Showing posts with label Gospel of John. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gospel of John. Show all posts

Thursday, January 3, 2013

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

Wednesday, October 31, 2012

John Chapter 6 Translation and Commentary - Vintage

Ever needed a good commentary on John 6? You an read Dr James White's commentary verse by verse.  Follow the link!

John Chapter 6 Translation and Commentary - Vintage
Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, February 11, 2012

Truthbomb Apologetics: 59 Confirmed or Historically Probable Facts in the Gospel of John

Chad has posted a good list to consider: 59 things that the Gospel of John gets right.

Craig Blomberg's The Historical Reliability of John's Gospel examines John's Gospel verse by verse and identifies an abundance of historical details and facts.

Check out the list at the following link

Truthbomb Apologetics: 59 Confirmed or Historically Probable Facts in the Gospel of John
Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

Debunking Christianity: A Quick View to the Evolution of the Trinity

I saw multiple FacePalm-worthy post on Debunking Christianity today. I decided that this one was bad but not the worst so it's not gonna get a FacePalm. TGBaker keeps churning out material that makes me doubt if he ever even picked up a Bible. So here we go again.

The idea of trinity was not found in the original manuscripts of the New Testament. The pronouns that refer to the holy spirit were neuter meaning "it" not "He." By the fourth century copies of the Greek started showing some of the pronouns changes from 'it" to the masculine, He. (such as Ephesians 1:14). Even in the Gospel of John the Paraclete (Advocate) is referred to by neuter pronouns and is itself a neuter noun.



The word "Trinity" is not in the New Testament, but it's wrong to say the "idea" is not in it. The Father is called God. Jesus is called God (and it's more than just in the Pauline letters and John) . The Holy Spirit is called God. TGBaker insinuates that no neuter personal pronouns, referring to the Holy Spirit, exist in any manuscripts before the 4th Century, yet he provides no reference.  Besides the point is moot because Christian doctrine does not include that the Holy Spirit has gender - only personhood.

The idea of holy spirit in the New Testament is demonstrated by Paul's statement in I Corinthians 2: 10


these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. 11 For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12 What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us.

The understanding of the Spirit of God is that God has a spirit like any human has a spirit. This is why we see the term is neuter throughout the New Testament.

No, not at all. The relationship between the Holy Spirit and the rest of the God-Head is more complimented than that. Recall what Jesus told the woman at the well

21 “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.” - John 4:21-24

God doesn't just have a Spirit. God is Spirit. TGBaker shows a complete misunderstanding of what the Trinity is. God is one being! Monotheism. We experience and interact with God in a personal way. Three Persons in the one being. I completely agree with what Paul wrote, but it doesn't go against Acts 5:    I' am surprised that he left it out of this discussion.

3 Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4 Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”  Acts 5:3-4

So the  Apostle Peter said that Annanias lied to the Holy Spirit and equated the Holy Spirit to God. On rtop of that, can you lie to an "it"? No, you can only lie to person(s).

This changed when Jesus began to be viewed as divine:

John 1:18, Θεν οὐδες ἑώρακεν πώποτε ὁ μονογεν θεός, ὁ ὤν εἱς τὸν κὀλπον τοῦ πατρός, ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο.

No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten god which is in the bosom of the Father has declared Him.

With Jesus as Logos and therefore the only begotten god monotheism was compromised. For two centuries the churches wrestled with the problem. Arianism which stated about Jesus, "There was a time when he was not" and several Trinitarian theories of co-eternal existence were competing . A plethora of Trinitarian formulas were running a muck. One won politically in part because Constantine bullied the counsel to come to a conclusion so that there would be one type of Christianity. One type won. Everybody else ran or was killed as heretics over the next several years.

People like TGBaker love to try to point out that the deity of Jesus is only supported by the Gospel of John, and many such individual want to date John as late as possible so they can conclude the belief evolved. Their problem is that  You don't need John to conclude that the first Christians did believe Jesus was God incarnate.

One of my favorites is the accounts (it is even in John) of  Jesus walking on water (see Matthew 14:22-34; Mark 6:45-56;  John 6:16-24). So why did Jesus walk on the water? To get to the other side, of course!!!  (Joking) The Old Testament says that God walks on water so by doing it, Jesus is identifying himself.

He alone stretches out the heavens and treads on the waves of the sea. - Job 9:8
Not to mention most of the epistles wicho all these skeptics also want to date before John;'s Gospel.

15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.- Colossians 1 :15-20

5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
 6 Who, being in very nature God,
   did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
   by taking the very nature of a servant,
   being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
   he humbled himself
   by becoming obedient to death—
      even death on a cross!

 9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
   and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
   in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
   to the glory of God the Father.- Philippians 2::5-11

And there are others passages outside of the Gospel of John!

Debunking Christianity: A Quick View to the Evolution of the Trinity
Enhanced by Zemanta