


Constantly curious about what Theists believe, but more importantly, WHY, I recently took advantage of the offer of three free books of explanation. One was an actual printed paperback, while the other two were pdf downloads.
The books:
What Time Is Purple?
Answering Atheism
Proof of God
The Authors:
Tom Hammond
A blogger who only identifies as A Bit Of Orange
The reviews:
Nothing new – Same-old, same-old! They disappointed equally, and to the same degree as all previous similar publications.
The purple book was a tiny, but expensive artifact – thick, glossy cover, only 46 thick, glossy pages, illustrations. A copy was mailed to me from Maryland, by a blogger who calls himself HillFaith (Good News for Congressional staff).
The author began by inviting us on a journey to discover Truth. A little reading quickly showed that all he really wanted to do was to find, or fabricate, evidence that somehow made his beliefs and presuppositions appear to be true. That is not the same thing!
Even his title shows his prejudice. The very fact that someone could question his unsupported claims was so alien to his vigorously-held, religious worldview, that he found it as strange as asking, “What Time Is Purple?” Again and again, he would make unfounded statements and claims, and be bewildered that others would not simply accept them.

Bitter Mr. Orange Rind was no different. His biggest, and constant, complaint/claim was that those rascally Atheists, Agnostics and Dictionaries – would not go along with his definitions and descriptions, so that he could blow those strawmen away. He wanted to know what the number 5 smelled like. They must all read from the same script/prayer book. From his own, homemade, definitions, he fabricates claims about Atheists like, “Also, most of them manage to confuse Islam with Catholicism and attack the one with descriptions of the other.”

Like a short row of dominoes, he set up six, sequential premises to prove God. Premise 1: God must exist by necessity – therefore premise 2 – therefore premise 3 – therefore premise 4 – therefore premise 5 – therefore God exists. If you begin your circular argument with an unfounded claim that God exists, of course you’ll end up with that as an unsupported conclusion.
If you start with the assumption that Hillary Clinton is running a child sex-trafficking ring out of the basement of a cheap pizza joint, of course you’ll prove that it’s tr…. Oh, wait. That one could be investigated, and was proved false. When I ran into Nietzsche, Adolph Hitler, Hillary Clinton, Democrats, and Atheists, all in the same sentence, I was sure of who and what he was. He apparently named his Bible-thumping blog-site after his favorite superhero.

He wanted Atheists to admit that they couldn’t be absolutely, positively, 100% sure that no God exists, so that he could stick the thin edge of his Christian arguments in. I find the likelihood of God/gods to be slightly less than the existence of a square circle, owned by a polygamous bachelor. If he can produce one of those, I will help him locate and present his God.
He kept making blanket claims that, (All) Atheists say this, Atheists believe that, Atheists claim…. While some – a few confused, uneducated Atheists make unsupported statements, I have never, personally, encountered any Atheist who said what he implies that ALL Atheists do. He writes that, By necessity, Atheists must be Nihilists, but when observed reality clearly contradicts his view, he merely inverts his claim, and insists that Atheists do not really exist.
My Dad told me the tale of the Ginchee Bird, which flies around in ever-decreasing circles, until it disappears up its own ass. I wish some of these Apologists would disappear up their own asses. They pull out enough shit. There should be room. Ah well, it was cheap entertainment. All I learned was that they were both charter members of the Lying For Jesus Movement.
If they worked half as hard at proving their claims to be true, as they do to try to prove others wrong, they might not be quite so desperate, but my past history has shown that that result seems to be impossible. I think they know that, and don’t want to admit it – but that’s the same argument they use against Atheists. Damn the counter-arguments! Full assumption ahead. 😳