What Is Spiritualism?

What Is Spiritualism? February 27, 2019

What is spiritualism? It is something that should be taught or is practiced in the Bible?

The Spirit World

There is another world out there that we don’t see. It includes both holy angels and fallen angels, now called demons. They seek to do harm to the church and to believers, but they have their limitations. Still, evil or unclean spirits can sometimes mimic or imitate lost loved ones, but that’s probably not why they’re called “familiar spirits.” In the ancient world, familiar spirits were believed to be supernatural entities that would assist witches in their practice of magic. Perhaps these familiar spirits were demons who worked through human agents to practice their magic. The Bible is clear that “we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places” (Eph 6:12), and these “spiritual forces of evil” will try to distort the gospel, or in some cases, come up with their own religion.

Fallen Spirits

When Jesus was speaking about unclean spirits or demons, He said, “When the unclean spirit has gone out of a person, it passes through waterless places seeking rest, but finds none. Then it says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ And when it comes, it finds the house empty, swept, and put in order” (Matt 12:43-44), but something interesting happens after this. “Then it goes and brings with it seven other spirits more evil than itself, and they enter and dwell there, and the last state of that person is worse than the first. So also will it be with this evil generation” (Matt 12:45). We know that Satan or a demon cannot possess someone who has the Spirit of God in them. God the Holy Spirit is greater than Satan or any demon. The Apostle John wrote, “[Y]ou are from God and have overcome them, for he who is in you is greater than he who is in the world” (1 John 4:19).

Failed Exorcism

The Sons of Sceva were so fascinated by all the miraculous sings and wonders of the Apostle Paul (Acts 19:11-12) that these “Jewish exorcists undertook to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those who had evil spirits, saying, “I adjure you by the Jesus whom Paul proclaims” (Acts 19:13). The problem arose from the fact that the Sons of Sceva didn’t really have a personal relationship with Jesus like Paul had. Paul had been born again; apparently not so with these sons. They simply knew about Jesus and the power in His name, but remember Jesus did not know them, so they had no authority to cast out demons. When they tried to cast the evil spirit out, “the evil spirit answered them, “Jesus I know, and Paul I recognize, but who are you?” And the man in whom was the evil spirit leaped on them, mastered all of them and overpowered them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded” (Acts 19:15-16).

Spiritualism

It is believed that the Modern Spiritualist movement dates from 1848 when the Fox sisters of Hydesville, New York produced knocking sounds that were alleged to be messages sent from a spirit. These knocking sounds were obviously hoaxes, but despite that, spiritualism never died. Spiritualists seek to communicate with the spirits of people who have died. Most Christians, I would hope, would realize that seeking to communicate with the dead is sin. Part of the Old Testament civil laws included the command, “Do not turn to mediums or necromancers; do not seek them out, and so make yourselves unclean by them: I am the Lord your God” (Lev 19:31). If they do manage to contact a spirit, my question is, “What kind of spirit is it?” Most certainly it is not a holy angel because God forbids this practice, so it can only be a demonic spirit that is imitating someone who has been deceased. They might think they’re seeing a ghost or spirits of the dead, but they’re demonic spirits, and they’re nothing to mess around with for those who are not saved. Even so, the Spiritualist community is one of the quickest growing spiritual communities; the largest being the Lily Dale Assembly in New York City. It is the world’s largest Spiritualist community, and they encourage people to participate in the activities and to open their minds and their hearts. They’re welcome to witness clairvoyance demonstrations during their services. They tell you to keep an open mind, but that’s not exactly safe, is it? Remember the unclean spirit who brought his friends with him? No one leaves their doors open at night, but they lock them to keep out potential harm. We are told that the peace of God will guard our hearts (Phil 4:7), and the Spirit of God and the Word of God can help us do just that. Regular study and intake of the Word of God helps us gain more discernment about certain practices we might encounter. More exposure to the Word of God helps us more easily recognize unsound practices.

Conclusion

Satan has his own ministers, and they do a great job of imitating teachers and preachers. So much so that it’s difficult to tell them apart, but as for the Spiritualist Movement, it’s not that hard to see that it’s wrong to try and communicate with the dead. They may reach someone or something alright, but they might not be who they think they are (see Acts 19:11-16). Most troubling is the fact that the Church of Spiritualism defines their foundational doctrine as this: “We accept all truths and endeavor to prove their validity.” Not very scientific is it? They accept something as true, and then try to prove it is. Why not open the Bible and start out with “the truth,” and that will prove its validity easy enough. It seems like they have it backwards. All truths cannot be equally true. What if one person’s truth is 2 +2 = 4, but another says 2 +2 =7. Remember, we’re told to accept all truths, and then worry about proving it later, however, what we believe to be true does not change what is actually true. Here is what is true: Jesus said, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me (John 14:6).  You are entitled to your own opinion, but no one but Jesus is entitled to their own truth.  He is the One and only way, and you can’t spiritualize that away.

Article by Jack Wellman

Jack Wellman is Pastor of the Mulvane Brethren Church in Mulvane Kansas. Jack is a writer at Christian Quotes and also the Senior Writer at What Christians Want To Know whose mission is to equip, encourage, and energize Christians and to address questions about the believer’s daily walk with God and the Bible. You can follow Jack on Christian Crier or check out his book Teaching Children the Gospel available on Amazon.

"As I remember, I was more profitable for the South to sell cotton and buy ..."

A List of Sins from the ..."
"Why would God ask us to sin which He is against and is contrary to ..."

A List of Sins from the ..."
"The Confederacy was facing economic devastation should the prevailing concept of Abolition gain Federal support. ..."

A List of Sins from the ..."
"Not to rain on your tirade, but no, I am not an Atheist. The question ..."

A List of Sins from the ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Evangelical
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Tee Eef

    If a christian prays and desires the work of God without the presence of the Holy Spirit then his or her life as a Christian will be the most difficulty thing. One can not be a full christian without the embodiment of the Holy Spirit. In bible it is written that for one to have the Holy Spirit he must accept and receive Jesus Christ, then the Holy can only come to be within and with him.

    • Jack Wellman

      Well said my friend. Thank you.

      • pud

        No it isn’t janitor jack. It’s total fictional made up nonsense woo woo for the stupid, simple minded, gullible and easily preyed upon

    • pud

      Bullshit. Demonstrate the existence of “spirit” or “holy spirit” …Total woo woo make believe made up gibberish.

  • pud

    It is just another one of your made up words that doesn’t exist. Demonstrate the existence of ANY of the invisible undetectable make believe characters you blindly accept as “truth” simply because you “believe” blindly in an ancient BOOK that is demonstrably WRONG about every single thing it says. Waiting… 2+2 = eleventeen to you jack if it’s in your man made made up ridiculous on every level BOOK

    • Michael TG

      Wow pud. Why so angry? We all have a choice. I see what you dont believe. So, what happens when you die? Dust, rot…..? That’s it? All this life for what? All about you and yours? We serve someone. Who do you serve?

    • Michael TG

      Wow pud. Why so angry? We all have a choice. I see what you dont believe. So, what happens when you die? Dust, rot…..? That’s it? All this life for what? All about you and yours? We serve someone. Who do you serve?

      • pud

        Not angry..I simply have great contempt for your cult and the people who perpetuate it.

        What happens when you die? The honest answer is I don’t know…The dishonest infantile make believe answer is the happy hunting grounds, valhalla, heaven etc. Rational intelligent people admit that they don’t know…infantile irrational people make shit up.

