Kingdom Warriors’ bullshit revisited
I sent the following to Emmanuel, the owner of Kingdom Warriors dot com.
Hey Emmanuel,
I read your site and checked out the first video. I have to say what you’re doing is at least irresponsible if not outright dangerous.
To claim that all that people need to overcome illness, fatal or otherwise, is to invoke Jesus’ name you know is patently false. Religious and irreligious die all the time from disease even if they do invoke Jesus’ name. If it really were that simple, anyone who ever called himself a Christian would never die of disease.
Now I’ll move onto the theological implications. You have no evidence that a god, Jesus, or the devil exist, nor of the exact nature of their relationship even if they did. Yes, you can quote Bible verses as you are clearly wont to do, but you must be aware that every faith and belief system has a holy book, they can’t all be right, and so that something is written, even by someone long ago, does not equal evidence of the written word’s validity.
But let’s assume that the written word is valid. This still raises plenty of questions. If your god is omnipotent, he has the power to rid the world of disease. That he hasn’t speaks either to his impotence or his disinterest. Let’s go by what you claim. The devil creates disease. Why does this omnipotent god then not stop the devil? Any way you cut it, what you say flies in the face of proven medical science.
From your videos that I’ve seen, you seem like a decent, concerned, and sincere person. It’s a shame, then, that you choose to put your energy into preaching such obvious falsehoods. If you must spout hogwash, you could at least curtail it by preaching that people seek proper medical care in addition to any religious activity they (futilely) engage in.
March 8, 2010 at 1:53 am
I would agree with you that advertising that invoking Jesus’ name will suddenly cure all is a complete pipedream.
As to the theological… did you come up with that stuff all on your own? No wait… that is the same pathetic set of arguments that every single light weight atheist has beem using for the last 1000 years.
You have no more evidence that everything is a great big cosmic mistake than a Christian does for believing everything has a purpose. You are so completely convinced that you are right that you will not even consider the possibility that you are wrong. That would make you a religious fundamentalist.
I love guys like you. You think you are so brilliant yet are to busy patting yourselves on the back to realize that your own “faith” (everyone has to believe something) does not stand up to same scrutiny that you use to argue against there being a God.
No one can prove or disprove a personal God. No one can prove or disprove that everything is a great big cosmic mistake. To delude yourself that you are somehow more intelligent than those of a different faith than you just confirms the delusion.
Futhermore, there is far more eveidence of a historical Jesus (Yeshua) than there is for much of the Greek history taught in schools as fact. If you actually take the time to do some real research instead of regurgitating tired old arguments you would realize that you don’t know nearly as much as you think you know.
Grow up cupcake. Time to put on your big girl panties and learn how to read something a bit more intellectual than Sam Harris.
March 8, 2010 at 2:40 am
Hey ADHD,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on Atheist Asshole.
>As to the theological… did you come up with that stuff all on your own? No wait… that is the same pathetic set of arguments that every single light weight atheist has beem using for the last 1000 years.
Ah, sarcasm. I definitely love a good dose. “Pathetic” and “light weight” don’t equal wrong. And actually, I think the arguments have existed for far more than 1,000 years. More like 3,000. Why so long? Because there’s no reason to believe any religious hogwash.
>You have no more evidence that everything is a great big cosmic mistake than a Christian does for believing everything has a purpose.
I never said it was a mistake. I’ve said over and over I don’t know how the universe came to be. But, unlike the religious, I don’t claim to know.
> You are so completely convinced that you are right that you will not even consider the possibility that you are wrong. That would make you a religious fundamentalist.
My beliefs are based on facts. The second I have proof that they’re wrong, I change them. I don’t know if black holes are real or not. But I’m not trying to teach children that they are or trying to tell you where to put your genitals based on my ridiculous black hole bullshit.
>I love guys like you. You think you are so brilliant yet are to busy patting yourselves on the back to realize that your own “faith” (everyone has to believe something) does not stand up to same scrutiny that you use to argue against there being a God.
Faith is belief in something without evidence or in the face of opposing evidence. Belief is based on reason. I believe the sun will rise again tomorrow because it rose yesterday. I believe it will not turn into a giant, chocolate bunny because I have no reason to.
What scrutiny?? Bring it!
>No one can prove or disprove a personal God.
