when thinking about this lady... even though it's possible she is a fake? Yes, why not. What does it change if it turns out she is fake?

    If she is not fake, well I do think that her kids are in a bad situation and I wish them the best. Hopefully they will learn better by themselves. If she is fake, well that's great! It's a relief... So I really hope you are right Bill honestly. You made good points but I am not yet convinced though, because you seem to forget one obvious point: if she is real, she is not smart... so anything goes!

    The second reason of why it does not matter is because it is in no way impossible for it to be true! As I mentioned previously, there are many real people who are no better than her in my own opinion. There are many cases of people with crazy ideas; so reality is already sufficient to show examples that are much worse than this lady, regardless of the fact that she might be fake. So, I don't care if that particular case is true or not. If it were important, I would have put more effort into trying to figure out if she was real or not. All I did was telling you why one of your argument was ridiculous and pointless. I did not even look at the other post from that lady... and wont! Because... I. Don't. Care.

    Want to have fun debunking some other people who must be fake? Go visit a forum by people who believe the Earth is flat:
    Seriously, I spent an afternoon reading what they answer to all the evidence for a Spherical Earth, and the effort put into it really makes you wonder if they are genuine or not... I just cannot believe it is the case, but good luck trying to prove the contrary!

    Well, I did not write down half of what I had in mind when starting to write this, but I think it's way too long already... Oh, and my last name is Pelland. So now you know my full name, whatever that change ;)

  31. Dear Hugo,

    You're right, I don't know you, and that is indeed the essence of the problem I am addressing: in the blogosphere, we don't know who anyone REALLY is.

    All I can do, Hugo, is respond to the words in front of me. And what I was sensing from your words is that you doubted the veracity of the website in question but were unwilling to admit you might have fallen for a trick; that you had, for a moment, let your guard drop. I was really asking you to be emotionally honest; it was not a moral as much as it was an affective appeal: I was simply giving you room to say, "You know what? I should be even more skeptical. I feel bad I wasn't."

    I particularly reacted to this sentence of yours:

    What does it change if it's an Atheist pretending to be a Christian making a fool of herself?

    It was this that made my knees buckle in incredulity. I still can't imagine that you think the authenticity of the blog in question does not matter. For it surely renders everyone else's incredulity meaningless. It also matters, at least to me, that NO ONE believes the alleged bloggress is an apparition. But, according to you, I am foolish, for authenticity is superfluous. This makes me all the more incredulous, especially when you intimate that you (and others) went rushing toward "Jean's" blog because you were simply interested in the exploration of "ideas." It's a bit like sending firefighters to a fatal blaze where they conclude it is irrelevant, NOT whether the fire was set with murderous intent, but whether the fire even happened. Of course, an accidental fire is far different from an arson; just as a real fire is far different from an imagined one. But if what you posit is true, that the authenticity of the blog is irrelevant, then the following is a viable conclusion one can draw: Everyone here went zooming over to read a blog they believed fake and then spent time and energy denouncing it for being real. Such folks extrapolated from a fiction: "You know, this is so ridiculous, it's PROBABLY real. I am sure there are real people who think this way; let's not find any of those people directly. Instead, let's scoff at a fictional character created by some mocking atheist and pretend that the real author has presented something accurately. And then we'll all talk about this illusion as if it is not illusory." Talk about a leap of faith!

    Anyhow, thanks for the exchange. Peace to you.

  32. Bill, she is real, and I'm not afraid to state that, at least until you provide some compelling reason to believe otherwise.

    As a former "Born Again" Christian (and quite a fundamentalist one at that) myself, I can tell you that her views are NOT impossible for a Bible-believing Christian to hold. She is a woman standing up for Christ in a secular world, and unlike most modern day Christians who don't really believe a Goddamned thing their religion teaches, she really believes in her faith.

    But IF she is real, Bill, do you consider her a sister in Christ or someone like David Stewart a brother? You've told us Christians don't really believe the things they so obviously do, and I'm confident I don't have to educate you about Scotsmen, so what are they?

    Further, what is a Christian and what does a Christian believe? And why does it matter what they believe or don't believe? Does correct belief have anything to do with salvation? At least our fundamentalist friends believe in something and you can pin them down on what they believe. That's why Fundamentalism arose in the first place, to combat modernism and liberalism in Protestantism and to get back to the fundamentals, one of which, by the way, IS the belief that the Bible is inspired and completely the Word of God.

    Why should we believe you when you tell us what a real Christian believes?

    Just some questions, as there are always, always questions.

  33. @Bill

    Hope you don't mind if I reply again even though you concluded with "thanks for the exchange" ;)
    because I am curious about a few things...

    Let me make something clear first because you don't seem to have grasp the most important aspect of my last reply: I honestly don't care if the blog is authentic or not.

    BUT I do not think you are foolish for investigating, not at all. You are right to question the authorship of anything you read; that's never a bad approach.

    However, for that particular case, (or actually, for any blogs with messed up ideas like being pro-slavery) I don't see why it's important. I fail to understand your analogy of "sending firefighters to a fatal blaze where they conclude it is irrelevant, NOT whether the fire was set with murderous intent, but whether the fire even happened"...

    Plus, I don't buy your "Everyone here went zooming over to read a blog they believed fake and then spent time and energy denouncing it for being real". I did not see that happening. Posting random comments as if it were true is far from denouncing it as if it were true; because, don't forget... I don't care if it's true. So I guess we have a different interpretations.

    Ok, anyway, what I wanted to ask you is exactly why you consider authorship to be that important? As I just said, yes, in the general sense, it is important, but I feel like it's important for you in this context only because it might be giving an example of a 'bad' Christian when the person is not a Christian. From my point of view, what I see is you trying to convince non-Christians that this blogger must be fake because it could not be a Christian. I really don't see why you would do that, so I hope I am wrong?

    In other words, it seems as if you think that by judging that particular Christian (fake or not) it might influence our general view of Christianity. Again, I hope I am wrong, but at the same time I here so often arguments that talk about Christians as a whole, or Atheists as a whole, so I would not be surprised if that's how you think yourself.

    How many times for example have you heard both Atheists and Theists debating over whether Hitler was a Catholic or not? or a general Theist or not? Personally, I find these debates to be one of the most disgusting waste of time to have ever been done. We ALL agree that what Hitler did was freaking wrong; why should we care about what he believed to be true or not? We would not listen to him anyway!!

    And it goes the other way around too. Creationists like to bash Darwin and try to make him look bad. But who cares!? Darwin could have been a racist misogynist pedophile and I would still think that his contribution to biology was a masterpiece that set the foundations for evolutionary biology.

    So I went a bit off track here but I am really interesting in reading your opinion on all that.



If your comment is too long, break it into multiple comments and post them all.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...