Naturalism v. the spurious supernaturalism

 Christian apologists deny the capacity of reason to fully give us knowledge. Why the miscreants who wrote the Eden myth have Yahweh denying the knowledge of good and evil, and then penalizes them and their posterity, because the former partook of that fruit of that forbidden truth and would have partook of the tree of immortality had they the chance: Yahweh is vain and egotistic, really another Satan. He entrapped the two by allowing the serpent to beguile Eve so as to have both her and Adam to commit the petty larceny! What an irrational judgment he made thence!

   Thus, from the beginning it was with Moses’s Folly, but Jewry came to love knowledge.

 Yeshua, that false Christ- messiah- also appeals for people’s credulity with  his be as the little children when I teach you. Yes, such is the voice of the cult leader, this one just another savior-god, miracle monger and man of his times. He taught silly and intolerable stuff: Double the robbers’ take is quite silly and to turn the other cheek is quite intolerable as that invites more violence! See what the deist, Miklos Jako, states about him in ” Confronting Believers.”  Jako however doesn’t fathom atheism!

     Then that sophist, Paul, recommends just blind faith also by decrying the wisdom of the world which sees through their imbecility. They claim the Truth whilst such as Thales recommend ever inquiring about matters.

   Sure, that lover of autos-da-fe, Aquinas finds faith for such  as the Trinity and reason for even God and other matters. However, this faith here means blind faith! No once can square a circle, which is all God and the Trinity and such are, as I’ll present anon.

   Dawkins’s supercilious nemesis, Alister Earl McGrath, excoriates the former for his so-called idiosyncratic use of faith as blind faith. He’d maintain that faith arises from evidence and embraces ones entire being, but that really means that faith as blind faith than that as trust which, he is surreptitiously undermining, because should doubts arise, he’d maintain, no doubt, just have faith; that means in the manner of Peter Kreeft and Blaise Pascal, keep or start  with your religious observances and you shall still believe!

   And that is what William James in the end means in his ”The Will to  Believe” in that he claims that one should tentatively have faith, but that very tentativeness becomes blind faith again! The much wiser William Kingdom Clifford maintains that one should proportion ones need for evidence, and contrary to Keith Ward, advanced theologian, that would never keep one from getting things done! Yes,  one can have trust in ones mate unless evidence arises to suggest otherwise. When one surveys a topic and scientists make a consensus as with global warming, one should readily accept that fact rather than accept the specious and sophistical arguments of the phony skeptics, who do not follow the conservation of knowledge that true skeptics indeed do follow. And as David Hume and Carl Sagan, naturalist heroes, admonish us ever to require extraordinary evidence for extraordinary claims such as God’s existence. That requires much more evidence than what it takes to reveal scams!

    In the latter, one can check with such as the BBB and  the police or the Amazing Randi or other magicians.

  Luther, that Judeophobe and peasant-hater, wants people to strike out at reason, that great whore. He and other so-called reformers, in the spirit of that ever dead fanatic Galilean would never accommodate heresy, no more than Aquinas, also a fan of autos-da-fe.

  Calvin, that murderer, wouldn’t accept the fact that Israel was not a land of milk and honey but a barren one and also for Servetus’s agreeing with Galileo and scoffing at the Trinity, that incoherent notion, had Servetus murdered at the stake and – tortured beforehand.

 Those three and other Christian leaders would have scorched all Europe had they the means and chance! No, this is no genetic fallacy as they fathomed Yeshua’s teachings, I daresay, as the latter, despite Paul’s note about eating unclean foods, as he dared anyone to disobey any tittle of the commandments, and Leviticus  would still hold sway!

  Yeshua himself, that enemy of knowledge, scam artist, was no one who could lead anyone to that more abundant life!  Reason saves!

  Strato advises to use the wisdom of this world to gain that more abundant life by acquiring knowledge. Theology by its very nature is against knowledge! Advanced theologians obfuscate by claiming that religion and science are compatible, ignoring that science finds no intent behind natural causes, and I add, it won’t do to prattle that theology and science are in different realms, because the latter deals with knowledge whilst the former with it maybes and it m ust be’s without evidence- utter guesswork!

  That sophist, Alvin Plantinga, claims that Christians have the warrant of having God as a basic belief as we have with other minds and the external world, but no, people  teach people to have belief in Him. So, he begs thae question. What does arise naturally is the animistic pareidolia, as the argument from pareidolia notes, that people read on to natural causes  and patterns, intent and designs. Scientists are investigating how people see those pareidolias of intent, agency and teleology.

   So, in the end, yes, Dawkins is quite right about faith! Advanced theologians and some scientists and many others operate under cognitive dissonance- compartmentalisation of  science and the rest of their lives.

   Faith doth that to people!

  Strato is ahead of our past with all that clerical dismissal of truly investigating nature,  making it under the thumb of any sect!

  Behold Yeshua’s stridency with his talk of  vipers and such and go to Hell messages, and the same with his major theologians of the past is way, way ahead of what we gnu atheists proclaim! We strongly defend our views but send no one to the stake or urge any denial of relgious or other liberty; indeed, atheists and deists of the Enligtenment and since have proclaimed the real love of thy neighbor as even the Qukers for the most part had slaves, and Christians and Jewry have come aboard. Nothing in the Tanakh or the Chrisitan Testament promotes knowledge or liberty but quite their opposites!

  Any good that relgions espouse, we can obtain elsewhere. So, also with any matter of beauty! So, I don’t overgeneralise or see narrowly what religions actually do, but remind others that naturalism does more to get us that more abundant life!

   Such notions as the Trinty, having no substance and  being incoherent, actually affrim ignosticism, and with His having no referents and having contradictory and incoherent attributes, He cannot exist!

  No ignostic or naturalist has to traverse all Existence or be omniscient as this is a matter of  logical analysis.

  I sought no exorcism for my pathology nor do mechanics have to affirm gremlins as the Primary Cause for mechanical failures!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s