The Farce Goes On: Ham Fisted Prophets

"Hey you, we've got a monopoly franchise on this business!"

We all know about the above "prophetic" farce. As in all the best farces we find earnest blockheads like Camping, with their wacko projects, played off against knowing and terminally cynical characters. In the latter role we have, of course, PZ Myers and his rabid raiders. The whole fundagelical business just wouldn't be so funny without PZ Myers and co to witness and react to it. And do we need the medicine of a little black humour, for in many ways the extreme antics of the fundamentalists, which they carry out with a straight faced seriousness of purpose, are really no joke at all.

In  this blog post  PZ brings together the Camping affair with his other favourite buffoon, Ken  Ham. The post links  to one of Ken Ham's facebook pages.  As a rule fundamentalists never see themselves mirrored in other fundamentalists; they are egotistical enough to think of themselves as somehow different and set apart with a monopoly on truth. They continue to show no coyness or embarrassment about themselves; they remain as ebullient and irrepressible as ever: On Ken's facebook page one of his admirers says: "Thank God for true prophets like Mr. Ham!!!;-)

No End to End of World Predictions

PZ Myers blog is required reading if you want to keep up with the weird and wonderful world of fundagelicalism. His latest catch of a strange fish can be seen here. Basically it’s yet another fundamentalist (lauded by gullible followers) predicting the end of the world; in fact 10 days from today on the 21st May. The man at the centre of this latest prediction is someone called “Harold Camping”. More details are available here. Let’s give Camping some leeway: This is probably his best shot at making sense of life. But like a large swath of religious humanity he is spiritually egotistical enough to be absolutely sure he is right and can write off as damned so many individual human stories of experience, hope, endeavour, aspiration, seeking, encounter etc. without so much as a second thought: “My way or the damned way” says the fundagelical with bullet proof confidence.

Keep an eye on this blog if you want to find out the latest news on the end of the world. On the 22 May I’ll up date you on whether it has happened or not – provided you haven’t been raptured, that is. When the rapture does come there's a chance atheists might get raptured too: God will hardly be able to blame them for not believing in Him given that the Christian world is suffused with the fallible utterings of the Harold Campings of this world......and the William Tapleys, the Weatherbill7s, the Barry Smiths, the Gerald Coates...... etc.; its all down to a toxic mix of egotism, spiritual elitism, authoritarianism, Biblical legalism, wish fulfilment, gullible followings, fideism, and spiritual spin - a list of all too human failings that provide a very plausible basis for a belief that religion is nothing but a quirky human foible. But it's going to be tough on the atheists if they are raptured: The're going to have to spend an eternity worshipping "Jebus" with some of the world' most egotistical spiritual pundits. In short heaven's going to be hell for them.

Fundie Argument Clinic Part 4: Summing up

He hasn't met the  Christians who Jesus  really, really, really loves 

Christian Fundamentalists, by definition, believe they have a very direct connection with the Divine. Consequently they are very sure of their respective spiritual positions, positions which will be based on some blend of gnosis and Biblical legalism. Convinced of the divine authority of their own opinions they will presume to speak in the name of the Almighty, readily condemning those they perceive to be heretics. They are likely to feel uncomfortable with Harries Formula “Meaning = Text + Context”, because for them divine meaning is unambiguous and clear, demanding little in the way interpretative context, a context which in any case they will probably identify as a corrupting influence. (And yet they themselves must make use of contextual resources in order to interpret texts!) For fundamentalists “compromise” is a dirty word and consequently when fundamentalists holding conflicting versions of “revelation” meet it is a meeting of the irresistible force and the immoveable object; the subsequent contention can be short, sharp and acrimonious....

STOP! I’m really sick and tired of this subject and it is not really what I would like talk about…what I would really like to talk about can be found here on my Physics blog.

Fundamentalist Argument Clinic Part 3

The following discussion thread, which I reproduce below, first appeared on the Christian web site Network Norwich and Norfolk, although it has since been censored. The thread is, in my opinion, instructive and I hope in due course to draw out the lessons in a later post.

In the last part of this series it would appear that a geocentric Christian fundamentalist has convinced a YEC fundamentalist that geocentricity is the teaching of the Bible. I was confounded by this outcome as I had always assumed that fundamentalists are extrenely unreasonable and not open to persuasion especially by other fundamentalists. However, as we shall see business returns to normal in this section of the thread.

As you read this thread you need to be mindful of "Poe's Law" which states that parodies of fundamentalism are all but indistinguishable from the real thing.

Lord Ipsulot (Guest) 12/11/2010 12:43

Hi g.s.

At least you are not trying to hijack the brilliant discovery made by Mr. Charles Darwin like some, by trying to involve god in it.

My Comment: Our simple minded atheist commentator would much prefer that all theists were as simple minded as GS. The atheist dogmatist's job would then be as easy as shooting fish in barrel.

geocentric believer (Guest) 12/11/2010 16:37

Yes, Darwinism and God must be kept in holy separation. To you Ipsulot Darwin is holy and therefore must be kept separate from unholy religion. I agree, except that you have got your holiness and unholiness categories switched round. But Ispolute, my son, you have correctly perceived the need for separation. Perhaps you are more spiritual than you think, much more spiritual than James Knight who mixes up God and evolution.

My Comment:  Like Ipsulot our fundamentalist geocentrist (GB) hates a three or four cornered gun fight. They much prefer a simple polarised world view of "us vs. them"

Mike 2 (Guest) 12/11/2010 17:10

Hi Lord Ipsulot,

Depressing to read this nonsense isn't it? You know, when I see stuff like this, I sometimes think there's no hope for the human race and that eventually reason will give way to the stupidity of religious dogma. It seems as though it doesn't matter how clearly and demonstrably wrong something is, these guys will just go on believing it just because its written in the bible. They will stand there and tell you that black is white all day long.

Where have they gone wrong in their lives to become so obsessed. Has our education system let them down, or have they been got-at from an early age by some over-zealous religious fruitcake? The nutters of Network Norwich eh!

My Comment: You can hardly blame Mike 2 for being well and truly put off religion. When I look in this "mirror" I sometimes wonder why I call myself a "Christian".

geocentric believer (Guest) 12/11/2010 17:42

I think you will find mike 2, my son, that you have availed your self of the opportunity to publish on Network Norwich far more than us geocentrists. To me it looks more like the "atheists and compromisers of Network Norwich"!

My Comment: GB shows typical egocentric fundamentalist arrogance; everyone is rotten through and through except him and his sect.

Lord Ipsulot (Guest) 12/11/2010 23:46

Greetings Mike 2.

The level of irrational nonsense displayed on this site is indeed quite astonishing. Mind you, I am not so sure about "geocentric believer". Seems to me he is only joking about the whole thing.

