“Debunking Christianity”: Never-Ending Insults of Christianity

“Debunking Christianity”: Never-Ending Insults of Christianity June 6, 2018


Debunking Christianity is the website of John W. Loftus: former Christian and now atheist polemicist and author. I recently had dealings with it when I did a critique of one of Loftus’ papers: The Census, Jesus’ Birth in Bethlehem, & History: Reply to Atheist John W. Loftus’ Irrational Criticisms of the Biblical Accounts.

When I made some comments in the same combox where I announced the paper, all of a sudden we saw a good old-fashioned Internet “feeding frenzy,” with five safely anonymous atheists (not a single one of them gives their full name), joining in with wholesale mockery and insults and slanderous garbage, about Christians and about myself.

As always, I like to illustrate the bankruptcy of all such worthless, non-rational “discussions” online (which happen everywhere: commonly in Christian venues as well) by simply exposing them. They are their own refutations. I sure hope this isn’t representative of atheism as a whole (I know many atheists personally who are very different), but I know this sort of nonsense is very common at atheist sites online. I’m sure it turns more people off to atheism than a hundred Christian apologetic arguments could or would. Atheists like this are their own worst enemies.

I won’t cite absolutely everything (if you read the whole thread, be aware that it contains vulgarities and blasphemies), but only remarks that are of an absurdly sweeping, prejudicial nature: against Christianity or yours truly (the latter, indented). Color coding is as follows:

Me = black
Gandolf = blue
articulett = green
brdeadite99 = purple
renoliz = orange
Randy = brown

John Loftus = red

* * * * *


I have made a lengthy reply to the post “Was Jesus Born in Bethlehem?” on my blog, entitled,“Census & Jesus’ Birth in Bethlehem: Atheist John W. Loftus’ Irrational & Uninformed Criticisms of the Biblical Accounts.” It will also be cross-posted on my Facebook Page (over 1200 followers, so lots of potential readers there) and Twitter page.

Atheists and agnostics are welcome on my pages and are treated politely and courteously (while their arguments are vehemently opposed). (2-3-11)

I would have referred him to what modern day archaeologists are saying about there being no Nazareth at the time of alleged Jesus but generally people who are this willing to ignore the obvious contradictions and complete lack of historicity in the birth narratives are too far gone to have a discussion with. He will be vehemently opposing any argument based on facts . . . Let us not allow facts to get in the way of our beliefs, for crying out loud.

There is one particularly foul git there known as “Doctor Doom”, . . . who dismisses links from atheist sites out of hand, saying that they’re “written by atheists with agendas, so you can’t trust anything they say”. Forget facts, they can’t even face simple reality. 

. . . the obligatory mocking already starting to take place. :-) (2-3-11)

I just selected the latest post, so you would see it and not overlook it. It is humorously appropriate in this combox, though, since now my reasoning is being ridiculed and that was the topic of the post! LOL

It continues to be quite fashionable in atheist circles, apparently, to mock Christians and Christianity and yuck it up, sans rational discussion of a rational rebuttal of pet atheist theories. I’ve always marveled at it, but I don’t think these tactics are gonna go away anytime soon. Mockery and irrationalism have long since replaced rational, constructive discussion, as the normative way to communicate and “refute” positions that are disagreed with, these days.

It’s the same in politics, too, as we have observed in the recent spate of attacks on political conservatives as the alleged cause of the nutcase in Arizona.

Your books certainly do not consist solely of mocking and ridicule. There must be rational argument in them, I’m sure. I’m suggesting that you might want to encourage rational, mutually respectful discussion on your blog, too. You guys might actually like it: you never know! (2-5-11)

Given the negative agenda of this site (like so many atheist ones), you guys oughtta have a “dislike” button, so you can express your personal contempt for Christians! :-)

Let it be known that I don’t return this contempt for atheists. Many Christians do, which is a sad thing (and they are wrong and inconsistent to do it), but I do not. That’s why I try to have rational discussions with atheists. The common reluctance to do so doesn’t come from my end.

We can continue to mock and ridicule (and in some cases, “hate”) each other, or we can talk and reason like intelligent adults. (2-5-11)

Well, seeing as how I’ve spent months debating dozens and dozens of Christians(maybe over a hundred of them at this point) and still have yet to find any intelligent arguments from even one of them, my ” personal contempt”, as you call it, is well warranted. I don’t even know why I bother; because in the end, no matter how intelligent you thought a Christian was, it all boils down to feelings, emotions, dogma, and their brainwashed inability to let go of cherished beliefs.

If that is your opinion, then why not simply ignore Christians? This is what is perplexing about atheist behavior. Apart from the very common spectacle and folly of being angry at a God that doesn’t exist, they are obsessed with Christians whom they think are dumber than a doornail, and devoid (as you say) of even one intelligent argument.

