Tag: evangelical

Not So Polite Dinner Conversation – my favorite dead horse to beat on: free will and predetermination

Christians often want their free will but to also claim that everything is their god’s will and that predestination is in play.  We can start off with the common definitions of both terms.

Free will: “is the ability to choose between different possible courses of action unimpeded”

Predestination:  equivalent to predeterminism: “all events are determined completely by previously existing causes”  – both definitions from Wikipedia.

One can of course try to use philosophical nonsense to try to split hairs but I find these to be quite universal.

 

Christians claim that Christians are corrupted and their version of their god is the only source of salvation.  Verses often cited for each are: 1.  Psalm 53:3; Romans 3:12; Ecclesiastes 7:29.  And 2. John 6:44; Romans 5:8; 1 John 4:19

To set the stage we need to examine these two claims.  Both types of Christians claim that humans are “corrupted” and need “saved”.   Corrupted by what or who?  Saved by what and how?

The bible has that a snake was in the garden, a garden that this god claimed was perfect.  This indicates that either the snake was considered necessary aka perfect or that this god wasn’t telling the truth.  Some Christians claim it was satan, some don’t, claiming a literal animal.  We also have Jews having their own opinions and these even nuttier folks, Noahides, which are either Jews who think that their god gave just Noah a certain set of laws or Gentiles who need an excuse feel extra special and to ignore the laws in the bible they find inconvenient but who find JC as a failure since there is no evidence for the character.  Always leave it to humans to find a smaller pond to imagine they are a big fish in.

We have this god insisting that humans not find about good or evil, threatening death on the day that they would eat the fruit.  Not death in the far future, death was, essentially, immediate.   The snake/satan countered this claim with what was evidently the truth, since neither Adam nor Eve died that day.  Eve, with the knowledge of good and evil *equivalent* to that of this god, decided that it was a good thing to give the fruit to Adam, who, having no reason to doubt her, accepted it and ate it.  Per some Christians, the knowledge of good and evil corrupted Adam and Eve in some manner.  If it didn’t corrupt this god, why would it corrupt them?

We also have the problem that this god, rather than forgiving Adam and Eve right then, starts a several millennium process of pain and misery for no reason.  It is for no reason since many, if not most, Christians, claim how forgiving their god is.

Then this god tries to correct things and fails repeatedly, an odd thing for a supposedly omniscient/omnipotent god.  It is only after millennia that this god decides it needs a blood sacrifice, like any other Bronze Age god.  It is only by a very poor attempt at “reinterpreting” the bible that we get that this god had any idea of doing this sacrifice early on.

It’s honest of some Christians that they admit that Christians don’t agree on some very basic things.  They directly contradict each other and since none of them can show that they have the one “truth”, and they cannot do what their bible promises they can do, there is no reason to accept the apologetics from either side for their supposed “truth” and attacks on each other.  All they have is baseless opinion that they all claim is supported by their god and told to them by the “holy spirit”.  This includes the vastly diverging ideas of free will and predestination.

If this god is picking and choosing which humans can accept it and then damning those it doesn’t choose for no fault of their own, then there is no free will.  A controlling force, especially an omnipotent one, eliminates free will, no matter what contradictory nonsence the bible says in other places.

Some Christians, in their attempt to make believe that these contradictory claims are not, illustrate what apologetics is all about, lying and trying to make sense out of nonsense.  It is trying to make up excuses why we shouldn’t take the bible as it is written but to try to assign some other intent that we have no evidence for.  It is built on presupposition that this god is real and *must* make sense, no matter how much the believer has to add to the mythos, and to differ from his fellow Christians.

Of course, when it is pointed out that this god damns people left and right, then the Christian claims that since the bible says that this god wants “everyone” to come to it, well, that part must be true too!  They can’t ignore one part over another since they’ve been told that *all* of the bible is their god’s word, so somehow, they have to make them work together.  They can’t accept that the bible is just a set of books by people who didn’t believe in the same things.

The verse cited from 2 Peter 3, arguing for a god that wants everyone to come to it, is problematic for our Christians, either the free will or predestination sides.  It’s a great excuse why this god hasn’t returned yet, to try to claim that this god “really” wants to give people all of the time they need to “come to repentance”.   The entire passage reads as such: “8 But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day. 9 The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some think of slowness, but is patient with you,[b] not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance. 10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and everything that is done on it will be disclosed.”