Mike 2 (Guest) 13/11/2010 08:35

Yes, I am also suspicious that he is a wind-up merchant and that poor old g.s. is the target of his humour. After all, why else would he write such nonsense?

My Comment: Cue "Poe's Law"!

geocentric believer (Guest) 13/11/2010 10:15

...I write "such nonsense" because it is the clear teaching of Bible. As g.s. must surely see his devotion to the Bible requires his assent to geocentricism.

This is not humour, it's about following the clear teaching of the Bible. I don't expect you to understand Mike 2 because you are not born of the spirit and don't understand the things of God.

Have you looked at that web set yet Mike 2? If you do you'll realise that it's not nonsense, but serious Biblically based science. http://www.geocentricity.com/

My Comment: Appeal to the inner light of the Holy Spirit is the fundamentalist and fideist way of dodging a reasoned engagement. Basically it's a form of Christian gnosticism. (See my introduction in part 1)

Lord Ipsulot (Guest) 13/11/2010 18:57

Yeah sure.

My Comment: Read that as "I'm Ipsulotely clueless about the fundamentalist mindset, so where do I go from here?"  

geocentric believer (Guest) 14/11/2010 11:44

Yes I am sure; just like you my good Lord Ibsulote. We have quite a lot in common in an opposite sort of way don't we?


My Comment: ....he's probably right: Ipsulot is likely to be as epistemically arrogant as GB.

Mike 2 (Guest) 14/11/2010 17:10

Then if you're not a wind-up merchant geo-b, then I truly feel sorry for you. I think you need a bit of one-to-one with the good James Knight.

My Comment: The atheist Mike 2 is not a bad guy at all. He can see that there is theism and theism just as there is atheism and atheism. James Knight, by the way, is a Christian who writes for Network Norwich and Norfolk.

geocentric believer (Guest) 15/11/2010 16:59

Ahh! So you are a bit of a fan of James Knight! Like I said this site is full of atheists and compromisers.


My Comment: ...meaning that James Knight is the sort of "compromiser" GB despises. In GB's books "epistemic humility" is likely to be identified as compromise.

Lord Ipsulot (Guest) 16/11/2010 16:27

Geo, yes, I believe we do have a few things in common. g.s., is it getting too much for you?

g.s. (Guest) 17/11/2010 13:10

No

My Comment: GS is lost for words (as usual). It is not a case of it getting too much for GS because it always was too much for GS

(Guest) 21/11/2010 17:15

Well thats the end of anythig interesting and radical debated on here now that "Big Brother" and the powers that be insist you are on the membership list and can censor you if you do not agree with their questionable spiritual practices. Mind you its been like that for years not just here but among the various groups. R1 R2 legacy of self appointed apostles and pastors heavy shepherding of the gullible still in tact here in Nowich.

What else would you expect when its run by the Wimber-ites and those that have an endless history of splits and division,jelousy who desire to be kings.. "facilitate christian fellowship", yes as long as its on certain ones terms, accompanied with trumpet blowing.

So watch this site for yet more back slapping pseudo spiritual claptrap masquerading as a move of God.

Timothy V Reeves (Guest) 23/11/2010 19:46

Hello Brother XXX old son!

(Guest) 23/11/2010 19:53

xxx is dead. Long live guest!

Timothy V Reeves (Guest) 23/11/2010 20:23

..well that rather clinches it doesn't it, as only xxx would know whether or not xxx is "dead" - as if that very characteristic line of forthright rhetoric wasn't enough to clinch it! No look here Brother XXX, you may have some interesting points there, but why on this thread? You see I was thinking of doing one of my blog entries on this particular thread as it's content intrigues me. Trouble is, now that you have made an appearance there is a distinct danger that Brother Keith will get "deleter's delirium" and bang goes my thread!

(Guest) 25/11/2010 13:38

That raises an interesting question about consciousness after death.

Would xxx know if he was dead or not? What about soul sleep? What about the two parts of Hades, Abrahams bosom? The souls of the martys under the alter "how long" etc etc. Ooppps I digress, is that deleters digit deliberating above us?!

One thing is clear, Christ is raised from the dead and so are we. We are already in ressurection.

Timothy V Reeves (Guest) 25/11/2010 21:37

Interesting questions? My foot! "Guest" simply meant that the label XXX was dead! XXX has simply been re-badged!

My Comment:  A joker in the pack suddenly  makes an appearance; namely, "Brother Triple-X" from the Witness Lee Brotherhood, a fundamentalist sect who (of course) want to "recover" the whole church to the Witness Lee way of doing church. Their enhanced sectarianism gives me a "professional" interest in them; hence I've made an appearance here in order to draw Brother Triple-X into the fray giving us a five or six cornered gun-fight! For Triple-X all this is beneath his hyper-spirituality: To him the "soulish"  GB and GS are badly in need to being "recovered" to the true spirituality of the "blended" brotherhood. He is probably making a very frustrated appearance here after having no doubt been censored by the moderator on another thread.

g.s. (Guest) 04/12/2010 15:57

All Christians must refute Darwin's ideas, and offer the truth of the gospel to everyone. Thus saving millions from the fires of hell.

My Comment: That's so extreme that I'm feeling the effects of Poe's Law at this point! GS wants to get back to the subject. I can't imagine why because he is so utterly out of his depth. But then like Triple-X he is so utterly assured of his own brand of fundamentalism that he knows the Holy Spirit is testifying to both apostates and heathen of the truth of his version of unreason. Thus, he "assists" the Holy Spirit by threatening hell and damnation.

geocentric believer (Guest) 05/12/2010 21:59

But don't forget g.s. Copernicanism came first. It demoted God's place for the Earth by removing it from the spatial origin of His Creation, just as the claimed billions of years removed the Earth from the temporal origin of Creation. Copernicanism paved the way for an Old Earth and Darwinism. What you should be saying is: All Christians must refute Copernicanism, and offer the truth of the gospel to everyone. Thus saving millions from the tortures of hell.

My Comment: This point (which GB keeps repeating) is interesting and telling. I will be coming back to it as I have already said.

g.s. (Guest) 06/12/2010 17:25

Copernicanism is not the issue here. Besides, it is not in conflict with the Scriptures.

geocentric believer (Guest) 06/12/2010 21:50

I gather, then, that it was "another" g.s. who said:

"So it seems therefore you are correct geocentric believer. Thanks for the link."

We are back to square one with you disobeying God's Word and compromising with science. Let me warn you for the second time: The Bible implies that the Sum moves - Ecclesiastes 1:5 says:

"The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose."

