Street Preacher

cc01Workington’s Very Own Crazy Christian.

There’s a street preacher that I see every so often in Workington. I think he was the one that was falsely accused of breaching the peace after a homophobic outburst and subsequently won thousands of pounds in compensation. I’m sure he feels vindicated in his homophobia.

He was there again preaching outside the O2 shop as I was leaving town to collect my son and his friend for the school run. I’ve always wanted to stop and chat but the moment has never been right, just as it wasn’t that day. I had to run! I did, however, ask if I could take a photo of his sign so I could look up his website when I got home. He agreed and I took the picture before turning to leave.

“Do you believe in god?” he called after me as I left. Now I’ve been practicing the answer to this one so when I replied it came out with just the right mix of disdain and incredulity.

“No.”

I carried on walking but he called after me; with his preacher voice.

“The scripture says ‘The fool says in his heart, “there is no god”’” (He was talking so wasn’t troubled by triple depth speech marks.)

I turned with a wry smile and said,

“Yes, I’ve heard that”

To which he replied, and I may not be one hundred per cent accurate here but the gist is there:

“Atheists do believe in god in their hearts, they just deny him in un-righteousness”

I carried on walking, I really was late by this time but I did spin round, give him a sarcastic wave and called back

“Well that’s just bollocks isn’t it”

Not my most eloquent statement but pithy I thought, and entirely accurate.

So that was my first exchange with Workington’s Crazy Christian. First he calls me a fool, then a liar. Nice technique there, very persuasive.

One observation. How can I both say in “in my heart” that there is no god whilst at the same time knowing “in my heart” that there is a god? I may be over thinking it.

I checked the website by the way. Apparently the second law of thermodynamics disproves evolution. Seriously. That’s what it says. It then links you on to Ken Ham’s pit of stupidity Answers in Genesis. Not persuasive. Not even interesting. Sigh.

53 thoughts on “Street Preacher

  1. Hey thanks for the post I remember the encounter well and yes you are inaccurate with our last exchange.

    Allow me to explain, as you know Psalm 14:1 says that “the fool says in his heart there is no God” and Romans 1 says that everyone knows that God exists but that many suppress the truth in unrighteousness.

    So, there is no contradiction here, a fool is someone who does/says “A” even though he knows better. If you did not know that God existed then on the day of judgement you would have an excuse, Romans Chapter 1 says that you are without excuse because God has given you enough revelation to know He exists.

    With respect
    Dale (Crazy Christian if you prefer)

  2. “Suppress the truth in unrighteousness”! That’s the one. I wasn’t far off, not far off enough for you to say I was ‘inaccurate’ given that I actually said I wasn’t one hundred percent sure of your comment.
    I confess I had come to a similar conclusion about the logical contradiction of your two statements. They don’t contradict. Not that that makes them in any way correct. The fact remains that despite your “with respect” epithet in your comment, our first encounter was you calling me a fool and a liar.
    Quoting scripture in support of your claims doesn’t help your argument. I don’t accept the veracity of your particular book of fables. Do you have any actual evidence, for example, that “The fool has said in his heart, there is no god”?
    Rob

  3. Thanks for replying.

    I actually did not call you a liar if you recall. The fact that the Bible says you know that God exists because He has revealed it to you, does not instantly follow that you are a liar.
    There is willful suppression of the truth and there is what is called self deception.
    Without talking to you at length,, something I would be happy to do, I cannot know which catagory you fall into.

    The evidence that the fool says in his heart there is no God is found in Psalm 14:1

    With respect

    Dale

    • I don’t think you understand the notion that you can’t use a piece of text to prove that same piece of text is true.

      I’ve got a bit of paper here, it says “the bible isn’t true, the proof of it is that this paper says the bible isn’t true” it was given to me by Jimbajamba the high god of all gods. I know this is true because on the other side of the paper it says “Jimbajamba is the high god of all gods and this paper is from him”

      How’s that? My piece of paper is just as good as yours, no?

