ExChristian.Net Has Been X’d, part 11

To the commentator to whom I began responding in the previous segment, who always came across as enraged and unduly belligerent, I responded by writing,

Whatever has happened to you to make you the way that you are all I can say that I am truly sorry, my heart breaks for you, I love you and if I can ever do anything for you please let me know.

This brought about a response which I will parse:

The way I am? Hmmm, well....for starters, you are not qualified to claim to know "the way" I am, because my participating in this blog, including, my passion when it comes to seeking to abolish legendary thinking from the face of the earth, is only one small facet of my life, thus, it would be utterly ridiculous for you to suggest that you know my entire person based on said participation. Then again, you already have a propensity to believe ridiculous things when it comes to reality, per "faith". [ellipses in original]

Is the context of our discussion not obvious? Of course, “the way that you are” is in reference to “the way that you are” here, with me, et al. I would pray that this person is not like this in their day to day lives but is hiding behind online anonymity. Note something very, very interesting: whereas before they had stated, “Atheism [is] right for me…Christianity is ‘right’ for you” as long as I exhibited it elsewhere, now we learn that this person has a “passion when it comes to seeking to abolish legendary thinking from the face of the earth.”
Thus, this person is about as militant an atheist as I have ever encountered. It is amazing what happens when the thin veneer comes off and the reality of a person’s passions surface (such as I exampled about James Randi). We went from, essentially, it’s all good, just do it elsewhere to an impassioned attempt to abolish Christianity and all theism from the face of the Earth.

Notwithstanding, perhaps you are a charming, likeable individual when the discussion isn't religion/spirituality. That remains to be seen, however, because religion is precisely the topic here, which leads me back to this: Your proselytizing, under which you now make cheap attempts to show how you "love" me/us, is NOT appreciated(nor convincing). Your blatant disrespecting of the site's purpose disclaimer is NOT appreciated. Additionally, you expect us to believe that you possess this "Truth" that you believe we missed out on, while yet, your blog title, itself, is a blatant mis-truth(lie).

Well, I cannot talk anyone into believing that I love them and that it is “NOT appreciated” is another issue. As for “the site's purpose disclaimer” I responded to this in part 1. Again, and again, and again, and again; refusing to engage this issue based on my blog’s title is an ad hominem (which they did not care if they committed) and an issue with which I dealt in part 2.
Again, and again, and again, and again; my repeated emphasis has nothing to do with my possession of any “Truth” beyond the “Truth” that evilbible.com misrepresents the Bible’s contents, my providing the evidence and ExChristian.Neters simply refusing to consider said evidence. Thus, the only reason that they “missed out on” this particular “Truth” is that they are no skeptical enough to consider it and continue serving up an all you can eat buffet of undercooked red herrings.

You've got problems to solve, pal. I used to have the same problems, but fortunately, I got brave enough to question the cognative [sic] dissonance that is inevitable when we are asked to believe ridiculous things, in this case, the mind-**** known as "Christianity". Until/unless you get brave enough to question, please keep your distance.

See what I mean? Belligerence begets belligerence. As will be evident below; I am a hardcore skeptical freethinker, have questioned and continue questioning.

As to my comment to this individual as to why they are the way that they are (toward me, at least) someone else offered a response which I will parse:

Interesting question you ask, but let me ask you this in return.
Whatever happened to you, to make you disbelieve in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny?
The answer for most of us, is that we matured as we got older and our cognitive minds realized that such mythical beings had no supporting evidence for their existence.
We then realized it was Mom and Dad, all along, playing out those roles.

In the Wizard of Oz, Dorothy finds out that the Wizard was just a flawed human being, who knew how to "dance the dance" of a Wizard.
While most of us were blinded by the delusion of the xtian [sic] god being a part of our reality, once we pulled back that "curtain" and saw the truth about your god, the answer for how god came to be known, was quite obvious.

Men made him up, as they did all their gods....Simply Really!! [ellipses in original]

Notice that, playing off of the previously discussed commentator, this person thinks that they are “qualified to claim to know” what I believe and why I believe it; while my comments were made by referencing actual statements this one is made based on fallacious prejudice (in the literal sense of the word: to pre-judge).

I should perhaps state that since I am Jewish I never believed in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny so it was never an issue. Yet, I will grant that indeed, “most of us…realized that such mythical beings had no supporting evidence for their existence.” I completely agree.