        All this life for what? Maybe you need a hobby?

        I don’t serve anyone least of all some made up invisible undetectable sky daddy

        • Michael TG

          Well, believing something doesn’t mean it’s a cult. I know what I believe is not because anyone made me to do so, and if I’m misguided by what I’ve read in the Bible, so be it. I believe Jesus is the missiah of the world, the son of God. Have you ever read the Bible, or is that just to…….. Beneath you? Lol

        • Matthew 22:37

          You haven’t proven you are sane so nobody needs to submit to your burden of proof demands.

          I have never met a perfectly sane person in my entire life. Everyone always has some kind of internal issue.

          And you want Christians to agree with your reasoning?

          God turned you over to a depraved mind because you refused His reasoning.

          You are no more in a fit state to control other people’s thinking than Hitler was.

          You say your goal is to deprogram people on this blog. Why? Because you are insane.

          Insane control freaks are the biggest meddlers of all.

          You don’t need an argument, pud. You need a shrink.

          Prove this. Prove that.

          God already proved everything on the Cross but you rejected God’s proof, He turned you over to a depraved mind and now you are on this blog everyday bothering everyone and derailing threads because you have lost your mind. Being a control freak gives you the illusion you are in control but you blow the illusion with your profanity and disrespect almost every time you post.

          If you can’t be a truth seeker then seek medical help.

          You never seek the truth, pud. All you do is try to sow worldly ideas on theists that they already rejected in favor of Jesus.

          Your bias is against God. You prove it with all your constant criticizing and complaining.

          I’d rather be saner which is mentally strong and not go around fault finding the way you do.

          Blaming, constant complaining, criticizing, belittling others, etc. They are all signs of a weak, less sane mind.

          I don’t have to argue with you, pud, because I psychoanalyzed you and atheists are mentally weaker than theists as a group in my opinion.

          Theists never as a group complain as much as atheists do. They learned from God to be thankful and gratitude makes a big difference in attitude and helps people form more beneficial relationships.

          All you atheist complainers do is saw off the branch you are sitting on.

          Who wants to learn to kill his own relationships and thoughtlife?

          But that’s what you out of whack people do. Let a lot of untruth be sowed into your heads becoming more and more dysfunctional til you cannot believe in God any more.

          Why would I want to adopt your dysfunctionality?

          Christ had the best character ever exhibited on this earth. I will allow him to sow his thoughts into my head. Everyone else’s thoughts are substandard in comparison to his.

          You reap what you sow, pud.

          Sow to the world and you reap insanity and death.

          Sow to God and reap sanity and eternal life.

          Your mind is like a garden. You have to tend to it and be careful what you sow in it.

          I don’t want to sow what you sow in your head.

          So the conversation is over now.

          You can stay insane if you want to or you can repent. It could be you have passed the point of being able to repent though now so I would pray for God to make a way for me if I were you. If you can muster enough reverence and humility to do that, of course.

          If you’re a narcissist then reverence and humility may be impossibilities for you to achieve now.

          Still pray and ask God to make a way for you.

          I hope you see the light some day. Your attitude is not as beautiful as a Christian’s who follows a kind God is. He teaches us His ways.

          You will never win over a Christian using the devil’s ways of mean spirited mockery in conversation.

          I hope you learn to give up the devil’s ways and learn God’s ways.

          Have a blessed day!

          • pud

            “God already proved everything on the Cross”

            1. Demonstrate that this actually happened as you and your BOOK claim.

            2. Show that it’s not insane to “believe” that an all powerful, timeless, infinite “god” sent HIMSELF as a human blood sacrifice to HIMSELF in order to fix a problem he HIMSELF set in motion.

          • Matthew 22:37

            You claim your mind descended from an ape. Well if that were true then you had better hope there is a god that can correct your mind.

            Even Darwin knew there was a problem with people claiming their minds were rational if they descended from apes.

            I am not reading your posts any more. You are not communicating your insanity to me any more.

            I tried to help correct you out of your insanity but you seem to have gotten used to living in crazy town now.

            You are going to have to appeal to God now. He’s the only One who can get you out of the insane mess you are in.

          • pud

            We are NOT descended from apes…WE ARE APES! It is a 100% FACT taxonomically that we ARE APES descended from a common primate ancestor. IT IS A FACT. A demonstrable FACT supported by multiple lines of evidence.

            Now you answer my questions…LOL…you won’t because you can’t.

          • Matthew 22:37

            LOL. Then prove God does not periodically return to Earth to manage our social evolution.

            Genesis could be part parable and part literal but you have surrendered all authority to science and are incapable of out of the box thinking now.

            NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE WITH GOD!

            Some Christians believe in theistic evolution.

            But everyone has a bias.

            I accord God authority ahead of science. I know Christ was raised from the dead.

            Science can’t raise anyone from the dead.

            You don’t have the right to assert your authority over me.

            I have personhood and can think and acknowledge whatever authority I reasoned was best.

            Science doesn’t get anybody out of the grave.

            I trust God more than science. I know doctors make medical errors.

          • pud

            Prove that there’s not a china tea pot circling Mars. You don’t have a clue do you about those who make positive claims bearing the burden of proof?

            Demonstrate that ANY “god” has ever existed…..still waiting..

          • Matthew 22:37

            I am done here.

            Prove you are sane.

            You can’t. Not to me. I obseved and analyzed atheists for 16 years now and my personal opinion is God turned you over to a depraved mind like the Bible says.

            The only way out of your dilemma is prayer and repentance especially if you are incapable of seeking and trusting your own mind.

            Faith is by hearing. Not by evidence.

            A human mind can hear and make value judgments.

            You let the world train you to devalue and vote against God.

            That is your error.

            I don’t care to learn it.

            I already have a strong truth loving mind and don’t need correction from your error ridden mind.

            I can look out a window and see a daisy, an oak tree, etc.

            To be a daisy there has to be a replicable pattern.

            The daisy didn’t come from randomness. It came from a seed pattern.

            You believe science.

            I will believe what my senses and mind concur.

            I’m not seeking to overturn God and human nature like you are all the time.
            This world needs more order and less chaos.

            You embraced chaos to serve your own motives.

          • pud

            “Faith” is synonomous with gullibility. It is THE most dishonest position one can hold. Literally ANYTHING can be believed by faith.

            Demonstrate that any “god” ever existed. 50 requests and 50 non replies….hmmmm

          • Matthew 22:37

            Prove you are sane.

            I think you aren’t.

            Thanks for the visit to crazy town.

            But I am tired of your ape like manners.

            Bye!

          • pud

            See you later!

            Why are you so incapable of demonstrating the truth of any of your claims?

          • Matthew 22:37

            I don’t have to God gave revelation.

            If you need evidence then either find it in the Bible or get it yourself.

            God has confirmed His revelation is true so many times to me that that is my evidence.

            I can’t help it if you lack the perception to confirm His revelations, can I?

            Have a blessed day!

            Francis Collins who wrote The Language of God is a human genome geek and if I recollect correctly a theistic evolutionist.

            Evolution isn’t incompatible with theism for some people.

            The guy that came up with the evolutionary synthesis was a theist. Stayed theist even while working on evolutionary theory.

          • pud

            Francis Collins is a religious lunatic falling to his knees at the sight of 3 frozen waterfalls. LOL

            You are a scatter brain….can’t stay on any topic for more than one post.

            “Revelation” is strictly personal and common to EVERY religion. Doesn’t prove any claim in the least other than the person claiming it is mentally ill.

