Monday, January 23, 2012

Faithful Thinkers: Zombies of Christianity - Updated

It has come to my attention that I have made a mistake in this post originally.  I want to preserve and correct the mistake so I will make my new comments in red and leave the original text in black font.  

Luke Nix has posted a great article about how silly people claim that zombies are in the Bible. Real silly. You can read it at the following link. It's obvious that when people bring up the term as a perjorative - mocking the Bible.

I made a huge blunder. The post is about how Christians in churches are like Zombies

Zombies remind me of people who simply like to just offer opinions, but without backing them up or defending their positions.

While what  I said is true, but the original post's subject is different and I was confused. No one's fault but my own.. I apologize to Luke Nix and anyone else who I have confused. Everyone should really read this post. by Luke at the following link.


Faithful Thinkers: Zombies of Christianity
Enhanced by Zemanta

62 comments:

  1. You should actually read the article you linked to, because it's not about how *silly people claim that zombies are in the Bible*.

    It's about something else entirely, and you proved his point very well.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Praise God! Thank you for allowing Him to use you to correct my mistake. God is sooo good! I apologize and repent. If I had the time I would go down in sackcloth and ashes. I made a terrible mistake - demonstrating my fallibility. I've never claimed to inerrant - but God and His Word are. Since you have pointed out my mistake, I will edit this post to correct the mistake.

    I don't believe that accepting the inerrancy of Scripture is being a zombie at all the way my brother in Christ Luke Nix is referring to. He's referring to people who follow their traditions and ideas no matter how much evidence is against them - ignoring what the Bible actually says. I think you would have demonstrate how I've done that. As for my mistake...there are quite a few atheists out there who do talk about Zombies the way I have described it. Thanks again. I thank God for you.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm wrong about this just like you are wrong about the miracles in the book of Acts. So we are even.

    ReplyDelete
  4. ***I'm wrong about this just like you are wrong about the miracles in the book of Acts. So we are even.***

    ***Luke Nix has posted a great article about...***

    No we are not even, right or wrong, I came to a conclusion about scripture over years of study and debate.

    Here, you did not make a mistake, you lied.

    We are not even.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You've come to the wrong conclusion. I didn't lie. That would imply that it was on purpose and unless you can read minds better than you can the Bible, you should not make such an assertion. i wasn't careful enough. My bad and I'm willing to admit it. What's your excuse?

    ReplyDelete
  6. How'd you know it was a "great article"?

    Genug! You are shameful liar.

    ReplyDelete
  7. You obviously enjoyed Luke's post, so I guess I was right wasn't I?

    You said that Dorcas was not raised from the dead and then said that you can't prove she was or that she wasn't. But you won't say how you know she wasn't - or how any of the miracles are false. Lying seems to be your department.

    ReplyDelete
  8. You are embarrassing yourself. It is fascinating that you would admit fault (I suppose you had to) but not admit to obviously lying. Perhaps you should watch *Larry Boy and the Big Fib* from the Veggie Tales, good lesson there.

    In any case, please provide a direct quote where I said that Dorcas was not raised from the dead. I can show you two or three where I explicitly don't do that.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Assuming that this is the same person who has been writing about Dorcas at this post: http://mmcelhaney.blogspot.com/2012/01/truthbomb-apologetics-84-confirmed.html

    You said I think I've added the *fact* that everything in Acts is not necessarily true even is somethings in Acts are.

    Yet you have not shown that anything in Acts is false, yet you think I should assume that things like Dorcas being raised from the dead did not happen.

    I know you have been trying to be careful and not say she wasn't but you don't believe she was and have no reason to reject that she was. That is why I said you were gutless at best and a liar at worst because you refuse to either commit to either Acts being true or false or just admitting that you don't know and shouldn't have commented in the first place. You claimed that not everything in Acts is necessarily true and failed to demonstrate a single thing that wasn't true. That's a lie or a mistake - given all your years of Bible Study. Pick one.

    I admitted that I wasn't careful enough on this post and if it makes you feel better about your own foible about whether or not Acts is true to call me a liar - works for me. At least I can admit when I am wrong. Just get truly saved, repent of your sins, and turn to Christ.

    ReplyDelete
  10. You really do not know what the word *necessarily* means, do you?

    Will you directly admit you lied? The way I see it either you did not read the article but claimed you did, making you a liar, or you actually did read the article, like you claimed, but completely misunderstood it, making you an imbecile.

    Which is it?

    ReplyDelete
  11. You really do not know what the word *necessarily* means, do you?

    Yes. You are waffling so you can pretend that there is enough doubt to reject the veracity of Acts. I understand. If you admitted that Acts was true...you might actually have to submit to Jesus. Can't have that can we?

