Saturday, November 6, 2010

Requiem for an Edski


Ed "I'm Talking and I Can't Shut Up" Babinski posted this on the Ticker, which will be deleted from there; he still hasn't figured out, after being told three times, that he's not welcome there. Just as well though -- it makes for great fodder here and on TWeb.
I have asked J.P. for years about his personal journey (let's not call it a "testimony" but simply personal development over time). How old was he when Christianity became his belief system? Can he list all that he read prior to converting?
No, Edski. I can't define an age because there is NO point of conversion I can identify. There is also therefore no list I can offer beyond vague memories. Not that it matters, since that would have zero bearing on the truth of the matter.
Personally reviewing one's own life, what one has read and experienced at different stages, is an essential part of a feedback loop that teaches us who we are and what we truly DO believe.
Maybe for a weak mind like you, Edski, but for those of us who consider objective truth the main thing, that's just a waste of time.
And we all change, sometimes in big ways, sometimes in small ones. Life is change. Even those who remain Christians have experiences and read books that alter their views of what Christianity is or is not.
No, Edski. Not for an INTJ. We change very little over time. We do change our mind based on evidence though -- not just any old book we find in the gutter, the way you do it.
And our minds from adolescence to adulthood change as well. It's good to review one's own life journey, even in the face of questions from others. Richard Carrier's journey is online. Loftus' is in print. My own journey is online and in print. So is Robert Price's. I'm not saying there are not also stories of journey's toward conservative Christianity. I'm just saying there are people with stories and there are people who are less than willing to share theirs.
Yes, we know. You find those books in the "Horror" section at B and N. I don't give a crap for your "journeys," Edski. People like you who cling to the past and can't let go of it are part of the reason humanity in the West is stuck in regressive childhood functions.
But I am convinced that challenging one's self to write down an account as best as one can recall it, of what one's journey has been like, what it involved, what one read, what pertinent events and meetings and questions and quotations from others along the journey that led to you becoming "you" -- is an essential part of being human.
Yeah sure thing, Dr. Anthropologist.Then I'll spare myself the indignity of being "human" and join some other group, like the Vulcans.
Each person's life is not simply a rehearsal of religious dogmas, nor atheist dogmas. It's an historical process of intellectual growth, asking questions, ingesting data of all sorts. Writing down such a story clarifies things in one's own mind, and also outlines what's most fuzzy and where further clarification is needed. It helps us explain even to ourselves who we are.
That's something weak-minded people like you need, Edski, but not me. I don't need to write things down to be reflective. What you write down, I do internally.
I would like J.P. to consider leaving aside the mouthing of dogmas for a second,
I never "mouth dogmas", fundy boy. I state facts arrived at by careful consideration of evidence. Just because you never advanced past that sort of babyish thinking, don't assume no one else did. If all I did was mouth dogmas, I wouldn't be a preterist, or someone who believes hell is not literal flames, or hold a dozen other views I have that set the average pastor's head aswirl.
and the mouthing of insults and write the J.P. story. Even if he doesn't share it with anyone but close friends the first step is writing it down. No one is attacking him for having a story. So he should feel free to examine questions and different matters arguing only with himself throughout. The greatest challenge is always converting one's self, not converting others.
Thanks for the advice, Ann Landers. Stuff it up your nose with the end of a fire hose. The only reason you think this is necessary is because you arrogantly assume that I need it, since I have not become a heathen wretch the way you are. IOW I must not have done it right, or I'd be like you.
If he does eventually decide to share it like Carrier, Price, Loftus and myself have done, questions will be asked. And perhaps that's what he's concerned about concerning his story, i.e., that he wasn't in grad school nor well read prior to converting to Christianity.
Welcome to Fantasy Island. It's the same old story: Edski can't win arguments, so he resorts to the genetic fallacy.
That his testimony resembles that of many other youthful converts. That once converted he wanted to be the best Christian he could be and convert the rest of the world, and how early attempts to convert others ("turn or burn") may have resulted in some harsh responses from others, and how he eventually became J.P. Holding.
I didn't ever try to convert anyone, Edski, least of all with "turn or burn" techniques, with which I always harshly disagreed. I had maybe 5-10 non-Christians come to me with questions (plus many more Christians), but I never pressed them to make a decision and they were always open and friendly. I always had a sense -- since confirmed by research -- that modern evangelistic techniques were faulty and centered in false premises of the Gospel as a self-help mechanism. So I never "witnessed" to anyone and still don't.
So much for your fantasies. Time to wake up and slap yourself.
I'd pay money to read his story, laid out in detail.
OK. Send me a check in advance. $1000 for the actual printing by Xulon, plus another $2000 for my time. Make it out to Tekton, please. I'll wait for it.
Just the part about being a prison librarian might prove interesting. In fact I just saw an autobiography of a prison librarian at Barnes and Noble: Running the Books: The Adventures of an Accidental Prison Librarian by Avi Steinberg (Oct 19, 2010) 27 customer reviews and four stars at amazon.com.
How nice. I won't spoil the surprise then. Just send me the cash and we'll let you see for yourself.