            You need to look up the definition of “evidence” “proof” “truth” “claims” etc so that you have a basic understanding …you clearly do not

          • Matthew 22:37

            Read the story of Nebuchadnezzar in the Bible. God turned N over to a depraved mind.

            Then wiki where the Babylonian tablets confirming this are.

            God hardened Pharoah’s heart after a certain point when Pharoah continued to refuse to acknowledge God.

            God can and does work with people and their hearts. David appealed to Him for a new heart in Psalm 51.

            The biblical heart includes the mind, the will, the conscience, the emotions, the reins and the gut.

            God stopped Saul’s depraved zealotry on the Road to Damascus.

            Some people like Saul are willing to surrender to God if God can get their attention but others like Pharoah and Nebuchadnezzar were too far gone in their pride to pay attention to Him.

            Some people learn the easy way while others are doomed to continue to make mistakes and only learn the hard way.

            I would rather learn through a revelation the easy way than learn the hard way like Nebuchadnezzar did and Saul of Tarsus did. Pharoah refused to learn and ended up on the bottom of the Red Sea.

          • pud

            Claim claim claim assertion story from a book claim, assertion more claims…..You do not have the foggiest notion of how we arrive at the truth.

            Demonstrate that ANY of the above claims you once again bandy about are ACTUALLY true.

          • Matthew 22:37

            Stop criticizing me and seek to understand God’s perspective. In the seeking He may reveal Himself to you.

            You are not getting anywhere acting like a hard case.

            Get the book I mentioned and read it.

            Seriously, when did you get so hardened that you refused to listen to a person that is looking out for your welfare.

            God loves everyone all the time.

            Get that Geisler and Zukeran book and read it and challenge your own mental picture for a change.

          • pud

            Demonstrate that any “god” including yours actually exists first. I’m growing tired of your endless claims and assertions. Back up your claims. Show that your claims are true representations of reality or you have NOTHING.

          • Hi Pud,

            Geisler and Zukeran are Fundamentalists.They believe in the inerrancy of the bible in the now missing original manuscripts. They are nut cakes! It is these fruitcakes that Matthew 22:37 is promoting. It’s no wonder that she is a nut cake herself!

          • Matthew 22:37

            You can google the Apologetic of Jesus on bible dot org and read a summary of the book.

            Jesus presented God’s evidence. Ignore it if you wish but don’t claim nobody presented an evidence case.

            Geisler and Zukeran show Jesus’ evidence.

            If you don’t read it then you are making a false claim to need evidence.

            You need evidence? Then you get it.

            I just did you the courtesy of telling you one of the places where to look.

            If you write these people off without reading their explanatory book then you lied about wanting evidence.

            I don’t have to make a case. There are already dozens of professional apologists out there who have written books in more detail than I could ever address on a blog.

          • pud

            I don’t read STORIES by religious lunatics about STORIES by religious lunatics.

            Apologists do not present actual evidence they present contrived arguments that have ALL been refuted.

            Doubt me? Offer up one of their arguments and I’ll show you

            PS..there is no extra biblical evidence for the existence of any “jesus”…NONE It is a made up story

          • Matthew 22:37

            Well I am done talking with you then. I see you are adverse to self reflection so that allows your insanity to prevail.

            The Bible says not to engage in quarrels and most internet “debates” are just thinly disguised quarrels just like mockery can be thinly disguised malice.

            You remind me of a narcissitic control freak always bullying people like Hitler did.

            If you examined yourself honestly your own fragile ego would be challenged and you would have to agree with God that you are less than perfect.

            Why should someone who is less than perfect like yourself get to dictate terms to people following Jesus who are on a better path than you are?

            Why do I have to devolve personally and socially and refuse to see God’s perspective because you did?

            Christians see the rage and hard heartedness that it has caused in you.

            I am a person and God is concerned with establishing godly people.

            Why do I want to devolve into apehood because you like to psychologically identify with apes so you can give into your personality disorder?

            Like I said. Prove you are sane or get off this board making demands.

            People don’t visit this comments sections to play the game you are trying to control.

            They just stop in trying to correct you then discover you are uncorrectable.

            Could you please stop taking your sin nature out on people via your personality disorder and making your issues controlling?

            You don’t know people in real life and none of the theists on here seem to be delusional enough to obey you so why don’t you take your deprogramming act elsewhere?

            The Only One fit to deprogram anyone and reprogram them is God.

            You really have the nerve to think you can deprogram people without their consent then you may have a god complex or suffer from some extreme form of narcissism like Hitler did.

            Why would a Christian submit to an insensitive, callous bullying name calling person like yourself?

            Learn to deal with yourself and stop making a public spectacle of yourself.

            You are not God to be able to expect anything of anybody beyond basic human love and respect.

            You certainly don’t have the right to demand other people’s proof when your personality disorder is already determined to reject it.

            So be a seeker and stop wasting your own time. Get off this board and go seek your own proof or be quiet.

            I have my proof but I am not sharing any further proof with you because you act like an immoral social savage.

            And that is exactly how the devil likes to keep you.

            Your moral relativity comes up sadly short in a world where some people suffer from mental illnesses.

            Many of the mentally ill are going to refuse to follow God’s moral standards so they can give into temptation and their own mental infirmities.

            Some of these people are even going to throw their own family and friends under the bus while they come up with theories and philosophies that challenge God’s. Like Ayn Rand did. Like Nietzsche did. Like Hitler did. Etc.

            There is no reason that I should substitute to some imperfect quack thinker’s moral philosophy in place of the thinking of the most rational being in the universe who puts my well being ahead of His own is there?

            Keep rejecting Christ’s example and publicly denying he exists but it is ignorant and self serving on your part and only proves you are incapable of self examination and have dedicated yourself to your own idol (hidden purpose). It could be your hidden purpose is so hidden that it is even hidden to yourself. That’s why you may need psychoanalysis. To get to the root of your own problem. You refused God’s help but why do you get to dump your personal issues and flawed reasoning all over this blog comments section trying to control it like you are God?

            Seek medical help.

            You haven’t proven you are sane and perfect with your profanity and bullying behavior, y’know so nobody is going to trust you enough to let you deprogram them. Nor should they. You are just a sinner like they are except you are determined to reject the notion of sin which allows you to stay mentally unwell.

            I hope you learn to get the beam out of your eye like Christ said.
            No one should have to go this far in explaining things to you but you seem to suffer from delusions of grandeur.

          • pud

            Sorry but you can’t escape your “apehood” You are, taxonomically, biologically, genetically an ape. You belong to the genus “homo” of the order “primate” just like Gorillas and Chimpanzees

            Demonstrate that ANYTHING you have ever babbled is actually true. Yeah, I thought so.

          • pud

            LOL!!! Your reference is one of the most infantile stupid circular wastes of time I’ve ever spent! Essentially your chosen apologist declares that the bible is true because the bible says it’s true! LOLOLOL! We all know the storybook stupid however the rational people recognize it as a STORY not literal truth. The STORY “CLAIMING” a “miracle” doesn’t prove a miracle anymore than Harry Potter can do magic because the BOOK says he does magic! You really are the MOST gullible human being I’ve ever encountered…next to janitor jack that is

          • Matthew 22:37

            Goodbye then.

            I have read that book and Geisler and Zukeran’s logic is better than your’s.

            The objective doesn’t reign alone and supreme contrary to what science promotes.

