« Advice for Ministry | Main | God Took His Own Medicine »

December 12, 2013


Jumping the gun a little, I think.

The complaint is that Christianity is spread ONLY on the force of the beliefs of missionaries.

The word only is missing form the original but it's pretty clearly implied.

And that implication is equivalent to the statement that the evidence isn't there.

Even if you doubt that only is implied, the right response is to ask the person what they mean. If the person isn't available to ask, the principle of charity still demands that you take their statements in the most rational and positive light possible.

Beliefs are just beliefs.

I guess we can argue that he didn't say such.

My map, your map, their map..... maps ....

My map is just a belief.
Your map is just a belief.
Their map is just a belief.

".....they’re just beliefs. They’re my personal roadmap to reality, but I’m not going to confuse the map with the actual territory that that map surveys anymore. I’m going to realize it’s just a map. It’s my map...."

His own belief here is also laid atop the altar.

Which is honest, and, also, the void which leaves his own belief void of evidence.

He has no evidence for this belief of his, for, it is just his own personal map.

Reality is who-knows-what.

The agnostic then (usually) in the next breath over-reaches and begins telling everyone what they can and cannot know, what they do and do not know, and so on.

It's the over-reach which (almost always) follows which is the problem here.

The only response to any question about truth the agsnostic can offer without violating his own map is.... well.... silence.

It's always amusing to hear anti-theists declaring how egocentric it is to think your view is right and then trying to convince others, when they are doing the exact same thing!

(Especially when go as far as writing ENTIRE BOOKS in order to persuade others that their view is right!)

If it wasn't so tragic, I'd find it amusing!


How much would you right to avoid living under Sharia?



Appealing to love.



Until he's pressed.

Then love too will be just a fantasy.

Death of circularity.


It seems your notion of a motivation to write, and write much, in a move to push against injustice, however your own personal preference happens to define that word, brings us to the afore mentioned death of circularity nonetheless.

And the reason is all roads still lead to preference, to fantasy.

Nothing has made a claim as to a map’s reliability up against actuality.

Everyone likes their own particular fantasy, though, nothing here has risen above such a ceiling.

And that is precisely the point of this whole dance.

Everybody’s map is just his own personal fantasy and just cannot make a claim on the actual landscape beneath our feet.

Actuality is, well, who knows.

And who cares, really.

“It’s my fantasy.”

Now, some fantasies happen to involve necessary violence, an inherent open door to such with no necessary declaration of ought-not against any and all fragmentations of E Pluribus Unum, that necessarily triune Singularity of Unity’s Self-Other-Us which scripture defines as Love, as God, the Immutable Whole by which all lesser fragments find definition.

We find such necessarily open doors to violence within the fantasies called Natural Selection, Islam, Atheism, Pantheism, and, well, Relativism.

We find no such necessities within Love.

@ Ron H -

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean with your comment.

Islam and Christianity are two completely different religions. They may have superficial similarities as far as names/words, but that's all. They have nothing whatsoever in common as far as their actual teachings concerning God, man, salvation, sin, heaven, hell, etc.

Aside from that, Christianity has NOTHING comparable to sharia. Nothing whatsoever.

So, again, I have no idea what possible point you could be making with this comment.

Thanks for taking the time to produce this video. I will have my refutation to this video ready by tomorrow.

Great thoughts and look forward to further discussions on this issue in the future.

Kind and warm regards

Michael Sherlock (Author of I Am Christ)

I posted the link to my reply, but it seems to have been deleted, or else disappeared due to some glitch.

Here is the link: http://michaelsherlockauthor.wordpress.com/2014/01/01/michael-sherlock-i-am-christ-one-big-self-exclusion-fallacy-refuting-my-refuters/

Kind and warm regards

Michael Sherlock (Author of 'I Am Christ')

The comments to this entry are closed.