Web-profile:
Sykowingnut Website
"We demolish arguments and every
pretension that set itself up against the
knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it
obedient to Christ." (2Corinthians
10:5)
During the month of February 2002,
the researcher who wrote this
article responding to Sykowingnut's website personally journeyed
through the world wide web (particularly
on Angelfire) to survey nearly sixty
atheists and anti-Christians websites. Sykowingnut represents the
typical website found and thus was picked
to be profiled. Our purpose in this
article is to demonstrate the faults made on Sykowingnut's website.
This atheist website can be found at
https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/index.html.
We will refer to this individual as
"he" due to the anonomyous
nature of Sykowingnut.
One
is greeted with the title, "Welcome
to My Little Anti-Christianity Homepage". His purpose?
He ends his essay stating "And so that concludes my page
defending my disbelief in God."
Defending his disbelief in God. Interesting.
It so happens that many atheists with
amateur websites have the same old lines
in attacking Christianity. This article seeks to inform and
prayfully perhaps, help pave the way
lovingly and truthfully for someone out
there to come to know Christ. It's realized that due to the sensitive
and controversial nature of this article
it can become highly offending.
The author has chosen an aggressive
systematic approach in his rebuttal to
FULLY counter Sykowingnut charges and assertion. Truth can be
offending but nothing personal is meant
towards Sykowingnut. Rather it is the
author's prayer and wish that Sykowingnut would come to Jesus Christ
than be damned to the world of the abyss.
And with that we roll...
Attack, Attack, and Attack
Sykowingnut takes a three prong attack
in defending his disbelief in God:
- Why People Believe
in God
- Who is Jesus
- God's "failure"
in mankind
Of course, along the way there are
many other unrelated statements attacking
or belittling Christianity too. We deal with each of the three
segments mentioned above one at a time.
Prong 1:
Why People Believe in God
Its interesting to quote Sykowingnut,
"Why do people turn to this God? Well,
many turn to Him for salvation, or they turn to Him out of fear,
or they turn to him out of desperation."
(From https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/index.html.)
There is a logical fallacy
found in this statement to defend Sykowingnut's position on why
he does not believe in God. One of the
first thing one learns in logic is that
EXPLAINING something is not the same thing as ARGUING about
something.
To explain the believer's reason for
turning to God does not in any way,
shape, or form rule out God's non-existence! When Sykowingnut
explains why people believe the things
they believe, he doesn't realize that
this a invalid argument by means of explanation slits his own
throat. It is self-refuting. He himself
doesn't believe in God because of rough
times in his life, afraid God would beat him up and in act of
rebellion because he doesn't want to
submit to Him at all. (see https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/ivc.html)
Yet, these very reasons why
he does not believe are the very same factors he accuses as absurd
of why Christians believe in God (his
"salvation" away from God's rule in His
life, his "fear" of God being sadistic and his "desperateness"
in his rough times...does that
sound familiar?). To attempt to refute Christianity
by explaining why Christians believe is to refute Sykowingnut
himself because he too have reasons why he don't believe!
Hypocricy has no limits with Sykowingnut
as anyone can see later on below.
We now go more in depth responding
to other statements made in this portion
of this "defense":
|
|
| "They also
tend to think that He is self-existent, but while they
accept this, they don't accept
that maybe the universe is self- and
not the creation of some God (sounds like hypocrisy to me)."
(From https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/index.html
|
| RESPONSE: What
makes it so hypocritical to believe God is self-existence
and the universe is not?
Let us say God being self-existent
is labeled as X and universal
self-existent is labeled as Y. X does not necessarily
demand Y here, and to assert that
this as hypocrisy is simply foolishness.
Following this fellow's logic applied to himself we see that
actually he's the hypocrite! As
follows: He thinks Jesus is a liar who fictionalized
things to people (https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/iiib.html)
yet he himself doesn't
accept that maybe he is the one who is the liar with a website
full of fictionalized lies!