    Will you directly admit you lied? The way I see it either you did not read the article but claimed you did, making you a liar, or you actually did read the article, like you claimed, but completely misunderstood it, making you an imbecile.

    Which is it?


    Neither. I already admitted I was wrong and that I made a mistake and thanked you for pointing it out. What would have made me a liar would have pretending that I was still right. You know like you pretending that not being able to prove Dorcas was not raised from the dead is enough to show that not everything in Acts is not "necessarily" true although you have not managed to show a single thing wrong in Acts.

    ReplyDelete
  12. This is fascinating. You think that lying, but then saying you made a "mistake" instead of "lying" some how absolves you of the transgression.

    Liar or imbecile, which is it?

    ReplyDelete
  13. This is fascinating. You think that lying, but then saying you made a "mistake" instead of "lying" some how absolves you of the transgression.

    Liar or imbecile, which is it?


    Still gnawing on that bone, are we? Well I already answered the question but I'll answer it again if you tell me if Dorcas was raised from the Dead or not?

    ReplyDelete
  14. There is not enough evidence to conclude she was.

    You are both then, I suppose.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Oh wow, this is fantastic. He has no more indwelling of the holy spirit than my thumb. I never thought to see someone so absolutely contradict in practice what they believe in theory. This is great!

    ReplyDelete
  16. First:

    So he rejects Dorcas' being raised from the dead although there is no evidence that she was not. Good one.

    Second:

    Foxy La Rue and Ryan Anderson, I don't even think either of you know what being Born again is. Being born-again don't make one infallible and perfect. If you want to claim that I haven't been born again because I made this mistake and was not careful, that is your right. Not Biblical, but it is your right to be wrong. I'm glad God is not like either of you. And I'm glad God is not like me. It's a shame that neither of you are taking God up on his offer of grace and mercy. You need it just as much as I do.

    ReplyDelete
  17. If you want to claim that I haven't been born again because I made this mistake and was not careful,

    Not because you "made this mistake" (or as a normal person would say "lied"), but because of how you've handled yourself after being caught on it. Anonymous is right, it's both embarrassing and shameful. Not just as born again christian, but as a person in general.

    Also, Anonymous more than covered the whole "no evidence that she was not" in the previous thread, talk about still gnawing on a bone...

    ReplyDelete
  18. ***Still gnawing on that bone, are we? Well I already answered the question but I'll answer it again if you tell me if Dorcas was raised from the Dead or not?***

    ***So he rejects Dorcas' being raised from the dead although there is no evidence that she was not. Good one.***

    I am waiting. Liar or imbecile?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Ryan Anderson, what do you want, "as a normal person"? I admitted to putting wrong information on my blog. I was wrong. What more do you want me to say? I never denied being wrong and attempted to correct that. That is what honest people do. They don't claim that something is wrong and not be able to point to single instance or example of something being wrong. Here is the difference because you seem to have missed it:

    I originally put information in this blog post that was not right. I was wrong. I didn't do it on purpose (which is what you said once was part of making something a lie) however the Book of Acts does not contain any such inaccuracies or misleading information. See the difference?

    How have I misbehaved or been underhanded in any way? Because I won't allow myself to be erroneous labelled a liar by a liar? I haven't done anything you said I did other than make another mistake on a blog post.

    Just because you have been unable to successfully make a single good argument against the Bible on this blog in over a year of "commenting", don't be mad. Better men have tried and will continue to try and will continue to fail.

    I brought up Dorcas' story again because it was not resolved in the other thread at all, and Anonymous linked the two himself/herself in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I am waiting. Liar or imbecile?

    Good thing God loves us, despite ourselves. There's hope even for you.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I think anonymous' point was that if you'd said "Luke Nix has posted an article about how silly people claim that zombies are in the Bible.", that would have have mistake, but you said "Luke Nix has posted a great article about how silly people claim that zombies are in the Bible." making you a liar because you're implying you read the article. Like he said , if you didn't read it, how would you know it's great?

    Now, however, you've lied twice because you said you'd answer his question if he answered yours, he did, you have not.

    ReplyDelete
  22. In any case, whether you've acknowledge it or not, you've exposed, we know it, you know it.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I think anonymous' point was that if you'd said "Luke Nix has posted an article about how silly people claim that zombies are in the Bible.", that would have have mistake, but you said "Luke Nix has posted a great article about how silly people claim that zombies are in the Bible." making you a liar because you're implying you read the article. Like he said , if you didn't read it, how would you know it's great?

