The Simplicity Of The Christian Message

[dangitbobby83]

Then there was Ironhorse's Great Manifesto about how he skeptically analyzed his theism in depth and, notwithstanding the years of critical and honest inquiry, he ended up (conveniently) concluding that his version of Christianity was the best explanation of reality.  The two (yes only two) reasons he provided for this conclusion was (i) the universe is too complicated to be formed by chance and (ii) life on Earth is too complicated to be formed by chance.

 

 

Even if we accept that (faulty) premise as being true, it still tells us nothing about who that creator is. 

 

His evaluation was terrible if he jumped from "well, it's all just to hard for me to understand" to "Christianity is the one true religion in a world with thousands and thousands of them". 

 

But this is what christians do. Assume X is true, because X is true, Z is true with no relationship between X and Z. Or...precisely:

 

"I assume the world is too complicated to just spring up, so it had to be a god. That god is Jesus."

[sdelsolray]

 

Then there was Ironhorse's Great Manifesto about how he skeptically analyzed his theism in depth and, notwithstanding the years of critical and honest inquiry, he ended up (conveniently) concluding that his version of Christianity was the best explanation of reality.  The two (yes only two) reasons he provided for this conclusion was (i) the universe is too complicated to be formed by chance and (ii) life on Earth is too complicated to be formed by chance.

 

 

Even if we accept that (faulty) premise as being true, it still tells us nothing about who that creator is. 

 

His evaluation was terrible if he jumped from "well, it's all just to hard for me to understand" to "Christianity is the one true religion in a world with thousands and thousands of them". 

 

But this is what christians do. Assume X is true, because X is true, Z is true with no relationship between X and Z. Or...precisely:

 

"I assume the world is too complicated to just spring up, so it had to be a god. That god is Jesus."

 

 

 

Ironhorse specifically stated, more than once, that when he claimed to 'skeptically evaluate' things, he only looked at different theologies.  He limited his inquiry to comparing Christianity with, say, Islam, or Hinduism, or Judaism, or perhaps even something a bit more philosophical like Confucianism.  He did this under the premise that one of them is true and the others are false.  Think about that for a moment.  He avoided rational thinking, the scientific method and the null hypothesis of 'no sky fairies'.  He never considered that all the theologies he allegedly 'skeptically evaluated' could be goofy.  I suppose he thought, 'Well, we can't have it that all of them may be nonsense, because what would be the purpose of evaluating them in the first place?'.  So, he limited his analysis to which was best (for him), not whether they were reality in the first instance.

 

Once he was able to fire enough neurons in his brain to conceive of the argument from incredulity fallacy (twice), that was all that was needed for him to fall back into the comfort of his prior religious indoctrination.  Actually, as an aside, I doubt he conceived of his "reasons" by his own thinking.  Given his pattern of thinking as expressed on this forim, it is much more probable that he found some creationist whore website that espoused the argument from incredulity fallacy itself and he merely copied and pasted it into his brain.  Remember, someone like Ironhorse was brainwashed into believed that scripture, authority and revelation is the sole source of Truth™, so it's not surprising at all that he never developed independent critical thinking skills.  Indeed, the religious poison to which he was exposed taught that using reason or thinking for yourself was a sin.

 

I also remember Ironhorse claiming to have read Darwin's On the Origen of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life twice, because it was in his father's library and his Baptist Preacher father told him (according to Ironhorse) to read all he can read.  Ironhorse stated he did not "believe" in biological evolution.  How helpful.  He never really challenged it much here on this forum other than to pose the question, "If we came from monkeys why are there still monkeys?"  This, after allegedly reading the Origin of Species twice, is all that he could come up with.  I thought it quite comical, and pathetic at the same time.

[dangitbobby83]

My brother in law did the exact same thing. He started with the assumption of "some" religion is true, then looked at a handful of them. Then determined Christianity was the true one, because (reasons).

Of course, he would never admit that being raised by a Methodist pastor was the only deciding factor for his revelation. 