WHAT A HYPOCRITE!!! Back to Outline |
|
|
| "It seems to
me that Christians turn to this god for salvation in hopes
that they won't go to hell. So they
pray to god when they do wrong and say
'please god save me from my sin and forgive me so that I may
go to heaven and not to hell'
Please. What if they do no wrong their whole life and
then kill a person and die before they can repent. Does that
person go to hell?"
(FROM https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/iia.html) |
| RESPONSE: The question
raised here proves not to be a problem at all. If
this guy knows any basic logic,
he'll know that he's committed a Straw man
logical fallacy. In a spirit of charity in case he doesn't know
what that means, the excerpt
here is a misrepresentation of what Christianity really
teaches about salvation. Anyone could misrepresent an opponent's
position and knock it down like
a straw man. Either that's the case or the particular
individual doesn't understand or know what is the Christian
position. If ignorance is the case,
why would anyone listen to someone that
doesn't know about what he is talking about?! Biblical
Christianity believes in terms of
salvation once saved always saved (see 2Corinthians
1:21-22, John 6:39-40, John 10:28-29).Back
to Outline |
|
|
| "The bible gives
quotes about how a person is saved and why they should
be saved, but can you really trust
the bible when there are so many different
versions and interpretations of it?" (
https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/iia.html)
|
| RESPONSE: Just because
there are many translations of the Bible does not rule
out the Bible in it of itself is not trustworthy. It is invalid
to logically deduct to that
position. In the same fashion, just because there
are different interpretations of scripture does not rule out
the Bible is without integrity.
Rather, we test the accuracy of an interpretation
of a certain Biblical passage through the study of Scripture
following grammatical rules, syntax and CONTEXT. Back
to Outline |
|
|
| "Why do Christians
even fear God? In the Bible God is said to be a caring
and loving God. Do you fear someone who loves and cares for
you?I don't think so, so
why than do Christians fear God?" (
https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/iib.html)
|
| RESPONSE:
Sykowingnut must be a bastard (as in without any parents). It
is not a problematic statement to
assert that one who has a relationship with
a caring and loving God can at times fear Him also. Many people
have loving and caring parents
yet at times they fear their parents also when they
have done something wrong or displeased their mothers and fathers.
Realization of the consequences
and nature of sin would bring a sinner to the
fear of God and perhaps repentance in Christ Jesus that result
in one being "born-again",
or being saved. (Repentance of one's sin and accepting
Christ brings salvation, cf. Acts 3:19) In addition, the fear
of God for Christians thrusts a
Christian the reminder that one must come back
to Him and His grace after sinning. Does not the owner of this
anti-Christian website not at least
know of someone who at one time in their
life fear their loving parents when they have done something
wrong? Back to Outline |
|
|
| "That
brings me to another point, Christianity is such a depressing
religion. The only way a Christian
can be happy is to die and go to heaven."
( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/iib.html) |
| RESPONSE:
There is happiness even before heaven for a Christian. "Rejoice
in the Lord always. I will
say it again: Rejoice!" (Philippians 4:4) Does
Sykowingnut knows joy and happiness himself? Back
to Outline |
|
|
| "But, many people
cower on up to God and say, 'oh God I need help, I am
such a weak person and I cannot
do anything on my own. I am cowering up to
so that you may help me.'(
https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/iic.html) |
| RESPONSE: It's interesting
to note how anti-Christians always attack believers
as weak individuals. But how strong is Sykowingnut when he has
tried to commit suicide before?
(See https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/iic.html)
Using his own method to
refute Christianity in the given
statement above, does that refute his own
position of anti-Christianity too? If Christianity is true
we would obviously expect
God to help those who are weak since this is taught in
the Bible at places like Matthew
11:28. Rather than taking out Christianity
here with Sykowingnut's statement, he now puts himself in
a tight spot! Weakness
of believers does not rule out the God of the Bible.