    Implied? I posted the article without being real careful and not reading it carefully. I've been reading Luke Nix's posts for a while now and they are always great and informative. Did you read it yourself? Anonymous did and agreed that it was indeed really good! I apologized for that. Want blood or something? And would your really go as far as saying that some atheists are not running around saying that there are zombies in the Bible? I hope not because that would make you a liar or an idiot.

    I'm not sure what you are going for? Is it really that important for me to be a liar? Is it so that that you can in your own conscious ignore everything I have written or will write? Fine by me. I'm not that important. I can be wrong in everything I write but that does not make the Bible wrong in anyway and you still have to deal with your sins before a Holy God.

    Now, however, you've lied twice because you said you'd answer his question if he answered yours, he did, you have not.

    I gave an answer before but maybe you'll like this one better:

    3 What if some were unfaithful? Will their unfaithfulness nullify God’s faithfulness? 4 Not at all! Let God be true, and every human being a liar. As it is written:

    “So that you may be proved right when you speak
    and prevail when you judge.”[a]

    5 But if our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.) 6 Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world? 7 Someone might argue, “If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?” 8 Why not say—as some slanderously claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is just! - Romans 3:3-8


    In any case, whether you've acknowledge it or not, you've exposed, we know it, you know it.


    Yup. I'm an errant...fallible sinner who's only saving Grace is Jesus Christ. Sometimes I make mistakes and not careful in important things I do. Opening myself up to attack from little minds like yours. You realize that by challenging me and forcing me to repent my errors you do nothing but help me. God is using you to help me. LOL! That's the richest part of all of this! You are the one doing me the favor. LOL. I just hope God extends His mercy to you as God continues to do so for me!

    ReplyDelete
  24. Want blood or something?

    No, just for you to admit to lying.

    ReplyDelete
  25. So in your point of view, it's not enough to admit to being wrong or having made a mistake - you want the satisfaction of my admitting to not being just as flawed as you? I never claimed to be more or better. I'm not that stupid to think that...you seem to be, but that's alright. But I won't accept being called a liar because that wasn't my intention at all - especially on an implication.

    Tell you what...I'll admit what you want if you admit that the Bible says you are a liar because you say Jesus was not raised from the dead.

    ReplyDelete
  26. So many words to avoid a simple admission to an obvious, if venal, transgression.

    I can't figure out if you won't admit it because you honestly don't think you lied, because you are embarrassed to admit it, or because three heathens (presumably) have called you out on it.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Also, for the record, I do admit that the Bible says I am a liar (Romans 3:4, Psalm 116:11, etc..). You also must realize that an admission of that sort is a little different from the one you need to make?

    If you don't realize that, we've got an answer to the imbecile part of Anonymous' question, at least.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Means a lot coming from a godless apostate doesn't it? Nope. Not at all.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I'm not the one incapable of admitting I lied...

    ReplyDelete
  30. You have never admitted lying before. And you have lied to me more than once. You know...like the one about having sought after God with all your heart and not finding Him. That was a lie and you know it was. Or how about the most recent one like the discussion about Dorcas being raised from the dead having been completed? That's two right there. "Lying" doesn't apply to what I did. I was wrong. I messed up. I admitted that I was wrong. But I'm not a "liar" and I won't become a liar like you saying something that's not true.

    ReplyDelete
  31. You have never admitted lying before.

    I've not lied here on your blog. Hence, I've never admitting lying here. Your two examples are idiotic.

    Back to you. But I'm not a "liar" and I won't become a liar like you saying something that's not true.

    Of course you are, all men are. But specifically, you claimed that you'd read a blog you didn't read. Liar liar pants on fire.

    This really is embarrassing for you. Painful to watch even. But impossible to look away from...

    ReplyDelete
  32. Let me be clear echo what Ryan has said, the lie itself was not embarrassing for you, these things do indeed happen, we are all human after all. It is the reaction afterwards that has been absolutely *dreadful*.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I've not lied here on your blog. Hence, I've never admitting lying here. Your two examples are idiotic.

    You denying it doesn't make it true.

    Of course you are, all men are. But specifically, you claimed that you'd read a blog you didn't read. Liar liar pants on fire.

    Says a liar.

    From Anonymous

    Let me be clear echo what Ryan has said, the lie itself was not embarrassing for you, these things do indeed happen, we are all human after all. It is the reaction afterwards that has been absolutely *dreadful*.

    I admitted you were right that I messed up. I have not denied that. What I denied is that I should be labeled a "liar". How could I know that the post was about "zombies" had I not read something of it? That is what I am taking issue about. I have nothing to be embarrassed about because I admitted my error and even thank God he used you to point it out. How does it feel to be an instrument for God? You should feel privileged.

