A Response, Finally

I initially started this Email chain asking if all those WWW pages recently (at that time) posted about “Self-Harm” were necessary. Got a reply that the attachment was lost.

Suddenly, an idea popped into my frond. Were these questions composed by Matt Slick indicative of something deeper. Below was my first response.

My main concern NOW is for the well-being of Matt Slick. I contacted one of his daughters to check on him. After I had sent him a proprietary EPUB draft of a website I was building, I became seriously concerned for Mr. Slick. I may be an obnoxious and disparaging scientist in my ancient years, but I still care about ALL humans, regardless of beLIEfs or lack thereof. When he published all those questions about Self-Harm on carm.org's WWW site, I became alarmed because I do have extensive studies into abnormal psychology. A person (and others) who tears apart their website and makes large scale changes, it means I must have hit a nerve.

However, when I saw all those pages, thankfully y'awl have yanked them down, about Self-Harm and Morality, I became concerned. Alarmed even. Usually when something like that happens, it means the person may have had a form of psychotic break. And notice the operant word is "may". I was afraid Mr. Slick was asking these questions to a possible precursor that he MAY be contemplating harm to himself. I may consider all staff at carm.org incredibly stupid, but that does not interfere with my love for all humans. I may have little tolerance for self-inflicted stupidity, but I still care. I may be considered a very hostile militant Atheist; however, my love for all humans overrides any AND all knowledge or beliefs I may possess. I had to contact one of his daughters to check on Mr. Slick.

I hope I was not too late. I shall be the first to admit I am no psychiatrist. Yes, I had enough education in abnormal psychology to have earned a MSc. I refused it. I was only studying that heavily, concurrently with my Majors, so I could hopefully discover what happened inside my tiny miscreant mind after the murders of my family, and my barely surviving. I wanted to find out if there was any way to get the "old me" back again. Alas, it shall never happen. I am stuck with this "new me" for the rest of me days.

You could answer this question, Please: Is Matt Slick OK? As said, I became worried after rereading those Self-Harm questions.

Dave's Response

Hello Arakish,

Arakish is the name on me Email. A nom de plume I used in older writings and publishings.

Thank you for your concern about Matt. He is just fine. I will let him know that you have been concerned about his health.

THIS was all I was TRULY concerned with. He also responds to some of me WWW site. And again loses the attached file. I ain’t resending. Evidently their EmailBot blocks ODFs and PDFs.

Regarding the link you provided in the last email (20250324), I have looked at it, and found it completely deficient in its critical thinking application, logic, and understanding of bible-thingy theology.

Trust me, I DO understand and comprehend theology. Just like philosophy, it proves absolutely nothing. Excepting one thing: You know how to LIE for your beLIEfs and igNORe anything, everything, something that may disprove your beLIEfs. THAT is theology: Complete and utter igNORance of that which is not of YOUR beLIEfs. BeLIEfs CANNOT be proven true. Give it up. Else, see about an R&D later…

Even if one does not believe in what the bible-thingy says, one should at least know what's printed on paper. I'm only going to address what you said regarding the carm Statement of Faith.

I already know what is printed within those completely unsubstantiated bible-thingies. Not just one religion, 1000s of religions across this planet. I have probably read more bible-thingies than I care to guess. I have probably read YOUR bible-thingy (all mistranslated versions) more than you. Remember, I am ancient with probably 3, 4, 5 decades more True Life experience and seeking of knowledge and learning than you can hope to obtain. As for that faith statement, it is pure Brain Diarrhea. If any faith statement requiring that much garbage, it is useless.

And, I am currently working on a NIV version to be released Public Domain. If I put the work in typing ONLY the biblical text, not any additional crap added, into a file, say EPUB, I can release that as Public Domain. How? The World Court in The Hague ruled that the biblical text is Public Domain. The only copyright “Holy Bible” printers have is ONLY on the additional text added to the printed bible. If I purchase a version, I can type in the “bible text” into a file, then release it Public Domain. The additional stuff ain’t included.

Basically, this means I can quote as much “bible text” I desire and ain’t got to give any attribution. If I quote any of the additional text, then, and ONLY Then, MUST I give attribution. Example: I can quote “Let there be light” all I wish. No attribution required. I can even do this: “Ruth 3:11 – Now, my daughter, don’t be afraid. I will do to you all that you say; for all the city of my people knows that you are a worthy woman.” No attribution required.