    • Okay, I’m not a liar, I’m either indulging in “willful suppression of the truth” or “self deception”. Your semantic trickery is really not that interesting.
      Wanna explain how the second law of thermodynamics proves that “Evolution is a hoax”? Now that would be fun!
      Rob

  4. No.

    And why can’t I use the Bible to prove it’s truth. The Bible is God’s Word and has it’s own authority, so if I want to know what is true I simply read it.

    What you are asking me to do when you demand that I prove anything to you without using the Bible (my source of truth and final authority) is like asking the strongest man in the world to prove he is without using his strength.

    With respect
    Dale

    • It is logically not possible to prove the truth of the bible by refering to the bible. No matter how strong your strong man is, he cannot lift himself off the ground by pulling on his shoe laces.

          • Rob, do you wish to engage in meaningful dialogue ?
            My worldview allows me to know things for certain because an all knowingGod reveals things to me so that I can know tthings for certain.
            What’s your justification for knowledge ?

          • I’m not sure that it is possible to engage in a meaningful dialogue with a presuppositional apologist. The denial of the reality of reality is just plain silly. If we are to get beyond this solipsistic mastebatory nonsense there are some axioms that we just need to accept as true. ‘I think therefore I am’ is a good starting point. ‘I know that god exists because god exists’ is not.

            How about you answer at least one of our questions. How does the 2nd law of thermodynamics disprove evolution?

        • Well, speaking personally, and I cannot speak for Rob, there is only one thing I know for certain and two things I assume are true because i cannot prove it one way or another.

          The certainty;
          That I exist

          The assumptions:
          My senses are telling the truth
          The universe is logical

          Everything else requires evidence.

          • I don’t have to justify my existence. No one does.

            I was born, hopefully because my parents wanted me, but other than that, my life just happened.

            That’s what makes life so amazing and so special – there’s nothing more, no magical rewards, no eternal existence and no higher power demanding I obey their rules. I’ve decided to make sure my brief existence isn’t wasted, that, once I’m gone, the world I leave is slightly better for those that follow after.

            it’s called altruism, and it’s a very, very powerful evolutionary and social catalyst. I don’t need a book of rules to tell me right from wrong, i don’t need the promise of heaven and the threat of hell to keep me in line, I, me, myself, have decided to do this and that puts me on a much higher moral high ground than anyone who claims their purpose, justification or morals are derived either from a book of immutable bronze age laws or a capricious higher being with dubious motives.

            I obey the law because I’ve decided it’s better for everyone if I do. I have a self-determined set of ethics because I’ve decided to stick to them. According to your religion, only your god can be good and you need him to tell you right from wrong.

            Ask yourself this; if you were sure that you felt your god telling you to kill someone, would you?

            If not, then your personal ethics are stronger than your belief in your god.
            If so, then your own god’s morals are relative and dependant on the whims of a being you claim cannot be known. Oh, and I’d go see a psychologist, because the secure mental units are full of people who killed because they claimed their god told them to.

    • Well, my piece of paper from Jimbajamba is -my- source of truth and final authority and it says your piece of paper is wrong.

      How do we sort this out?

      • Dagsannr, the reason I ask you to justify your existence is because the proof that God exists is that without Him you cannot known anything, including whether we exist or not.

        I have a question for you, since you believe we are here by chance and you believe in altruism, can you answer me this;
        How do you know that what you believe is true ? How do you even get truth in your world that “just happened” ?

        Thanks for your time.

        • Hey, no need to thank me; it’s important to discuss things with others of a different opinion. If we didn’t where would we be?

          Truth?

          There is no truth, merely different levels of wrongness. Some things are less wrong than others. We assign a certainty to everything and, every now and again, something gets a level of certainty I’m content to accept is as good as it gets. These are the things I ‘believe’ in, although belief implies a certain level of faith.

          You’re being slightly disingenuous by implying I believe we are here by chance. I don’t assign a purpose to the universe, or my own existence, therefore calling it ‘chance’ is meaningless. I do think, however, that we’re here as a result of an unguided, purposeless series of events. It’s certainly not chance though; a highly specific sequence of occurrences had to happen for us to be here and a lot of that wasn’t random.

