Thursday, January 3, 2013

2012 Rap Up! - @DeStorm - YouTube

This guy manages to cover all the major events of 2012 I remember plus some I had forgotten!

2012 Rap Up! - @DeStorm - YouTube

Intermission: Possibly the World's Oldest Dashcam Footage | Living on GOOD

A camera mounted on the dashboard of a fire truck gives a fascinating glimpse into what Manhattan looked like in 1926.

Intermission: Possibly the World's Oldest Dashcam Footage | Living on GOOD
Enhanced by Zemanta

FacePlant of the Day - Debunking Christianity: Sin: An Imaginary Problem with an Invented Solution

Harry McCall continues to faceplant. Just before the end of  2012, he posted the following post.  I recognize what he's trying to do. If he can explain that there is no such thing as "sin" then the Christian message fails.  There is no need to for Jesus, atonement, or anything Christianity offers. In order for him to make his point McCall is going to have to prove that there is no sin and nothing to atone for. Will he be able to do that?

Picture right is the typical Salvation Gospel Tract found at bank ATM’s, left on tables at restaurants and ironically, in restrooms. This one was left under a wiper blade on my wife’s car at work by Freedom Baptist Church (as stamped on the back) located just a quarter mile from where she works.

McCall should be thanking God that God sent another opportunity for him and his family to hear the Gospel.
(Click on Tract to read)

Let’s briefly review some of the major problems with, not only on this Gospel Tract, with but everyone I’ve found:

First, like any good sales pitch, it needs have a product to sell. In Christianity the product (whether you need it or not) is an imaginary problem: Sin

How does McCall know that sin is an imaginary problem?

Secondly, after a person is pitched the imaginary problem, then and invented solution is offered to solve the problem of sin: Atonement

Too bad McCall is into invented problems based on assertions he can't prove. 

Thirdly, to prevent the imaginary problem and the invented solution from being empirically examined, a dogma is used to glue the problem to the solution: Faith

How can he equate "faith" and "dogma" with a straight face?

Fourthly, once a religious consumer has been exposed to the third step and by now to have swallowed the sales pitch hook, line and sinker; the entire imaginary dogma is sealed by: Damnation (Hell’s fire awaits those who reject or even doubt this sales pitch!)

McCall's ignorance of Christianity is extremely evident. He doesn't seem to know what he is talking about.  Hell is the final destination of everyone because we are all sinners. You escape hell because of what Jesus did for us. Hell is default. This is why the denial of sin is so important. McCall so far has failed to explain how he knows he is not a sinner.

Now let’s examine the tract’s statements:

A. They are rambling statements from eclectic writings in the New Testament. Of the 27 religious texts that make up the New Testament, only 7 could be used to prove this point and most from a man who never even saw nor heard the earthly Jesus preach: Paul Like most Gospel Tracts, much of the sales pitch comes from Paul’s last perfected theological views , Romans. Reality proves that this salvation sales pitch is nothing more than a cut and paste theory created by the tract's author to fish for converts!

Any examples or proof that there is no sin? Nope. Without this, McCall is the one who is rambling, not Paul. 

B. Notice too, that nowhere does God (the one who is demanding atonement for the imaginary problem of sin) makes a single statement!

You want a statement from God demanding atonement for sin? 
 Ezekiel 18 is a good example of God demanding repentance and and atonement for sin. Being that God punishes sin, why would anyone of us think that God would let our sin just go ignored? He wouldn't.

C. Notice also that Jesus - the center of which the entire Christian faith built upon – makes any statements either (except a rambling statement taken from the Gospel of John made to other Jews) since Jesus hated gentiles.

McCall neither proves nor demonstrates that Jesus hated Gentiles. And If I can point to another passage in Matthew, Mark, or Luke where Jesus tells us how bad sin is, McCall illustrates a faceplant and not a valid point. 

Now there were some present at that time who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. Jesus answered, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.”
Then he told this parable: “A man had a fig tree growing in his vineyard, and he went to look for fruit on it but did not find any. So he said to the man who took care of the vineyard, ‘For three years now I’ve been coming to look for fruit on this fig tree and haven’t found any. Cut it down! Why should it use up the soil?’
“‘Sir,’ the man replied, ‘leave it alone for one more year, and I’ll dig around it and fertilize it. If it bears fruit next year, fine! If not, then cut it down.’” - Luke 13:1-8

And there are many, many other passages I could have brought up. Looks like McCall faceplants again.

D. Finally, notice that this whole eclectic rambling sales propaganda assumes the person reading the tact understands completely the concepts of sin, atonement and salvation as found in Jewish Covenantal Theology as drawn from the Hebrew Bible!

Obviously, McCall doesn't understand the concepts of sin, atonement, salvation, and Jewish Convenantal Theology. Maybe he should re-read the New Testament, especially Romans and Hebrews.  

E. In short, Gospel Tracts are little more than “fishing” for human guilt trips build on ignorance.

Yes, let's examine whose ignorance is on display here. McCall writes an article assuming that there is no such thing as sin but never once explains why he rejects the existence of sin. How does he know he is not a sinner? Given that there isn't a sin human being who talks who has not lied, stolen something, or has failed to live selflessly I'd say that sin is an established reality. If that is not enough proof, I'd say that the fact that there is so much suffering and pain (like a man walking into an elementary school and killing 26 human beings) is amply explained by the existence of sin. And God's restraining mercy and grace for why it doesn't happen more often.

 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us. - 1 John 1:9,10

So whose lying? Is it God or McCall. Since it is not God, we are forced to the conclusion that if lying is a sin (and it is) then McCall is just a much a sinner as the rest of  humanity and need a savior to atone for his sins. It sure is a good thing the at God sent him a tract to remind him. Too bad he has not listened yet.

Debunking Christianity: Sin: An Imaginary Problem with an Invented Solution
Enhanced by Zemanta