April 20, 2011
-
Are atheists demon possessed?
Intro:
Previously, I posted some chunks of Christian apologist, Steve Hays', views on demons, skeptics, and UFology from "This Joyful Eastertide" (TJET), his ebook length response to the skeptical anthology, "The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond the Grave." Today we're going to get into another example of how he attempts to apply that in debate (see also, "Christian demons vs. Muslim demons").
The original conversation started in another skeptical anthology, "The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails" and the ebook length response to it called, "The Infidel Delusion" and then continued into the blog realm with Debunking Christianity and Triablogue "discussing" the issues further.
In his response to Loftus, "Scoring the Outsider Test," Hays says:
[Loftus] shifts from literal demonization to figurative demonization. Is Loftus so caught up in his persecution complex that he can’t tell the difference any more?Hays is being a little superficial. For example, in TJET, Hays had said:
I find it more than plausible that a man who was dabbling in the occult (Taoism) would leave himself wide open to the demonic—especially in the case of an apostate like [Richard] Carrier. Those that pray to false gods become the devil’s prey.*shrug* It's not like Hays isn't known for the accusation (or the overt suggestion, in the case of Carrier). And as I showed in a previous post, "Steve Hays' 'Demon-Haunted' Apologetics" it should be pretty clear that if Hays isn't saying it overtly, I don't see why we shouldn't assume he isn't thinking it. Satan is behind everything!
In his third post to me, "Ne'er shaw yir teeth unless ye can bite!", Hays avoids the issue in favor of a personal attack as though this has something to do with me:
Since Carrier is one of Ben’s “heroes” (along with other luminaries like Barack Obama, Jon Stewart, Al Franken, Anthony Weiner), I understand why his feelings are hurt when I slight his idol. However, I simply drew an inference from autobiographical material which Carrier publicly volunteered about himself. Since Taoism is an occultic tradition, and Carrier also admits to having undergone an episode of Old-Hag syndrome as a practicing Taoist, there’s nothing untoward about my suggestion.While I'm sure that a Christian like Hays has some lovely things to say about Obama, Stewart, Franken, and Weiner, Loftus' original point is that Hays is willing to think his opponents are demon-possessed (and ignores perfectly mundane explanations like "sleep paralysis hallucination"). Hays avoided the issue to attack Loftus personally and I demonstrated Loftus' inference about Hays was in fact perfectly reasonable. We're all just making perfectly innocent inferences around here, right?
Outro:
Hays doesn't like his inverse scarlet letter, but that's just too bad isn't it? Maybe he should bother to prove that demons actually exist or that Loftus is actually wrong about something important. There's a thought.
Ben
Comments (5)
No. Just read the title.
Ok, I'll read the rest, but I'm just baffled that in the 21st century such an ass-backwards, face-buried-in-the-mud Medieval silly claim needs ANY sort of real rebuttal.
@Unstoppable_Inner_Strength - Exposing it to public scrutiny can be helpful. And it's humorous, too.
Midevil is right. Everytime I hear one of those moronic paranormal lunatics start talking about demons it makes me sick. How the hell can people be so stuck on that type of thinking? I try to point out that ONE THING has helped us progress, science. If it were not for people working in science we would still be stuck in a time where you burned people for being a witch and killed people who were mentally ill because demons were the cause. Shit even in the 50's and 60s we were doing horendous things to mental patients thinking it was the right treatment. Religious sheep, paranormal dumb-asses they are the same in the way that they need some "mystical force" to validate their lives and to make them feel like there is some secret waiting at life's end.
In the Old Testament there is nothing about "Satan" being the "ruler of this world," not like he morphed into during the Intertestamental period when Satan and Beelzebub gained cred, prestige and power and then were introduced into first century apocalyptic and New Testament lore. In the Old Testament Satan is at most God's accuser, keeping an eye on humans, God's district attorney, even appearing before God as in the book Job. God does the smiting, even the heart hardening in the Old Testament, except for six or so people that Satan gets to smite in the book of Job, and only at God's decision. But by the time the NT was composed Satan could offer Jesus all the world's kingdoms, and he was prince of this world, and prince of the power of the air! Can anyone say "upgrade?' Neither was "Satan" identified with the serpent in the Eden story. Satan is never identified with that serpent or any other serpent anywhere in the whole Old Testament. It was during the intertestamental period when someone wrote about Satan being a serpent, and when Satan and Beelzebub gained cred and prestige as I already pointed out. In the Old Testament the word "satan" was still a general word for accuser, and was applied to humans and even an angel sent by God (in the case of Balaam if I recall properly). Even John Walton points this out in his NIV Application Commentary on Genesis, a book that Steve Hays seems to have read at least parts of, though here and in the case of Walton pointing out the flat earth assumptions of the author of Genesis, Steve continues to squirm. See also these pieces, the latter of which includes quotations from people who visited with exorcists to try and see some evidence that exorcisms were real. One person went across the country, visiting many, saw many exorcisms performed. What did he see? Read the quotations:
http://edward-t-babinski.blogspot.com/2010/06/satan.html
http://edward-t-babinski.blogspot.com/search?q=exorcisms
@EdwardTBabinski - From snake to lawyer and hit man, to ruler of the world...not bad. Thanks for the links.