Once again, over to you g.s. Let me advise that you start using scripture to prove your points.

geocentric believer (Guest) 08/12/2010 15:56

Yes it does matter: How can you make claims to discovering the accuracy of the Bible if you subscribe to Copernicanism? Have you got any scriptures to support Copernicanism? I think you know the answer to that question g.s. - No! In fact do you use your Bible at all other than to parrot what other people tell you it says?

geocentric believer (Guest) 08/12/2010 18:07

...how can you ask people to refute evolution when you are not also asking them to refute copernicanism which is clearly against the word of God? This looks like hypocrisy to me g.s. and atheists will see through it as hypocrisy.

My Comment: We are well and truly back on track:  This will make any argument clinic proud: We are going round in circles again!

g.s. (Guest) 08/12/2010 18:26

So you are an atheist.....thought so.....explains it all.

My Comment: Even a fundamentalist can feel the force of Poe's law!

geocentric believer (Guest) 08/12/2010 18:41

You're getting desperate if that crass response is anything to go by. Have you looked at that link I provided? Can you start using the Word to justify your Copernican position? For the third time:The Bible implies that the Sun moves - Ecclesiastes 1:5 says: "The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose." For the third time, over to you g.s. Third time lucky? I doubt it, I don't believe in luck any more than I believe in hypocrites

geocentric believer (Guest) 08/12/2010 22:53

BTW g.s. you will find that geocentrist scholar Dr Gerardus D. Bouw agrees with me about your hypocrisy (See herehttp://www.geocentricity.com/ba1/fresp/index.html):

"Evolutionists, atheists, and agnostics in the know can easily shame creationists on the issue of geocentricity by simply pointing out the hypocrisy of their insistence that the days in Genesis 1 are literal while the rising and setting of the sun is not."

Are you now going to accuse Dr Bouw of being an atheist?

g.s. (Guest) 08/12/2010 23:20

I never asked you to bring in this "copernican" stuff. Let us concentrate on the fallacy of Darwinism. Like I asked before: when did anyone witness a monkey giving birth to a human? Going on the theory of evolution such a thing must happen every now and again, right? But so far no one has ever seen it happen. Yet evolutionists insist on holding on to this nonsense. They just invent the irrational presupposition that species simply "evolved", and that therefore the Bible must be wrong. Yet they fail to produce one bit evidence to support their assumption. I feel that there is something different at work here; something very sinister, which has more to do with satanism than with science. Sadly, there are also some Christians who pander to this abhorrence by suggesting that the Holy Scripture and evolution are both true. By doing so, they give some level of credibility to atheism. We must stay true to our faith at all times, our Lord demands no less. Evolution is incompatible with the Bible.

My Comment: Heck, GS has written a whole paragraph. GB must be getting to him. But notice once again, it's just sheer ignorant assertion. In his own words he fails to produce one bit evidence to support his assumptions !

geocentric believer (Guest) 09/12/2010 18:59

As I have tried to make clear above, Copernicanism, in subtly devaluing the pinnacle of God's creation here on Earth is the thin end of the Satanic wedge. It paves the way for Darwinism in devaluing man's place in God's plan. Therefore we cannot proceed with a critique of Darwinism without a critique of Copernicanism. The two go hand in hand. In any case as I have said above to hold to Copernicanism and yet to reject Darwinism is hypocrisy. So g.s. stop sitting on the fence.

BTW: I'm no evolution buff but even I know that evolutionists are not saying that a monkey one day gave birth to a human. You really need to get your facts straight first.

My Comment: GB keeps repeating this same point about a link between Darwinism and Copernicanism. The dimwit GS just won't engage it. This is the point I will come back to in due course.

g.s. (Guest) 09/12/2010 23:38

I still don't understand why you keep bringing up this copernicanism stuff; it has nothing to do with it.

Do you or do you not agree that evolution is basphemy against God?

My Comment: Of course GS doesn't understand, he's all but brain dead.

geocentric believer (Guest) 10/12/2010 00:20

In answer to your question: Yes. Now will you please answer my question: Do you or do you not agree that Copernicanism is basphemy against God? Depending on how you answer that question you will then understand or not understand, as the case may be, why I keep bringing up this "Copernicanism stuff"

geocentric believer (Guest) 14/12/2010 18:31

Four days and still no answer from g.s.

My Comment: GS obviously had to think long and hard about this one: 

g.s. (Guest) 16/12/2010 17:30

It is the popular believe that there is no centre in the universe. This has not been proved or disproved. To Christians it is clear that Gods reation (relation?) is the centre. But the question of the earth's physical position is less important than the spiritual reality of God's love for his people. If nothing else, the earth is the spiritual center of the universe.


My Comment: Ironically a similar argument could be invoked in regard to GS's YEC philosophy.

Mike 2 (Guest) 17/12/2010 17:27

Yes g.s., and what's more the dinosaurs also believed that to be the case some 60 million years ago. The truth of it was revealed to them just seconds before the impact.

My Comment: Worthy point Mike 2, but you are wasting your time here I'm afraid to say!

geocentric believer (Guest) 17/12/2010 18:22

...and such imaginary scenerios show us why Copernicanism stinks and g.s. won't admit it. Copernicanism set us up for all this rot about us being just an accident in a remote and obscure corner of the universe with no special status to protect us from apocalyptic meteor impacts. And g.s. foolishly thinks it's unimportant.

g.s. (Guest) 17/12/2010 23:57

You have a very narrow-minded world view geo.

My Comment:  A case of the pot calling the kettle black I think! 

geocentric believer (Guest) 18/12/2010 17:02

But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it - mat 7:14

In any case I am sure there are many on this web site who would accuse you, g.s. of having a narrow-minded world view. What's wrong with being narrow? But how narrow is "narrow"?

(Guest) 22/12/2010 00:04

Network Norwich. Shame on you. Keith. John and John.

You are not what you think you are.

geocentric believer (Guest) 22/12/2010 00:33

Don't tell me Mr. XXX, another of your forum threads has been nuked by Keith and co? Now look here my man, me and brother g.s are having a nice civilised Christian discussion and the last thing we want is another "Local Church verses all them others" fight breaking out on our nice cosy peaceful thread. Next thing you know, all our comments have gone to thread heaven.

My  Comment: Triple-X uses this thread to make his protest after being censored elsewhere; in fact it is probable the whole thread he was contributing to was deleted - clearly a destiny that GB thinks is likely for this particular thread now that Triple-X has appeared. Triple-X is, needless to say, as dismissive of "all them others" as are GB and GS. Consequently, the vitriol arising when Triple-X and his brothers engaged posters, especially  ex-WLB members, made threads unmanageable and they were often deleted wholesale. This vitriol is comprehensible when one understands that the WLB considers that all who are not with the sect to be, by default, against it; the WLB demands ultimate acquiescence or else.  ("Local Church", by the way, is another name for the Witness Lee Brotherhood)

***

And that folks, was the end of that! As GB predicted the thread suddenly disappeared for unaccounted reasons. Its destruction seemed to come out of the blue just like that meteor which Mike 2 spoke of. As if they were its lumbering dinosaur inhabitants GS, GB  and Triple-X went the way of the thread. And yet the thread is such a gem, such a microcosm of fundagelicalism. The wallahs at NN&N deleted it presumably oblivious of just what this thread was trying to tell us about the state of  modern fundagelicalism.

