I normally would not use Triablogue as a means of responding to comments others have made about me in comments sections elsewhere, but if Steve will allow me to hijack T-blog for a moment; since I have not been permitted to respond apart from my comments being deleted, I’d just like to make a few notes here.
To the person I deleted who said freethinkers don’t think for themselves…at least I am not sitting around obsessively analyzing one f–king ancient book 24-7. There is a whole big world and universe out there. Also, you can write volumes about me and what I write on your narrow-minded and boring blog..I couldn’t care less. Whatever floats your boat.
The article that is being referenced by this “free thinker” (i.e., enslaved mind) is my post “Free Thinkers” Never Think For Themselves. It is very evident that she did not even read the first paragraph of that post, her excuse being that it is was too long. But this is really embarrassing on her part. A few notes:
1. I did not write “volumes” about you, nor did I write anything about what you wrote. Rather, I responded to an article that Dan Barker had written, which you posted, and kindly gave a hat-tip link to your blog for credit, since it is where I had read it. So let’s not make this all about you, shall we?
2. You are the one who claims to be a “free thinker,” not me. Yes, I claim to think for myself. But I also claim to have a worldview with a set of principles, the authority being the Bible. You, however, do not claim such authority, but you allow the atheistic worldview to be auto-programmed into your brain while at the same time deceptively telling others that you are a “free thinker.”
3. You completely ignore the rationality behind my studying the Bible. Sure, that may be worthless to you, but we do not share the same worldview. As a Christian, it is in my interest to give a defense for what I believe. From the little I have read of you, I suppose that is no priority in your life.
4. All you are telling me by mocking my devotion to God is that you are not a Christian. That’s obvious. You do not share my worldview and do not share my presuppositions. But don’t discount my presuppositions because they are not yours. Rather, justify your own, or have me justify mine. It is much more effective than the immaturity and language you have been displaying that we would expect from a 14 year old teenage boy, not a 51 year old woman.
5. The reader should note that this commenter fails to address the article mentioned. She mocks it’s length (it is not much more lengthy than the size of her posts, so she is a bit hypocritical), but if anything it’s length should at least get her attention. Of course, lengthy things can be full of meaningless content and be a waste of time. But it is at least worth a shot, especially when I spent the time writing it. Of course, I did not address it to her, but to Dan Barker (to whom I was responding); but since she has flattered herself into thinking that it was a response to her she might as well at least attempt at writing back.
6. The fact that my comments were deleted for no better reason than that I posit an opposing viewpoint is quite telling. This is the way they do things in an atheist world. Of course, I effectively displayed in my original article that the notion that an atheist has a basis for morality is a precious myth, so we shouldn’t expect them to be honest in their interactions with us.
7. She calls Triablogue “boring.” Now, she may not agree with what we say, but anyone who reads this knows that it is anything but “boring.” In fact, Triablogue is in large part a blog of satire, and I must say that Steve is quite gifted at this talent.