Why bother? If I had such a view, I wouldn’t waste time interacting with Christians, and I wouldn’t even use up any energy mocking them. Speaking for myself, I don’t waste time debating flat earthers or Neo-Nazis. I don’t make fun of them, either. I simply ignore them as irrelevant and beyond hope (for intelligent discussion).

But you guys don’t and can’t seem to do that. This very site illustrates the problem: atheism seems to have to be self-defined by opposition to something else.You can’t just live your life and live and let live. You have to mock and express contempt for those who disagree with you.

I have two books that could be said to be arguments against atheism. I also have 21 that aren’t, because I don’t define or confine myself in terms of beliefs that I oppose. But with John Loftus, it is different. Look at his books: it’s all one droning theme: how Christianity is false, why he left it, etc. Has he nothing positive and pro-active to offer?

It’s a very curious phenomenon, but there are several possible explanations, I suppose. (2-5-11)

we are somewhat miffed at the superior and arrogant attitudes that his followers adopt and have held for well over two thousand years. As for expressing mock and contempt, if our opponents could actually dredge up ONE good reason to believe in talking animals, mythical creatures, and demi-god rabbi/carpenters(without telling us that we were never True Christians(TM) . . . we might have some respect for them. . . . At least atheists don’t churn out cheap, slanderous propaganda about other people’s personal beliefs, . . . John Loftus wants people to see Christianity for the sham it is, no different from an ex-cultist victim who warns people about the Church of The Seventh Stone, or whatnot.

Thanks for the quintessential display of irrational atheist anger. Pathetic . . . (2-5-11)

And thank you for the quintessential display of the arrogant, condescending attitude I was talking about. How precious… :)
And you wonder why atheists come to the conclusion that some theists are “dumber than a doornail”.

I think faith addles the brain so that the believer is unable to see themselves the way an outsider perceives them due to the Dunning-Kruger effect (the ignorant are too ignorant to know they are the ignorant people). The believer needs to believe that their magical beliefs make them more moral so they are everlastingly trying to prove that to themselves. Unfortunately they often lose their sense of humor in the process. Fortunately, I think lurkers who read these posts are often moved towards reason. No one wants to seem like the theist blowhard who doesn’t know he’s a blowhard. Mockery is probably the best tool we have against such primitive thinking. . . . former believers often find comfort and healing in laughing at their former superstitions and those that try to manipulate others with them. . . . Life is jollier when you can find glee in their buffoonery.

(I suspect no-one but David Armstrong takes David Armstrong seriously.) I think it’s funny that DA came to a skeptics site to get attention and then tells others to ignore him as though responses to him are “persecution”! I don’t know any skeptics that go to “woo” sites or churches goofing on believers for their silly beliefs, do you?

I think it’s just very hard for the theist to accept that the atheist finds their magical beliefs as silly (and potentially dangerous) as all the magical beliefs the theists rejects. (And for the same reasons!) 

You suggest atheists are angry at God , this is manipulative and very misleading and deceitful propaganda. Most Atheists are not angry at God. Yet here you are pushing this deceitful manipulative propaganda that other theist sheep around you will end up having faith in. You also make the decietful [sic] manipulative accusation that atheists are simply “obesessed” [sic] with Christians. . . These false manipulative accusations turn theist sheep against atheists, plus have the effect of blinding theist sheep . . . And yet here you are Dave today, willingly spreading the manipulative deceitful propaganda/ministry. . . Does it make you feel morally superior? with your supposed God given “objective moral” values and Church hours spent warming pews, to be here today spreading blatant lies about Atheists. . . And when it upsets people like Brdeadite a bit .Dave Armstrong suddenly crys [sic] wolf and trys [sic] to suggest…”Thanks for the quintessential display of irrational atheist anger. Pathetic . . . ” . . . Daves [sic] “faithful attitude” makes him feel NEED to revert to use of even more manipulative decetful [sic] propaganda tactics again. . . . This is simply deceitful.Its a manipulation of the truth. And amounts to propaganda. . . . Dave you cannot come to places like this and use such manipulative deceitful tactics ….And not expect people to get a little angry about it. . . . I suggest to you that while Theists continue on with these blatantly manipulative deceitful practices ..It is indeed even warrented! [sic] that we sometimes do use ridicule. . . Theists display thoughtless uncaring attitudes that deceitfully misjudge people in a bigoted way . . .

Grand total:

“manipulative”: 9 times
“deceitful”: 9 times
“Propaganda”: 5 times

. . . for theist children to throw away their wee faith cuddly rugs, learn to grow up! and face responsibilities. . . We do see that much of its been so very childish and immensely irresponsible . . . 