          • Dagsannr, You just made the statement that “there is no truth”

            Is that true, that there is no truth ?

            Is it true that you “don’t assign a purpose to the uni erse” ?

            Is it true that “we’re here as a result of an unguided, purposeless series of events” ?

            I agree with what you said about being able to discuss things, let’s keep it respectful.

          • If I said it was true there was no truth I’d be self-contradicting, wouldn’t I?

            What I’m saying is that nothing is certain, that everything is hedged with levels of certainty. Don’t confuse certainty with truth.

            The only thing I’m prepared to accept as being 100% certain with no qualification is that I exist. Everything else is up for interpretation based on the evidence.

  5. Dagsannr, you missed the point. You made the claim that “there is no truth” then went on to make truth claims.

    You did it again when you said “Nothing is certain” then you made the claim that you “are 100% certain you exist. ”

    It’s absurd to make those claims “there is no truth” or “there is no certainty” they are self refuting!
    and that is what you are reduced to when you reject God.

    With respect
    Dale

    • Well, you certainly failed to comprehend my meaning, and also what the term ‘certainty’ means.

      I’m -prepared- to accept my existence is 100% certain, that doesn’t mean that’s the case.

      I’ve made no truth claims at all. Unless you want to argue semantics over the tautology of ‘nothing is true’.

      It seems that when one accepts god, you lose all ability to argue rationally.

      Besides which, you’ve asked many questions but never answered any put to you. Why is that?

  6. If you “are prepared to accept your existence is 100% certain but that does not mean that’s the case”

    Then logically you are not certain.

    Suppose I ask you the size of your house and you say ” it is 50 feet but I could be wrong”
    Do you know it ?
    Of course not, you are not certain.

    Saying “Nothing is true” is a truth claim, if it isn’t then it is meaningless. If it is then it is self refuting.

    I thought I was answering questions, if you are wanting me to argue for the existence of God using evidence then that is not going to happen, showing you evidence won’t help you.

    What I am doing is showing you the folly of denying the God you know exists.

  7. I don’t think you’re grasping what I’m saying.

    What I’m saying is that nothing can be known with 100% certainty. Nothing. Even the claim that nothing can be claimed with 100% certainty. That’s what it all means.

    It’s not contradictory to claim that because it’s impossible to prove anything to 100%

    Your constant claim that I know your god exists is wrong on three levels:
    1) Which god do I know exists?
    2) Why that god and not the 1000’s of others?
    3) Aside from the self-contradictory self-referencing known as the bible, can you prove this?

  8. I’m grasping what you are saying alright. As I previously pointed out, this is the absurdity you are reduced to when you reject God.

    You say “it is impossible to prove anything to 100%”

    Is that 100% certain that it is impossible to prove anything to 100% ?

    Correct me if wrong here but you call yourself an atheist? yet by that statement above you could be wrong that God exists right ?

    You see, I can know things for certain because God who knows all things reveals things to me as such that I can know them for certain.
    When you reject God you don’t have that option and if you are consistent have to admit you could be wrong about everything you claim to know for certain.

    If you could be wrong about everything you claim to know for certain how can you object to anything I say ?

    In answer to your questions:

    1. The one true God.

    2. He is the only one that exists.

    3. As demonstrated without God’s Word you cannot know anything, why would I give up my only source of truth.and knowledge ?
    You could be wrong that the Bible is self contradictory right ? Because as you said you cannot know anything to 100% right ?

    Appreciate the dialogue, maybe we could debate these things face to face if your organisation would like to ?
    Just a thought.

    Dale (crazy Christian)

  9. You’re constantly confusing ‘truth’ with ‘certainty’.

    Something can be true – that is 100%, unequivocally the way it is with no other alternative.
    However, we cannot prove anything to be true – merely to state with what confidence the certainty of it is. Even the statement ‘nothing is certain’ is probably hedged with a 99.99999% confidence level.

