In Which Bob Enthuses Over A Website Of Dubious Value

I've missed a few, but here's a quick reply to Bob's latest offering.

Bob sez:

Over the last 10 years, or so, I've sought many opportunities to engage in reasoned debate with non-Christians on the internet. Although there have been some people with a willingness to discuss various issues in a reasonable way, there have also been many occasions when I've had to stop such debates because the unbeliever has showed a distinct hostility to having a sensible discussion.

I just checked, and no, I didn't copy-paste from the wrong blog. This is, indeed, Bob the Broadstairs Balderdasher speaking of 'reasoned debate' and 'sensible discussion.' And yet here I write on a blog which owes its very existence to the fact that Blathering Bob wouldn't know either if they bit him on the very same arse he argues from.

Such people are not interested in searching for truth, all they want to do is pour out invective against God and the Bible; to attempt to reason with them is a classic case of "pearls before swine" – Matthew 7 v 6.

Au contraire, Bob. 'Such people' tend to be very interested in the truth. They merely disagree as to the amount of truth contained in your Bible. Oddly enough, they/we don't happen to see your assertions, unsupported by evidence as they are, that the Bible is literal truth from cover to cover as, well… anything but assertions unsupported by evidence.

Also, I have to wonder Bob. Do you have a hotkey assigned to '"pearls before swine" – Matthew 7 v 6'? If not, you really should have. It'd probably save you hours of typing over the course of a year, what with you seemingly typing the damn phrase out every ten minutes or so. Still, I suppose, having found a Biblically-allowed schoolyard insult, you're probably a bit loathe to give it up.

(Indeed, some of these people have been so angry against the Bible they have even banned me from their blogs, no doubt because they cannot cope with the power of God's word).

Umm. No. Speaking from experience, The Bouncing Bob is banned from many blogs for being an insufferable boor who will neither shut up nor say anything original or interesting. Oh, and a self-admitted user of sockpuppetry. And a plagiarist. And a hypocrite. You get the idea. The bloke's a cad of the first water.

Moreover, when passing out tracts on the street I've become adept as discerning the difference between a genuine seeker and those who just want to have an argument.

Let me guess… the former don't ask inconvenient questions, or point out bits of the Bible where God acts a bit nasty, whereas the latter do.

When meeting genuine seekers I often point them to an excellent web site which seeks to answer people's sincere questions and exposes the errors of false teaching eg evolution, atheism and the cults. This web site I write on the back of a booklet entitled "Knowing God personally" which I give to people who show any kind of interest in the truths of the Gospel.

Ah, the very definition of humble faith. Humdrum Hutton knows the creator of the entire freakin' universe. Personally, no less. Probably pops round for tea and scones dontcha know. And people like him say atheists are egotistical?

The address of it is: [Bloody hell! Bob added a link! Be still, my gaping jaw.] and it is well worth a Christian studying it in order to strengthen one's faith and give ready answers to genuine enquirers. The Bible says that we need to be ready to give an answer to those who ask about the faith we have (1st Peter 3 v 15).

I've had a look and, well, let's just say it makes Answers In Genesis look intellectual. I can see why Bob likes it though. Lots of unsupported assertions of fact, strawmanning and suchlike fuckwittery. Nowhere does it address the central problem with religion—that there's no actual evidence that a god even exists. It does address the central problem with Biblical literalism—that evidence-based enquiry shows such a viewpoint to be flatly wrong—but it does so, in patronisingly simplistic language, by pretending that either the evidence doesn't exist, or that the Bible is better evidence.

In short, it's a pile of that stuff you usually find just to the south of a well-fed bull. I might, if the whim takes me, take a closer gander at it and take the piss out of critique some of the more amusing interesting bits on my regular blog.

This web site is an invaluable aid to evangelists and, indeed, to any Christian with a desire to spread the word so that others can be saved. As we do so let us remember that if a person is truly, and sincerely, seeking after God then they will find Him.

Whereas if a person is truly, sincerely and honestly weighing up the evidence for and against, they're merely looking for an argument, Bob?

"You will seek me and find me, when you search for me with all your heart" Jeremiah 29 v 13

"If you're convinced it's possible for invisible friends to truly exist, you'll have no trouble convincing yourself you have one of your very own."
Daz 3.14159 v 227

You may use these HTML tags in comments
<a href="" title=""></a> <abbr title=""></abbr>
<acronym title=""></acronym> <blockquote></blockquote> <del></del>* <strike></strike>† <em></em>* <i></i>† <strong></strong>* <b></b>†

* is generally preferred over †


In Which We Find That Bob Is No Ian Paisley

You can't get to heaven in an old Ford Prefect,
But not 'cause the car's got a fault or a defect.
You can't get to heaven in a baked bean tin,
But not 'cause the tin's got baked beans in.
And you'll never roll to hell in a tractor-tyre,
But not 'cause the tyre gets stuck in the mire.
You'll never lose your soul in a gambling game,
But not 'cause winning wards off the flame.

This doggerel is horrible so here's an end,
And a reason my rhymes took a negative trend.
You'll never do the things I mention in that list
'cause souls and afterlives don't exist!

Ordinarily, Gentle Reader, I would not have unleashed the above mess upon your eyes. You are a refined, gentle, and cultured person (I know you are!) and do not deserve such ocular torture. Continue reading

A Singluar Lack Of Pointedness

Okay, so I've spent three bloody days trying to wrestle something worth discussing out of Bob's latest. Something which, given how limited his actual point is, I could extend into a point of my own and expand on it.

I have got zip, nada, bugger-all, nowt, sweet Fanny Adams.

So okay, Bob thinks that the fall of the church-persecuting Soviet Union is evidence that "the Gospel had triumphed over communism and God had had the last word against those who opposed Him and His word – the Bible." It can't have been caused by human corruption and the failure of the economic system. It must've been God! Continue reading