The burden of proof lies on the assertion. No one can prove or disprove the existence of leprechauns either, but I bet you’re not agnostic about those.
I don’t know what the hell you mean by “personal.”
> No one can prove or disprove that everything is a great big cosmic mistake.
Nobody ever said it was a mistake.
>To delude yourself that you are somehow more intelligent than those of a different faith than you just confirms the delusion.
I never said anything about my intelligence on its own merits or relative to anyone else’s.
>Futhermore, there is far more eveidence of a historical Jesus (Yeshua) than there is for much of the Greek history taught in schools as fact.
Name it! Point out one independently verifiable fact of Jesus’ existence. Just one. I already know about Josephus’ references. That’s general and not independently verifiable.
I don’t know what the hell you’re talking about with Greek history being taught in schools. No one ever told me Zeus was real.
>If you actually take the time to do some real research instead of regurgitating tired old arguments you would realize that you don’t know nearly as much as you think you know.
I never claimed to know that which you claim I claimed to have known. Just because arguments are “old” doesn’t mean they’re wrong.
I’m not equipped to go on an independently funded archaeological dig in Israel solely to try to find evidence of Jesus’ existence. Therefore, I’m forced to rely on other evidence. In my research, I’ve found none. Once I do, I will happily admit I was wrong.
>Grow up cupcake. Time to put on your big girl panties and learn how to read something a bit more intellectual than Sam Harris.
Ouch. Cupcake. Man, I’ve heard some really nasty insults before, but to be called a baked good, shit, I may not be able to sleep tonight. Oo, and to question my masculinity. That really stings. Gonna call me gay next? Or fat? What is it with ad hominems? The second I have the audacity to question a baseless claim or call it crap automatically necessitates attacking me? Who truly needs to ditch the tighty whities?
If you’re up to an actual discussion, like to scrutinize me, awesome, but if you’re gonna be a douche solely for the sake of being a douche, do all of us rational folks a favor, don’t vote and go fuck yourself.
March 8, 2010 at 3:09 am
I thought I was having an actual discussion I just did my best to match the rude belittling tone you use in all of your posts. I mean you call your blog, atheist asshole… what the hell did you expect.
You seem to be comfortable being a “douche” so I figured “when in Rome”.
I would love to hear some of those “facts” you base your beliefs on.
Zeus was part of Greek mythology. Greek history would include people like Alexander the Great.
Actually the oldest’s copies of the the New Testament gospels, Paul’s authentic letters etc are all more than sufficient as independent accounts of Jesus’s existance. The Bible as we know it today was not written as a single book. It was assembled from multiple writtings some of which we have copies of that are dated less than 200 years from Jesus death. As the vast majority of history that is considered fact by most of society has far less actual documentation than that I would say it is pretty trustworthy. I do not know of any credible main stream scholars who deny the existance of Jesus.
“The burden of proof lies on the assertion. No one can prove or disprove the existence of leprechauns either, but I bet you’re not agnostic about those.”
Unfortunately for you I have not tried to prove God exists to you. You however have made your opinion widely known that there is no God. Prove it. Let’s see those facts.
“Faith is belief in something without evidence or in the face of opposing evidence. Belief is based on reason. I believe the sun will rise again tomorrow because it rose yesterday. I believe it will not turn into a giant, chocolate bunny because I have no reason to.”
Where did you get these definitions? Nevermind…. So please provide me with your evidence that there is no God. I already said no one can prove there is a God (personal would mean a relationship with a God that gives a crap about us individualy). Hell even Dawkins acknowledges the possibility of a Higher Power. Lets see the things that seperates your belief from faith.
March 8, 2010 at 4:07 am
Hey ADHD,
Here we go!
>I thought I was having an actual discussion I just did my best to match the rude belittling tone you use in all of your posts. I mean you call your blog, atheist asshole… what the hell did you expect.
I’ve not yet used an ad hominem. I viciously attack people’s beliefs and I’ve given my reasons why.
>I would love to hear some of those “facts” you base your beliefs on.
I’ll give you one. I believe the earth is older than 5,700 years because I’ve seen archaeological, astronomical, and linguistic evidence that proves such.
Beyond that, feel free to ask me specific questions.
>Zeus was part of Greek mythology. Greek history would include people like Alexander the Great.
