( U-Tube playlist: Dr. Timothy Keller )
In my brief sojourn through the land of d.a.d (discussion, argument and debate) forums on the internet, I could no more accurately sum up my own experiences than Roger Pearse has done on ~ There is no evidence for a biblical jesus @ Theology Web Campus (what’s with the small ‘j’ for Jesus? ):
Before I came online, I had quite a bit of respect for atheism, because of time spent reading J.S.Mill and a now sadly unknown book which made some very useful remarks on classification of religion. But when I did, I found myself dealing with people who had neither education, nor honesty, nor manners, and who posted, not to inform, not to discuss, but to insult, to harm, and to give pain if at all possible. I found myself dealing with people who could give no account of their way of life and thinking, who could only repeat stale vituperation which they had never examined critically. I found myself encountering people posting with the utmost certainty on subjects of which they knew no more than that they had read something once and found it convenient. The troll, the brinker, the liar, the scumbag … not all of these are atheists, and not all atheists are such. But so many of them are, that I am quite hardened to it.
I popped in here, because my Google searched turned up a post on a subject on which I know something. I responded. The atheist, instead of addressing my post, first insulted me and then tried to play games of “oh my answer is somewhere else, you have to guess where I justify my comments”. What honest person, posting in good faith, would play games like that?
Once again, I reply to a post, only to find an atheist who is ignorant and dishonest at the same time. Until atheists, as a whole, clean up their act, they will enjoy, and will deserve, the contempt of all honest people.
Christianity may not be true. But if it is not true, then surely that can be shown by rational means? Surely only those who believe that Christianity is true, but find it inconvenient, could engage in the sort of rubbish tactics that we have both seen? If they knew it was false, they would say so. Troll tactics are for those who know they have no case but are determined to say it anyway.
From: Page 15
Though this statement wasn’t responded to, by the time I got to post #225, the exchange between two T.W.C regulars (Darth Ovious and Tassman) proved the point.
In post #254 ‘Tassman’ made a statement that I thought might be worthwhile delivering to those about whom he has made the statement:
Hello Ben,
I’m a very slow reader and am currently reading two commentaries (one by Douglas Moo ~ Romans, and another by Donald Carson ~ John), but my primary task is to work through the N.B.C (2010) and a few books that have been recommended by a friend from Theology Web Campus.
Having read quite a few of your blog entries, as well as begun slowly reading NT History (Narrative Account) this is a nice surprise!
Actually a few minutes ago I was reading through a forum post titled ‘There’s no evidence of the biblical jesus’ and came upon a rather odd comment by a bloke who calls himself ‘Tassman’:Witherington and Blomberg may have been properly trained and obtained their degrees, but that is just the beginning. As scholars they are required to use their expertise, not rest on their laurels. And they have chosen, of their own free will, to do just this in their own comfort zone of a tenured safe-haven from which to promulgate their supernatural beliefs.
They are based in institutions which have Statements of Faith that must be assented to – “without mental reservation”. AND they chose to be there . They weren’t forced.
Thus, they have no choice except to function on the unquestioned premise that the bible is the inspired ‘Word of God’. This is their starting position. It leaves them in the impossible position for any scholar to be in that truth claims made by a biblical text cannot be open to the possibility of refutation. Thus, by their own doing they have limited the field of enquiry and left unquestioned and sacrosanct important aspects of the Jesus story.
To: New Philippians Commentary by Dr. Ben Witherington
Update: 02 July 2011, In post #258 ) Challenger Grim summarized my own thoughts. It’s common enough for those who insist on a liberal view to embrace the ideas of liberal scholars and like-minded thinkers (e.g.), but those who are really serious about exploring the Jesus narrative will desire a more full-bodied approach to their studies.
Update: 03 July 2011, In post #260, the engine of Tassman’s agenda surfaces, yet once again. I’d create a separate blog to address this, but the truth is I’ve addressed it before. Here’s what he wrote:
‘….there is no methodology for knowing the supernatural, nor has there ever been verified evidence for the existence of the supernatural world or of supernatural entities. So, while the existence of the supernatural can be viewed as a logical possibility, the strong probability is that it doesn’t exist.’
In my own world view ‘supernatural’ was something that kept me in a state of frustration. Ever seeking a supernatural something to experience, until the day that I realized that I was looking in the wrong place. If anything the ‘super’ natural things are only really ‘shadows of the divine’ (refer an earlier blog post) They are fleeting flickers of things we may guess at. Miracles are in the same category.
Though some focus most determinedly upon historical evidence (alone) or this fleeting ‘super’ natural idea, in the end one will discover that one is looking in the wrong place. The same goes for the methodology used by science, biology and the like. As I told this poster before, one needs to find a methodology that matches what we are seeking. The Lord GOD is neither natural nor supernatural, though He has entered into the root of all things, or better said ‘in Him we live and move and have our being.’ (refer: Acts 17) The methodology one needs to explore is ‘prayer’ (refer earlier discussions with this bloke.) When I raised a similar argument on A.F.D (Apologetic Forum Discuss) I was met with similar hostility, as my view removes the force of this argument against what in my opinion is nothing more than an attempt to debunk a straw-man argument for the existence of God, to begin with. (Maybe I will post something up in the future. Back to prayer 
)
‘Because something is happening here
But you don’t know what it is
Do you, Mister Jones?’