...to be continued

GB feasts on GS, but  something comes along to spoil the party.

Of Dragons and Unicorns

The screen shot below is taken from an Answers in Genesis facebook page. Ken Ham, AiG Supremo, is asking for some (favourable) testimonies regarding the ministry of AiG and in particularly his Kitsch Creationist Extravaganza, the Creation “museum”.

(Click to enlarge)

The visceral spiritual superlatives come in thick and fast:

“God bless your ministry”, “One of the most peaceful places I know” “I’m am so blessed by …YOU”, “Praise God for your ministry and good example”, “I could feel the presence of God” , “God made sure I stood firm in trusting a literal Genesis as a sure foundation”, “This is the proof that the Holy Spirit leads us into truth”, “it is an amazing place and the anointing is very strong there”.

Clearly these people went in with their expectations and hopes fulfilled thrice over. The world they have come to believe has been made palpable by a stunning spectacle of foam rubber, glass fibre, and plaster exhibits with a backdrop of painted wooden facades and atmospheric lighting. The cosmos of their imagination has thus been brought to life; they can almost touch it: But smell it? No.

But we must set beside this testimony the fact that many Christians don’t believe in a Ken Ham’s Young Creationist cosmos. To them the glitzy Bible Disneyland of AiG is to the Earthy Biblical World as a Star Trek convention, with its plastic phasers and communicators, is to Astronomy.

Having said that we now have to grasp the nettle: There is a contingent of Christians out there who are fundamentally mistaken about the nature of the physical world and yet they are able to dress up their error in the language of intense devotion, ecstasy and epiphany. That they can be so utterly vehement, so utterly sure they know the Divine Will  and yet so utterly vacuous debases the first person language of religious testimony almost beyond recovery; almost.... 

The Fundamentalist Argument Clinic. Part 2

The following discussion thread, which I reproduce below, first appeared on the Christian web site Network Norwich and Norfolk, although it has since been censored. The thread is, in my opinion, instructive and I hope in due course to draw out the lessons in a later post.

We are at the start of an argument between two fundamentalists one of whom is accusing the other of compromise on issue of geocentricity. Strange though it may seem there are still Christians out there who, based on their view off the Bible, believe in a geocentric cosmos. The geocentric believer ("GB") has just accused a Young Earth Creationist ("GS") with compromise. It was GS who actually started the thread by accusing Christian evolutionists of courting blasphemy. (See part 1) It is the turn of our YEC, GS, to reply to GB

g.s. (Guest)

That is a different matter.

My Comment: GS is man of few words; he can only assert, he cannot or will not reason. Given that he accusing Christian evolutionists of something tantamount to blasphemy you would think that the least he could do would be to take the trouble to get some Biblical evidence together to support his case. His short reply to GB betrays a desire to get off a subject that is likely to confound him and get back onto to familiar ground. For GS this is all a very annoying distraction.

geocentric believer (Guest)

No it isn't. Copernicanism is as evil as Darwinism. In fact Darwinism is just another type of Copernicanism applied to the animal Kingdom, making man insignificant, just like Copernicanism does. Copernicanism came before Darwinism and is the thin end of the wedge that takes us away from the Word of God. If you believe in Copernicanism you are a compromising the clear Word of God.

My Comment: Ironically I agree there is conceptual link between Copernicanism and Darwinism; I will be coming back to this matter in another post.

g.s. (Guest)

If you read the Bible properly, you will see that the scriptures are in harmony with the copernican world view. Evolution is an entirely different thing. It is at odds with the word of God. It is a blasphemous theory, and deeply offensive towards Christians.

My Comment: GS has managed to get to together all of 3 sentences, but once again it’s sheer assertion; in spite of all the vehement affirmation about what the Bible says GS seldom uses it. He is just parroting the line put out by his sect

geocentric believer (Guest)

Clearly .. you are not reading the Bible properly. The Bible teaches the Earth is stationary. Joshua 10:13 says: "And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day."

      As I keep trying to tell you g.s. Darwinism is linked to Copernicanism. In belittling God's created Earth Copernicanism paved the way for Darwinism. Christians like yourself who have compromised with the first blasphemy of Copernicanism have only got themselves to blame for the blasphemy of Darwinism.

My Comment: To give a robust and clear meaning to such terms as “the sun stood still” would require quite a technical discussion about motion. But GB is likely to think this as entirely unnecessary because to him everything is crystal clear and he takes it for granted that his mindset about motion is up to the task of spiritually indicting someone – as does GS. GB thinks his position is so obviously corroborated by the "plain teaching" of scripture that anyone who disagrees must have a bad conscience. However, let’s take a little pleasure in the fact that GS is getting a good dose of his own medicine!

Lord Ipsulot (Guest) 06/11/2010 13:47

Hi g.s., how nice to read another one of your contributions again. So, here it is: I accept the theory of evolution to be accurate (as against "believe"). Moreover, I think the bible is a load of old bunk, made by people who were - at best - not too well informed. Am I a blasphemer now? What will happen to me?

My Comment: This is an atheist who calls himself “Lord Ipsulot”. Although more articulate than GS he too only indulges in “argument clinic” assertion. His attempt to make a distinction between “accurate” and “belief” fails given that his sentence is naturally rendered as “I believe the theory of evolution to be accurate”!!

Mike 2 (Guest) 07/11/2010 16:18

Well well well. It seems that the bible is the authoritative text on just about everything then. I don't know what to say other than It Must Be Wrong Then Musn't It?

My Comment: Up pops another atheist called Mike 2 (to distinguish him from Mike 1 if you wondered). He’s usually a lot better than Lord Ipsulot at engaging, but at the moment he seems gob-smacked and “I don’t know what to say…..” really sums things up for him. Who can blame him.

geocentric believer (Guest) 07/11/2010 20:42

g.s. does not obey the clear geocentric teaching of the bible. He is compromising with science.

http://www.geocentricity.com/

My Comment: Yes, we've already heard that GB. Interesting, however, is the link to the geocentric web site. It’s the same site I considered on my physics blog  here.

g.s. (Guest) 08/11/2010 12:48

This so-called geocentric idea is at variance with the Bible as I read it, just like evolution.

My Comment: This is now looking like an argument clinic exchange,  the kind of “oh yes it is / oh no it isn’t” stuff you get at the pantomime.

geocentric believer (Guest) 08/11/2010 17:34

Then you are clearly not reading the Bible correctly. Where in the Bible does it say the Earth moves round the Sun?