I wasn’t sure whether you were counting history as history or myth as history. As for Alex, I’m not sure that he historically existed. My understanding of the subject is that there are countless records Greek and otherwise that detail him, but beyond that, I’m Alexander-agnostic.
I’ve heard similar things about Shakespeare, Socrates, Julius Caesar, and the George Washington cherry tree story. The fact, though, is we have the plays, the philosophy, the conquests, and the corpse. Whether every detail was true is ultimately irrelevant. That is until legislation is based on it.
>Actually the oldest’s copies of the the New Testament gospels, Paul’s authentic letters etc are all more than sufficient as independent accounts of Jesus’s existance.
(This is a long conversation I’m happy to have privately over e-mail, but I’ll give it an initial stab.)
Except that it is widely known that none are 1st-hand eyewitness accounts.
Second, it’s also widely known that the different gospels tell the tale differently.
Third, just because someone claims something doesn’t mean it’s true. I can write a story about Bob the Almighty. Doesn’t make him or his Almightyness real.
Fourth, you’re ignoring the reality that all holy books have been translated and edited to fit claims, prophecies, and kings’ whims.
Moreover, I’ve seen the 1st pages of the Book of Mormon that claim that Joseph Smith and his followers all swore they saw the golden tablets. Doesn’t mean it happened.
If you choose to take Paul’s supposed “authentic” letters as verifiable accounts, I’d hate to have you as a witness in a murder trial. “Some guy I’ve never seen says he’s innocent! He must be! He said it! Look, I wrote it down!”
> The Bible as we know it today was not written as a single book. It was assembled from multiple writtings some of which we have copies of that are dated less than 200 years from Jesus death. As the vast majority of history that is considered fact by most of society has far less actual documentation than that I would say it is pretty trustworthy.
So because something is documented makes it real? The Norse sagas and Mayan myths are very well documented. Doesn’t make them real. And I would say that much of what we collectively call “history” isn’t necessarily true. George “cherry tree” Washington for example.
>I do not know of any credible main stream scholars who deny the existance of Jesus.
Seriously?? An appeal to authority? I guess you’ve made an appeal to popularity, an appeal to history, and other fallacies, so this one shouldn’t be a surprise.
Just because mainstream scholars haven’t proved him not to exist doesn’t mean he did. Mainstream scholars haven’t disproved the existence of Heracles, do you believe him to be an historical figure as well?
>Unfortunately for you I have not tried to prove God exists to you. You however have made your opinion widely known that there is no God. Prove it. Let’s see those facts.
I can’t disprove a negative. Prove to me that the Easter Bunny doesn’t exist. The assertion is a god does exist. There is no proof. The assertion is an Easter Bunny exists. There is no proof of that either. And yet we’re not discussing the relative merits of Easter Bunny existence, are we?
>Where did you get these definitions? Nevermind….
Dictionary.com definition #2 of “faith.” That mainstream enough for you?
>So please provide me with your evidence that there is no God.
I can’t prove a negative.
>I already said no one can prove there is a God (personal would mean a relationship with a God that gives a crap about us individualy). Hell even Dawkins acknowledges the possibility of a Higher Power. Lets see the things that seperates your belief from faith.
I already told you. I believe that there is no god for I see no reason to. The assertion is that there’s a god, for which there is no proof. I also believe there are no pink unicorns. I assume you agree with me on that. And yet you don’t call my lack of pink unicorn belief “faith.”
It’s true that any belief is ultimately just a belief. The question is how much evidence is there to support any belief? If we are to afford any belief merit just because someone conceived of it, that necessitates that we afford all beliefs merit. And yet we don’t.
The sun shall rise again… there’s evidence.
Black holes exist… there’s some evidence about which we don’t have a full understanding.
A god exists. No evidence.
March 9, 2010 at 7:11 pm
This is fun. Sorry I have been crazy busy over the last few days. I will carry on our coversation (hopefully complete with all the entertaining but meaningless insults) in a few days when things settle down a bit for me. Hopefully you will not give up even when you realize you came unarmed to a battle of the wills. (:-P
Cheers
March 9, 2010 at 7:18 pm
Unarmed. That’s funny. Not really “ha ha” funny, but funny nonetheless. Just come up with something better than “cupcake.”