 

Christians cannot take that further step back - starting from no assumption at all - or consider the possibility that *no* religion is true. I think that is where the indoctrination ultimately lives - and is impossible for some people to root out. There has to be a creator, it has to be supernatural and it has to have some interaction with humanity at some point.

 

To consider that no religion is true is dangerous. To even go down that path is scary - it requires considering that ones entire upbringing was bullshit, your parents have been duped and they duped you. So, it's easier to not make that final step back to look at the entire picture. Assume a religion has to be true, then the rest falls back in place. 

 

It's intellectually lazy and dishonest, but hey, it's easy and comfortable and our brains like easy and comfortable!

[♦ ficino ♦]

[ironhorse] never really challenged it much here on this forum other than to pose the question, "If we came from monkeys why are there still monkeys?"  This, after allegedly reading the Origin of Species twice, is all that he could come up with.

What?? IH actually asked that? Holy shit.

 

can humans evolve into trolls? Whatever IH's intentions were at the beginning, by now it's obvious trolling.

[Jeff]

If he did, I would love to find that link. Omg

[bornagainathiest]

 

[ironhorse] never really challenged it much here on this forum other than to pose the question, "If we came from monkeys why are there still monkeys?"  This, after allegedly reading the Origin of Species twice, is all that he could come up with.

What?? IH actually asked that? Holy shit.

 

can humans evolve into trolls? Whatever IH's intentions were at the beginning, by now it's obvious trolling.

 

 

Ficino,

 

I PMed Ironhorse years ago (please note the date) about how he was de-evolving into negativity and how his threads would soon devolve into little more than clashes of will between us.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Sent 14 June 2014 - 07:27 AM

IronHorse,

 

On May 23 I asked you if you considered the Gospels to be an unbiased historical record.

You still haven't done me the courtesy of replying.

 

I've also had to repeatedly PM you on two previous occasions to prompt a response from you.

 

More recently I answered a post of yours in the, 'No Shit Sherlock' thread in the Den.

It concerned Nicolaus Copernicus.  My response can be found on page # 22, post # 443.  I concluded the message with a question for you.  Please answer it, either here or in that thread.

 

And please answer the question I put to you here, weeks ago.

.

.

.

Y'know what, IronHorse?  (Rhetorical question, btw.)

I just don't buy this I've-been-too-busy-to-reply crap from you.  Not any more. 

 

As far as I can judge you're following the standard pattern of behavior of most Christians who come to this forum.  They start out confident that their arguments, their testimonies, their witnessing and the Bible quotes they post will have some great effect on us.  But they just don't quite 'get' the fact that we are EX-Christians.  Not lapsed or fallen-away Christians.  Not lost or confused Christians.

 

EX-Christians.

 

The Christian apologists don't realize that there are ex-pastors, ex-missionaries and ex-lay preachers here.

They don't see that individually, some of us have decades and decades of Christian life safely behind us.  That collectively we've got millennia of personal experience of Christianity to look back on.  That any scriptural knowledge, any spiritual gifts and any spiritual fruit they have, we've also had and in far greater abundance and with far greater understanding.  That any argument they can cite, we've already seen and already seen thru and already dismantled.  That any item of scientific data or any piece of history they might think about using is already known to us.  That any website or book they know of, we already know of.  That we will always be one step ahead of them.

 

When the Christians gradually realize all of the above, their behavior here changes.

Just as yours has changed.  They stop replying to posts where their arguments are refuted.  They fail to answer polite requests for answers on various issues.  Their initial optimism sours and the dialog between them and us changes.  It devolves into the following cycle. They pop up infrequently to make an occasional argument and then, when it's roundly demolished by us, they stubbornly, petulantly and rudely refuse to respond any further or to admit that they were wrong.  After a suitable period of sulking, they pop up again and the cycle repeats itself... ad nauseaum.  

 

And this is where it's at with you, IronHorse.

The above description fits your behavior here to a tee.  There's no real dialog taking place any more - things have devolved to a clash of wills between us.  You can't make any headway, but you're so convinced you're right that you just won't give up.  You aren't the first Christian to change like this and you won't be the last.  We've seen many, many of them change this way and their wilful, stubborn resistance usually results outcomes like these.