Rather with cases like Paul the
Apostle, Johnny Erickson Tada (a crippled who
through God's grace was able to launch a ministry to help
others like her) their
very weakness fulfills the later part of a verse in
2Corinthians 12:10, "For
when I am weak, then I am strong." Back
to Outline
|
We are now done scraping Sykowingnut's
first futile frontal attack, now we
are dealing with the second attack. The second segment treated
here concerns who Jesus was and
is. It must be pointed out that IF EVER Sykowingnut
could disprove Christianity by swinging around his blade of
"who Jesus is", Sykowingnut
still fall SHORT of his goal to defend atheism.
To "disprove" Jesus does not prove Atheism at all!
But to be polite, we will not
ignore Sykowingnut's second segment but give it a response
also.
|
|
| "Is Jesus the
true savior? What proof do we have of his claims outside
of the Bible? We have none, so it
is fence situation." (
https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/iiia.html) |
| RESPONSE: Sykowingnut
is in a fence situation because he wouldn't even be able
to "fence" correctly in his polemics against Jesus.
That Jesus claims to be the
Savior or the Christ can be verified outside of the Bible.
A Jewish Historian name Josephus stated in the Antiquities at
18:3, "Now there was about
this time Jesus, a wiseman, if it be lawful to call
him a man. For he was one who wrought surprising feats...HE
WAS THE CHRIST...he appeared
to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets
had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things
concerning him." (Bold statement
in quote is the author's emphasis) Back
to Outline |
|
|
| "In the NT [New
Testament - Ed.], all the exploits of Jesus are mentioned.
Everything from walking on
water, to miraculous healing, to feeding hundreds on fish and
bread. But still, where is the proof
to these claims?" (
https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/iiia.html) |
| RESPONSE: See our
response in Statement #1 and #9. Back
to Outline |
|
|
| "...it is human
nature to glorify and exalt our heroes. So how do we
know that this ain't what Matthew,
Mark, Luke, and John and the rest of the
disciples did?"( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/iiia.html) |
| RESPONSE: While it
is human nature to glorify and exalt one's hero, it must
also be pointed out that human nature does not lead one to make
exaggerated lies about how great
Jesus is when people with power and contrary
views wants to harm you very much greatly (flogging, stoning
to death, etc) for making
such claims as Jesus rising from the dead. If anything,
if Jesus outrageous claims were not true, human nature would
dictate that one would lower Jesus
claims and say he was just a good man instead
of Lord and Savior, etc. Contrary to human nature however, the
early Christians who followed Jesus
while He was alive on earth BOLDLY declare
despite the overwhelming opposition and no cardinal advantages
for any of the apostles that Jesus
who they have witnessed and live with for
three years, did rise from the grave and is the LORD and SAVIOR!!!
Back to Outline |
|
|
| "Here is a situation
for you, let's just say I am Paul. Okay? Now I love
Jesus, and I want to spread his word all across the land. Do
I tell people that he was
just a really good teacher, or do I sensationalize and
say Jesus was the son-of-God, and
support his claim with lies and exaggerations?
I do the latter because people will more believe a big lie
than a little lie"( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/iiia.html) |
| RESPONSE: While this
statement reveals Sykowingnut's damaged morality, Sykowingnut
baggage of issues is in no way logically relevant to his
defense of unbelief other than the
fact that it demonstrates the irrational
motive of why he won't believe. It is something Sykowingnut
would face God with when Judgment
comes around and the writer here can only
tell Sykowingnut that if he does not repent of his sin and come
to Christ, he will burn under
the glorious fury of God's wrathful justice.
In addition, three other things
can be pointed out concerning Sykowingnut's
statement here.
First off, Sykowingnut describes
a possible event to discredit
Christianity but he does not prove that the event
he described was something that DID take place!
