Free speech as long as you agree with me.


“All censorship exist to prevent anyone from challenging current conceptions and existing institutions. All progress is initiated by challenging current conceptions, and executed by supplanting existing institutions. Consequently, the first condition of progress is the removal of censorship.”

George Bernard Shaw

So I landed on Colostrom’s blog and I find a healthy discussion going on. And I ask myself why heathens bother to engage with him and his crowd of Jesus freaks. He writes in a response to Peter,

Puzzled Peter in light of your own words of doubt. People young in the faith visit this blog, and your post, as do many others, create more questions than provide food. This is one reason many ‘depart’ the faith, because of half truths and not being grounded in scripture. It only takes a morsel to make a feast of doubt. I’m not too fond of providing the table setting.

which in essence means any questions that arouse doubt are almost unwelcome if not entirely.

And shortly afterwards in the same thread he writes

Your comment seems strangely familiar as aligning with others who say Moses was a fraud, and this site does not promote the unbelief, attack, and overall vitriol toward the Jews and the scriptures. I have no interest in helping others in their leap from faith to unbelief.

If faith is valuable, it should be obvious why your comment went to the trash.

but elsewhere he has written

Please know that the merits of scripture need no defense.

which would imply that even against such doubt being raised, scripture would not need defending for it can stand on its own against such assault.

So which is it? And why would scripture be treated as immune to challenge?

I will however be quick to point out my comments haven’t suffered the indignity of having editor’s note attached to them, so far, nor are they under moderation. If his interest is seeking truth as he purports, I don’t think that truth is to be found between Genesis 1.1 and Revelation 22:21.

Advertisements

About makagutu

As Onyango Makagutu I am Kenyan, as far as I am a man, I am a citizen of the world

68 thoughts on “Free speech as long as you agree with me.

  1. Yeah, I read that thread earlier. I see you tackled the dear Eliza and came off lightly. There is something to be said for avoiding those sort of blogs. They are bad for the soul.

    Like

    • makagutu says:

      Oh yes. I don’t know why the two A twins bother with him knowing him so well.
      Am waiting for the next barrage of bible verses from Eliza.

      Like

      • If she doesn’t know you well, she may be nice to you. She was nastily acid to me without any justification or provocation. I was upset for days. No, weeks. Maybe months.

        Like

        • makagutu says:

          Maybe she will find out soon enough and my case will be closed

          Like

        • makagutu says:

          I don’t know why I engage this weirdos. She is praying for me to see the light. I will avoid that madhouse for the moment

          Liked by 1 person

          • Haha 😀 Pink came up with some salient advice over on Ark’s, respond twice and then walk. Not even three strikes. Sounded sensible to me. Anyway, as it’s night, here’s a practical tip, if you can’t see the light, turn the light switch on.

            Like

          • makagutu says:

            I should have read that advice sooner. The madhouse prefect claims I am maligning her comments based on the opinions of my esteemed friends, male and female.
            ION, I saw we finally were prayed for.

            Like

          • It’s sound advice. Banging head against brick wall doesn’t come into it. Esteemed friends = bunch of reprobate atheists?

            I hadn’t seen that. But, no doubt it explains why the price of potatoes came down today. Rather than the law of supply and demand. Divine intervention rules.

            Like

          • makagutu says:

            i tell you. the sun has been in hiding thanks to his prayers. It is better when he doesn’t pray I guess

            Like

  2. “Please know that the merits of scripture need no defense.” This statement is true only when applied to the Koran, a real holy book. Visiting CS’s blog is like moving into a leper colony and expecting not to get lepersy. It’s an ugly, scary place where the inmates are running the hospital.
    *Editors note: CS, you looked simply beautiful last Friday night. Thanks for going that extra mile to cheer me up. 🙂

    Like

  3. Arkenaten says:

    We know it cannot withstand serious scrutiny. The problem often lies in
    ignorance. You may have read on the same thread the one commentator who had never heard that Moses is considered a fictional character.
    One’s initial reaction is …wow!
    But to be fair, until around ten years ago, I always considered he was historical – even if I dismissed all the supernatural crap, I still believed the bloke was real. Turns out I was wrong.

    And this is why the evidence – the likes of which John has tons of – needs to be out there ”in their faces”.

    Ignorance needs to be tackled.
    Then, of course, comes the harder task of demonstrating its veracity to people who have been thoroughly indoctrinated to believe otherwise – a more difficult task altogether, and one I am at a loss to know how to seriously approach.

    Like

  4. seems like the censor is right there with C.S. Lewis when he advocates lying to others as long as it hides the problems with Christianity. How fun to watch Christians ignore their own supposedly objectively moral bible. 🙂

    Like

    • makagutu says:

      Problems? There are none. Scripture says [insert verse] that you are wrong.