‘Til then, Train.
March 9, 2010 at 8:22 pm
Why? Cupcake seemed to piss you off.
Okay. How about Cream Puff?
March 9, 2010 at 8:29 pm
Only in the fact that it wasn’t that interesting. I mean, seriously, if you’re gonna insult a total stranger, at least pick something that might be offensive. I’m neither a 13-year-old boy, nor a closeted gay man, so either questioning my masculinity or sexual orientation does nothing.
March 9, 2010 at 11:34 pm
you protest to much… still coming to terms with your true identity?
March 10, 2010 at 2:54 am
I’m not protesting to much, yet I might be protesting too much. Nope. I’ve already arrived at all terms.
July 16, 2011 at 5:21 pm
people doubted Jesus when he did miracles right in front of their eyes! it happened 2000 years ago happening now and will be happening until He comes!
one of my friend said, you beleive in God but later (after death) find out that God doesnt exist then you lose nothing…you refuse to believe in God and later find yourself wrong..then you lose everything
July 17, 2011 at 8:59 pm
Hey FromRussia,
Thanks for dropping by. Let me address a couple of your points.
“people doubted Jesus when he did miracles right in front of their eyes!”
This has never been demonstrated. You can’t prove that 1. Jesus existed 2. he performed miracles or 3. that anyone witnessed them. If you believe the Gospels to be eyewitness accounts, then I have to ask if you believe the Odyssey to be literally true or Grimm’s Fairy Tales, and if not, why not? Both contain historical facts. Both take place in real places. Both bear witness to people and events.
“it happened 2000 years ago happening now and will be happening until He comes!”
How do you know it happened 2000 years ago? How do you mean it’s happening now? Where’s Jesus and where are the miracles? What do you mean it will be happening until he comes? How do you know this? How do you know he’s coming?
“one of my friend said, you beleive in God but later (after death) find out that God doesnt exist then you lose nothing…you refuse to believe in God and later find yourself wrong..then you lose everything”
Your friend is an idiot. What your friend is suggesting is Okham’s Razor. But this argument is built on false premises and logical fallacy. Let me explain.
1. If one believes in God, but God doesn’t exist, one has indeed lost time, energy, perhaps fear, guilt, and who knows what else? I personally wouldn’t want to waste my time and energy believing in something that I had no evidence for. I’ve done so before and it was time and energy I could’ve spent on more useful and enjoyable pursuits.
2. By saying “refuse to believe in God”, you seem to suggest that I know He’s real, but am simply being stubborn. This isn’t the case. I did believe in God, but found 1. no answers to the questions I had about Him and his supposed role in the universe and 2. encountered zero evidence of the claims made about Him. Would you say I “refuse” to believe in Zeus?
3. By saying “then you lose everything”, you assert an undemonstrated premise. What is your evidence that I would lose anything? What is your evidence that your brand of theology is true and no other is? Why do you (presumably) believe in the Abrahamic God and not Zeus?
The main fallacy in O’s R is a false dichotomy. It suggests that there is either a (punishing) god or there isn’t. But the existence of a god, punishing or not, can’t be demonstrated. If I were to base my life on the fear of retribution of every single god, force, or notion I potentially have to fear, I’d never leave the house. Some things, like flying through the windshield at a sudden stop, are worth fearing. I wear a seatbelt. Other things, like being struck by lightning, are not worth fearing. I perpetually expose myself to open areas in which I could potentially be struck by lightning because the likelihood I actually will is nil.
If, FromRussia, you have any evidence of your claims and therefore reasons why I should take the just-in-case side of Okham’s Razor, then please drop them on me. If not, then I suggest you ask yourself why you fear the lightning that most likely will never strike you.
July 20, 2011 at 4:58 pm
Oops. I got this completely wrong. I kept saying “Okham’s Razor” when I meant to say “Pascal’s Wager.” D’oh!
July 17, 2012 at 2:24 pm
atheists cause war not religion!
July 17, 2012 at 5:12 pm
Hi Steven,
I agree. People start wars, not social constructs. I don’t think I’ve ever made the opposite claim. Some social constructs, however, certainly make war more justifiable whereas atheism doesn’t if for no other reason than atheism says nothing one way or the other on war.
Best,
Anton.