    ReplyDelete
  34. OK, I'm starting to lean towards him not wanting to admit it because three heathens (presumably) are the ones that have called him out on it.

    ReplyDelete
  35. ***I have nothing to be embarrassed about because I admitted my error***

    Yes, you *admitted your error* in the same way someone who methodically plans and executes a murder, and then admits to lesser charge when caught is admitting their *error*.

    Ryan; I hate to think this, but I am starting to believe that he is actually not aware, or just dimly aware, causing me to settle on my latter option.

    ReplyDelete
  36. 12 I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things? 13 No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man.[e] 14 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,[f] 15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.”[g]

    16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God. - John 3:12-21

    ReplyDelete
  37. Just out of curiosity, how do you think that passage applies to the conversation at hand, or are you just hiding behind the Bible?

    ReplyDelete
  38. I think you need to be reminded what truth looks like. Do I hide behind the Bible> Of course. It's all I need and more than you can handle.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Ironically, it was this zombie like behavior in fellow believers, that you have exemplified, that first lead me away from this belief system.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Let's review

    1. You didn't understand what Jesus said nor see the relevance to truth and this thread.
    2. You rejected Christianity because of the people you did not think lived up to your expectations of what a Christian is not because you know the Bible is not true.

    Yup, that makes a lot of sense. Not logic. Just you looking at the wrong place. Thanks for illustrating that Jesus is right.

    ReplyDelete
  41. You do not have enough information to put forward either claim one or two.

    ReplyDelete
  42. You do not have enough information to put forward either claim one or two.

    1. You said the answer was a non-answer. That means either you don't understand it because you are ignorant of what Jesus was saying or you don't have the mental capacity to grasp it. I was trying to assume ignorance rather than stupidity but I've demonstrated that I can be wrong.

    2. You said that it was the behavior of Christians that lead you away from belief.

    Nope, I think you more than proved my claims correct. Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  43. I understand the passage, it is one of the basics. I do not understand why you think it's relevant to the discussion at hand.

    I would love for your to elaborate, but I suspect you are more content with scoring internet points.

    ReplyDelete

  44. I would love for your to elaborate, but I suspect you are more content with scoring internet points


    And just who is keeping score? And the other thing you should really think about what did Jesus say? He was talking about truth and why people don't believe it. You choose to believe that Dorcas was not raised from the dead, although you can't prove that she wasn't because then you can comfortably dismiss the fact that you need to pay the debts you have incurred for your sins. In other words, you choose to reject the Word of God for the same reasons that Jesus gives in that passage.

    ReplyDelete
  45. ***In other words, you choose to reject the Word of God for the same reasons that Jesus gives in that passage.***

    No. I reject the Christian narrative because there is no compelling evidence for the existence of any gods.

    As for the debts I've incurred, my only interest is in assuaging those actually wronged during this one and only life we have. Christianity creates disincentives for actually assuaging your debts against those who you actually owe.

    ReplyDelete
  46. As for the debts I've incurred, my only interest is in assuaging those actually wronged during this one and only life we have. Christianity creates disincentives for actually assuaging your debts against those who you actually owe.

    I thought you said you knew the Bible. If you are correct then why did Jesus say:

    22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister[a][b] will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’[c] is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

    23 “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, 24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift. - Matt 5:22-24

    I wonder if you even know what you think you are rejecting. Jesus demonstrates that this is way more than what you have reduced it to. We are supposed to deal with the debts to one another, but what about what you owe God? How do you expect to pay that, let alone the things you against other people that you can't possibly fix?

    You didn't answer my question: who is keeping score?

    ReplyDelete
  47. Surely you must realize that knowing the Bible and accepting as fact the doctrines put forth in the Bible would be two completely different things.

    As for who is keeping score, I suspect you are.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Of course. But you must also realize that the Bible is self-consistent even if you disagree with what it says. You made a statement earlier that goes against what it says because you misrepresented what it says and objected to the idea you attributed to it. That does not show an understanding of what you say you object. If you are going to deny the Bible at least get what you are objecting to correct.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Look Marcus, you seem like a decent person, but you really should review this post of John Loftus'

    ***http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2012/02/empty-rhetoric-of-christian-apologists.html***

    I think you may have a belief that outweighs your interest (or even possibly your intelligence), but I have no idea how anything you said above applies to anything we've said so far.

    Perhaps you are just lazy, or perhaps you can't adequately express yourself?