      Like

    • ColorStorm says:

      Hey club-

      Do you ‘censor’ what goes into your salad, or do you sprinkle in rat poison so the spices do not complain?

      Your excuse is lame and baseless. Have you ever read the comments by your friends on my site? Do you really believe disagreements are withheld?

      You have no case.

      Like

      • makagutu says:

        Colostrom, you seem to enjoy adding editor’s note to comments by my esteemed friends and deleting those you don’t like and you admit to doing so yourself.

        Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Maggie-

          Delete? No, some go straight to the trash and are burned with the other waste.

          Delete them? Ha, they go straight to the trash bin. You want to take a second look at what you consider print worthy, for I have no interest in the promotion of depravity.

          The real surprise is how any of them are allowed.

          Like

          • makagutu says:

            I like the sound of Maggie. My girlfriend goes by that name 😛

            The real surprise is how any of them are allowed.

            Must be a miracle, don’t you think?

            Like

      • wonderful analogy, CS. It shows the usual lack of thought of a Christian. Please do explain how spices complain. tell me how telling the truth about your religion is “poison”. I’d be very happy to see you provide one bit of evidence your nonsense is true. Can you? I’ve looked at your blog and it’s the usual baseless claims of a Christian who wants to pretend he knows some magical truth, and knows nothing more than his own opinion.

        Please also tell me how lying about Christianity is a good thing. I seem to recall, from being a Christian myself at one time, that the Christian god said that lies were never to be told, not even for its sake (Romans 3).

        We do need to know why we should assume you, and only you, have the “true” meaning of scripture. Can you show us how we should know that you are the only TrueChristian? Can you do the miracles that JC promised that all true believers could do? I’d meet you at a hospital, perhaps a veteran’s or a children’s hospital so you could demonstrate these abilities. Tell us why we should believe that you have some truth and no one else does.

        All you are doing is hiding the problems with your religion and it’s truly hilarious to see Christians do their best to hide the problems and then claim that their religion needs no defending, when that’s exactly what you are doing. If your religion is so true, then you don’t need to hide its problems. Everyone should see that it’s true with no problem. There should be evidence all over the place and there isn’t.

        All we get is you trying to claim you have the truth when all you have is just a religion based on one human, you.

        Like

      • It’s also quite hilarious to watch you try to claim that you are such an ardent defender of Jews and their religion when your entire religion says that they are wrong and damned. The Jews are sure that your claims are utter nonsense; that’s why they are Jews, not Christians.

        Evidence for Moses? Evidence for the plagues? What year did those events happen, CS? When did any of the essential events of the bible happen?

        Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Hey club-

          You may want to consider the life and times of Saul of Tarsus, ahem, then the apostle Paul.

          Circumcised the eight day; of the tribe of Benjamin; of the stock of Israel; concerning the law a Pharisee (of the strictest sect); a Hebrew of the Hebrews; a Jew; sat under the feet of the stellar Reb Gamaliel.

          There is enough evidence in the scriptures to keep you busy for a thousand lifetimes;

          Like

          • Why yes, Saul was supposedly a Jew. He attacked the Jews too. He also couldn’t keep his story straight on how his god spoke to him. The “stellar” Reb Gamaliel says that you, CS, and his supposed student, Saul, are utterly wrong in your belief that Joshua ben Joseph was God’s son. Should I believe Reb Gamaliel rather than you? Indeed, if one believes what is in Acts, Gamaliel’s words show that the claims of the gospels aren’t quite true since some claim that the apostles went right back to Jerusalem and celebrated in the temple and some claim that the apostles were fearing for their lives. Which was it, CS?

            What we have in the bible are claims, stories no more supported than the story that Auhumla the magical cow licked a giant free of primordial ice or that Athena and Zeus directly intervened in the Trojan War.

            Myths aren’t evidence. Evidence would be that any other nation noticed that Egypt suddenly lost its entire army and was decimated by plagues. Evidence would be that there is a world-wide layer of hydraulically sorted sediment that had velociraptor fossils mixed in with modern humans. Evidence would be that anyone else noticed a strong earthquake, the dead walking out of their graves, and the sky darkening on one single day. All we have are historians who mention Christians existed and that these Christians believed in such things. If the mere existence of believers is evidence, then Isis is as real as your god. I’m guessing you won’t agree and that’s the problem. You have no evidence.

            Evidence would be external facts that can support the claims, not the claims themselves. Another example would be a criminal case. The story is ” Dark haired man shot red haired woman”. The evidence would be the weapon, the alibis for the time of the shooting, the similarity of the arrested to the descriptions, etc.

            Where is this evidence, CS? What year did these events occurred? Surely Jews and Christians can agree on that, right? Then we can know exactly where to look.

            Like

          • archaeopteryx1 says:

            Here’s one for you, CS – where you can’t delete or censor my comments – why would Saul/Paul be on the road to Damascus? He was employed by the Sanhedrin to weed out Christians, but Damascus was entirely out of the jurisdiction of the Sanhedrin – why would he have been on it?