 

1.

The persistent and stubborn Christian unwittingly embarks upon a kind of negative Christian ministry - actively turning people away from Jesus by their behavior.  Even if their arguments are flawless, their doctrine sound and their words are loving, people will see thru this façade by looking at their behavior - their fruit.  These Christians can talk the Christian talk, but their behavior shows that they don't walk the Christian walk.  People see this and take note.  We have taken note of your behavior too.

 

2.

The persistent and stubborn Christian might begin to behave badly, getting themselves warned, confined to the Den or even banned.  SteveBennett is a classic example.  He's tried to get back in here and have his say, forcing his views on us... how many times now?  Six?  Or is it seven?  We'll always catch him.  Likewise with Thumbelina - the textbook example of an unwavering religious fanatic.  She abused a newbie, was unrepentant (after all, she's doing God's work - so how could she possibly have done wrong?) and has been confined to the Den ever since.  Or the Christian might start lying.  JayL and Rayskidude are just two that I've caught doing so.  We catch them all in the end.  People see this and take note.  Just as we've taken note when sdelsolray recently caught you quoting in the 'F.A.O. Ironhorse' thread without citing your source.  Ok, that's not actively lying, to be sure.  But that kind of maneuver is indicative of a less-than-totally-transparent-and-honest mindset.   If you understand nothing else about this post, understand this. We always take note of your behavior.

 

Yes! Yes!  I know! I know!  Those people aren't TRUE Christians.  But you are. 

Isn't that what you were thinking?  ('nuther rhetorical question, btw.)  Well Ironhorse, Jesus said that we'll know who the true Christians are by their fruit - their behavior.  We are taking note of yours.

 

3.

The persistent and stubborn Christian might end up as a permanent, but impotent fixture here.

They continue to pop up in various threads, but they are largely ignored until they write something that stirs us up.  When this happens they stick around for a while, usually until their position is shown to be wrong and/or mistaken.  Then, when the 'crunch' is imminent and they should admit they were wrong and/or mistaken... they quit. 

 

They quit because they wilfully refuse to change their minds about the issue.

They know that we've dragged them a fork in the road and they have to make a choice, which way to go.  To avoid making that choice (and losing face, I suspect) they don't choose... they quit the thread, never to return. They don't quit because they no longer have the time or the energy to put into the thread any more.  They don't quit because they simply don't understand what's being said.  They don't quit because God told them to.  No.  It's much simpler than that.  They just won't change their minds.  When it comes down to it - they refuse.  It's that simple.

.

.

.

And so we're back to the Nicolaus Copernicus issue, Ironhorse.

I replied to your post.  I showed you where you were wrong.  I asked you a question about it... and you quit the thread.  Well, I've taken note of this and as you can see from the above, your behavior is evolving nicely along the lines I've described.   You are gradually becoming more and more defined by the type of behaviors I've outlined.   This is no real surprise to me.

 

But here's your chance to surprise me!

Why don't you do the proper thing and reply to me (out in the forum, not here) about Copernicus, conceding that he wasn't motivated by his Christian faith to explore the universe, but was using a non-Christian methodology, first formulated by Thales of Miletus?

 

Go on, surprise me, Ironhorse!

 

BAA.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Needlessly to say, he didn't surprise me!

 

Thanks, 

 

BAA.

[ironhorse]

My comments on the first two paragraphs by BAA:

 

As far as I can judge you're following the standard pattern of behavior of most Christians who come to this forum.  They start out confident that their arguments, their testimonies, their witnessing and the Bible quotes they post will have some great effect on us.  But they just don't quite 'get' the fact that we are EX-Christians.  Not lapsed or fallen-away Christians.  Not lost or confused Christians.

 

I’m as confident now in my Christian faith as I was in 2014 when I joined this community. I don’t know what effects my posts may or may not have on members or guests. What a person decides on faith or nonfaith is something decided by that person. It can’t be forced.