    For example, lots of things that are not true, are self consistent (The Client, The Iliad, etc...) and I have no idea which statement you are referring to that *goes against what it says because [I] misrepresented what it says and objected to the idea you attributed to it.*

    Perhaps you can let us know which statement that was.

    And this, *If you are going to deny the Bible at least get what you are objecting to correct.* is complete nonsense. What am I objecting to that I got wrong?

    ReplyDelete
  50. I am amazed that you can't follow a simple argument. But that is okay. I'll connect the dots for you.

    You said:

    As for the debts I've incurred, my only interest is in assuaging those actually wronged during this one and only life we have. Christianity creates disincentives for actually assuaging your debts against those who you actually owe.

    Your statement about what Christianity teaches is wrong because Jesus said that you should fix whatever offenses you have made against others. I offered Matthew 5:22-24

    This shows that you don't know what the Gospel is or what Jesus taught if you think Christianity is about "disincentives for actually assuaging your debts against those who you actually owe".

    You either misrepresented Christianity or you lied.

    I see nothing difficult nor unclear in what either of us have said. You are just wrong.

    I read Loftus post when it came out. He's wrong too...not completely but fails to see how empty his own arguments are.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Again, you are confusing knowing the Bible and accepting as fact the doctrines put forth in the Bible. Also, I am not making a statement about what Christianity teaches, but rather about the (possibly unintended, to be charitable) consequences of that teaching.

    It is also very unseemly for you to accuse anyone of lying.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Again, you are confusing knowing the Bible and accepting as fact the doctrines put forth in the Bible. Also, I am not making a statement about what Christianity teaches, but rather about the (possibly unintended, to be charitable) consequences of that teaching.

    Again you said:

    As for the debts I've incurred, my only interest is in assuaging those actually wronged during this one and only life we have. Christianity creates disincentives for actually assuaging your debts against those who you actually owe.

    Is "charitable acts" anywhere in those two sentences? Nope. You are making a statement about what the Christians believe and insinuating that the Bible teaches causes "disincentives for actually assuaging your debts against those who you actually owe" Jesus said different. Even if you don't believe Jesus said it (you'd be wrong but it's your right to think that), you can't deny that the Bible does not have anything in that makes it okay to ignore harming others. That is why I am left either concluding you're ignorant of what the Bible says or you are lying about what it says. Whether or not you agree with what it says doesn't matter, you can't just pretend whatever you want is written in it.

    It is also very unseemly for you to accuse anyone of lying.

    How did I make you pretend that the Bible " creates disincentives for actually assuaging your [one's] debts against those who you [one] actually owe"? I didn't that was all you. And I'm calling you into account for it.

    ReplyDelete
  53. ***Jesus said different. ***

    That's enough, we're done, you cannot see that there is a difference between what the bible says and how, statistically, Christians behave.

    La revedere pentru totdeauna

    ReplyDelete
  54. That's enough, we're done, you cannot see that there is a difference between what the bible says and how, statistically, Christians behave.

    LOL...like "how, statistically, Christians behave" has anything to do with the validity of the Bible. That is truly hilarious. Very Fallacious and truly pathetic. The whole point is that people who (in word and deed) deny what the Bible says by living contrary to it could not really fairly be considered "Christians" (ie followers of Christ). Everyone. ME included. That's why Jesus came and died so that we would have the opportunity to live up to the standards God has called for. Being a Christian does not mean you arrived but you recognize the need and you are moving towards that Goal. I still don;'t think you have no idea what the Bible means or what a Christian is. I hope God has mercy on you so that you will get it.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Three days ago you said:

    Ironically, it was this zombie like behavior in fellow believers, that you have exemplified, that first lead me away from this belief system.

    And today you said:

    you cannot see that there is a difference between what the bible says and how, statistically, Christians behave.

    So you say you were lead away from Christianity because you think that Christians you know were not up to the standard you think they should be. Real smart. Why didn't you just follow Jesus? You aren't going to be judged by anything I or anyone else have done or said, but you will be judged based on your own words, thoughts, and deeds. It is really weak that you would be lead away by anything but what the Bible truly says if you were really trying to evaluate Christianity fairly and accurately.

    Are there Hypocrites in Christianity? OF course! In every congregation. You should go to your closest one...there is always room for one more.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Jesus can fix you while He's working on the rest of us.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Does being a Christian mean you lie about reading someone else's blog post?

    As for the rest, you've shown an amazing ability to connect unrelated things, and to not connect related things. I don't think one can do that without having an agenda (or because they are an imbecile).

    ReplyDelete
  58. "unrelated"? Yup, the fact that you think that shows exactly how utterly clueless you really are. Again thanks for demonstrating just how right the Bible is.

    ReplyDelete