Or maybe you can.
I never know which wall my friend Gary will bounce off next. I guess he has become bored with his favorite, the Resurrection, because he now seems to have the Holy Spirit in his sights. Of course, his cover is his justification that he is now “scholarly” because he has read many books (the list however, is hardly impressive). His penchant for describing the faith as magic is merely part of his schtick in his false attempt to escape the “fundamentalism” that, to this day, still governs his thinking.
The hanger-on in the comments decries “the magic.” Well, Dude, the “magic” is ensconced firmly, and primarily, in Gary’s mind. That point is then supposedly enhanced by the bragging of Bruce who, doncha know, knows a whole lot!
Bruce, I would have to say I am pleased that after all your education, you finally saw through the calvinistic farce that is disguised as evangelicalism. Kudos to you for that. That you folded your tent and moved into the nihilistic camp only enhances and reinforces the nothingness of evangelicalism. But then, you march on undeterred in your quest to explain your superiority over others? No kudos on that count. Erecting straw men to compete with “what you know” is hardly a persuasive line of objective argumentation, no matter John’s less than ideal delineation of “subjective and objective knowledge.” Knocking down straw men is child’s play, Bruce. Beneath someone touting their theological knowledge, to be sure!
John, whom I like as I do Gary despite our differences, dispenses with his usual peace-making and offers an unsubstantiated pronouncement of guilt upon the heads of Christians in general. Bahd foam, John. You know better than that!
Gary? Ah, he has a new term with which to go after ordinary Christians – “the intensity of their emotions.” I about blew a beer through my nose when G-Man threw that one out! I mean, for anyone having read his blog for longer that a few months, would clearly come to a two-part conclusion.
A. Gary is chastising Christians for an intense lack of “objectivity.”
B. Gary’s own intense lack of objectivity over the last 4 years is astounding!
Whatever seems to separate Gary from his fundamentalistic past, is in his mind defending him. He has yet to cogently explain why he is probably more fundamentalistic with his new “faith” that he ever was with the old. I don’t believe Gary intends to be duplicitous, it just kinda/sorta happens to him anyway.
If nothing else, it is an interesting show. I admit my regular amusement, and surprise, at each new “revelation” from Gary – I am trying to use that term in judicious fashion, because he is not fond of it all. Were I an agnostic or an atheist from a non-religious background, I would wonder how all of the fuss he is making is of any purpose. I reject the concept of lizard people walking amongst us, wearing a skin cover as they go about subverting the human race. But I don’t need a blog and a desire for blog groupies to emphasize my disbelief of the Lizard People, because I do not need to constantly harp on something that is nothing.
John, you cannot advance any serious notion that Gary is somehow “objective,” – as opposed to “the intensity of emotions!” If anyone is guilty of that accusation, it is Gary and the words he has “penned” over the last 4 years or so. His constant need to prove he is “qualified” to talk of such matters, coupled with his likewise constant need to somehow prove himself via his reading list, belie his credibility. His first problem is his complete lack of understanding of what Scripture says. He does not have (pardon the term) a fundamental understanding of that. How he can presently advance himself as an objective arbiter is beyond the bounds of reason. He is taking the Formal and Material Principles (Personal Decision For Jesus and the Faith, and The Bible) of the fundamentalism in which he was raised as a child, and merely replaced them with new words – Denial of Faith and Science (which itself is in a state of perpetual change, overall). His thought process, and his progress escaping “fundamentalism” as he defines it, are severely subjective! He is in no position to either prescribe or proscribe anything!
John, defending that, seems very unwise.
My observations above could be uttered by any informed agnostic or atheist, as I alluded to earlier. That he betrays that when challenged and retreats into a non-response”, suffices adequately to permit one to surmise, frankly, that he simply does not know what he is talking about. On that particular post, I would like to simply mention one more crucial thing:
“Gary, your son does not disbelieve in God, rather – he believes in you. Tread lightly on that ground, my friend, tread lightly.”
I am leaving matters there. This will pop up as a “ping-back” at his site twice, so he should read it, as will, hopefully, the others I mentioned. And I am certain, as little as it may have to do with what I have written, Gary will somehow attempt to defend what he says and does. He must! Or, the cards of his house, crumble into a heap.