In realizing that “it was Mom and Dad, all along, playing out those roles” we are on to something very, very personal to me. I was not born or raised in the USA and so we did not have the Tooth Fairy but had the Teeth Mice (who were said to serve the same function). When I was a child (I do not recall how old but know that it was prior to age nine) I found out that there was no such thing as the Teeth Mice but that it was Mom and Dad, all along, playing out that role. This infuriated me so much that I became an instant skeptic and have been one ever since.

Much, much, much later in life I was only all too pleased to discover that the Bible praises/commands skepticism (true and honest skepticism and not the diversionary sort displayed at ExChristian.Net)—consider the Bereans being praised for double checking everything that Paul told them (Acts 17:11), Thomas asking for the evidence which the others had seen and had merely retold to him (John 20:24-30 see The Apostle Thomas : Patron Saint of Scientists? for elucidation), Jesus stating, “Love the Lord your God with all your…mind. This is the first and greatest commandment” (Matthew 22:36-38), the Bible stating, “‘Come now, let us reason together,’ says the LORD” (Isaiah 1:18), etc., etc., etc.

The statement, “Men made him up” is interesting as since there is no God to claim that “Men made him up” means that men made up the idea of God. This borders on the ad hominem (if it is not one outright) since God’s existence is being called into question by attacking its source, “Men made him up.” Men may have made up the idea of God’s existence and yet, God could exist; perhaps God inspired men to make up or recognize His existence, perhaps men made up an idea about something which is actually so—it happens all of the time.
Imagine invisible organisms that cause infection, then imagine prescribing sterilization before surgery, then image being thought insane for proposing the existence of invisible organisms. Eventually science caught up to theory and the invisible organisms became visible. Likewise, such as with, for example, the “discovery” of a finite universe science may someday catch up with the Bible and the invisible may become visible—in a manner of speaking. I am aware that reasonable atheists will sate that if that is ever the case then they will change their minds. This is quite fair. Yet, this also disregards natural theology.

I must admit that I did have a Wizard of Oz type of experience. While the metaphor is not perfect (as by definition no metaphor ever is) do recall that when Dorothy and her posse come upon the Wizard of Oz, the façade, it is a hulking, smoking, fiery, mean and nasty figure. Yet, behind the curtain they found the man—ecce homo.
I found that the façade was “religion,” religious leaders, hierarchical ecclesiastical systems, etc. Yet, behind the curtain was God, was Jesus, who emphasized a personal relationship with Him above all else and most often, in direct opposition to that which the idolatrous façade was promulgating.

Of course, just like having to face up to the fact that these other childhood fantasy people were just myths, it wasn't easy for most here to reconcile our lives, without our god beliefs still intact.

It takes pounds of courage to face such a truth, far more than losing one's faith in Santa.

You obviously haven't the courage to question your Faith and see reality as it really is.

You still cling to your sky-daddy, as a child clings to it's [sic] teddy bear when it needs support.

In part 5, I considered some of atheism’s consoling delusions which are tantamount to atheists clinging to their version of sky-daddy teddy bears. They cannot handle the reality of God’s existence and so they, and here I am referring specifically to the ExChristian.Neters which I have encountered, constantly huff and puff up clouds of smoke and enough mirrors to make a disco ball in order to make it seem as if they have “reason” while they are merely demonstrating their lack of ability to deal with the issue at hand, maintain their composure or engage in logical reasoned discourse.

I must state now that even though I am Jewish, initially I was only Jewish by birth as I was raised in a 100% secular manner. I had the courage to question my lack of “Faith,” saw reality as it really is and now continue to constantly ask various questions of my “Faith.”

Come back and visit us when you develop the courage to face life without your personal mythical god, but until then, you have NOTHING to offer us that we haven't heard a million time already. That you can take to the bank, as they say.

Notice the admission: they have had their logical fallacies pointed out to them a million time already and they just do not care (I know that this is my twist but it is a mere tweak). They are hiding behind a very thinly veneered façade of intellectual superiority whilst failing to even follow my argument.

For some odd reason someone thought that this was a clever comment to make,

Who wonders if his heart is broken, then what's pumping his blood around his body?

Speaks for itself does it not?

Well, who knows what will become of all of this especially considering that Ex-Chrisian.Net has been made so that I cannot, via automated emails to comment section participants, inform the majority of those with whom I was in discussion where to find my responses to their assertions.

Of course, this presupposes that they will develop the integrity to go beyond their ad hominem and read something, anything, posted to a blog which is entitled with a term with which they disagree.