I don’t think believers in magic are qualified to have “rational discussions”, are they? — especially when such discussions might interfere with the magical things they feel saved for “believing in”? Does anyone here know of a religionists who is capable of having a “rational discussion” when it comes to their religion? I would venture that those who are capable of rational discussion are on their way to becoming non-believers if they aren’t there yet. I don’t find self-described Christians any more capable of having rational discussions on Christianity than self-described Scientologists having a rational discussion on Scientology. I find that former believers are much more capable of rational and insightful discussion on the subject of supernatural beliefs than those who are beholden to such beliefs.

Christians march into skeptic sites feeling all mad and claiming persecution because someone dared to find their magical beliefs as goofy as they find other myths.

Ah, it’s a feeding frenzy now, huh? (2-5-11)

“What You Can Find Here at DC”

By John W. Loftus at 11/18/2010

There is plenty of discussion that takes place afterward. . . . Stay on and engage us. We aim at having respectable debates, more or less.

Um, it’s totally lesin this thread, dude! How can you possibly write that last sentence with a straight face? LOL I could have a better dialogue with a comatose jellyfish than what is available here (at least based on the evidence of this thread).

Christian, see if your faith can withstand our assault.

Sure, my faith can withstand the endless personal assaults of atheists. No problem there. But rational dialogue cannot survive in such a scenario. Takes two willing parties to do that.

You will grow as you do. What harm can there be in seeing if your faith can be defended?

But this contradicts what everyone here is saying: that no Christian has ever given a single intelligent argument for anything! LOL

Try it and see. Test your faith here.

More like “test your patience,” to see if it matches with Job’s, . . . (2-6-11)

For a lot of Theists this thing they call being polite and courteous seems to also include endless manipulation and educated sophistry. They even will use it to turn the existence of very abusive faiths . . . I dont bother much going to faithful folks blogs because i dont really expect much straight forward honesty. . . . Yes indeed Theists can sure create some wonderful harmonizations that will end up with human throwing live babies into fire. Or that Joseph Smith found some Golden plates. Ect.Ect.Ect [sic]

Thanks for some semblance of an actual reply to my arguments (even a semi-rational one in-between all the endless humorous put-downs and psychoanalyses). But of course it is Loftus’ argument and he needs to defend it. (2-6-11)

. . . the truth remains theists have traditionally proved they are quite capable of dragging themselves down into the bottomless mire and muck of being caught out ! and sprung for often being deceitful and untrustworthy. . . . And yet some theists will still wonder why some people would ever dare think of theists with such ridicule and contempt.

But it really isn’t healthy for society to be respectful to adults who engage in and promote magical thinking. . . . I think mockery is the best way to end the inanity of all these believers in assorted faiths imagining themselves superior to all those who believe in a different brand of magic. . . . Faith makes people self righteous and nutty!

tsk tsk– DA’s feelings are hurt because people don’t agree with him and no one here is coddling him for having magical beliefs. . . . the manipulations your indoctrinators used on you, Dave, don’t work here. All believers in all “woo” feel insulted by those who think their beliefs are delusional.

I continue to await Loftus’s counter-response. He made an indication that there is some slight chance it may happen. That may actually be on the topic, too (as an extra bonus). As for this thread and its 1001 rabbit trails, . . . zzzzzZZZZZ. (2-6-11)