Regarding your definition of “God-Thing” comments: God, noun, uncommon; the supernatural being…

I see you chose YOUR definition and NOT the True Definition: “Any supernatural being worshipped as controlling some part of the world or some aspect of life or who is the personification of a force”. And as I said, there is no gender reference in the True Definition. A FACT about American Lexicography. The “Religitard” definition is always #1. The True Definitions before the Religitards perverted and twisted it into Their definition is virtually always #2. Why? How? Because it is Religitards that write those lexicons (a reference book containing an alphabetical list of words with information about them).

NO where in any definition for “god” is there any reference to a gender. Your God-Thing-Thing is an IT, a THING, a MONSTER amongst monsters. To visualize y’awl’s God-Thing, simply watch the Netflix series Stranger Things. The Upside-Down of that show has been the truest depiction of the christinsane and islamiboob God-Thing and its realm of existence.

Question: By what logical syllogism or theological doctrine is it necessary that "my God-Thing" have a gender? You have created a "strawman" argument here.

Not straw-man. AND, NOT category error. Ask any of you Religitards what your God-Thing’s gender is and every last one of you call that thing a he, him. You missed my defining why your God-Thing is an IT. A THING. It ain’t human; thus, gender is not applicable. Your God-Thing is usually equated with the Four Omnis. That means IT ain’t human. It is some Thing else. It is an IT. Never a s/he. Not straw-man. Not category error. FACT. And defining IT as spaceless, timeless, and immaterial only proves ITs Non-Existence. If outside (whatthefuckever that means), IT has no control over the inside. OR, your God-Thing, in order to create everything, sacrificed ITs self in the “Let there be light” proclamation. Big Bang. And the result after 14Ga is what we now see in this universe. Your God-Thing no longer exists. Except as the ash that is now within the universe. Two explanations infinitely MORE plausible than the Religitardism.

And my usage of God-Thing and bible-thing is in reference to all those God-Things that still exist. Notice plurality. BeLIEfs in thousands of incompatible God-Things still exist to this day. Although science has proven there is no existence of any God-Thing. In fact, the monumental mountains of evidence scientists have arduously wrestled from the Natural World are completely contradictory to any AND all supernatural causes. And if you Religitards were truly intelligent, knowledgeable, and intellectual, Y’awl would get together, pool those Billions of TAX-FREE $ stolen each and every year, putting those $ where your dogmatic rhetoric is, and construct your own Religitard Research & Development Center as with Research Triangle Park in the State of North Carolina.

The one that IBM foundationed and started. Prove Science and its Theories are False. In the least, prove the supernatural actually coexists along with the Natural World. None shall do this because the ONLY way you Religitards can even gain acceptance for your philosophy is by:

  1. Perversion and Twisting FACTs into foolishness in order to later make it look stupid.
  2. Concoction of BeLIEvable Prevarications while ensuring usage of Empathic Predation.
  3. Only through emotional (already fallacious and irrational) thinking can you Religitards get persons whom are not as knowledgeable as they should be (the Great GIGO Machine) to use only their emotions.
  4. Empathic Predation in order to make people to use their emotions to override their intellect. This is the psychological terrorism, emotional molestation, and mental abuse I have spoken of in the past. Now, I just call it Emapthic Predation.
  5. Beguiling Semantics and Prestidigitative Dialect to make science seem false and ridiculous, and YOUR God-Thing seem true.
  6. The ONLY evidence any Religitard can offer is only philosophical solipsism and philosophical logic. These only prove two things: 1) You can speak truthfulness. 2) You know how to lie beLIEvably. Philosophy is ONLY true if it is stating truthfulness. Such as, die-hard religious believers definitively show lower capabilities of intelligence, knowledge, and intellectuallism. CONSTANTLY. In ALL time periods such poll testing is done. IQ. SAT. Many others…
  7. And, perversion and twisting of FACTs also allows them to shoe-horn their narrative lies as misinformation.

The above is EXACTLY what your theology is. Mental and psychological abuse. Why MUST you people LIE? For My Moral Code, misinforming people of actual FACTs, and perverting and twisting those FACTs, is reprehensible. Condemnable. Deplorable. Criminal. Does NOT those bible-thingies say something about that? Exodus 20:16 – Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour. By misinformation, you are lying. Bearing False Witness against your neighbors.

