A sneer is as good as a wink to a blind man

Check this out. The Tekton Apologetics Ministries guy has finally decided to “address” some of the comments I’ve made about stuff on his web site.

Not long ago I discovered yet another site by a pissant Skeptic with zero credentials and no inclination to use any sort of Biblical scholarship. In fact, it seems that his most advanced source is stuff like Strobel. Not that there’s anything wrong with Strobel: As I always say, his stuff is good “gateway” material. But as is typical, our man here — who I’ll call Dumplin’ Dumbash — seems to think that making a few cutie-pie comments is enough to do the job.

What is it with Christians and this compulsion to commit the same “sins” they accuse me of, in the very act of accusing me of them? Cutie-pie comments indeed!

I’ll be adding this to my list of blog fodder, but I thought some of you might get a kick out of it in the meantime. What’s really funny is that he’s just dying to call me a Dumbass, but he can’t! Baby Jesus might cry or something, so the best he can do is call me “Dumbash.” Why not just call me Dumb-diddly-um-dum, Ned?

It’s clear where he puts his faith anyway: in the credentials of men, and in human scholarship. Not that this is a bad thing; after all, since God doesn’t show up in real life, it’s not like he has any opportunity to put his faith in Him. It’s up to men to work up reasons for believing, in God’s absence. Meanwhile all I have is myself and my God (since my God does show up in real life). Poor me, nothing but the Truth to hold onto in the face of this withering gale of criticism!

Heh.

 
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...
Posted in Amusements, Unapologetics. 8 Comments »

8 Responses to “A sneer is as good as a wink to a blind man”

  1. GaySolomon Says:

    When one strips away the ad hominem attacks of Tektonics, and his presumption of omniscience, we are left with very little that is not an appeal to tradition or to authority.

    He appears to believe that we must be scholars of scripture before we are qualified to point out that his “emperor” has no clothes.

    I am reminded of PZ Myers masterful piece entitled “The Courtier’s Reply”:

    http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/12/the_courtiers_reply.php

  2. jim Says:

    Wow! The Tekton ‘parody’ page of your site seems to have missed the most salient of points, by not recognizing that its brand of apologetics is a parody of orthodox exegesis. Most of the OT prophecies are meant to be read as simple analogies, and NOT as predictions?! Since when? Also, I see Vox Day’s brand of reason-replaced-by-snark is spreading throughout the Christian blogworld. Of course, when information is compared head to head, as in your criticisms here, what else do the theists have to offer but snark? Theirs is a child’s game, so what else can we expect but a child’s response? Fairly typical, I’m afraid.

    Also, the attempts at justifying the apparent absence of God demonstrably acting in this world are priceless, if stale. Follow the logic all the way to the end, and you wind up with something like ‘the less proof we have of God’s existence=the more proof that He exists’. Sigh…

  3. jim Says:

    Also, the real ‘scholars of scripture’…meaning, of course, the professional historians of ancient texts such as those found in the bible, find the ideas about inspired writings and inerrant scriptures laughable. The only ‘scholars’ *chuckle* representing the fundamentally ‘inspired’ view of the bible are pre-disposed believers with an eye towards squaring up any discrepancies in favor of ‘the faith’. Not exactly an honest approach, is it? The same can be said for ‘scholars’ of the Koran, the Book of Mormon, etc.

    I can’t believe we’re still arguing about this stuff, especially in the West. Christians, the verdict has been in for more than a century! You lost!!! (Although, it IS fun pointing it out, sometimes).

  4. Chris Says:

    1. Robert Turkel, the guy behind Tekton, has no bible scholar credentials either. The guy has a library degree, so at best he can categorize his books better.

    2. Turkel is a complete dick, and not really worth the effort. He’s no better than Strobel, but at least Strobel is polite.

  5. jim Says:

    Thanks, Chris. I just googled the guy, and discovered in great detail what you’re talking about. And you’re right…the guy’s a joke.

  6. Deacon Duncan Says:

    By the way, hello to all the fine folks visiting from theologyweb. Don’t be shy, leave a comment and say Hi. Cheers. :)

  7. AndyD Says:

    So, if I paraphrase him properly…

    If I contract a carpenter to replace my roof and when he’s finished I can see no difference whatsoever, inside or outside of the roof, then I must go and get my own carpentry trade papers before I can declare the contracted carpenter a fraud?

    Or let me put that another way… if a plumber claims to have fixed my leaking taps without ever showing up at my house…

    Of course, by extrapolation, if Tekton isn’t an aethiest, he is no position to dismiss your arguments.

  8. Paul Murray Says:

    “Most of the OT prophecies are meant to be read as simple analogies, and NOT as predictions?!”

    I rather like (I think) A E Whites take on the OT prophets. According to him, in OT times they thought that artistic skill of any sort came from the gods. A prophet is simply anyone who has a little literary pizzaz. That’s why so much of Isiah (for instance) is in verse. That’s the whole *point*: the fact that he can construct good verse is precisely what makes him a “prophet”.

    This neatly explains how “false prophets” can exist, and how it’s possible for there to be schools for prophets (there’s a passage involving king Saul and such a school), and why king David was a “prophet”.