My Comment…well you’ve got to concede it – he’s got a point in that last sentence!

g.s. (Guest) 08/11/2010 17:56

Where in the Bible does it say that the sun moves around the earth?

My Comment: … GS has let himself in for it now…look at this:

geocentric believer (Guest) 08/11/2010 18:41

Easy; the Bible implies that the Sun moves - Ecclesiastes 1:5 says:

"The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose." Over to you g.s.

My Comment: Advantage GB! GS really ought to learn to use his Bible! Whatever do they teach him at his fundangelical chapel?

Mike 2 (Guest) 08/11/2010 19:20

That may be so, but just because it is written in the bible, it does not mean it is correct. The bible is well known to be wrong on many counts. Nor does it mean that relative motion is precluded. Wake up man, the universe runs on relative motion. It is impossible to say that you have no motion unless you devise some method of measuring your dopler shift relative to the 3K background radiation which appears pretty constant in all directions. Your standpoint is demonstrably rediculous, so why do you persist?

My Comment: Good points Mike 2 but you are wasting your breath – these two Biblical sectarians are not in the least bit interested in science – they debunk it as “man’s reasoning". The riposte from GB is all too predictable:

geocentric believer (Guest) 08/11/2010 19:33

..because I believe the Bible and not science; unlike g.s. who merely claims he believes the Bible, but in fact disobeys it and follows the blasphemy of copernicanism.

Mike2: If you want to find out more about absolute motion, follow the link I have provided.

My Comment: Re: the Geocentricty link. GB feels he can leave all his scientific problems in the hands the incorrigible Dr Bouw,  a geocentrist; although I hesitate to call him a "geocentrist scientist". GB is effectively saying: “I don’t do science – go and see Dr Bouw”. He is thereby relieved of the responsibility of defending the technical merit of his position, and he can then thoughtlessly mouth off scripture, tacitly assuming he knows what it means, thus giving him the pretext to accuse “compromisers” of heinous sin.

g.s. (Guest) 08/11/2010 23:08

Whenever the science and the Bible are at variance, it is the Holy Bible that is correct at all times. So it seems therefore you are correct geocentric believer. Thanks for the link.

My Comment:....am I seeing things? Surely GS isn’t acquiescing that easily? In fact is this the real uncompromising GS we've all grown to love?

Mike 2 (Guest) 09/11/2010 07:31

Then you both live in a world of phantasy. How sad that you cannot even attempt to reconcile science with your religion.

My Comment: Poor old Mike 2 is in despair!

geocentric believer (Guest)

So g.s. do I take it that you are in agreement that the whole universe revolves round the Earth in one day?

My Comment: I don’t think GB can believe this is happening ! Must admit, it does look fishy.

g.s. (Guest)

If that's what it says in the Bible, then yes.

geocentric believer (Guest)

..and do you believe the Bible says that?

g.s. (Guest)

If the Bible says it, it settles it for me.


My (Whispered) Comment: I'm not sure GS is entirely convinced; he is being evasive.

geocentric believer (Guest)

g.s.: Congratulations on joining the geocentrists! Spread the message about the blasphemy of copernicanism, the precursor of Darwinism!

My Comment: This apparently lame outcome certainly wasn’t expected. So is it really all settled with two uncompromising fundagelicals actually managing to come to an agreement? Not in a month of fundagelical Sunday Services, as we shall see…

The Fundamentalist Argument Clinic. Part 1: Introduction

STOP PRESS 24/12/10: Network Norwich and Norfolk appear to have censored the thread that is the subject of this blog post. I had prepared for this not unexpected eventuality by copying the entire thread and will in due course be presenting it on this blog . NN&N appear to delete forum material regardless of whether or not it breaks their house rules; in fact in this particular connection I saw no violation of the house rules. The underlying and unarticulated policy seems to be one of suppressing contention. Thus my policy is to keep a close watch on NN&N and grab the gems as soon as they make an appearance. This material is too precious to leave in the hands of those who find themselves under pressure to censor it. (Note: The thread seems to have reappeared recently!)

This discussion thread on the local Christian website Network Norwich & Norfolk is noteworthy for reasons that I hope will become clear. I have copied the comments of the main protagonists and I will be reproducing them on this blog over the next few posts. The creator of the thread is someone who signs in as “g.s.” - I shall call him GS. GS is a fundamentalist. He appears to be unwilling or unable to sustain a reasoned argument over more that two or three sentences and instead engages in strong but bald assertions and accusations of wrong doing against God. He is a man of few words, a kind of evangelical terminator who well earns the term “Godbot”. A couple of sensible commentators attempted to redeem the thread from what was basically a cesspit of intellectual debauchery, but to no avail – I will not be publishing their particular comments as the thread is unworthy of their contributions.

The key to understanding the Christian fundamentalist approach to reasoning is their concept of the Holy Spirit. The fundamentalist may make a token effort to back up his assertions with appeals to his proprietary interpretation of the Bible, but in the final analysis the fundamentalist has a low view of reasoning of any kind regardless of whether or not such reasoning employs Biblical references. In fact, as I have said, in the extreme case of GS supporting argument is almost completely absent (even absent of the use of Biblical references). What inclines the Christian fundamentalist to a low view of reasoning is that he believes the Holy Spirit is arguing for the truth of his bald assertions in the privacy of the nonbeliever’s heart. Thus, the fundamentalist is released from the work of arguing – he can just assert his conclusions and leave the rest up to the Holy Spirit if needs be. He can walk out after he has dropped his slanderous spiritual bombshells knowing that those who don’t agree with him are in complete darkness, have bad consciences and at worst are knowingly blaspheming the Holy Spirit. This not only relieves the fundamentalist of the responsibility of making reasonable representations, but it also gives him license to abuse his antagonists with spiritual insults; to him those antagonists must have heard the promptings of the Holy Spirit in their hearts and therefore must be disobeying God. It also allows the fundamentalist to condemn those he has never met or listened to: “If you are not with us you are against us. If you are against us you are against God”; “It’s our way or the blasphemous way”. As with the Islamic Jihadists the world beyond their legalistic sectarian community is thought of as a Satanic domain of war, conflict and contention upon which God’s judgment rests; the fundamentalist therefore has a prerogative to despise it. The tactic of exploiting the name of the Holy Spirit to underwrite a form of gnosto-fideism is common to the whole of the Christian fundamentalist scene – from the wacko charismatic sects through the Mormons and JW’s, to the traditional strict and particular evangelicals, they are all quite capable of asserting black is white if they believe the Holy Spirit is testifying to it!

Anyway, without further ado let me set the scene by reproducing the first two entries of the thread in question. (See italics below) I have added my comments in non-italics underneath the entries. Just one note of caution: The contributor GS has proved such a caricature of fundamentalism that there has been some doubt as to whether he is real or just a troll. I have reason to believe he is the genuine article, but draw your own conclusion.