Secondly, in an earlier
rebuttal a passage was quoted from the secular Jewish historian
Josepheus who lived during the
contemporary time period when the truth concerning
Jesus could be verified. In this quote the Jewish historian
Josepheus mentioned Jesus making
"surprising feats". The naive thought that
Sykowingnut would know more than Josepheus two thousand years
later and far from the
facts is absurd and totally unfounded. This displays
Sykowingnut's attitude as one
who has made up his mind even before the evidence
and goes upstream contrary to the facts. Such ignorance
is damned.
Thirdly, Jesus miracles proclaimed
by the apostles were not lies made
up by His disciples. These men were martyred for what they
clearly known was either
truth or fiction concerning Jesus miracles and resurrection.
While other followers far from the time of Jesus could be
martyred and not demonstrate logically
that Jesus is who He is, the case with
the apostles is different since they have been physically
with Jesus during His earthly
ministry and resurrection. Back to Outline
|
|
|
| "Hey he convinced
12 disciples that he was the son of god, and they believed
him. Hey some people are just good with propaganda."(
https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/iiib.html) |
| RESPONSE: It
is amazing how Sykowingnut seems to demand evidence from
Christians but provides no evidence
himself for anything he says. Jesus claim
to Son of God was defended with miracles (see our response earlier
in
Segment Two, Statement Two) and ultimately His resurrection.
How bad of an infedel propagandist
could Sykowingnut be? Back
to Outline |
|
|
| "Look at Hitler
or Mussulini. They both convinced thousands of people to follow
and believe them. So who is to say that Jesus didn't do the
same thing."( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/iiib.html) |
| RESPONSE: And who
says Jesus did the same thing as Hitler? Hitler was bound
on being sensational to get people to follow him along with
Mussulini whereas Jesus, since He was into saving people(Cf.
John 3:17) was into changing hearts and even confronting sinners.
Whereas Hitler and Mussulini was popular to the mass, Jesus
was not. And ultimately this where the seperation of the
Hitler type difer from Jesus: Whereas Hitler lost followings
dramatically with his death, the dramatical growth of the followers
of Jesus immediatley after His death with the claim that He
is risen can only suggest one thing indeed: JESUS IS DIFFERENT
IN THAT HE HAS RISEN! Back to Outline |
|
|
| "So Jesus lied
about being the son of god, but painted such a lovely picture,
people believed him."( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/iiib.html) |
| RESPONSE: The picture
Sykowingnut tries to paint here isn't even appealing when one
realizes that this is an example of Sykowingnut's logical fallacy
of circular reasoning. In trying to argue the point that
Jesus is a liar, he defends his conclusion by stating again
that Jesus is a liar. Sykowingnut paints a picture that
just can not be believed. Back
to Outline |
|
|
| "They wrote
down nice little stories that told of the great things that
Jesus had done, but they really never happened. So where is
my proof in this? Well, I think someone outside of the early
church would have wrote down something about these miracles."
(https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/iiib.html) |
| RESPONSE: Definitely
an argument from silence, but one that is answered! Sykowingnut's
statement here is based upon ignorance, as one can see in our
earlier response in Segment two, statement two. Sykowingnut
"thinks" someone outside the early church should have
wrote something about these miracles but he does not realized
that someone DID. Back
to Outline |
|
|
| "Well, I think
someone outside of the early church would have wrote
down something about these miracles.
Perhaps a Greek? But no one did until
almost 40 years after Jesus got what he deserved." |
| RESPONSE: Even
more powerful of an evidence than a Greek writer, if
Jesus own enemies who put him to
death (the Jewish Rabbis and teachers) were
to mention Jesus as practicing some form of supernatural performance
(whether it is negatively called
"magic" or positively called "miracles")
this would devastate Sykowingnut's
position. In Sanhedrin43a of the Jewish
Talmud (commentaries by Jewish religious leaders) we find this statement:
"On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For
forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth
and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced
SORCERY..."(word in bold by this writer). How about
it, the very people bent on destroying Christianity confirms
facts about Christianity! Back
to Outline |
|
|
| Concerning what the
apostles wrote, "so what proof is there that these
are accurate representations of
the true story? We have none, so either they
are fact or they are fiction. "(
https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/index.html) |
| RESPONSE: Two points
in responding to this statement. First off, the
apostles were Jesus' early disciples
and KNEW about facts concerning Jesus death
and resurrection (simply put, they would know whether Jesus
did or did not resurrected).