    You see this as nonsense and absurdity. I, as a scientist and rationalist, see this as logical and sensible. To me claiming a truth as fixed and unchanging is wrong and open for clear and obvious errors.

    Yes, I’m an atheist and, yes, I accept there might be a chance gods exist. However, the evidence for gods is lacking, therefore I don’t accept the hypothesis of their existence.

    Your three answers are flawed:

    1) Which one true god? All religions with a deity claim their god is the one true god. They can’t all be right. Why is your god truer than the others?
    2) Again, adherents of other gods claim only their god exists, why should your claim be any more valid?
    3) You demonstrated nothing, other than you like circular logic. If the bible is your only source of truth and knowledge, what do you do when it tells you something you don’t like? The last time I read it (and I’ve read it all) slavery, stoning, genocide and murder were all entirely acceptable.

    • You just said “Something can be true – that is 100%, unequivocally the way it is with no other alternative.”

      Earlier you said “There is no truth, merely different levels of wrongness. Some things are less wrong than others.”

      I looked up the definition of “Certainty” ~ The state of being certain and “certain” is defined as ~ Sure, positive, not doubting.

      You also said “We cannot prove anything to be true”

      Is that true Dagsannr ?

      If it isn’t then your statement is meaningless, if it is then it is self refuting because the statement is a truth claim.

      You said “To me claiming a truth as fixed and unchanging is wrong and open for clear and obvious errors”

      Is truth relative ?

      In answer to your further questions:

      1. I agree “they can’t all be right” there is only one truth and that is found in Jesus Christ, He said “I am the way the truth the life, no man comes to the Father but by Me.”

      2. Without the God of the Bible we cannot know anything as you have demonstrated, The Bible (God’s Word) says; The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge. Unless you start with God, you cannot know anything.

      3. I haven’t found anything in the Bible yet I don’t like. I love the God of the Bible because He has changed my heart, and His Word that is a lamp to my feet.

      By what standard are you judging slavery,stoning and murder wrong ?

      If you live in a world where there is no truth, there is no certainty, where you are not even certain of your own existence, a world where we “just happened” to exist, where we are simply molecules in motion, who cares what a bag of molecules does to another bag of molecules ?

      You know how absurd that reality is, you know right from wrong because you are created in the image of God who gives you a conscience.

      If you change your mind about a debate of some sort I would be pleased to join you.

      With respect as always

      Dale

      • “I haven’t found anything in the Bible yet I don’t like”
        Now that is a remarkable statement by any standard. The bible is filled will vile characters indulging in deeply unethical behaviour.
        To name just one: Judges 19 22 a supposedly righteous man offers up his daughter and his concubine to be gang raped by an angry crowd ending in their death. Tell me; what is it that you like about that?
        Remember. The question is, what do you like about it. The question is not where my morals come from.

          • I have answered lots of questions for all to read Rob.

            The original question was from Dagsannr re The Bible;
            “what do you do when it tells you something you don’t like?”

            My response was ” I haven’t found anything in the Bible yet I don’t like. I love the God of the Bible because He has changed my heart, and His Word that is a lamp to my feet.”

            I love every Word that is contained in the Bible because it is from the God I know and love.

            Do I “like” what men and women did throughout history contained in the Bible e.g. sacrificing children to false gods like Molech ??

            Of course not but that goes without saying and was not the original question.

          • I have a worldview that tells me that behaviour is wrong Rob, I can account for laws of morality because I have a God who reveals these things to me so that I can know for certain.

            How can you say what is right and wrong if all we are is just a bag of molecules that simply happened to exist ? who cares what a bag of molecules does to another bag of molecules Rob ?

          • Seriously Dale. What is it that you like about a man offering his daughter to a gang to be raped to death?

  10. I don’t think an actual meeting would be worthwhile, let’s face it, if evidence was going to convince you that you’re wrong, you wouldn’t be a young Earth creationist.

    Likewise, nothing you’ve got to say will be new or original to us old-hat skeptics and we’ve heard it all.