Believing in evolution is blasphemy against God

To observe the great creation of which we are a part, and then to attribute that to evolution, is a vile form of blasphemy against God.

g.s. (Guest) 04/11/2010 11:10

So we’re off to a flying start, straight in with an accusation of blasphemy, the worst sin any one can commit. Too dull to be subtle GS can’t work up to it in stages but presses the nuclear button right away. Fundamentalist spiritual insults, especially directed toward Christian evolutionists, don’t come much stronger than this. Interesting to note that he conflates “evolution” with the whole of creation and not just biological change. But what makes this thread really notable is the comment that now follows:

geocentric believer (Guest) 04/11/2010 17:22  

You are a hypocrite g.s. How can you claim to be following the word of God when you don't believe the Earth to be stationary?

Wahey! This is going to be exciting! Looks like we’ve got a fundamentalist vs. fundamentalist death match on our hands. Fundamentalists often have huge egos – they will both be assured that the Holy Spirit is especially on their side and this will lead to a classic “immoveable object meeting the irresistible force” altercation.

Pastor Kerney Thomas is a Scream

Here is Pastor Kerney Thomas whose efforts to get God on the move bring down not just the roof but the whole of the heavens with it:



..and if you want the essential Pastor Thomas without the boring bits, the video below is the one for you:

SuperHero WeatherBillZero Saves the World!

In my last blog entry I posted a YouTube video by SuperSoylent on failed prophet Weatherbill7. Weatherbill7 predicted that during August and Early September California would be devastated by a tidal wave and mega earthquake. He had had, he claims, seven warnings of disaster; hence the "7", I assume. But needless to say not one of his warnings have materialized into anything real; that’s why he is better referred to as "WeatherbillZero". I’m not interested in the details, but WeatherBillZero’s prognostication methods involved what he called “casting lots” with a deck of cards. In the video below he appears to be facing up to his abject failure as a prophet by burning his tarot playing cards and admitting that he was just “plain old deceived”.

OK, so having faced the plain old painful truth about himself, does WeatherBillZero go back to being plain old Mr. Small Guy and try to forget all about it all? Not a bit of it. The humble, wimpy, nerdy looking WeatherbillZero doesn’t exactly cut a dash like one of those brash, suave, loud mouthed alpha male evangelists with a Death Star sized ego armoured with 24 inches of high carbon steel; but let’s not underestimate the power of the mythology that WeatherbillZero is tapping into, a mythology that presents the player with an attractive win-win option; in effect a game of "heads I win, tails you lose". For it seems that the above video was not the beginning of a restoration of integrity, but just a blip, a temporary crisis of confidence in an ego that, it now seems, is well back on track, as the commentary WeatherbillZero has added to his video indicates:

This is the deck of cards I've had for sometime now. Through these cards, I had casted lots. I thought, after the September 3rd mega quake did not come to pass, that I had been deceived, but I have come to realize, this was a judgement that was held off by The Call's (thecall.com) 14,000 Christian brethren who had prayed for God's mercy. God had answered and boy, do they not realize what they have done! They have stopped massive devastation on California! Praise God and the proof of this, is the more than 17+ sources at the web site, earthquake2010.org, who were given amazing signs that this was going to take place.

My accusers do not beleive in the power of prayer, so naturally, they are going to mock, ridicule and belittle all of this. To my accusers, I say, MAKE MY DAY! I am a man without reputation! I will preach the gospel in the face of my tormenters. No one is going to stop me! BTW, there is some wonderful worship music here on youtube at weatherbillmusic. Have a blessed day !

So weatherbillZero only thought he had been deceived when in fact he had achieved nothing less than help save America from destruction by getting thousands to pray and stop the catastrophe. In short WeatherbillZero has managed to reinflate his ego! The feel good factor has returned to his life.

The heroic fight against evil continues in WeatherBillZero's fantasies

Don’t you know There’s a (World) War On?

..at least according to self proclaimed "YouTube prophet" William Tapley who runs a “ministry” called “Third Eagle Books”. According to Tapley’s YouTube video  posted this month on 10th October the War started on 13th October. However, I recommend that you actually watch the version of the video below because it contains accompanying comments that help interpret the ministry of Prophet Tapley. Tapley, of course, has irrefutable proof that he is a prophet of God: He reasons that because he attracts opposition this must prove he is God’s prophet under Satanic attack! (See this video for criticism of that claim). This means that any attempt to prove the ministry wrong has the opposite effect of proving it to be right! How many times have we heard that sort of defense from those with an unshakable faith in their faith?

Given that World War III has not exactly started with so much as a single bang, a more likely hypothesis is that Tapley is yet another “prophet” whose over blown delusions and/or bloated ego are inflated by a gullible following. Ministries and prophets like Tapley are two a penny out there, all of them claiming to be the agent of the latest definitive Word of God. The only consolation is that they at least provide us with roars of laughter.


________________________________________________________________
For a bit of perspective it is also worth watching this video on failed prophet "Weatherbill7":

(Acknowledgements: Videos by SuperSoylent)

Healer Dealers

Miraculous Healers: Be careful that no one puts the wool over your eyes.

Christianity magazine (see christianitymagazine.co.uk) specializes in a very candid take on the Christian faith. One of the themes treated frankly in the October issue of Christianity was healing.

Broadcaster and Christianity help page columnist Steve Chalk gives advice to a correspondent “crushed” by the experience of nine months of prayer and fasting by a church for a cancer victim who eventually succumbed and died. Moreover, this wasn’t done in a corner and apparently the local community was aware of the prayer effort. Steve was really only able to offer the correspondent empathy because, to cut a long story short, Steve's been there and got the T-shirt. But he does plead for honesty and points out that as far the public community is concerned openness, vulnerability and the resilience of the fellowship are “compelling”.

The next healing story comes from an ex-tabloid reporter who writes in Christianity pseudonymously under the name of “Ruth Roberts”. Ruth admits to wrestling with questions about healing and miracles. She says that at her (charismatic) church they pray a lot for healings and miracles but in spite of really wanting to believe she doesn’t think she has seen a real, proper cast iron one. She confesses that she (cynically) groaned one day in church when her pastor said he felt there were people in the congregation that God wanted to heal. What's this pastor think he is doing given that week in week out what he claims "God wants" doesn't come about in "a real proper cast iron" way? He must be deluding himself. Ruth ends the article with Lord, please show me a miracle.

My last healing story is provided by Jeff Lucas on the last page of Christianity. He says he believes God heals today, but he then tells us of a case where a claim of miraculous healing certainly proved false. He is also implicitly critical of those who see healing being willed by the power of their belief and those who refuse to concede that healing has not come. He also frankly tells us the story of how gut wrenchingly hard it was when he himself had his own serious health scare.