IF Jesus did not raise from the dead then the disciples
would be knowingly lying about it but this does not seem to
be the case as they died
for this "lie". One does not knowingly die for
a lie with no benefits for
lying. It can also be documented from Jewish religious
sources that one of the Gospel writer in the Bible, Matthew,
was martyred for his faith: "Yeshu
had five disciples, Matthai, Nakai, Nezer,
Buni and Todah. When Matthai was brought before the court
he said to them the judges,
Shall Matthai be executed? Is it not written, Matthai
when shall I come and appear before God? Thereupon they
retorted: Yes, Matthai shall be
executed, since it is written, When Matthai
shall die and his name perish." (From Sanhedrin43a) Again,
one does not die knowingly
for a fabricated and benefit less lie. Second point,
the quotations we have given throughout this segment from sources
outside the Bible is in harmony
with the Bible. It confirms Jesus death on
the eve of passover, his miracles and nothing less than a resurrection
on the third day when Jesus was
raised to life and appeared to His disciples.
Turning the table around now, could Skyowingnut actually give
any evidences besides arguing from
silence for his assertion? Back to Outline |
|
|
|
"If you are a Christian,
then they are fact, but if you ain't a Christian,
then they are pure fiction."(
https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/index.html)
|
| RESPONSE: Certainly,
we see Skyowingnut admitting the irrationality of nonbelievers
of his caliber! Truth is truth, whether he bends his knee to
it or not would determine his future
for suppressing the truth. Back to Outline |
Prong 3:
God's Failure of Mankind
Having nailed Sykowingnut's section
on Jesus Christ, let us press forward
"now on to how God has failed humankind."
( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/index.html)
It can be seen here that Sykowingnut
has a defect in his thinking in assuming that God owes him
something. In reality God does not have to answer any one of our
sinner's cardinal request. It's only
by a merciful grace that He does answer
prayers. Unlike an old bubblegum mark, we shall finish scraping
Sykowingnut's website off for good.
|
|
|
"Now on to how God has failed
humankind. You are wondering by now how in
the world could I support such a claim as to how God has failed.
Well it is easy, and I
know I'm going to receive some hate mail for this, but
I am going to prove God has failed
by disproving He has done anything for humankind."(
https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/index.html)
|
| RESPONSE:
Here he is going to prove God failing mankind by God failing
mankind. Just another logical fallacy
of circular reasoning. Back
to Outline |
|
|
|
"First off, God has not
been there when people need Him."( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/index.html)
AND "Now, I know you are
saying, hey, that person just didn't pray hard enough or they
didn't really believe that God was there, etc. But hey, from
personal experience, I know that God was never there for me
when I was suicidal."( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/IVA.html)
|
| RESPONSE:
Notice that Sykowingnut need to use personal and subjective
testimony in order to make this
claim. Since his aim is to "prove God has failed
by disproving He hasn't done anything for humankind"(
https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/index.html),
if it be shown that God did
just one thing for man, then this would be enough to
refute Sykowingnut's position. If
Sykowingnut's method of demonstrating that
God has not done anything for man is personal and subjective
testimony, then using his very methodology,
he is refuted when one read testimonies
on the TEAM website of how God is working within believers
lives. Of course, if Sykowingnut
objects to personal and subjective testimonies,
then he too must object to his own personal crutch of
atheism. Back
to Outline |
|
|
|
"What, you ask, do I mean
by God not being there? What I mean is this, sometimes
a person goes through such a rough time in their life that
they need some outside
support. So they turn to their God and pray to Him that
he might take away their pain
and burdens, and that He may help them get through
their rough time. Well, sometimes, no help comes and the pain
never goes away."( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/IVA.html)
|
| RESPONSE:
It is important that you turn to the true GOD and not a false
god. Notice how he mentions of how
one in pain turn to "their" God, but not
necessarily the true God. Sykowingnut self-invented god from
his own bosom is just that:
a god that takes away all pains in this life time and
runs on the mercy of the emotions
of whiny babies like Sykowingnut. All pain
WOULD some day go away, that is, if you are believer of the
God of the Bible. The Biblical
God is a mighty God who at times allow certain hardship
to strengthen you and forge you but the pain would end for His
followers when the Day of the Lord
arrives. "He will wipe every tear from their
eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying
or pain," surely the
Bible says, when "the old order of things has passed away."