I fully understand that this site has many EX-Christians. I have been reading these forums and threads, I get it.  I also understand others, members and guests, might be in various stages of questioning their faith or seeking answers to various questions. 
This is why I compliment the administrator of EX-Christian for allowing The Lion’s Den forum to be here. I know of very few Christian sites that allow the same freedom for nonbelievers or atheists.

 

 

EX-Christians.

The Christian apologists don't realize that there are ex-pastors, ex-missionaries and ex-lay preachers here.
They don't see that individually, some of us have decades and decades of Christian life safely behind us.  That collectively we've got millennia of personal experience of Christianity to look back on.  That any scriptural knowledge, any spiritual gifts and any spiritual fruit they have, we've also had and in far greater abundance and with far greater understanding.  That any argument they can cite, we've already seen and already seen thru and already dismantled.  That any item of scientific data or any piece of history they might think about using is already known to us.  That any website or book they know of, we already know of.  That we will always be one step ahead of them.

 

At the moment I don’t know how to respond to this paragraph.

[bornagainathiest]

My comments on the first two paragraphs by BAA:

 

As far as I can judge you're following the standard pattern of behavior of most Christians who come to this forum.  They start out confident that their arguments, their testimonies, their witnessing and the Bible quotes they post will have some great effect on us.  But they just don't quite 'get' the fact that we are EX-Christians.  Not lapsed or fallen-away Christians.  Not lost or confused Christians.

 

I’m as confident now in my Christian faith as I was in 2014 when I joined this community. I don’t know what effects my posts may or may not have on members or guests. What a person decides on faith or nonfaith is something decided by that person. It can’t be forced.

I fully understand that this site has many EX-Christians. I have been reading these forums and threads, I get it.  I also understand others, members and guests, might be in various stages of questioning their faith or seeking answers to various questions. 

This is why I compliment the administrator of EX-Christian for allowing The Lion’s Den forum to be here. I know of very few Christian sites that allow the same freedom for nonbelievers or atheists.

 

 

EX-Christians.

 

The Christian apologists don't realize that there are ex-pastors, ex-missionaries and ex-lay preachers here.

They don't see that individually, some of us have decades and decades of Christian life safely behind us.  That collectively we've got millennia of personal experience of Christianity to look back on.  That any scriptural knowledge, any spiritual gifts and any spiritual fruit they have, we've also had and in far greater abundance and with far greater understanding.  That any argument they can cite, we've already seen and already seen thru and already dismantled.  That any item of scientific data or any piece of history they might think about using is already known to us.  That any website or book they know of, we already know of.  That we will always be one step ahead of them.

 

At the moment I don’t know how to respond to this paragraph.

 

I sent this directly to your Inbox, two and a half years ago, Ironhorse.

 

 

But five hours after I posted it here, you make the effort to reply.

 

 

That speaks volumes about you.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

At the moment I don’t know how to respond to this paragraph.

I'm sure you could find some Bob Dylan lyrics; or perhaps Answers in Genesis has something relevant you could copy and paste.

[bornagainathiest]

My comments on the first two paragraphs by BAA:

 

As far as I can judge you're following the standard pattern of behavior of most Christians who come to this forum.  They start out confident that their arguments, their testimonies, their witnessing and the Bible quotes they post will have some great effect on us.  But they just don't quite 'get' the fact that we are EX-Christians.  Not lapsed or fallen-away Christians.  Not lost or confused Christians.

 

I’m as confident now in my Christian faith as I was in 2014 when I joined this community. I don’t know what effects my posts may or may not have on members or guests. What a person decides on faith or nonfaith is something decided by that person. It can’t be forced.

I fully understand that this site has many EX-Christians. I have been reading these forums and threads, I get it.  I also understand others, members and guests, might be in various stages of questioning their faith or seeking answers to various questions. 

This is why I compliment the administrator of EX-Christian for allowing The Lion’s Den forum to be here. I know of very few Christian sites that allow the same freedom for nonbelievers or atheists.