            Try picking up Kierkegaard some time and understand why the subjective is important, too.

            God gives us a double witness through both the objective and the subjective but you people determined to reject God so you can reign in His place almost always toss the subjective out in favor of maintaining your own broken thinking.

            Seriously, you don’t reason better than God and you constantly project your evil onto Him so you can evade dealing with your own personal weaknesses.

            So who is the coward running from the truth of self discovery?

            Not me. I regularly wrestle with my conscience sorting things out but you don’t because you are a self loving narcissist who thinks he can do no wrong and give yourself permission to meddle and control people who you don’t even know in real life.

            If you had a conscience then you would have to admit you have been wrong about a lot of things and that your behavior has been bullying.

          • pud

            You strike me as someone who has had little to no education. Or if you did have some it was grossly inferior.

            Throughout all of these exchanges the ONLY thing you have done is create strawmen. You have utterly failed to defend even a single of your absurd claims. You’ve run away from every challenge and avoided every argument in favor of made up assessments of my character. You are an emotional and intellectual coward and misfit.

            You are supremely gullible and credulous absolutely devoid of any critical thinking skills which is why your only methodology is to attack the one challenging your ridiculous claims and assertions. It is a hallmark of insecurity and ignorance

            “Subjective” stupid is “opinion” and with the exception of personal preferences “opinions” do not define “truth”

          • Matthew 22:37

            There goes your narcissism again.

            You had to find fault with me rather than yourself.

          • Matthew 22:37

            What is your education and degree in?

          • Matthew 22:37

            You seem incapable of thinking critically about yourself.

            Why is that? Is it too painful for you to face reality?

            So painful you would rather be a social outcast and maintain this superiority complex than deal with your underlying inferiority complex.

            God gives people a better understanding of themselves.

            Spirituality is all about wellness. Learning to focus on the right things so God can build people back up and they can experience abundant living.

            Sin tears people down.

          • pud

            Demonstrate the “reality” of a single one of your claims…just one.

            Show that any of your assertions or claims comport with reality

            I can demonstrate that you are an animal, a vertebrate, a mammal, a primate and an ape

            Let’s see you demonstrate that A SINGLE ONE of your many claims comports with reality….waiting..

          • Matthew 22:37

            I have already said prove you are sane.

            Your incoherent worldview doesn’t get to dominate mine.

            Worldviews are based on perception and there is no reason for me to replace a more perceptive view with a less perceptive one borrowed from someone who cannot process both objectively and subjectively.

            It doesn’t matter where one came from. It matters where one is going.

            Since you are incapable of self reflection we are done here.

            Bye. I will put you back on block since I can’t force you to get analyzed or raise your emotional intelligence.

            You keep devaluing the subjective in favor of the objective so your superiority complex can continue to reign over your inferiority complex.

            You should have dealt with your own internal issues before arguing this stuff.

          • pud

            LOL! You truly are unhinged.

            I am sane by virtue of the FACT that I make rational decisions, value evidence, can demonstrate my claims objectively and I don’t talk to invisible undetectable agents in my head as you do.

            You by contrast are not sane as you do not think rationally, are contradictory, don’t value evidence or even understand what it is and you talk to invisible undetectable agents in your head

            I am sane because I can critically think and don’t subscribe to a religious cult based on a primitive book. You are insane because you do.

            Worldviews are based upon perception but perception doesn’t define what is actually true. By your lack of logic every single worldview is equal no matter how absurd.

            You can’t think clearly or objectively. You have FAILED to demonstrate a single thing and are capable ONLY of the same repetitious slandering attempts on my personality…EPIC FAIL

            Your deranged and unhinged nature is clearly demonstrated by your dozens of “blocking” threats only to come right back to vomit up the same gibberish all over again! Too funny but sad that such a dysfunctional mind such as yours exists

          • Matthew 22:37

            Prove you are sane.

            I don’t think you are.

            How dare you call other people’s sanity into question when you have a personality disorder incapable of analyzing itself to self correct.

            You have no right to bully anyone, Narcissist.

            Your personality disorder makes you think you are better than others so you permit yourself to bully them.

            If anyone needs “deprogramming” it is you.

            Your subjective capability is broken as shown by your conscienceless, lack of empathy on this board and you refuse to get it fixed.

            Who cares what a deranged, conscienceless person totally lacking in empathy thinks?

            You are an internet nutcase playing at God. You will deprogram people…what is that?

            You’re a narcissist just like Richard Dawkins, Ayn Rand and Friedrich Nietzsche. What is objectivism? Thinly disguised narcissism. What is Nietzsche’s superman? Another raging narcissist. No wonder Hitler identified with Nietzschean and Darwinian ideas. There were no checks and balances on his crazy thinking or will to power then.

            If I earned a narcissist’s approval I would be ashamed of myself because it would mean I let a sociopath force me to walk on eggshells.

            Go ahead and mock. You disgraceful ape of a human being. You have lost your mind and are too foolish to know it and most people aren’t wise enough to tell you to get some help when you need it more than just about everyone else.

            Well I told you. Hope you get your act together. You can’t even be a good socially responsible person with a good attitude if you lack empathy and you have stated you hold nothing but contempt for Christians.

            But according to you a Christian should trust you enough to let you deprogram them when you have no higher regard for them than Hitler had for the Jews.

            That’s your reasoning and that is insane.

          • pud

            “Hitler” “Jews” “Dawkins” “Blocking now” Yep…totally unhinged

          • Matthew 22:37

            I made my case. Bye.

          • pud

            Request #213 Demonstrate that any of your claims of “gods” “sons of gods” “devils” etc are actually true and have any basis in fact or reality….Oh, let me guess….LOL!

          • Matthew 22:37

            Your liking for objective truth is a facade that your subjective hides behind.

            You are an incredibly insecure and overly emotional person and that is why you make so many personal attacks on people.

            When your own subjective personality is so vulnerable it’s amazing you want to argue with people more secure than yourself.

            You should have dealt with your own underlying insecurities rather than taking them out on message boards on people you claim not to like.

          • pud

            You become more irrational and incoherent with every post.

            Demonstrate that any “god” past or present has/does actually “exist”

            Since you repeatedly fail this simple exercise EVERYTHING else you babble is just nonsense

          • Matthew 22:37

            Lol. You deliberately block revelations from God to serve your own sinfulness.

            People can process both objectively and subjectively unless their own personal subjectivity has been clouded, distorted or destroyed.

            In your case you always uphold the distorted that’s how you refuse to understand God then claim the mistake is all His.

            The error is all within you. Too bad you can’t give up being a narcissist easily. Narcissists are usually too self promoting to admit they have a problem.

            They would rather restructure the world around them to suit their own egos than admit they are wrong.

            They would rather control others than get helped themselves.

            There are a lot of people walking around that need cognitive behavioral therapy but they are going to refuse to get it.

            There is a strong strain of cognitive behavioral therapy in the Bible but for some reason people like taking their problems to other imperfect people rather than to infallible God.

            Be careful you don’t go to a hack psychiatrist. Like Sigmund Freud.

            I have a friend who was suffering from a brain tumor but her doctor misdiagnosed her and mistreated her for depression for months. If my friend had not known subjectively that her doctor was wrong and sought another diagnosis then she would probably be dead today.

            The problem is with you, pud. If you can’t deal with your own subjective error then try to find someone who can help you with things.

            God provided Jesus but for some reason you prefer being sick to getting well.

            I hope you see the light some day.