            And what did he claim to have seen, other than a bright light? What evidence would he have had that that represented a resurrected Christ? Could it have represented a Great Flying Spaghetti Monster? If not, why not?

            Please answer these – people are watching, and you’ll likely not get any self-affirming “atta-boys” here, that you so live for on your own site. UNLESS – your answer is so profound as to startle all of us and leave us speechless – but no pressure —

            Like

          • ColorStorm says:

            hey arch-

            I wonder if your friends know how lame your charges are; if one of your comments ‘gets trashed,’ there is no doubt a good reason.

            Even some of your friends have chastised you, and perhaps some will agree that you can be a master of prolixity.

            Currently, on the ‘brucette’ post, of 44 comments, 13 are yours; so yea, I’m the great eraser huh.

            Now then, as to your false interest in Paul the apostle, if the scriptural account is not good enough for you, then certainly my response will not be welcomed either.

            Like

          • makagutu says:

            CS, deleting one comment that you disagree with is already too much. Adding your editor’s note to people’s comments is uncalled for unless you blog for children then it is understandable.
            Now tell us something about Paul

            Like

          • makagutu says:

            Interesting questions arch

            Like

  5. ColorStorm says:

    Hey mak,
    I see you linked.

    Scrutiny? Ha. You may as well try to find a flaw in the scent of the lily of the valley.

    It is easier to believe Moses lived, than it is to believe you will live to see tomorrow. God’s word is that sure. It is unimpeachable.

    As to your ‘free speech’ thing, correct, certain commentary is not fit for the landfill.

    ‘Shun profane and vain babblings.’ Saying Moses lived is vain babbling. Saying Christ was mistaken about history is profane.

    These truths hardly need defended, and no mockeries should be taken seriously.

    Like

    • makagutu says:

      Hi CS,

      It’s only fair, don’t you think? so you have a right of reply.

      Depending on how you square with reality, you can easily believe you see ghosts than to know when you have your foot up your mouth, don’t you think?

      Like

      • ColorStorm says:

        Reality mak?

        When you and I are long gone, God will still be God, he will continue to send the rain, and His word will be just as sure as it was a thousand years ago.

        And death will still be the greatest sting of mankind, and sin will still be mocked.

        Foot in mouth? Yes, that is a common thing from people who handle sharp objects such as the word of God who do not believe its contents.

        Like

  6. ColorStorm says:

    ………should read:

    ‘Saying Moses NEVER lived is vain babbling……..’

    Like

  7. Ah. I thought CS was referring to his own vain babbling there for a minute. Thought it was a rather neat self-analysis.

    Given that we don’t know Christ’s view of history, given all we have is someone else’s point of view, who chatted about it with Gladys and Amos down the village shop, it’s rather difficult to accurately assess Christ’s credentials as a historian.

    Like

    • makagutu says:

      Even the dumb as soup have their light bulb moments. That was his short window.

      Before we get to his credentials as a historian, we have the bigger huddle of was he there?

      Like

  8. archaeopteryx1 says:

    So which is it? And why would scripture be treated as immune to challenge?” – Even more importantly, if scripture is in fact immune to challenge, how could allowing our comments to stand, possibly harm it? After all, doesn’t he trust his god to protect those young minds he seem concerned we’ll corrupt (translation: that he won’t be able to indoctrinate)?

    Like

    • makagutu says:

      No no, I think in the believer’s mind, in this case CS, he must hold it that Satan is equally powerful. There is no way of explaining his censorship, And I saw he added an editor’s note to my comment.

      Like

      • archaeopteryx1 says:

        As an antagonist, Satan didn’t even appear in the Jewish mythology until about 300 BCE – on the few occasions in which he is mentioned earlier, he appeared as one who tested beliefs – a helper monkey – rather than as an antagonist of god.

        Like

  9. archaeopteryx1 says:

    @Colorstorm:
    if one of your comments ‘gets trashed,’ there is no doubt a good reason
    More than one, actually:
    1) You don’t know the answer and don’t want to admit it
    2) It shows up your religion for what it is, a collection of myths, contradictions and laws designed to control a population
    3) It detracts from your own personal glory, the entire reason you blog
    4) It shows the more open-minded of your cult that there are two sides to every coin

    …as to your false interest in Paul the apostle, if the scriptural account is not good enough for you, then certainly my response will not be welcomed either.
    You’re fond of flinging scripture, you don’t have to respond, just toss me the chapter and verse number of the part of scripture that tells us why Paul was on the road to Damascus when it was entirely out of his jurisdiction. And the part that explains how a flash of light led him to believe a dead Jew had come back to life. (See reason #1, above –)

    Like

We sure would love to hear your comments, compliments and thoughts.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s