 

 

EX-Christians.

 

The Christian apologists don't realize that there are ex-pastors, ex-missionaries and ex-lay preachers here.

They don't see that individually, some of us have decades and decades of Christian life safely behind us.  That collectively we've got millennia of personal experience of Christianity to look back on.  That any scriptural knowledge, any spiritual gifts and any spiritual fruit they have, we've also had and in far greater abundance and with far greater understanding.  That any argument they can cite, we've already seen and already seen thru and already dismantled.  That any item of scientific data or any piece of history they might think about using is already known to us.  That any website or book they know of, we already know of.  That we will always be one step ahead of them.

 

At the moment I don’t know how to respond to this paragraph.

 

You don't know what effects your posts may or may not have on members or guests, Ironhorse?

 

Well, let me help you out there, friend.

.

.

.

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/64182-thank-you-ironhorse/?hl=sherlock#.WGxIh1OLSpo

 

Posted 13 August 2014 - 10:04 AM, by LongWayRound

POPULAR

You don't know me.  We haven't interacted in any threads but I wanted to thank you.  

 

My deconversion is fairly recent and I am still working through what it means to no longer be a christian or to believe in any god and you have helped me along that journey.  As I read your interactions in the Lion's Den and see how you conduct yourself, it is a vivid reminder of why I left christianity.   The attitude that comes across in your posts is one of arrogance fueled by blind adherence to the company line.  I keep waiting to see a genuine answer from you when questions are posed; an answer where you show us what you, Ironhorse, really think but one never comes.  Instead, there is more of the same tired, copy and paste, logic twisting, word definition changing, fingers in the ears apologetics that we have all heard a million times.  That is, if you answer at all.

 

Something that surprised and disappointed me about you and some of the other christians in the lions den is the total lack of love and empathy that is expressed in your posts.  I know it is difficult to be kicked in the head by 15 different ex-christian posters at the same time but I expected more from someone who is claiming to emulate christ.  I can't say that I have ever read anything in a post from you that demonstrates that you care about the people on the ex-christian forums as human beings.  I am honestly unsure why you are even here.  It is hard for me to fathom that you think that your example might lead someone back to christianity or strengthen the faith of some christian that is lurking.  It comes off more as some sort of ego thing where you enjoy the attention you get here.

 

In short, thank you.  When I am working through the hard times associated with deconversion, it helps to watch a cosmos episode, read on an atheist website, or watch how you conduct yourself in the Lion's Den.  They all reinforce that I am now on the right path.

• 32

•  

[bornagainathiest]

And  the members who upvoted what LongWayRound wrote to Ironhorse are...

 

BrotherJosh, crazyguy123, FreeThinkerNZ, Deidre, mymistake, buffetphan, Vigile, bornagainathiest, moanareina, Thackerie, RipVanWinkle, The RedneckProfessor, Orbit, midniterider, Marty, Thought2Much, sdelsolray, par4dcourse, Ravenstar, seven77, Rank Stranger, TheUnknown, waitingongod, WarriorPoet, SkipNChurch, xtify, Roz, Lucynia, Citsonga, StillLooking, Fweethawt and Shinzon.  (32 in all)

 

The number of lurkers who have been affected by Ironhorse's behavior in this forum remains unknown.

 

 

 

 

[bornagainathiest]

Ironhorse wrote...

 

"Whatever view I hold has nothing to do with the simplicity of the good news that salvation is found in Christ alone."

 

Salvation from what, Ironhorse?

 

Do tell.

[bornagainathiest]

Ironhorse wrote...

 

"Whatever view I hold has nothing to do with the simplicity of the good news that salvation is found in Christ alone."

 

Salvation from what, Ironhorse?

 

Do tell.

 

(Bump!)

[bornagainathiest]

A copy of the above message has just been posted directly to Ironhorse's Inbox.

 

Unless he has me on ignore or treats my messages as spam, he will be aware that I've just PMed him.

 

I patiently await his reply here.