          • Geisler and Zukeran make several assumptions:
            (1). God exists.
            (2). God has revealed himself.
            (3). God has revealed himself through general revelation (nature) but that this is not sufficient for salvation.
            (4). God has revealed himself in many and various ways in times past, but that his supreme and final revelation of himself is in Jesus Christ.
            (5). The bible is the inerrant Word of God in the now missing original manuscripts of the bible.

            Their arguments are based on these assumptions but fall flat if the bible is not the inerrant Word of God. If some of it was written, by bloodthirsty, violent and ignorant savages then it is not the inerrant Word of God. 1 Sam.15 shows a bloodthirsty and violent Yahweh commanding Israel to commit genocide, to butcher little children and babies. This command is alleged to have come through the false prophet, Samuel who hacked the prisoner Agag to pieces.

            The books of Joshua, Judges, I and II Samuel, I and II Kings, I and II Chronicles are Israeli propaganda by a very violent and barbaric people who justified their barbaric behaviour with propaganda to their people telling them “God told us”.

            Don’t believe the propaganda that Geisler and Zukeran are peddling!

          • Matthew 22:37

            Why don’t you buy the Apologetic of Jesus by Geisler and Zukeran and read it.

            God provided the evidence.

            But human standards of evidence vary by person.

            A worldview is based on perception not evidence.

            You could be using evidence to block your perception.

          • pud

            I don’t read lunatic religious echo chamber irrational propaganda. I’ve heard it all there is nothing new. It is all vacuous, irrational, illogical, stupid and demonstrably wrong.

            Evidence is objective not subjective. If you can’t show it, you don’t know it and you don’t know it because you can’t show it. Trotting out idiots who babble the same nonsense as you do is not objective evidence for any of your ridiculous supernatural claims.

          • pud

            Here’s a challenge for you skippy. Put forward just ONE…the best one argument or piece of evidence you cling to from this book or any other….I will show you how wrong you are. Pick any one but only one. Do not change the subject, do not ramble on mindlessly as you do….put forward your singularly best argument or piece of evidence that supports ONE of your absurd claims…I will then destroy it right before your eyes

          • Matthew 22:37

            I am not interested in being destroyed or destroying other people. The devil already did that.

            I am interested in building up people on Christ’s foundation.

            You’ve already allowed your own spiritual foundation to be torn down so why don’t you seek to know God and His ways and let Him build you back up.

            I am already in a very long process of the sin being torn down so I can be rebuilt in God’s image so why would I want to reverse that progress and regress and become an inveterate sinner?

            I hope you learn to think more deeply about things. Especially your own sins.

            It seems like you have done everything you can to destroy any chance of becoming a spiritual person so you can act like an animal and let matter rule your mind.
            Instead of learning how to put mind over matter.

            Why anyone would refuse Jesus and the Fruit of the Spirit I don’t know because Jesus is wonderful and the fruit of the Spirit are all the greatest human attributes.

            Maybe you need to listen to something meditative like Rachmaninov’s Concerto # 2 in symphony.
            Rachmaninov
            https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QNRxHyZDU-Q

          • pud

            Of course you’re not…you want to believe what you want to believe. What is actually true is of no concern to you.

            Demonstrate that any “devil” exists or this will be my last reply

          • Matthew 22:37

            Nope. Done here. You will have to start proving things to yourself.

            How can you develop a spiritual mind if I do all the work?

            You are spiritually sabotaging yourself by demanding proof all the time.

            When all you had to do was what it says to do in Romans 10:9.

          • pud

            You are a coward.

            A verse in a book is not evidence that the book is true. Are you truly this stupid?

            You make a claim that a “devil” exists

            It is only reasonable that anyone should ask for you to demonstrate that this extraordinary claim is actually true. You refuse. You refuse because you can’t. This exposes you as just a gullible fool who believes what he wants to believe regardless of any evidence to support your many claims. It exposes you as completely gullible and willing to believe anything no matter how absurd. If you had the strength of your convictions you would and could easily show that what you claim is actually, demonstrably and verifiably objectively true. You won’t because you can’t

          • Matthew 22:37

            Bye.

            You aren’t interested in learning God’s perspective.

            I have to leave you to yourself because it appears you cannot be motivated towards a higher spiritual understanding.

          • pud

            You are indeed an intellectual coward.

            For a “god” to have a “perspective” there first has to be a “god”

            You fail to support this absurd claim….you lose. You lose the argument and you lose your honor if you ever had any.

          • Jack Wellman

            you are so right. I dont’respond and can’t even read their comments anymore but they can still contact me through a message, but they are not searching for truth but for an argument somy response is simply, Matt 7:6, meaning it’s not worth the time or trouble to respond.

          • Matthew 22:37

            Thanks, Pastor. I’m the overly helpful type with an inborn counselor streak so I wasted a lot of time on the truly lost. You can’t get more lost than having a depraved mind that refuses to see God’s perspective in His own work of salvation can you? Then complaining that science which has nothing to do with salvation should be in charge.

            Most people aren’t depraved enough to believe they are already perfect and don’t sin. Thanks be to God.

            Have a blessed day!

          • Jack Wellman

            My pleasure. I pray they repent for no one desires what is coming if they do not (Rev 20:12-15, 21:8). God send your spirit to these who hate Jesus, God, and us, that they might repent and trust in Christ, and I pray this all for your glory, and none to us (Psalm 115:1). The Bible tells me to ‘not to quarrel about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers” (2 Tim 2:14), but if they are earnestly seeking Him, I will do whatever I can do answer their questions.

          • Matthew 22:37

            Exactly. Quarreling is no good and many of these internet “debates” devolve into quarrels. Some even use the debates as pretexts to insult believers but no discerning person submits to another person’s psychological problem if he can help it.

            I am sorry you have so many malcontents visiting your blog. Maybe you can move it to another location where you have better control of who posts in the comments section and who doesn’t.

          • Matthew 22:37

            There’s no clear philosophical burden on the theist to prove anything either. There are multiple reasons for that. From a theological perspective we’re told not to argue and faith is the gift of God and that unbelievers are suppressing a knowledge of the truth so how does an argument gift someone determined to suppress the truth. I’m not the Holy Spirit to give another person the gift of faith through an argument.

            Then various philosophers say this:

            Arguments and positions

            The last 50 years has seen an increase in academic philosophical arguments critical of the positions of atheism arguing that they are philosophically unsound.[11] Some of the more common of these arguments are the presumption of atheism,[12] the logical argument from evil,[13] the evidential argument from evil,[14][15][16] the argument from nonbelief[17] and absence of evidence arguments.

