Well, I had set up a section of TrueFreethinker titled, The BOBA Digest which was meant to hold those particularly poor Atheist arguments with B.O.B.A. referring to Bottom of the Barrel Atheism. However, as I ended up noting therein:
…well, sorry but not more entries are being made into the BOBA Digest since Atheists have become caricatures of themselves and anymore, all of their arguments are bottom of the barrel.
Well, as recent attempts at dialogue with an Atheist who goes by the pseudonym “Neo” from the pseudo-Skeptic Arena has brought it all back and done so with extreme prejudice.
Firstly, I asked him why he refers to himself as “Neo” and he, in turn, referenced the Matrix movies in stating, “Neo saved humanity from the Matrix. I hope to do no less (I like to dream big).”
I noted that he does not realize that “Neo” is a reference to Jesus with “Neo” being a rearranged form of the word “one.” This is explained in detail within my article Replyto an Atheist on the Terminator and Matrix Mythos.
I wrote of the “pseudo–Skeptic Arena” because I discerned that Neo was not a true and honest skeptic (such as the Bereans referenced in Acts 17) but was merely a cynic. You will find that most Atheists who apply the term skeptic to themselves are, in reality, cynics. Succinctly stated: a skeptic thinks, I will not believe until…” while a cynic thinks, “I will not believe”—period.
The issue is that Neo devoted a podcast to seeking to discredit my About page and I, in turn, replied in details to each and every one of his claims. For example, he claimed that Jesus failed to fulfill His very own prophecy and I wrote a specific and detailed reply. Within one of Neo’s many mass spam emails I noted that he repeated this claim. I pointed out to him that I had provided him a reply to that very point and that he already knew that.
Well, at least he was honest enough to admit that he had not even bothered reading my replied to him. In fact, he said, “Ken, I have to admit that I didn’t read it. Your attempts to rationalize a failed prophesy are simply not something that I would waste my time reading, anymore than I would waste my time reading my astrological horoscope [sic.].”
Now, since he had not read my reply, pray tell, how does he know that I was just rationalizing? You can see that him mind is made up and he will not even consider information contrary to him faitheism. Thus, he is a cynic.
Now, the first time around he was merely wrong but now, purposefully avoiding relevant information, he is actually deceptive in continuing to make that particular claim which is to say that ignorance is merely lacking information but purposeful ignorance is another matter altogether.
Thus, when the purpose of The Skeptic Arena is said to be that it is a “Web site devoted to the improvement of rational thinking skills.” Nothing could be further from the truth. Here is another merely example of very many.
On July 28, 2015 AD, Neo posted a link to an article about the Denisovans, stating:
With each new discovery, human origins get more complicated … but better defined [ellipses in original]
Family tree of the four groups of early humans living in Eurasia 50,000 years ago and the gene flow between the groups due to interbreeding. (The tree is easier to understand if you read it upwards from the root)
This is indicative of that about which I wrote in Atheist and Darwinian Science and Story Telling as it is another case of fining a tooth and a tiny bit of bone and, suddenly via the fertile mind of the Darwinist, it becomes an entire group of human ancestors: for details, see my article Evolution news – meet the Denisovans, the new Nebraska Man.
One of his mass spam emails was subject titled, “‘Skeptic Arena’ Atheist on Christianity disappearing from America” and stated, “PEW Poll: following Europe’s lead – Christianity is also disappearing from America.”
Neo editorialized thusly:
All your time, effort, and money to keep America mired in the Dark Ages has all been in vain. Future humans will look back on this barbaric time when many humans still worshiped invisible murdering monsters … with pity.
Congratulations on drawing out the horror … as long as you possibly could. [ellipses in original]
Do you see the problem when dealing with childish taunters? Just where does one start?
The poll shows that CINOS (Christians In Name Only) are deciding to no longer even bother referring to themselves as such.
The “Dark Ages” are a secular myth, for example, see that which the agnostic Rodney Stark has to say about it within the artivcle, ““The Victory of Reason” on the why the “Dark Ages” Europeans advanced and succeeded.
Like most Atheists, Neo is a brimstone and fire preacher who instantly goes to condemnation. For example, he implies condemnation of YHVH as an “invisible murdering monsters” but provides no premise upon which to condemn, well, anything at all.
Well, I thought to reply via a different tactic and stated:
Well my friend, you are certainly good at employing emotive and childish taunting tactic that allow you to elbow your buddies in the ribs but I am less than impressed with your lack of ability to engaged in reasoned discourse.
The only thing you wrote that remotely is within the realm of a serious issue is, “The Jesus and the Bible” also prophesied that Jesus would return. How many more thousands of years do you get on that one?”
You know perfectly well that I wrote you a detailed reply to this including many quotations and citations. You may be able to fool your buddies by repeating it but you cannot fool me as I provided you enough evidence upon which to have you cease from this talking point.
Please do not cross the line from simply being wrong to actually lying.
Well, his erudite elucidation of the matter amounted to, “Ken, you wouldn’t know a fallacy if you dug one out of your nose.”
He followed up with, “Ken, if an Atheist sending you a report on the collapse of Christianity has strengthened your faith … then your faith must have been awfully weak to begin with.”
Do you discern the utter lack of reason? Why would evidence of the Bible’s accuracy not strengthen my faith and do so even more.
He also wrote, “Ken, ‘The Jesus and the Bible’ also prophesied that Jesus would return. How many more thousands of years do you get on that one? (we already know your answer Ken – ‘as many as it takes’).”
Indeed, as many as it takes because He did not set a date and there is no reason to think that it has been much too long as there is no time frame via which to come to such conclusions.
Due to his inability and/or lack of willingness to engage in reasoned discourse, Neo keep appealing to his modis operandi in stating, “You Ghost Worshiping nutbags are all the same. You just have different names for your imaginawee fwends [sic.].”