(Revelation 21:4) Back
to Outline |
|
|
|
"I prayed and prayed for
God's great glory to shine down upon me and that He may take
away the pain. But after a week of praying, I realized that
no help from this great God was coming to me."( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/IVA.html)
|
| RESPONSE:
Sykowingnut has proven the Bible when God didn't answer this
blasphemous non-believer's prayer!
"If anyone turns a deaf ear to the law,
even his prayers are detestable." (Proverbs 28:9) Back
to Outline |
|
|
|
"Okay you are saying, well
God just never gives up on people, but you know
what, sometimes good people pray to Him and it seems He just
ain't listening."(
https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/IVA.html)
|
| RESPONSE:
Sykowingnut says it himself: "it seems". It seems
to Sykowingut. "GODISNOWHERE"
might seem like "God is no where" but it really
is, "God is now here!!!!" Back
to Outline |
|
|
|
"God does give up on people,
because if He didn't, why wasn't He there for
those people who are praying to Him for help and wisdom?"
( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/IVA.html)
|
| RESPONSE:
God is never obliged to answer our prayers, especially when
we are sinning against Him.
"If anyone turns a deaf ear to the law, even his
prayers are detestable." (Proverbs
28:9) We must know His will also. "For this
reason, since the day we heard about you, we have not stopped
praying for you and asking God to
fill you with the knowledge of HIS WILL through all spiritual
wisdom and understanding." (Colossians 1:9; emphasis
by the author's; see also 1John
5:14) Back to Outline |
|
|
|
"If prayer works, how come
there is no documented proof to it working? Huh?
Because there is no power in prayer."(
https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/IVA.html)
|
| RESPONSE:
Has Sykowingnut visited the testimony section of TEAM's
website? Back
to Outline |
|
|
|
"Which either means, God
doesn't listen to you pray and thereby failing to
be the great God you pray to, or there is no God to pray to."
( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/IVA.html)
|
| RESPONSE:
Sykowingnut's concept of God is actually not so great as he
thinks it is: If God is so great,
could He answer no and not be enslaved to
a petty finite master like Sykowingnut's whining? Sykowingnut
be warned: sometimes God
is go great that He doesn't answer foolish prayer requests
too for the person's sake (if a girl prays to be a guy that
happens to be abusive, God might
not answer the prayer for her benefit). Back
to Outline |
|
|
|
"We all suffer, but if there
is some great loving god, why would he let us suffer? Does
he instead hate us and likes to watch us squirm and writhe
in pain? Possibly, but still he is suppose to be a loving
god."( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/ivb.html)
|
| RESPONSE:
For some of the reasons why God allows believers to suffer,
go to https://www.angelfire.com/rock2/team/qna_jinnyli.htm
Back to Outline |
|
|
|
"Now I have been told before
that suffering comes from Satan. But hold on for one minute,
god is the "creator". So he created disease and
sickness. Satan is not the creator, and can only destroy.