7 comments:

  1. J.P. is how I imagine most Christian apologetics ought to function, especially if eternal punishment of some sort is on the line. I can see how a doctrine of eternal punishment might drive some folks to preach curses like Jesus, Paul and the prophets did, and declare certain things anathema or anti-Christian. J.P. essentially is attempting to put up lots of yellow tape (and grade school insults) around the crime scene of less orthodox theologies as he sees them. To warn the flock. He also wants to recreate Christianity in his image. No more pietistic focus on "personal testimonies," which he deplores, partly because his own was probably so inconsequential, typical teen convert I imagine, Chick Tracts probably played a role, no big thought involved in his own entrance into the one true faith. The other apologists like Lee Strobel seem to spend much time fawning over other inerrantists who allegedly have all the answers, whom he interviews to make his "case" books. J.P. has at least read some original source materials, and even perused some classic works of biblical scholarship. But none of it makes a dent in his infallibilist/inerrantist views. I think Eric Hoffer could explain that reaction. J.P. has joined his personhood, his ego, to a cause, a worldview, and so none of what he does is any longer his fault. He's part of something so big that his own life doesn't matter, only the cause, the absolute truth and authority of the Bible. King James Only Folks and Garbage Eaters are like that too. The latter are sometimes recruited from quite intelligent college students, away from home, who get attracted to the solidity of belief, and soon learn to memorize the King James Bible and speak to others simply by citing verses from it. Their minds are completely taken over with Bible Speak, and the desire to preach to others and eat out of garbage bins when necessary while roving about preaching. Their own families can't talk to them. In high school I was also taken with joining something bigger than myself, Jesus my Lord and the Christian cause was everything to me in high school. I was reading Tortured for Christ books, dreaming about being another Brother Andrew smuggling Bibles into Russia, or becoming a creation evangelist. I did not exist, only the cause. J.P. thinks the same way. I also read some of the non-Christian classics like The Age of Reason, as well as atheist bestsellers of my era, Beyond Freedom and Dignity (B.F. Skinner), Human Nature (E. O. Wilson), and wrote rebuttals to them in college.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Edski also left a second comment as a continuation, which I deleted as spam. Keep to the frinkin' limits, Edski: No one wants to read your constant verbal diarrhea except you.

    Most of the above is goofball garbage that says nothing in as many words as possible, but here's a few slaps back:

    >>>J.P. is how I imagine most Christian apologetics ought to function, especially if eternal punishment of some sort is on the line.

    Except that I don't believe in "eternal punishment" as you read it, Edski. Remember? Duh...but this is a stupid comment anyway. What you're saying is that unless Christianity can be preached with NO possible negative consequences for rejection, it's obviously using threats to coerce people. Nice way to cordon off the scene with yellow (as in "coward") tape of your own, you moron.

    Beyond that, once again you're obviously too weak-minded to actually answer the arguments: Eg, SHOW by argument and evidence that warnings are not warranted. News flash: You're supposed to show that someone's argument is WRONG first, THEN you can babble on about motivations. But that's well beyond your ability to do with your limited mental horsepower.

    >>>so inconsequential, typical teen convert I imagine, Chick Tracts probably played a role, no big thought involved in his own entrance into the one true faith.

    Yeah right. :D Correction already issued; continue with your fantasies. Chick tracts? I collected 'em for the art.


    >>> J.P. has at least read some original source materials, and even perused some classic works of biblical scholarship. But none of it makes a dent in his infallibilist/inerrantist views.

    News flash #2: That's because I don't hold to a FUNDY, ignorant version of that doctrine the way YOU did, Edski, and which still impacts that molecule-sized brain of yours today. Inerrancy as I have it is much less demanding, and much less important, than the version YOU held to in your Bob Jones days.

    >>>I think Eric Hoffer could explain that reaction.

    I think Edski is using ten-cent psychoanalysis as a poor substitute for his inability to formulate a coherent argument. The story is YOUR bio, Edski, one from which you still have not recovered, and from which you still try to work out all your guilt, frustration, and embarrassment. How's that grab you?

    >>> I did not exist, only the cause. J.P. thinks the same way.

    True. I also think you don't exist, Edski. I think you're just an AI that someone programmed as a joke. No doubt also why you continue to post crap on blogs during work time and don't seem to get in trouble for it.

    >>>I also read some of the non-Christian classics like The Age of Reason, as well as atheist bestsellers of my era, Beyond Freedom and Dignity (B.F. Skinner), Human Nature (E. O. Wilson), and wrote rebuttals to them in college.

    Probably your response to AR was crap too. You probably "rebutted" it by hypothesizing that Paine was beaten as a child. Guaran-dang-tee my own response to Paine makes yours look like a kiddy production. Just like today, Edski.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Don't get me wrong, I think you're a great apologist, Holding, but why do you feel the need to throw so many insults at your opponents?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mainly, because they earn it.

    Edski has been working on his just desserts for about 10 years now.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The fact that the person converted isn't important, it's what made him convert and his arguments' soundness afterwards.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Lol, if Ed actually did send you 3000$ would you write such a book?

    ReplyDelete
  7. @Jason: Sure would! But ya know he won't.

    ReplyDelete