As I’ve pointed out before, Christians usually only cite verse 9 and do their darndest to ignore the rest, intentionally leaving out the important context.  This causes all sorts of issues with how Christians want to claim the bible is literal in some parts but not in others.  How does this match up with the Genesis claims of a seven-day week of creation?  How does this work with JC’s claim that he’ll be back within the lives of people he is speaking to?  Well, it doesn’t since it flatly contradicts those claims.  This god should have been back long ago if days are literally 24 hours periods, but as we know, Christians don’t agree on that either.  If this god counts a millennium as a day in its experience, then seven days would have been 7,000 years, and if JC meant he’d be back in the number of millennia that the days of a human generation would be (around 20-30 years) that would be, conservatively, 7,300 days or 7,300 millennia aka 7,300,000 years.   This is the very silly number one gets when apologists want to pick and choose what they want words to mean.

Another common verse used as an excuse is from John 12, which causes more problems with its gnostic claims of a “ruler of the earth” which directly contradicts with Christians who claim that everything is their god’s will here on earth.  Either this god is responsible for everything or not.  Christians can’t cherry pick their way to having their cake and eating it too.

So, having established this background, we go on to the claim that predestination and free will can work together.

If this god is responsible for everything *and* wants every person to be saved, then an omnipotent being can have anything it wants.  If this god needs this, it can have everything it needs by definition.  If this god picks and chooses, then this god has what it wants and needs.  Free will has no place in the bible.  A god would have no reason to deny itself.  Indeed, it kills people repeatedly because it wants it to happen because an omnipotent god would not need anything.  It literally can’t fail at a task unless it chooses to.

There are a couple of verses in the bible that contradict completely free will.  They are in Romans 9 and Matthew 13.  Both state that this god prevents some people from accepting it before we were even born.  Full stop.  No exceptions at all.  Some Christians accept these verses as stated, some try to claim they mean something else than what is literally written.  JC and Paul, if they existed, say that this god needs to show off, so it damns some people so it has something to hurt as an example to the people it chose to allow to accept it.  Which makes sense how?  Why would anyone need an example made of others if it was so obvious about this god?

The Christians who don’t like such an authoritarian god try to add things to their bible so they can invent a god that is more in their image.  They insist that the context is “incomplete”, which is rather embarrassing for a “perfect” god and its supposed words.  They insist on ignoring the parts of the bible that don’t work with their new god. The parts about election and predestination are suddenly declared not true, though no where in the bible does it say that somehow those parts are null and void if you just don’t happen to like them.  All it has is contradictory verses that each Christian picks and chooses to determine their very own “truth”.

We have the following which says that predestination, not free will is what goes:

“11 In Christ we have also obtained an inheritance, having been destined according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to his counsel and will, 12 so that we, who were the first to set our hope on Christ, might live for the praise of his glory. 13 In him you also, when you had heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and had believed in him, were marked with the seal of the promised Holy Spirit; 14 this] is the pledge of our inheritance toward redemption as God’s own people, to the praise of his glory.” – Ephesians (predestined/predetermined to accept/praise this god)

“15 For he says to Moses,“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”16 So it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who shows mercy. 17 For the scripture says to Pharaoh, “I have raised you up for the very purpose of showing my power in you, so that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he chooses, and he hardens the heart of whomever he chooses.

19 You will say to me then, “Why then does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20 But who indeed are you, a human being, to argue with God? Will what is molded say to the one who molds it, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one object for special use and another for ordinary use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience the objects of wrath that are made for destruction; 23 and what if he has done so in order to make known the riches of his glory for the objects of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— 24 including us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?) Romans 9  (the classic might equals right morality, that no one can question this god for abusing others to impress those he chose from their creation).

This god does not allow people to do what they want and then accept them for what they’ve done, it chooses them before they’ve done anything.  And this choice, commonly called “grace” by Christians, isn’t something that people earn.  Thus there is no free will, no action that will determine what will happen.  And when we go back to the definitions of free will and predestination at the top, we see that there is no free will allowed “all events are determined completely by previously existing causes”  aka this god.

Some Christians try their hardest to pretend that if their god knows who we will become out of free will, then his choice of us to allow us to accept him is free will.  However, this doesn’t work as soon as this god interferes in what we do.  As we see, this god made the choice before we existed to make choices, not the other way around, that this god made his choice after we existed.  That would be free will, and this god’s choice being dependent on *whatever* we did with no interference.

Again, predestination: all events are determined completely by previously existing causes. Free will: is the ability to choose between different possible courses of action unimpeded

The argument of the Christian only works if the bible is full of lies and this god never interferes.

“I believe that predestination and free will work together in ways that are both glorious and mysterious.”

Unsurprisingly, the Christian will claim that it’s “mysterious” at the end of it all. This is the default excuse when Christian fails.

Not So Polite Dinner Conversation – a Christian’s excuse for supporting an anti-christ aka Trump

Haden, over at Helpmebelieve.com, has done a great job at showing just what some Christians will do to gain power. Haden, unsurprisingly, is a Trumpie.  Nothing new is here.  Pretty much every Trumpie will make the same excuses.