[Thumbelina]

 

Thumbelina: John 3:16 sums up the whole bible. It. Is. Simple. God means it, man!

 

Hi, Thumb, glad to see you again.

 

 

 

You can see me? You have surveillance?

Nice to "see" you too

 

 

............

 

Happy New Year to all you lions (& non lions)!

You know I come around to pat your manes -or yank your tails- occasionally. Hope y'all are Ok.

[midniterider]

 

 

Thumbelina: John 3:16 sums up the whole bible. It. Is. Simple. God means it, man!

 

Hi, Thumb, glad to see you again.

 

 

 

You can see me? You have surveillance?

Nice to "see" you too

 

 

............

 

Happy New Year to all you lions (& non lions)!

You know I come around to pat your manes -or yank your tails- occasionally. Hope y'all are Ok.

 

 

You thought the webcam was unplugged, didnt you?

 

I survived another year. How about you?

[Thumbelina]

 

 

 

Thumbelina: John 3:16 sums up the whole bible. It. Is. Simple. God means it, man!

 

Hi, Thumb, glad to see you again.

 

 

 

You can see me? You have surveillance?

Nice to "see" you too

 

 

............

 

Happy New Year to all you lions (& non lions)!

You know I come around to pat your manes -or yank your tails- occasionally. Hope y'all are Ok.

 

 

You thought the webcam was unplugged, didnt you?

 

I survived another year. How about you?

 

 

 

Yes. I need to put a post-it over the lens lol.

... but I don't think you all will peek, you, spiritual gentiles, do have good values/principles as it says in Romans 2:14.

 

Glad to know. I nearly did not survive last year; I'm gonna see what's in store for this one.

[bornagainathiest]

Thumbelina, on 24 Oct 2016 - 12:48 AM, said:

Thumbelina: John 3:16 sums up the whole bible. It. Is. Simple. God means it, man!

 

Thumbelina,

 

In this thread I've repeatedly asked Ironhorse to tell us what it is that Jesus is giving us salvation from.

 

So far, even though he has been receiving and reading my polite requests, he hasn't seen fit to respond.

 

Therefore, since you're back and posting, I'll ask you.

 

John 3 : 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.

 

Please tell us what it is that would cause anyone who doesn't believe in Jesus to perish and not have eternal life.

 

(I'm hoping that you won't go strangely quiet on this, just like Ironhorse.  It's almost as if this is a question he desperately doesn't want to answer.)

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

 

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

How long are you here for this time, Thumperina?

[bornagainathiest]

 

Ironhorse wrote...

 

"Whatever view I hold has nothing to do with the simplicity of the good news that salvation is found in Christ alone."

 

Salvation from what, Ironhorse?

 

Do tell.

 

(Bump!)

 

 

(Re-bump!)

[bornagainathiest]

A copy of the above message has just been posted directly to Ironhorse's Inbox.

 

Unless he has me on ignore or treats my messages as spam, he will be aware that I've just PMed him.

 

I patiently await his reply here.

[ironhorse]

Salvation from what, Ironhorse?

Do tell.

 

~ BAA

 

 

saved from perishing

[Jeff]

This is bullshit trolling

[bornagainathiest]

Salvation from what, Ironhorse?

 

Do tell.

 

~ BAA

 

 

saved from perishing

 

What three letter word, found many times in the Bible, causes us to perish, Ironhorse?

.

.

.

Hint :  A B C D E F G H  I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

 

(But you have to rearrange the highlighted letters to make the proper answer.)

[bornagainathiest]

Salvation from what, Ironhorse?

 

Do tell.

 

~ BAA

 

 

saved from perishing

 

What three letter word, found many times in the Bible, causes us to perish, Ironhorse?

.

.

.

Hint :  

You can find these letters on your keyboard quite easily.  

The first one is under the W and the E, but above the Z and the X.  It's to the right of the A and to the left of the D.

The second one is under the 8 and the 9, but above the J and the K.  It's to the right of the U and to the left of the O.

The third one is under the H and the J, but above the space bar.   It's to the right of the B and to the left of the M.