Even the fact that I referred to him as “my friend” raises his ire as of that, he wrote, “You’re joking – right Ken?”
Why would I be kidding about it; just because he is a childish taunter with whom I disagree does not mean that I cannot consider him a friend. I always seek to be as friendly as possible with personages such as Neo as they are tantamount to a blind person stepping on my toe—would I get upset at the blind person for doing so?
Neo also stated, “Ken, you are an adult who has imaginary friends. Reasoned discourse is not available to you.” He demonstrates his unpolished view of theology by making such references as well as others such as, “an invisible magic ghost” and he refers to me as a “Ghost Worshiper.”
Yet, of course, this is a logical fallacy as one can hold to certain beliefs that do not accurately reflect reality and yet still be able to engage in reasoned discourse in general. Of course, the deeper question is how does he know? After all, I wrote specific and detailed replies to his every claim and he did not even bother reading them.
Another point he made is interesting in elucidating that when it comes to evidence of YHVH’s existence there are, at least, two major categories. Yet, let us back up a step as, in reality, I was not aiming my replies at Neo: at least not to begin with. As I noted in my initial reply which was directly to him, I noted:
…I raised the issue of truth up front and from the get go and he simply disregarded it. The issue is that in an Atheist universe (whatever denomination of Atheism he may adhere to) truth is not part of the furniture of the universe, as it were, that is to say; there is no imperative to ascertain empirical truth. One may choose to do so, like one may chose vanilla over chocolate ice cream or no ice cream at all, but it is a mere personal preference… The issue is that Neo did not provide me any reason for thinking that even if I am wrong and he can prove it; I should change my mind or even bother considering that which he states. He provided no premise upon, no basis upon, no foundation upon to make claims and challenge my claim…
Thus, I will proceed with my reply but only for my fellow believers who want to learn about how to deal with the objections which follow.
Now, if you do get yourself into a position of attempting to provide evidence for YHVH’s existence, keep in mind two major categories: 1) Evidence that you can provide: this would be via argumentation, history, archeology, etc.
2) Evidence that only YHVH can provide: this would be via miracles, an appearance, etc.
Thus, when Neo states, “Ken, show me Jesus and we can cease the debate” he is asking me to provide evidence that I cannot provide and, of course, he already knows this.
He then becomes even more emotive in stating, “As long as you are being threatened with torture by an evil invisible monster, no amount of time, nor any amount of evidence, can free you. That requires a courage Ken … something you obviously do not possess [ellipses in original].”
Just as aforementioned, he condemns “being threatened with torture” and refers to YHVH as “an evil invisible monster” but provides no premise upon which to justify his condemnations.
To my statement, “Please do not cross the line from simply being wrong to actually lying” he did not tackle the issue or assure me that he would read the reply or simply stop making his claim about Jesus failing to fulfill His own prophecy. Rather, he chose to reply in a, sadly, typically incoherent manner with, “Ken, I understand that you believe rational people are wrong. That is your right as a Ghost Worshiper.”
Moreover, he took my specifically stated wording “Please do not cross the line” as in do not do it, “from simply being wrong to actually lying” to mean that I was making an “accusation of lying” to which he replied, “while some might take offense at that, it only makes me laugh. It’s like being called stupid by someone in a mental institution. So if that’s what you were going for … sorry to disappoint you [ellipses in original].”
Indeed, sadly, he utterly missed the point on various levels.
Now, this has been for your benefit, my readers, this is what I actually wrote to him in reply:
Well friend,
Let us keep this nice and succinct so that you will not feel the need to parse completed thoughts into fragments to which you reply in turn.You merely assert but provide no epistemic premise upon which to, childishly, claim that I am “an adult who has imaginary friends” and therefore, “Reasoned discourse is not available to you.” If reasoned discourse is available to you, please begin employing it.
But now for a world-class lesson on just who is “Neo” and that is what you would have seen if you would have read the point by point reply that I wrote to you: you are not a true and honest skeptic rather, you are a cynic. That is, you do not say, “I will not believe unless or until…” but you say, “I will not believe—period!”
I noted that “You know perfectly well that I wrote you a detailed reply to this including many quotations and citations” and you “admit that I didn’t read it.” Well, at least you are honest.
Yet, you, having not read it, still go on to conclude that I employed, “attempts to rationalize a failed prophesy.”
This should prove to everyone whom you constantly include in your email group that you are not being intellectually honest and base your conclusions on merely unfounded assertions, presuppositions and assumptions.
It is astonishingly clear to me now why you constantly opt for childish taunting; you appear to not have much more with which to work—as sad as it is for me to realize this fact.
I love you friend.
I referenced that he engages in a manner of reply whereby he will “parse completed thoughts into fragments to which you reply in turn” because he does just that. Rather than formulating a reply to the specific, if not main, point(s); he merely fragments one’s statements into fragments and replies to each in turn which makes it quite simple for him as he can make one non sequitur reply after another whilst missing the point(s) entirely.
Well, this exchange went on and on and on and on with me begging him to engage in reasoned discourse and he merely continuing to engage in childish taunts.
In closing, Neo epitomizes why, for at least a short time, the New Atheist movement was so very popular. Statistics demonstrate that Atheist is primarily a young white male phenomenon.
The New movement succeeded specifically succeeded due to Atheists being, mostly, just that: Young (emotionally and intellectually immature). White (comfortable and privileged).
Male (testosterone filled and along with being young, naturally rebellious towards mommy and daddy—which they then take out of YHVH).
They realized that they did not really need to know much of anything but merely had to engage in childish taunting. And so, they fell for a variety of Atheism’s consoling delusions such as being more erudite than thou on the mere basis of them being an Atheist.