As some of you might know, the editor of Christianity Today, a magazine started by the Billy Graham family of pastors, wrote an article on why Christians shouldn’t support Donald J. Trump.   Haden is quite sure that it is wrong for Galli to have pointed out why Christians shouldn’t support a liar, a cheat, a self-proclaimed sexual abusers, someone who has said he doesn’t need forgiveness by Haden’s god, and who idolizes murderous dictators that kill their own people, including Christians.

“It is no secret that evangelicals are split on Trump. Many are his strongest allies. Many view him as an abomination. Many voted for him simply because they did not like their other options. “

Vanishingly few evangelical Christians find Trump an abomination. Most voted for him because they are indeed bigots and wannabee theocrats that will do anything for power. We know that they want judges appointed to give them a chance to legislate their religion into law.

It’s something when Haden claims this “Although, naturally a Christian evangelical publication is going to lean right and conservative.” This does seem to be a tendency but what is this reason when their supposed savior was a communist who supported the sick and the poor? It seems that again, Christianity is made up by the believer, not the other way around.

We do know Haden’s stance, anything for power and anyone who doesn’t agree with him is not a true Christian. He isn’t objective but he does want to claim that *no one* is, as an excuse for himself. Haden says he will likely vote for Trump in 2020. “I won’t vote for anyone else”, and he admits that. Someone who won’t vote for anyone else has declared that Trump is indeed is “favorite guy in the world.” His bias *is* in the open.

As much as Haden doesn’t like facts, there are some that show that his intended choice, above anyone else, is indeed someone that Christians wouldn’t vote for.

Haden tries to argue that Trump, by trying to force a foreign power to conduct a baseless investigation of an American citizen, isn’t “really” an abuse of power. What is Haden’s excuse? That Galli hadn’t mentioned all of the evidence in the editorial. Of course, one can read the report from the House to see all of the sworn testimony and evidence. We don’t have the actual transcripts since they have been hidden by Trump in a separate confidential server.  Funny how Trump isn’t willing to be under oath and is terrified if any of his closest people are under oath. An oath to be honest before Haden’s god. Hmmmm.  We do have the evidence, Haden, and you again try to ignore that fact.

The editorial, and Haden’s (plus other evangelicals) actions do paint themselves as ignoring their bible and their god.  The editorial in CT has “That he should be removed, we believe, is not a matter of partisan loyalties but loyalty to the Creator of the Ten Commandments.” Haden is offended by that last statement.

Hmmm, how dare anyone expect Haden to be loyal aka faithful to his god and to what the bible claims? Well, what does the bible actually say about a man like Donald J. Trump and his known actions? Is salvation conditioned on support of Trump or not?

Is salvation connected to actions at all? Well, that’s a problem for Christians since, again, they disagree if it is or not. There is the “always saved” bunch, the “actions will happen because of faith” bunch, the “faith alone” bunch, and “any good act is rewarded” bunch.

But if we look at the bible itself, it seems rather clear on at least what this god doesn’t want in a leader. But in the bible we do have that problem that Paul claims that *any* leader is put in place by this god, so obedience to a leader is indeed required for salvation, despite what Haden says “So, does Galli really believe that if one votes, or supports Trump, that one is not loyal to God? If pressed, surely he would not make salvation conditioned on support, or non-support, of a president. Even if we tone down the language to that of obedience, surely this is an overreach.”

Ummm, yep, Haden, your bible does literally say this: Romans 13 if you are confused (or trying to ignore it).

Haden’s also horrified that anyone dares not call him the only True Christian, and that other Christians might find this to be the case. Haden of course does this repeatedly. And oh no, someone dares to speak prophetically about how Christians should act? You mean like Pat Robertson, Robert Jeffress and others that Haden follows? Such the pot calling the other Christian kettle black.

Indeed, Haden, who will take you seriously after you support Trump? He offers these excuses:

  • “The truth of the Gospel message is not dependent upon the character of the Gospel messenger.”

In that no Christian can come up with a “truth” here that they all agree on is the problems Christians like Haden have.

  • “The effectiveness of the Gospel message is not dependent upon the character of the Gospel messenger.”

That Christians can’t agree makes a completely ineffective message since the message changes with each Christian.

  • “If a person will only accept the Gospel message on the condition that I publicly denounce Trump, that person does not understand the message.”

If a person notes that you ignore your bible, that person understands that you cherry pick what you want to accept.

  • “A vote for Trump is not a justification of all of his actions and words. I repeat: a vote for Trump is not a justification of all of his actions and words.”

This from a Christian who wants you to think he doesn’t completely support Trump but who will vote for NO ONE ELSE. It is a justification of all of his actions and words.