            The Presumption of Atheism

            Philosopher Antony Garrard Newton Flew Authored The Presumption of Atheism in 1976

            In 1976, atheist philosopher Antony Flew wrote The Presumption of Atheism in which he argued that the question of God’s existence should begin by assuming atheism as the default position. According to Flew, the norm for academic philosophy and public dialogue was at that time for atheists and theists to both share their respective “burdens of proof” for their positions.[18][19] Flew proposed instead that his academic peers redefine “atheism” to bring about these changes:

            What I want to examine is the contention that the debate about the existence of God should properly begin from the presumption of atheism, that the onus of proof must lie upon the theist. The word ‘atheism’, however, has in this contention to be construed unusually. Whereas nowadays the usual meaning of ‘atheist’ in English is ‘someone who asserts that there is no such being as God, I want the word to be understood not positively but negatively… in this interpretation an atheist becomes: not someone who positively asserts the non-existence of God; but someone who is simply not a theist. The introduction of this new interpretation of the word ‘atheism’ may appear to be a piece of perverse Humpty-Dumptyism, going arbitrarily against established common usage. ‘Whyever’, it could be asked, don’t you make it not the presumption of atheism but the presumption of agnosticism?[18]

            — Excerpts from The Presumption of Atheism, Anthony Flew, 1976
            Flew’s proposition saw little acceptance in the 20th century though in the early 21st century Flew’s broader definition of atheism came to be forwarded more commonly.[20][21] In 2007, analytic philosopher William Lane Craig’s described the presumption of atheism as “one of the most commonly proffered justifications of atheism”.[22] In 2010, BBC journalist William Crawley explained that Flew’s presumption of atheism “made the case, now followed by today’s new atheism” arguing that atheism should be the default position.[19][23] In today’s debates, atheists forward the presumption of atheism arguing that atheism is the default position[24][25] with no burden of proof[26][27] and assert that the burden of proof for God’s existence rests solely on the theist.[18][28][29]

            The presumption of atheism has been the subject of criticism by atheists,[30][31] agnostics[32] and theists[33][34] since Flew advanced his position more than 40 years ago.

            Criticism of the presumption of atheism

            The agnostic Analytic Philosopher Anthony Kenny rejected the presumption of atheism on any definition of atheism arguing that “the true default position is neither theism nor atheism, but agnosticism” adding “a claim to knowledge needs to be substantiated, ignorance need only be confessed”.[31]

            Many different definitions may be offered of the word ‘God’. Given this fact, atheism makes a much stronger claim than theism does. The atheist says that no matter what definition you choose, ‘God exists’ is always false. The theist only claims that there is some definition which will make ‘God exists’ true. In my view, neither the stronger nor the weaker claim has been convincingly established”.[35]

            — Excerpt from What I Believe, Anthony Kenny, 2007
            Modal Logician Philosopher Alvin Plantinga is widely regarded as the world’s most important living Christian philosopher
            Modal logician philosopher Alvin Plantinga is viewed as an important contributor to Christian philosophy[36]
            Atheist philosopher Kai Nielsen criticized the presumption of atheism arguing that without an independent concept of rationality or a concept of rationality that atheists and theists can mutually accept, there is no common foundation on which to adjudicate rationality of positions concerning the existence of God. Because the atheist’s conceptualization of “rational” differs from the theist, Nielsen argues, both positions can be rationally justified.[30][31][37]

            Analytic philosopher and modal logician Alvin Plantinga, a theist, rejected the presumption of atheism forwarding a two-part argument. First, he shows that there is no objection to belief in God unless the belief is shown to be false. Second, he argues that belief in God could be rationally warranted if it is a properly basic or foundational belief through an innate human “sense of the divine”.[22] Plantinga argues that if we have the innate knowledge of God which he theorizes as a possibility, we could trust belief in God the same way we trust our cognitive faculties in other similar matters, such as our rational belief that there are other minds beyond our own, something we believe, but for which there can be no evidence. Alvin Plantinga’s argument puts theistic belief an equal evidential footing with atheism even if Flew’s definition of atheism is accepted.[31]

            University of Notre Dame philosopher Ralph McInerny goes further than Plantinga, arguing that belief in God reasonably follows from our observations of the natural order and the law-like character of natural events. McInerny argues that the extent of this natural order is so pervasive as to be almost innate, providing a prima facie argument against atheism. McInerny’s position goes further than Plantinga’s, arguing that theism is evidenced and that the burden of proof rests on the atheist, not on the theist.[31][38]

            Analytic Philosopher William Lane Craig
            Theoretical philosopher William Lane Craig is a well-known critic of atheist philosophies
            William Lane Craig wrote that if Flew’s broader definition of atheism is seen as “merely the absence of belief in God”, atheism “ceases to be a view” and “even infants count as atheists”. For atheism to be a view, Craig adds: “One would still require justification in order to know either that God exists or that He does not exist”.[22] Like the agnostic Anthony Kenny, Craig argues that there is no presumption for atheism because it is distinct from agnosticism:

            [S]uch an alleged presumption is clearly mistaken. For the assertion that “There is no God” is just as much a claim to knowledge as is the assertion that “There is a God.” Therefore, the former assertion requires justification just as the latter does. It is the agnostic who makes no knowledge claim at all with respect to God’s existence.”[39]

            — Excerpt by Definition of Atheism, William Lane Craig, 2007
            Forty years after Flew published The Presumption of Atheism, his proposition remains controversial.

            Other arguments

            William Lane Craig listed some of the more prominent arguments forwarded by proponents of atheism along with his objections:[40]

            “The Hiddenness of God” is the claim that if God existed, God would have prevented the world’s unbelief by making his existence starkly apparent. Craig argues that the problem with this argument is that there is no reason to believe that any more evidence than what is already available would increase the number of people believing in God.
            “The Incoherence of Theism” is the claim that the notion of God is incoherent. Craig argues that a coherent doctrine of God’s attributes can be formulated based on scripture like Medieval theologians had done and “Perfect Being Theology”; and that the argument actually helps in refining the concept of God.
            “The Problem of Evil” can be split into two different concerns: the “intellectual” problem of evil concerns how to give a rational explanation of the co-existence of God and evil and the “emotional” problem of evil concerns how to comfort those who are suffering and how to dissolve the emotional dislike people have of a God who would permit such evil. The latter can be dealt with in a diverse manner. Concerning the “intellectual” argument, it is often cast as an incompatibility between statements such as “an omnipotent, omnibenevolent God exists” and “the quantity and kinds of suffering in the world exist”. Craig argues that no one has shown that both statements are logically incompatible or improbable with respect to each other. Others use another version of the intellectual argument called the “evidential problem of evil” which claims that the apparently unnecessary or “gratuitous” suffering in the world constitutes evidence against God’s existence. Craig argues that it is not clear that the suffering that appears to be gratuitous actually is gratuitous for various reasons, one of which is similar to an objection to utilitarian ethical theory, that it is quite simply impossible for us to estimate which action will ultimately lead to the greatest amount of happiness or pleasure in the world.
            T.J. Mawson makes a case against atheism by citing some lines of evidence and reasoning such as the high level of fine-tuning whereby the life of morally sentient and significantly free creatures like humans has implications. On the maximal multiverse hypothesis, he argues that in appealing to infinite universes one is in essence explaining too much and that it even opens up the possibility that certain features of the universe still would require explanation beyond the hypothesis itself. He also argues from induction for fine tuning in that if one supposed that infinite universes existed there should be infinite ways in which observations can be wrong on only one way in which observations can be right at any point in time, for instance, that the color of gems stay the same every time we see them. In other words, if infinite universes existed, then there should be infinite changes to our observations of the universe and in essence be unpredictable in infinite ways, yet this is not what occurs.[41] – end quote

            The above is why atheists’ internet arguments are specious. There is no theological burden of proof and the philosophical burden is highly debatable.

            Quote above from “criticism of atheism” on wikipedia dot org

          • How would the arguments you present for theism apply to those who believe in leprechauns? You say that the burden of proof does not necessarily lie with the theist to prove theism, yet you are making the positive claim for God’s existence. Does the atheist really have to disprove God’s existence?

            Well, neither of us believes in the existence of leprechauns. You and I would ask someone who makes the positive claim for leprechauns to prove or provide evidence for their existence. What if they said, disprove the existence of leprechauns? How can you do it? Does this mean that leprechauns exist simply because you cannot prove their non-existence?