From: Ballad of the Thin Man by Bob Dylan
Update: 9 October 2011 (post #264 - This is exactly what Tim Keller refers to as the slippery slope. The discussion has deteriorated into name calling and personality assaults. Having witnessed this blokes styles before, he will not rest until his comment is the last one on the thread. Even if it means coming back a month later, just to put it there. As if anyone actually cares to wade through a post that starts with an insult. Some people just have to be right, even when they’ve been proven to be wrong over and over. It’s not even sad, it’s pitiful. )
Finis.
What I have done is to retain the memory of a single encounter I had with a bloke who I would regard as a genuine atheist, though he’s probably closer to an agnostic. He was polite, informed and never resorted to demeaning and cruel conversational strategies. In fact quite the opposite. I found him open, engaging and willing to admit when he had been challenged. He was willing to learn, but sadly this new generation of anti-theists have very few of the qualities one might hope to find in someone who is interested in exploring the best possible scholarly sources when it comes to the details about Jesus.
I’ve copied the whole d.a.d to Word.doc for future reference, for though much of what was presented was a) not scholarly and b) loaded with personal insult, the above quote was a classic and one that will remind me of the great moments as well as the devilish moments in the quagmire under troll bridge.
R.I.P Freezbee, (This Notes For You)
Eric.
————————–
Mad Hater’s Tea Party:
1. ( U-Tube playlist: Dr. Craig (D.A.D) ~ Discussions, Arguments and Debates )
2. The Date of the Gospel of Matthew by TolkienFan ( This should be worthy of a read, as it should certainly separate the wanna-bees from the earnest students/scholars.
Flowers?
3. The Saga Continues: The Inevitable Evil of Atheism esp. post 65 and 67 (sorry, no links, I’m bored already.) According to fm93, this post was meant as a parody of bertaberts’ thread. (I suspect the return of Pai ____ /Plantasm 
)
I see your true colours: A philosophical question ~ You’re in my prayers. Don’t be afraid to let them show.
Finis.
—————————
A Momentary Lapse of Reason:
Update: 18 July 2011
I note that the two discussions referred to above, have proven unequivocally that the views expressed in my opening letter-quote stand:
Refer: Anti-Theism ( post #200 – as the moderator Raphael engages Tassman ) and ‘There is no evidence for a biblical jesus’ ( post #321 – the old tick-tack-toe continues )
Update: 20 July 2011
I’ve seen trolls come and go. Very often a troll will assume a new alias and return and be banned several times (each time assuming a new identity), yet eventually certain characteristics shine through and it’s not soon before they are banned again.
The troll will slowly heat up their threads, seeking to draw the moderators of forum owners, so as to attempt to justify themselves.
T.W.C is a very liberal forum but when t-webbers begin criticizing moderators and the way they do their job, their days are numbered.
I’ve witnessed quite a few trolls being banned from this forum this year and the troll (the thread starter) being replied to in this post reminds me of one of them: (same M.O.)
Thread Title: Thread statistics of the use of insults, name calling ( I suspect it will probably be sent to the Psychiatric Ward, so I’m am going to post up the post followed by the moderators question:
Post:
‘Still of topic, However I’m not going to leave, why would I want to, I don’t like the abusive nature of the place. but I’ve got strong shoulders I just don’t like the constant rudeness it’s like you’re all reading from the same book and I don’t meant the bible. and I’m not going to allow all the so called “Christians ” too claim victory or that I left with my tail between my legs, I’ll leave with my dignity intact, when I’m good and ready or I’ll get forced out,’
Moderators reply:
‘And, I’m certainly not trying to push you out. I don’t recall being rude to you, and if I did, I would be happy for you to show me and I’ll consider an apology. It DOES seem to me, by the post reports that I’ve seen, that you tend to enjoy (or maybe just can’t help?) pushing the envelope on the rules.
May I ask what your purpose is here?’
The next post, pretty much sums up the mission of this troll. ( post #31 )
‘Asserting there is no evidence for Jesus or equating Christian belief (and this was your intended target) with UFOs and Leprechauns? Come on, dude, get real. I really don’t care what threads atheists start, but I have no respect for obvious phonies. Your intent was cause and effect, and you know it. In fact you admitted in another thread that your intent was hostility against theism. So when you get the effect you were shooting for, why whine about it now?’
“Well said, SeanD!“
“The Man” ~ Beyond Tradition
Update: 20 July 2010
Another thread started ( this troll’s m.o. – read back ) What is Natural? What is supernatural? ~ post 2 fm93 rebuts. (also a comment: “You people just don’t seem to get it, I have no belief in the bible, it is all fantasy, but you Christians DO believe it, and as such must adhere to its rules, to be considered a Christian.” on ‘The problem of apologetics’ – yolunch-composer m.o surfaces) – double yawn.
———-000———–