Well, these columnists get full marks for being honest people and full of faith. You certainly cannot criticize them for lacking faith; their's is the sort of faith that remains in place in spite of…. Anyway, all credit to Christianity magazine for publishing these candid columns. It is worth comparing these ground zero accounts with the accounts coming out of the heady meetings of the healing evangelists who appear to heal on an industrial scale (except amputees). I have to say that I have yet to be a ground zero witness of a genuine miracle - although I do occasionally hear those messages coming out of a healing ministry production line, but more often than not they have travelled a long way through the rumour mill before these accounts reach me! Any attempt to probe these rumors by asking for solid evidence is often greeted at best with askance looks and at worst with less than subtle hints about "blaspheming the Holy Spirit" and questioning the work of the most high God who sits on Heaven's throne and judges us. What these spiritual bullies fail to realize is a) the question mark is not over God, but rather the human ability to provide reliable reports in an exhilarating and intoxicating crowd atmosphere and b) discouraging critical validation actually works against the very claims of healing that this discouragement, in its perverse way, is seeking to support, because it suggests that gullibility rather than criticism is the mode of validation.

Many of the rumours of miraculous healing that have come my way have propagated themselves much like one of those threatening chain letters that we used to get in the post before the days of viral email scams: “Pass this on or else…” was the subtle and sometimes not so subtle subtext, a subtext that on occasions exploited mankind’s instinctual fear of the numinous and the unknown. As Lovecraft said: The oldest and greatest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and greatest type of fear is fear of the unknown.

Do I believe in healing? Of course I do: So far I have been healed of every illness I have had (although not miraculously). But one day I will have my last illness…..

Michael "Hell-Fire" Voris is Back With a Vengeance

Angry Catholic Voris: Just look at the picture top right: Heronymus Bosch would be proud. Need I say more?

After publication of his Catholic Dictatorship video on militant atheist PZ Myers' blog (See my last post)  it seems that Real Catholic Michael Voris is none too pleased with his foul mouthed treatment by PZ Myers' coarse speaking "raiders". But poor PZ will find that he and his raiders' puny anti-superlatives are utterly out classed; after all, they can only resort to an assortment of body parts, excretions and private acts to use as insults. This school boy invective pales compared to the spiritual "invective" the Michael Vorises of this world can muster from a deep supply emanating out of what in some people's books is a terrifying world view. They can call on the gravitas of eternity and presumed knowledge of the human spiritual predicament to insult, condemn and above all curse, really curse. And don't forget that they really mean it and believe it; it therefore carries far more anti-value and is far more cathartic than saying something like "You w*nker!". Here's just some of it transcribed from the above video; it sounds a lot like some of the protestant fundagelical language of spiritual condemnation I have heard, and which I myself have also been on the receiving end of:*

They hate the Catholic church and what she teaches because they hate themselves...They are in love with evil. They are entrapped by it and enslaved by it and rage against the good....adulterous...money worshipping...power hungry, attention crazed, pride filled, promiscious lives...chained by their passions and fears...they will die in their sins...deep down they know the spiritual ship wreck their lives really are or will become...monarchy of hate...who do you prefer for your monarch, Christ or Satan? (and the following is really ironic - ed)... you really need check your hate speech, it is way too revealing...

It's no surprise that in the depths of the Middle Ages the Catholic church, in its dungeons, knew just what to do with some of those body parts that PZ and his raiders speak so lightly of; and, moreover, it "knew" it had the right to do it!

Characters of the Wild Web: PZ Myers dreaded raiders strike again, but when it comes to Real Cursing the Real Catholics provide a much more professional service.

* For reference read the book of Jude.

One Ring to Rule Them All

(Note: 18/8/10: The Real Catholics have pulled the video: Perhaps to spite the people they thought were "wrenching it out of context to try to make a weak point" to use the words of one of my detractors)

When I watched the above video on PZ Myers’ blog my first reaction was that it must be a trolling spoof or at least a tongue in cheek production with the aim of baiting the PZ Myers of this world. But seemingly not: The man in the Video, Michael Voris, a Catholic who talks and sounds very much like a fervent Protestant fundagelical, has a series of YouTube videos promoting Catholic religious hegemony. Nothing unusual about that you might think given that this blog is always criticizing the authoritarian spiritual hegemony of some Protestant sectarians. So what’s new here?

Voris tells us that “Our nature is fallen” and is “self absorbed”. Fair enough, I can go along with that; its core Christian doctrine. But then suddenly out of the blue we get this:

….Only virtuous people should be allowed to vote! … Limit the vote to faithful Catholics…. Only true Catholics look at God. …. When true Catholics vote they cast them with an eye to what God desires not fallen human nature …. Democracy is doomed to failure… The only way to run a country is by benevolent dictatorship – a Catholic monarch.

Surely this man can’t be serious! He must be having us on! The last time I saw a very similar looking manifesto was when I read “Mein Kampf”. It is difficult to credit that anyone, in the light of Western History, can still hold such views.

Isaiah Berlin has made us very conscious of the difficult balancing act between positive and negative liberty that must be maintained in a democracy. Given the human nature that we all share, both extremes of positive and negative liberty have undesirable consequences: Positive liberty can drift toward dictatorship; negative liberty drifts toward market chaos.

The problematical question that never occurs to anti-democrats is this: Just who is going to decide who is virtuous enough to rule autocratically? Who is going the “morally bootstrap” the first virtuous autocratic government? Can fallen beings trust themselves to identify, let alone implement, the absolute government of the virtuous? Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Voris ought to learn the main lesson of that famous book by fellow Catholic J. R. R. Tolkien where the tempting and corrupting effects of absolutism find an excellent metaphor in the One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.

Oliver Cromwell did away with the crypto-catholic dictatorship of Charles I and consolidated parliament. Trouble was, Cromwell himself didn’t understand or know how to handle parliament. He was repulsed by the cacophony of voices of competing (self) interest that was the English parliament and so he effectively dissolved it and became dictator; although credit to Cromwell, true to his beliefs, he was probably a reluctant dictator. Cromwell blew his chance and failed at the test of getting the balance between positive and negative liberty right. The Protestant Cromwell, like the Catholic Voris, was of the opinion that once you’ve got rid of “all them others” somehow the rule of the virtuous and Godly would just emerge. But it didn’t: Parliament became a forum of argument and counter argument expressing the inevitable balance of interest of a democracy; that is what authentic parliament is all about - we must simply accept it and run with it. But the puritanical Cromwell couldn’t accept it. The only solution Cromwell could think of, like Voris, is to enforce the autocracy of a self-righteous and probably self-appointed oligarchy. However, we have to make all due allowance for Cromwell: In the history of Western government Cromwell was breaking entirely new ground without the hindsight of past models to go on. Voris does not have that excuse, and ought to know better.