            So does it mean that God exists simply because you cannot prove his non- existence?.

          • Which atheists assert that “there is no God”? Most atheists that I know of do not make such an assertion. What they say is the evidence for the existence of God or gods is so low that it is highly probable that a God or gods does/do not exist.

          • William Lane Craig is a Christian apologist who assumes that the bible is the plenary and verbally inspired Word of God. This assumption affects the whole way he argues for God’s existence. Even when you think he is arguing for God’s existence on other grounds, it turns out that he presupposes the existence of the God of the bible and the total reliability of the bible as the Word of God. Isn’t this circular reasoning? And no, it’s no use arguing that God lies outside the circle as you are prone to do. This also is presupposing the existence of God as part of the proof for God’s existence.

          • Does an innate belief in fairies mean that you can trust the existence of fairies for those who have this belief? Similarly if some people have an innate sense of the existence of God, does this mean that God exists? Plantinga is an evangelical Calvinist philosopher who assumes that Calvinist theology is true. Such theology is presupposed in his arguments for the existence of God. How does this make God’s existence true?

          • Matthew 22:37

            I wasn’t too afraid to commit myself into God’s hands like you are.

            Your “critical thinking” turned you into a coward who refused to trust God.

            Mine turned me into a committed Christian.

            Bye and may His grace abound to you!

          • pud

            You follow no “god” You follow a religious cult and an ancient book. You have utterly failed to demonstrate that ANY “god” has ever existed let alone your man make one. You follow voices in your head, group think delusion and make believe nonsense. THAT IS THE TRUTH

          • Matthew 22:37

            Lol. I don’t follow voices in my head.

            I have never once heard a voice in my head.

            You see what a sick psycho you are projecting lies onto people as if they are facts.

            I hope you get yourself checked out.

            I am tired of reading psychos on the internet projecting negative personal judgmental assumptions on people as if they are facts.

            You’re not in my head to know anything about how it operates or what I hear nor are you a psychiatrist.

            Why would you allege someone hears voices who never said they heard one?

            You are so dishonest and have the nerve to enter a Christian board and make grossly wrong negatively judgmental statements about people without even asking them first.

            The fact that you project your mistaken assumptions as negative value judgments onto people as if they are fact shows how wrong you are.

            Honest people don’t make up things about other people like you do then claim they are true. Liars or the delusional do that.

            Luke 6:45
            New American Standard Bible
            “The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart.

            You’re not a worthy debate opponent, pud, because all you can do is ad hominem attack when you aren’t being a dictatorial control freak. Ad hominem attacks seem to be the social weapon of choice of dictatorial narcissist control freaks. It’s a cheap manipulation trick that reflects badly on you.

          • pud

            So the “lord” doesn’t talk back when you talk to him in your head eh?

          • Matthew 22:37

            Lol. I rethought things and think you should stay on this blog making an ineffectual nuisance out of yourself.

            I would never accept evolution over God’s explanation even if I cared to study it in detail because I would hold in reserve the idea that nothing is impossible with God.

            Besides, God did things in kinds. It is quite possible He made creatures close to human beings in kind but some people have chosen to leap to the conclusion these similar creatures are human ancestors then insist on their conclusion prevailing.

            But there is only latent moral failure in identifying with animals over Jesus Christ.

            God’s standard of human behavior is much higher than animal behavior and a safe and peaceful secure world depends on higher behavior not lowering human standards.

            I am convinced you are an antisocial, control freak narcissist with overly controlling and xenophobic tendencies. That’s why you refuse to follow Jesus and insist on making a nuisance out of yourself on this blog.

            Why I or any other theist should have to be the object of your insanity is the real question but as an insane person in need of narcissistic supply I am sure you will continue to pretend to yourself that you are changing the world.

            Stay on the blog. You will do a lot less damage than you would if you were out in the real world. Look at what Mao, Marx, Pol Pot and Hitler did. They were all narcissists who didn’t confine themselves to other people’s blogs.

            I have to laugh at you though for thinking you will eradicate religion. You won’t. The theists are stronger than atheists in my opinion. We use both the objective and the subjective in an intelligent manner to follow the best of all possible world leaders: Jesus Christ.

            That you consider us cowards is a hoot, too.

            Christians stood up to not one but ten Roman persecutions and Christians continue to stand up to worldly persecution all around the world today.

            And we’re not dying out. Persecution seems to make us stronger.

            Didn’t you know. What doesn’t kill you will only make you stronger.

            So go on persecuting us. I will enjoy the comedy of you thinking you can change us. In my opinion, Christian courage is legendary as it draws on Jesus Christ’s example and spirit and you won’t make a dent in us. You will only strengthen God’s will and purpose in us and thanks be to God for that.

            Have a blessed day!

          • pud

            Of course you wouldn’t! FACTS mean nothing to you, evidence means nothing to you. You only want to believe Bronze and Iron Age mythology so of course reality has none of your interest

            No “god” ever said or wrote ANYTHING. Men did…superstitious stupid ignorant primitive barbaric men made up stories

            Stupid credulous gullible people like you continue the tradition.

            Had you been born in India you would be singling the praises of Hanuman the monkey god…in Iran you would be praying to Allah 5 times a day. You are predisposed to be a religious cult member and NO facts will ever change your deranged mind

            Request #468…Demonstrate that any such “jesus” exists…Demonstrate that any “god” has ever existed….Demonstrate that ANY of your repetitious delusional claims are actually TRUE! ….$100 bet you won’t, can’t and will run away….

            I do not talk to invisible undetectable agents….only 4 year old children, the insane and reiigious lunatics have invisible undetectable and imagiinary friends. Gee, sounds a lot like YOU!

          • Matthew 22:37

            You are an intellectual savage with the morals of a pig. You prove it every time you post by your lack of civility.

            Spiritual enlightenment is the road to higher morality but you never took it so you sit on this blog like a caveman casting verbal stones at people.

            How could you be truly rational/sane subjecting others to your own immorality all the time like you do.

            Shame on you but you can’t register shame because you seared your own conscience.

            Like I said stick around unloading your backwards immorality onto people but I am done reading your backwards, immoral reasoning. It’s borderline insanity.

            You will repent when God says so.

            Goodbye.

          • pud

            Demonstrate that any “god” past or present ever existed/exists……still waiting….

          • Matthew 22:37

            Take it easy. God bless!

          • Matthew 22:37

            You demonstrate by your own statements on this blog that you are under Satan’s power.

            (Proverbs 25:28) He that hath no rule over his own spirit is like a city that is broken down, and without walls.

            If you had acknowledged Jesus he would have given you help to obtain self control but you rebelled against him to serve your own sinful motives so the old slave master sin retains control of you.

            You never control your words. Something evil is prompting that.

            Read “Developing Self-Control” on Brandonweb dot com.

            Your rage filled lack of self control should be a red flag to you that something is not right with you.

            The Bible says some people get offended at the truth.

            So don’t get offended. If you do then sin gets to rule you. Proud people are easily offended. So pride goeth before a fall.

            If you won’t start to cooperate with God to rule over sin then how will you ever rule enough over sin to evict the devil once and for all?

            People do evil all the time but you want to deny sin exists. That is lying to one’s self.

            If you truly examined yourself like Christ said to do then you could identify the sin extant in yourself and cooperate with God to eradicate it but you never do. You keep insisting you are better than theists while you keep inflicting your insults and tantrums on them.