So that means all diseases are sent by god."(
https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/ivb.html)
|
| RESPONSE:
For some of the reasons why God allows us to suffer, see
https://www.angelfire.com/rock2/team/qna_jinnyli.htm
Back to Outline |
|
|
|
"The only way to leave a
marriage according to the Bible is if one person is unfaithful.
So if what if a man beats his wife, she according to the Bible
cannot get a divorce because her husband is still faithful
to her." ( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/ivb.html)
|
| RESPONSE:
This statement here is so absurd, it's comical. How "faithful"
is a husband who abuses and
beats up his wife? If Sykowingnut thinks one can beat
up his own wife and still call himself "faithful",
then we could understand
how God can be so great and just as to not answer Sykowingnut's
prayer to be with a beautiful girl! Back
to Outline |
|
|
|
"But why would god allow
this? I have a friend who is a Christian, and all
of her boyfriends have all physically abused her. Yet she
prays to god to help her
break the cycle and for god to help her find someone who
will not abuse her, but no help
comes. Why would a loving and caring god allow
one of his followers to be abused?" (
https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/ivb.html)
|
| RESPONSE:
How could God be blame for her own stupidity? Christians are
suppose to have godly mates yet
with this girl she disobeyed God's command.
If she followed God's command, she would not have any ungodly
boyfriends thus eliminating the
problem of abusive guys in the first place.
How true can the Bible speaks to us even for today: "As
a dog returns to its vomit,
so a fool repeats his folly." (Proverbs 26:11) Back
to Outline |
|
|
|
"Why would a loving and
caring god allow one of his followers to be abused?
Simple, god is not so loving and caring after all."
|
| RESPONSE:
This is a logical fallacy of hasty inductive generalization.
This is "when a person generalize
from a single anecdote...to support his conclusion."
(From "A Practical Study of Argument", fifth edition,
pages 442) Back
to Outline |
|
|
|
"Why would god test his
followers? Because god is petty and cruel and likes to mistreat
those who follow him? My cat loves me, but I don't test her
love by mistreating her."( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/ivc.html)
|
|
RESPONSE: God is not being sadistic
here, but developing people's character. See https://www.angelfire.com/rock2/team/qna_jinnyli.htm
for other reasons why God
allows us trial. Back to Outline
|
|
|
|
"If god is so great and
powerful, than he would already know if a person's faith in
him is strong"( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/ivc.html)
|
| RESPONSE:
Trial comes not for God's sake so that He would know whether
one's faith is strong or not, but
for the tested person to be developed TO
BE STRONG.Back to Outline |
Closing Remarks
We have finished responding to the
website of Sykowingnut in it's entirety.
We have contacted Sykowingnut about this article via email. As
one more point against his view concerning
God not answering him in relations
to God existence we used his own twisted methodology to show Sykowingnut's
"non-existence", thus shattering his own position
internally into oblivion!
As follows:
|
"Feel free to email me
at the address below with any questions, comments,
complaints, prayer requests, hate
mail, etc"( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/index.html)
|
| RESPONSE: Having
emailed Sykowingnut twice without any response from Sykowingnut
and using Sykowingnut's own twisted logic, Sykowingnut does
not exist since he did not answer!
The Website can now be safely ignored for
good since all "his" alleged arguments are accidental
chance gibberish in the e-world. |
Would you really believe that Sykowingnut
does not exist and that his website
was nothing more than an impersonal, accidental, "freak of
nature" chance event? If you have
a hard time swallowing this as fact because
his website has too much design and coherent information, how
much harder must it be to be an atheist
when Sykowingnut exists. After all,
DNA is much more complicated than html.
The only reason why Sykowingnut remains
an atheist is not because of sound
reason but a personal subjective issue that goes contrary to the
facts as he himself admits:
"I will not worship a god that
tests people."( https://www.angelfire.com/tn/sikosyko/ivc.html)
--JIMMY LI
|