You were the one who started the rabbit trails, you bozo-face– you posted off topic and then had a fit when John didn’t answer claiming censorship!
[I threw no “fit” at any time. I simply announced my new paper on the latest thread, so Loftus would see it. Because my first post disappeared, at first I thought it was censored. But after Loftus denied it, I figured out that it was Blogger’s automatic spam function (as indeed it was, as confirmed by Loftus), and so I wrote on 2-4-11: “It musta been Blogger’s automatic spam function. You can go to your comments section and check the spam folder. It acts weird sometimes. I should have thought of that. My apologies.”]
People who feel saved for having magical beliefs aren’t really capable of rational discussion on their magical beliefs. . . . the funny thing is is this was a thread illustrating how theists are unable to see themselves the way an outsider might see them…. and then you came in and proved the point– which made goofing on you too irresiistable. [sic] You tried to plug your creepy website and now you’re trying to imply that John not responding to your wackadoodle Christian conjecture means that your wackadoodle beliefs have merit… just like a slew of other wackadoodle Christians who post here trying to plug their goofy websites that no-one is going to. You guys should bond with each other and post on each other’s site about how great all your arguments are since the rational people here can’t seem to make sense of you and you end up feeling like your “patience is being tried” and we feel like we are being preached at by folks we’d never look to for advice.. . . I don’t appreciate the self righteous folks who do believe in such things interrupting a humorous thread to push their beliefs while insulting those who rightly find such beliefs mock-worthy. You are the one who has been rude here– not any of the atheists. I don’t know any theist that would put up with someone interrupting a humorous thread to try to push some website while insulting the readership in the process.
My experience shows me that believers in the supernatural are seldom able to have rational conversations when it comes to their supernatural beliefs– especially if they feel “saved” or “moral” or “righteous” because of those beliefs like Muslims and Fox News viewers. To me, you guys are like children pointing at presents under a Christmas tree while claiming that it’s proof that Santa is real.
As such, I feel that YOU are poorly qualified for rational discussion here or anywhere, and I wouldn’t be surprised if John comes to a similar conclusion. Surely, you don’t waste your time on every “woo” who comes your way; why should John? What’s in it for him?
Oh ok …All of a sudden Dave doesnt want to play ball anymore …First he makes these claims suggesting there is no good reason for atheists to mistrust theism .We put a few possible reasons forward why it might not be so wise to “trust” theism. But Daves no longer keen to play ball. . . . That seems to be Daves plan?, continue to turn a blind eye, put the fingers in the ears and say nah naaa nah naaa ! …im not listening . . . But now Dave suddenly chooses to feel all sleepy and discontinue with the discussion that he started ?.Why is this ?, might it be because ? Dave knows he will need to be a little honest and admit that yes indeed he was wrong !. . . I think maybe Dave is having some trouble with dwelling within continuing denial .This seems to be a very traditional type trait for many faith believers. My own family sits rotting within a Christian cult stuck in this faithful “denial mode”, . . . I mean why would John Loftus even bother getting involved in another bitch-fight again , with a theist who obviously cant even see any good valid reason at all to feel need of some mistrust for theists and their theism, somebody so stuck in faithful denial mode he wont even bother to discuss it any further. Whats the use in discussing these matters much with theists on their blogs if this is the type of brick wall one comes up againsts right from the get-go.

I just want it known that I’m an equal opportunity mocker. I mock the Scientologists, Muslims, Mormons, and Christians. I mock those who believe in fairies and those who believe in astrology and those that believe in voo-doo. I mock reincarnationists as much as I mock those who believe in Heaven, hell, or Valhalla. I mock all those who believe in the supernatural. . . . I think the Christian “persecution complex” is HI-Larious given the fact that it’s atheists that are regularly actually discriminated against in America . . . I think you’ll find the majority of prejudice is the US is spread by Christians to Christians — many of whom are dishonestly and hypocritically claiming to be persecuted because people on skeptic sites don’t defer to their delusions! 

I even purposely stay away from sites where other “ex members” of the cult we were born in, get together to chat. . . . Anyone dare even discuss it and they throw all their dollys out the pram and start wailing whaaa!…booo hoo i want my cuddly rug! They rather not face it, so as to claim the right to continue to live in “faithful” hope …Even if it means history keeps on repeating itself …and as such future generations need to keep suffering faith-abuse . . . 

Keep it up, folks! I’ve always loved farce. I wanna see how many atheist stereotypes and caricatures of self-parodies can be present in one thread. Y’all are very inventive. It’s marvelously entertaining (if little else). (2-7-11)

* * *

John Loftus then posted that I am far too ignorant and stupid for him to waste his time on. If I see further papers of his that I think will serve as examples of shoddy, flimsy atheist reasoning, I will refute them, whether he chooses to respond or not. My job as an apologist is to defend truth and refute error. If those defending errors (such as atheism) see no need to defend their view against critique, then it helps our cause. It would be nice to actually have a dialogue, but my first duty is to refute error, whether a person is willing to “talk” or not.

And let my self-proclaimed critics or “enemies” (as the case may be) mock and insult all they want. It never has stopped me from doing anything and it never will. We’re told by Jesus to fully expect this. Generally (though not always), it means we are doing something right and hitting a nerve.


(originally 2-7-11)

Photo credit: David and Goliath (1888), by Osmar Schindler (1869-1927) [public domain / Wikimedia Commons]


"No, but that's what the devil wants and loves."

Marshall, Keating, & Lawler: Exchanges Re ..."
"Heard a discussion on Catholic radio this evening, an interview with Cardinal Dolan about the ..."

Marshall, Keating, & Lawler: Exchanges Re ..."
"Of course, there is no proof that Pope Francis is a heretic. He never can ..."

Phil Lawler: No Proof Pope Francis ..."
"I might suggest we take his flawed, self-serving list and propose a negative path. Q. ..."

Seidensticker Folly #72: Why an Eight-Week ..."

Browse Our Archives