That people vote for Trump means that they *have* justified his actions and words to be more important than following what the Bible says. Haden desperately wants abortion to be made criminal. He will accept anything as long as he thinks that will happen. He is indeed saying that as long as he gets what he wants “the bent and broken character of our nation’s leader doesn’t really matter in the end”. Haden literally says this “if we don’t vote for the conservative candidate that has the best chance at winning, we are more likely to get a president who will make our efforts toward ending abortion that much more difficult.” The end justifies the means, a suitable amoral idea that goes well with the “might equals right” claims of conservative Christianity.

There are no false dichotomies as Haden would claim. His words out his intentions. Unlike Haden’s claim “We can support the candidate that is most pro-life “friendly” while at the same time calling-out his moral failures.” , these people never consider or call out Trump’s moral failures. They invent excuses for them, just like Haden is doing.

For people like Haden, abortion is just a “think of the children” lie that they use to try to hide their desire for a theocracy. That they consistently elect people who cut help to families and children aka “innocent human beings made in the image of God” and who have no problem with over a thousand children lost in Trump’s immigration nightmare, and who don’t want children to have the best chance in life, shows that they are not “pro-life” at all. Not caring for children after they leave the womb shows that all they want is control.

For someone who wants to toss about the term “genocide”, Haden doesn’t want that term being used for his god when the bible has it commanding genocide committed on other people. If genocide is wrong, then it is always wrong. If not, then Haden’s god is as subjective as Haden is. Haden assumes he knows what his god is concerned with “At the risk of going too far, let me ask, what is God more concerned with? The way other people view you, or the genocide of millions of innocent lives? The question is really: Are you willing to support a president with a less than perfect moral life for the sake of ending abortion, or not?”

Hmmm, a god that commands genocide? This god has done nothing about abortion. The bible only mentions the killing of children as being approved of or being done directly by this god. If we go with the bible, abortion is at best no concern of this god, and at worst, approved of by this god. Are you willing to support a god that is like this?  A god that wants you to go for a “lesser of two evils”, which is not a biblical idea? Are you willing to ignore the parts of the bible that say not to follow a liar, a cheat, an adulterer, etc?

“Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, 11 for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.” – 2 John 1

As we end up seeing, Haden is all about winning and power. “To them I say: show me the pro-life candidate with a perfect moral life that actually has a chance at winning.” And then we see this “Whatever option you take, far be it from me to question your “loyalty” to God as Galli has done.” Except, you know, when Haden insists that some Christians really aren’t Christians, like Mormons, JWs, etc.

Haden insists that some candidate needs to be supported, but we have the bible saying to not bother with the actions of this world. It would only be someone who is quite sure that this world is it when he is so concerned about it. That an evangelical has no one to vote for shouldn’t be an issue.

It seems we have a schism between conservative Christians and Trumpie Christians. Haden is a Trumpie Christian, close to a conservative Christian, but another step away in being sure that he and he alone can decide what this god wants and ignoring even more of his bible as is convenient. Even the OT, the bastion of conservative Christianity, doesn’t go far enough for him. Losing this “base” isn’t a bad thing at all. For all of the claims of “irrelevantness” about who Billy would have voted for, Haden found it necessary to mention.

The hypocrisy of conservative Christians and Trumpie Christians is fun to watch. They are after each other with knives, and all about who knows their invisible friend best.  I do feel sorry for the Christians who are good people in spite of the religion.   They often get tarred with the same brush.

Just in case Christians are a bit forgetful about what their god says about following someone just for power and excusing what he does when convenient:

“15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. 18 A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.” Matthew 7

“14 Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? 15 What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever?” – 2 Corinthians 6

“You shall not spread a false report. You shall not join hands with a wicked man to be a malicious witness. 2 You shall not fall in with the many to do evil, nor shall you bear witness in a lawsuit, siding with the many, so as to pervert justice, 3 nor shall you be partial to a poor man in his lawsuit.” – Exodus 23

“And a ruler asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 19 And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone. 20 You know the commandments: ‘Do not commit adultery, Do not murder, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother.’” 21 And he said, “All these I have kept from my youth.” 22 When Jesus heard this, he said to him, “One thing you still lack. Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”” -Luke 18

“Like a madman who throws firebrands, arrows, and death19 is the man who deceives his neighbor
and says, “I am only joking!””- Proverbs 26

“But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” Revelation 21

“5 But if our unrighteousness serves to show the righteousness of God, what shall we say? That God is unrighteous to inflict wrath on us? (I speak in a human way.) 6 By no means! For then how could God judge the world? 7 But if through my lie God’s truth abounds to his glory, why am I still being condemned as a sinner? 8 And why not do evil that good may come?—as some people slanderously charge us with saying. Their condemnation is just.” – Romans 3

Some will chide me for using the bible to point out the failures of Christians and Christianity, mostly Christians. But how else to show such hypocrisy and thoughtlessness?  No one needs the bible or Christianity or Christians to be a humane person.  If you aren’t even going to try, you get to be held responsible.