            You can’t stand against the devil in your own human nature without Jesus. Nobody can.

            Stop quarreling and reflect on it.

            Why would you let the devil steal your peace? It only brings insanity.

            Do not reply with an objection. I am not arguing with anyone who allows the devil to rule them.

            Meditate on it. Then read Romans 10.

            If you have Jesus then he will evict the devil, rescue you from chaos and help you put your life and house in order.

            If you want to remain insane that is up to you but don’t embroil me in your insane decision any longer. I have other things to do than spend all my time on someone determined to stay insane and separated from God.

            In our own power we are incapable of controlling our mouths…our tongues.

            (James 3:8) But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.

            He saved us and has given the power to become all that we need to be through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

            (2 Corinthians 5:17) Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

          • pud

            You do not KNOW that any character name of christ ever existed.

            You do not KNOW that any “god” ever existed

            You do not KNOW anything that you claim….you simply “believe”

            You believe what you want to believe like a child. You have no clue what constitutes reality, truth, evidence or proof. You can literally make up anything you like and “believe” it but don’t lie to yourself by claiming you KNOW anything…you don’t

      • Matthew 22:37

        He’s angry because he belongs to the devil. The slave master sin is ruling him and he won’t join Jesus but he wants to rule over Christians in our thoughtlives and let the old slave master deprogram us through him and his ideas even though it ruined him both spiritually and socially.

        He has poor self control and self observation skills but wants to control Christians following the godly pattern of Jesus.

        He is Satan’s demotivational tool in this world.

        He enjoined with Satan in his own spiritual self sabotage though he is blind to that fact and now works with Satan to sabotage others so they cannot receive spiritual birth, growth and maturity.

    • Matthew 22:37

      There is no burden of proof on theists just because Anthony Flew presumed there was and the New Atheists adopted his perspective.

      Atheism

      Philosopher Antony Garrard Newton Flew Authored The Presumption of Atheism in 1976
      In 1976, atheist philosopher Antony Flew wrote The Presumption of Atheism in which he argued that the question of God’s existence should begin by assuming atheism as the default position. According to Flew, the norm for academic philosophy and public dialogue was at that time for atheists and theists to both share their respective “burdens of proof” for their positions.[18][19] Flew proposed instead that his academic peers redefine “atheism” to bring about these changes:

      What I want to examine is the contention that the debate about the existence of God should properly begin from the presumption of atheism, that the onus of proof must lie upon the theist. The word ‘atheism’, however, has in this contention to be construed unusually. Whereas nowadays the usual meaning of ‘atheist’ in English is ‘someone who asserts that there is no such being as God, I want the word to be understood not positively but negatively… in this interpretation an atheist becomes: not someone who positively asserts the non-existence of God; but someone who is simply not a theist. The introduction of this new interpretation of the word ‘atheism’ may appear to be a piece of perverse Humpty-Dumptyism, going arbitrarily against established common usage. ‘Whyever’, it could be asked, don’t you make it not the presumption of atheism but the presumption of agnosticism?[18]

      — Excerpts from The Presumption of Atheism, Anthony Flew, 1976
      Flew’s proposition saw little acceptance in the 20th century though in the early 21st century Flew’s broader definition of atheism came to be forwarded more commonly.[20][21] In 2007, analytic philosopher William Lane Craig’s described the presumption of atheism as “one of the most commonly proffered justifications of atheism”.[22] In 2010, BBC journalist William Crawley explained that Flew’s presumption of atheism “made the case, now followed by today’s new atheism” arguing that atheism should be the default position.[19][23] In today’s debates, atheists forward the presumption of atheism arguing that atheism is the default position[24][25] with no burden of proof[26][27] and assert that the burden of proof for God’s existence rests solely on the theist.[18][28][29]

      The presumption of atheism has been the subject of criticism by atheists,[30][31] agnostics[32] and theists[33][34] since Flew advanced his position more than 40 years ago.

      Criticism of the presumption of atheism

      The agnostic Analytic Philosopher Anthony Kenny rejected the presumption of atheism on any definition of atheism arguing that “the true default position is neither theism nor atheism, but agnosticism” adding “a claim to knowledge needs to be substantiated, ignorance need only be confessed”.[31]

      Many different definitions may be offered of the word ‘God’. Given this fact, atheism makes a much stronger claim than theism does. The atheist says that no matter what definition you choose, ‘God exists’ is always false. The theist only claims that there is some definition which will make ‘God exists’ true. In my view, neither the stronger nor the weaker claim has been convincingly established”.[35]

      — Excerpt from What I Believe, Anthony Kenny, 2007

      • pud

        You are SO gullible and SO stupid.

        Burden of proof (also known as onus probandi in Latin) is the obligation on somebody presenting a new idea (a claim) to provide evidence to support its truth (a warrant). Once evidence has been presented, it is up to any opposing “side” to prove the evidence presented is not adequate. Burdens of proof are key to having logically valid statements: if claims were accepted without warrants, then every claim could simultaneously be claimed to be true.

        “Accepted without warrant” = “Faith” = “Gullibility”

        • Matthew 22:37

          Christianity is not a new idea.

          It is approximately 2000 years old and the proof was presented then.

          I am putting you on block now because I am not the gullible one allowing sin to rule me.

          You are. And I am sick of reading the insults flowing from your sinfully diseased mind that you now seem to have no control over at all.

          You don’t know philosophy better than a professional philosopher does Mr. Dictionary Definition Quoter. You just use your definitions in attempts to deny other people’s free thinking trying to force them to think like you.

          Why would I want to think like such a socially maladjusted person as yourself?

          You can’t even admit you are not perfect and that atheism has failed in the French Revolution, the Soviet Union, Red China, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, Kim’s North Korea and in several places in South America and Eastern Europe.

          What kind of an idiot places control of work production or materialism ahead of people’s lives?

          It took the bonehead atheist Karl Marx to come up with that one then a bunch of violent atheists adopted his political ideas. Such extreme violence as they have displayed around the world has links to both psycho and socio pathologies and narcissism.

          Don’t you think you ought to take care of your own mental health first before playing pretend psychiatrist on this blog, pud, and indicting others.

          Why should your prejudices be allowed to rule? You have not proven you are sane to me.

          Your level of ill will towards theists convinces many of us that you have mental health issues.

          Why would a theist concede to a mentally unhealthy person such as yourself.

          Why don’t you try mastering and mustering some real self control before posting on here again.

          I don’t think you can do it or you would have left a long time ago.

          If you totally lack self control and cannot restrain yourself from verbally disparaging people then you have a mental health issue which you clearly display every time you post.

          • pud

            The mentally ill and psychotic…you and your fellow indoctrinated cult members….are in no position to assess the mental state of anyone.
            Your constant incoherent babbling and inability to address a specific topic speaks to your derangement
            I would suggest you take a break from “praying” to invisible undetectable non existent agents and make an appointment with a qualified mental health professional. There are treatments you might avail yourself of

          • Matthew 22:37

            There are Christian psychiatrists, pud.

            Christians have better health stats than atheists. Atheists have higher substance abuse and suicide rates. Substance abuse is linked to cancer and psychosis.

            So maybe you had better confine yourself to your own mental health.

            Richard Dawkins attacked a lot of theists casting aspersions on their mental health but he’s not a psychiatrist just like you aren’t.

            Most psychology studies show theists are more well adjusted socially than atheists.

            So why don’t you keep your social maladaptation to yourself?