    You’d be throwing out bad arguments, we’d be showing you how they don’t work and at the end of it all, you’ll go away feeling good that you’ve managed to evangelise the great unwashed (and perhaps feeling a little justified) and we’ll be frustrated that you clearly don’t understand reality.

    I’d only be prepared to accept a face-to-face if you’d be prepared to accept your point of view could be just as wrong as you think we are. You’re a man of faith, so I can’t see you doing that.

    You won’t accept the founding fundamentals of science, so therefore you’re not capable of debate in a rational format.

    • I agree. There would be very little point in in a meeting. You have demonstrated that you do not engage in discussion, you only preach. You have failed repeated to address any of our questions and have repeatedly used word games instead of arguments.

      As for this:
      “By what standard are you judging slavery,stoning and murder wrong?”
      Your faith has robbed you of your humanity if you cannot see that those things are axiomatically wrong through the simple expedient of asking, “how would I like to be treated?”
      Step away from the delusion. You are better than your imaginary god.

      • I thought I was doing ok engaging in discussion, fair enough I admit I will not engage in giving you evidence for God’s existence, but that is because as I said earlier, you do not need evidence for the God you know exists.

        If I give you evidence on one point you will simply move on to the next objection and so on.

        You need to see how foolish your worldview is, so that you will abandon it and come to Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sin.

        With respect and concern for your eternal destiny

        Dale

        • So you are happy to engage in the discussion, just so long as we don’t question the central thesis of your claims?
          Claims you refuse to provide evidence for?

          • Rob, as I have pointed out you have no basis to object to anything I say. Dagsannr admitted he cannot be certain about anything, even his own existence, he does not believe we can know anything including what is true.

            If you live in that world then it logically follows that
            you cannot judge anything I say to be right or wrong, but throughout this discussion you have made knowledge claims and truth claims, you are walking contradictions.

            I could give you evidence for the existence of God, but that will not help you.

            Your presuppositions that “God does not exists” and that “the Bible is a fable” prevent you seeing or even thinking straight.

            Just like the Bible says you are in darkness and unless God opens your eyes and awakens you to the truth you will remain in that state forever.

            Unless you start with God you cannot know anything.

            In Christ are hidden all the hidden treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

  11. Rob asked …..”Seriously Dale. What is it that you like about a man offering his daughter to a gang to be raped to death?”

    I answered his question here :

    “I have a worldview that tells me that behaviour is wrong Rob, I can account for laws of morality because I have a God who reveals these things to me so that I can know for certain.

    How can you say what is right and wrong if all we are is just a bag of molecules that simply happened to exist ? who cares what a bag of molecules does to another bag of molecules Rob ?”

    The Bible is full of accounts of wicked things men and women did throughout history.

    Unless you start with God you have no standard to even judge what is right or wrong.

    I appreciate you allowing this dialogue to continue and I seriously do respect you both.
    Dale

    • Ah. I’m assuming that you meant to say
      “I have a worldview that tells me that *that* behaviour is wrong Rob,” That would make more sense.
      It still doesn’t explain how the Bible in no way condemns the behaviour yet you still claim to find nothing in the bible you don’t like. (Lot – supposedly the only righteous man in Sodom – does exactly the same thing and is also not condemned)
      There are plenty of other unspeakable acts condoned by the bible. It is a deeply immoral book.

  12. Gentlemen, I will bow out now and thank you for allowing me time on your blog.
    I am not here to antagonize or to show how wonderful my arguments are, as a preacher, I simply desire for all to come to a knowledge of the truth.

    If you change your mind and would like a face to face discussion on whatever topic you think is relevant to you please contact me and let me know.

    Thank you once again and I look forward to meeting some of you someday, Lord willing of course.

    Dale (crazy Christian)

    • Probably a good idea.
      Arguing with presuppositional apologists is like trying to pin jelly for a wall.
      You would better demonstrate your claim that you “seriously do respect [us] both” if you were more honest in your debating. Don’t use straw man arguments and do try and answer the questions put to you.