Wednesday, January 25, 2006

Via Deogolwulf, an amusing kicking is doled out, by Blimpish, to everyone's favourite Labour mouthpiece.
Neil, why won’t God strike down stupid, ignorant embarassments like you, to save us all having to read your utter crap?
...

As for your reply to MatGB, it’s the most confused crap I’ve seen so far this year.
...

Really - you are some kind of automated spamming device unleashed by Downing Street, aren’t you?

Harsh, but quite possibly fair, and hardly unexpected. Blimpish is a reformed atheist and Neil has a rabid and, often, ill-considered aversion to religion in all its forms.

5 comments:

dearieme said...

Is there a subtlety there? Is a reformed atheist a protestant and a converted atheist a catholic? Is a lapsed cathoilc a devout atheist and a former protestant a staunch atheist?

Devil's Kitchen said...

The subtlety is only this; as I see it, an atheist (the natural thing to be, in my mind) would have to have a pretty Damascene conversion to take up religion (B's about the same as me) and therefore his faith stronger than a "quiet" Christian. This means that he will be more virulent in defending religion (and B's not exactly known for holding back on any topic!).

DK

MatGB said...

It is a rather good one; I like Blimpish, amusing (for a tory). Having re read it several times, I still don't understand Harding's response to mine in that thread, so I decided to leave it. Not worth the effort.

Neil Harding said...

Matgb, Sharpener bandwidth is down so can't expand on my comment there.

I have pointed out many ridiculous instructions from God listed in the Old Testament. You claim Jesus is better, which he is, although he is partial to a few moral quirks.

He can be sectarian: 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel'(Matt 10:5-6). In a similar vein, he refuses help to the non-Jewish woman from Canaan with the chilling racist remark 'It is not meet to take the children's bread and cast it to dogs'(Matt 15:26; Mark 7:27). He wants us to be gentle, meek and mild but he himself is far from it:'Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?'(Matt 23:33). The episode of the Gaderene swine shows him to share the then popular belief that mental illness is caused by possession by devils. It also shows that animal lives - also anybody else's property rights in pigs - have no value(luke 8:27-33). The events of the fig tree in Bethany(mark 11:12-21) would make any environmentalist's hair stand on end.

I asked whether we can safely disregard the Old Testament otherwise how can we justify picking and choosing out of it?

The Koran comment was just emphasising how even books written thousands of years after the Old Testament are full of insanities. I know this is not Christian, but my criticism is for all religions. If you want criticism of the New Testament then read my latest post. Cheers.

Blimpish said...

Reformed suits me better than 'converted'. First, 'cause I changed internally rather than through any noticeable external force (the Lord moves...). Second, 'cause, as DK and I have discussed before, I remain very economic in my Christianity - I'm no Bible-thumper and I neither have seen nor expect to see Divine intervention in this life. Therefore, the more gradual sense of reformed works better.

Now to Harding's ludicrous litany:

"Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Mt 10:5-6) is sectarian? Not really. Bearing in mind this is the bit where Jesus sends the apostles off to preach, he's simply pointing out the target market.

"It is not meet to take the children's bread and cast it to dogs" (Mt 15:26; Mk 7:27) is only the first part of the story. The woman points out dogs at least gets the scraps, he sees her point and rids the daughter of the devil possessing her.

The rest of it is such a laughably silly load of crap as to need no detailed refutation. The 'meek and mild' point simply shows that Harding believes Christianity to be a pacific non-judgemental religion, which it never has been or claimed to be (cf. Mt 10:33-42). To reduce the Gadarene swine to poor diagnosis of mental illness is to (ahem) miss the fucking point - you don't have to believe in demons to see that such a notion is internally coherent within scripture. Ditto the point about animal rights. The point about the Bethany fig tree is just so weird I'd better leave it.

Stop, stop. Kicking a cripple would be more challenging than batting away this prat's ludicrous attempts at Biblical commentary.

Moonbat still loony

It's always delightful to dip into George Moonbat's nutty articles ... We cannot rely on market forces and corporate goodwill to de...