Ironically, anti-democratic leanings are also a recrudescent phenomenon among Protestants in spite of their Biblio-centric individualism. Hierarchal absolutism is not far under the surface of the mindset of some Protestants as typified by the following quotes taken from a ministry that shall remain nameless:

Some have wrongly taught that the local churches are autonomous, that once an apostle establishes a local church and appoints the elders, he is through with that church and should stay away…..The leaders in the church must take the lead in all things. They must be the leading sheep, the head sheep, in the flock. When the sheep at the head of the flock move, the rest of the sheep follow ….The elders should be regarded, obeyed, and honored by the saints.

The tempting and corrupting effects of the "One Ring" are, alas, as real in church government as they are in society at large (See my last post).

The two faces of English democracy:

Cromwell: The uncompromising face of positive democracy

Walpole: The compromising face of negative democracy

The fact is that truly democratic government will always have to emerge from an ongoing and contradictory tumult of voices, interests, perspectives and viewpoints that tug in different directions; such are the consequences of the ambiguities and sinfulness inherent in our world. Sir Robert Walpole, England’s first prime minister, well understood the underlying self interest that often motivated democratic rule and referred to it as “the natural state of human affairs”.

There is no one party that has a monopoly on righteousness any more than it has a monopoly on sin. As the good book says:

For there is no difference, for all have sinned and come short of the Glory of God (Rom 3:23)

****

During the last 'benevolent' Catholic dictatorship even dissenters were given a stake in government.

Disney Land Christianity

Why doesn't Hinn just 'Jacket' in?

Two articles in the August "Christianity" magazine are notable.

The first article is about excess in some churches and is entitled “Money, Sex and Power”. Although the churches concerned are largely American Charismatic churches, it is usually not long before UK churches pick up the baton.

The article starts by dealing with the money and sex scandals that are now all too familiar, but my own opinion is that this is really a distraction from the main problem. Sex and money tempts people in all walks of life and a fall here can happen to anyone. When the Christian showman and “miracle” entertainer Todd Bentley came a cropper over his affair and divorce, some parts of the church reacted as if this was the only problem with his ministry. Some even tried to spin doctor it by making a virtue out of it: It was all down to poor brother Bentley’s “burn out”; poor guy, he was so over worked! Trouble was he was burning himself out peddling junk spirituality egged on by a gullible crowd who were baying for “more Lord, more…”. In fact as far as I’m concerned Bentley’s marital infidelity is the least of his sins and arguably could be excused as having mitigating circumstances. Basically fundagelicalism never learned from the “Bent Oddly” affair and never took the cue to take a good long hard look at itself. In fact by implicating sex and money fundagelicalism could get itself side tracked by putting it all down to a good old fashioned sin that is easily identified. But I’m of the opinion that the real sin is endemic to fundagelicalism itself. The problem will not go away unless fundagelicalism reforms itself.

The article in “Christianity” leaves the subject of power until last. This matter, I suggest, is much closer to the nub of the real issue than is sex and money. Under the subtitle of “The Abuse of Power” the article tells the story of a church where:

The issue was over the pastor’s teaching on a variety of issues including creation, tithing and the nature of spiritual authority. He insisted that these teachings were central to the faith and that dissenters from his line were in serious error that threatened their eternal destiny. It reached a head when one Sunday during a sermon the pastor launched into a personal attack on those in the church who disagreed with him. Naming them – and most were in the congregation that day – he called on them to ‘repent’ and then proceeded to pray for this to happen. During the prayer these people stood up and left the building. Within ten minutes other members of the congregation, some in tears and others heckling the pastor walked out. The meeting ended in chaos.

The article claims that this story is “the tip of the iceberg”, and like all such icebergs it is the “sea of faith” that is keeping it afloat: It is not a case of people occasionally (or even frequently) being tempted by the lure of power as they might also be tempted by sex and money. The problem is to be found in the underlying ethos of fundagelicalism, particularly charismatic and Pentecostal fundagelicalism. That ethos is one of a brash, positively affirming and assertive Christianity flowing naturally out of a culture that, as an affected reaction to its marginalization, is so totally convinced it speaks with the very words and authority of God. I suspect that the pastor referred to in the above quote was less tempted by sheer power per se than he was tempted by the common fundagelical delusion that he was the mouth piece of God. It’s not that this culture is necessarily peopled by the authoritarian, the arrogant, the gullible and the stupid, but the cultural mores of fundgelicalism helps feed authoritarianism, arrogance, gullibility and stupidity.

If the authoritarian, the arrogant, the gullible and the stupid start to populate institutions and sects whose ethos attracts them, then naturally enough one is going find them giving a very hyperbolic explanation of what they are doing. This brings me to the second article in “Christianity” by regular writer Jeff Lucas. In a column entitled “Mind your Language” Lucas acknowledges that many Christians give a fabulous account of their doings using a language of spiritual superlatives that raises the prosaic into an ethereal grandiose realm. Lucas kindly calls it “metaphor and shorthand” but a case could be made out for calling it “spiritual spin”. Lucas, in fact, gives an example that he himself is guilty of:

I used to describe prayer as a conversation, until, decades on, I came to realize that it could be misleading. ‘God spoke to me this morning’ I would announce breathlessly, perhaps suggesting that (a) I awoke to the sound of a booming voice that rattled the alarm clock and (b) I have an ongoing hotline to God and am enjoying happy little chats with him through each and everyday. In truth 99% of my praying is me doing the talking.

Lucas also says:

.. after a while we start to believe in the Magic Kingdom ourselves as I found out when I went to Disney land and actually approached Mickey Mouse and asked for an autograph. Only as I walked away did I realise that I’d just asked a sweating college student togged in furry fancy dress to honour me with a signature. I’d bought in to the myth myself.

Telling, truthful, candid, sobering stuff. But Lucas is taking a big risk: He could be in for some brickbats on “Christianity’s” letters page if the religious fanatics who speak for God decide to mobilize.

The following is an example of the output of one Christian sect very sure that it has an ongoing hotline to God, a line that needs no interpretation:

The all-inclusive Christ, who as the life-giving Spirit indwells our spirit, is everything to us. We must believe the clear Word in a pure way, saying, "Amen," to whatever the Bible says, and we should take care of our experience. There is no need to interpret. Simply take whatever the Bible says and believe it.

No need to interpret: That's right, no need to think about it, just get a direct download from the Almighty Himself and you're away; in fact no need to even bother to get the download as we have it already, so just come to us and we can tell you what to believe. One little problem though: A million and one fundagelical ministries, sects and cults, all with their proprietary and mutually inconsistent authoritative downloads, can't all be right.

Over confidence, over certainty, and spiritual arrogance are the inevitable products of the false belief that Christians somehow speak the very words of God, and this very naturally leads into the abuse of spiritual power and authoritarianism.