Because you have attempted to identify God-Thing as an "IT” (quit changing my words), you have created in logic what is known as a “category error.” It may be possible that you are confusing the God-Thing of the bible-thingy with many of the Pagan gods that are found in religious systems around the world. This is typical of people who have not read the bible-thingy, and therefore do not have any knowledge of how the God-Thing of the bible-thingy gives a “personal existence” description.

Actually, NOT category error. Remember the definitions for all those God-Things you people supply describes an IT. Something that is supposedly so far outside anything it boils down to a make-beLIEve fantasy. No Religitard can offer any OHEFE. The ONLY crap y’awl ever provide is gish gallop, word salad, Brain Diarrhea. And, your “personal existence” has no bearing on Reality. Anything that is existent on a “personal” level, is just THAT. It is entirely subjective. Ooops.

As for having read your bible-thingy and its origins, I have done so more than you have. I have many different copies and versions of the “Holy Bible”. Including the Septuagint, Torah, Talmud, etc., in the original languages of Old Greek, Ancient Hebrew, Akkadian. The stories remain similar, but details got changed and added. I even have some that are versions older than Akkadian (replicas, of course). That bible-thingy has actually been around longer than you claim the age of the Earth using your bible-thingy. Some relics even pre-date the supposed time of Adam and Eve. Humans were already around when your God-Thing decided to have an ego trip with a pair. Played a sick game. Sounds more like Trelane to me (à la Star Trek). A childish buffoon. Kewl Wild Tangent: Your God-Thing’s parents took IT back home after found fucking with us too much. Hmm…

Remember, there is no such thing as absolute, universal, objective FoR (Frame of Reference). For ALL FoRs are subjective, no matter the location, and everything else is RELATIVE to that FoR. That one singularity point. If you move your FoR, then the before FoR is now relative to new FoR. Think.

For example, [reference removed since is Claim, NOT evidence.]

These verses indicate that the God-Thing of the bible-thingy is telling us that there is only one God-Thing, and that God-Thing’s existence covers both eternity past and eternity future.

Actually, there are NO verses in any bible-thingy that are not also copied, repeated, ad nauseum. You Religitards KNOW that your bible-thingies are a human-construct (thus fallacious and contradictive) from the Common Tropes of those ages. You KNOW this FACT.

Therefore, no matter how you want to describe it, God-Thing is not an "it" because an "it" is something created. Since the God-Thing of the bible-thingy declares eternal existence, a "zero" moment of time is out of the question regarding a "coming into being.” Also, an exclusivity to that existence is also declared.

But those God-Things in those 1000s of bible-thingies WERE created. Evidence: Their God-Thing is described as being what can only be called a Thing. An IT. A mental concept that only exists within each and every mind that thinks on such. A Thing so far removed from he/her labels. Thus, the only one left is IT.

For Posterity: The reason I use an HTML trick to make God appear doG. Simply add the word Rabid in front and you have ITs behaviour.

However, you do say something in the last paragraph of that section that I found intriguing: “IT is NO gender.”

Now this is interesting, as christinsanes have essentially said something similar to this all along. With the exception of the word "IT", we would agree with you in that, in God-Thing's “essence” there is no gender. But that goes along with the nature of an UNCREATED, ETERNAL Being.

You just said your God-Thing does not exist: UNCREATED. Until humans pondered IT into existence. You seem to forget, all those deities are ONLY ONE THING: An admittance to failure of understanding Reality. Thus, these “happenstances”, such as lightning, was explained by angry spirits. Spirits became deities. HOWEVER, as science progressed, it showed all these “happenstances” attributed to spirits and deities were actually Reality behaving as Reality.

“Eternal” and “Nothing” are both simply mental abstracts constructed within the tiny miscreant minds of all humans. Nothing has never existed in Reality. And eternity is meaningless, moot.

I also found your section above the word T…H…I…N…K… interesting. You said "Thus, ALL religions ARE cults. Followers of an exclusive system of religious beLIEfs and practices, usually opposed to ALL others.”

You need to be very careful here, because you're going to “saw off” the very tree branch are sitting on. How? No matter how you define it, religions are belief systems.

Actually, I am sawing the branch YOU are sitting on. ALL religions worldwide meet the criteria for being a CULT. The ultimate proof is Religitards’ desire to control your mind. NOT teaching. You Religitards teach nothing. Instead, you deliver False information and pawn it off as silly, or as truth. That is the very definition for LYING. “The deliberate act of deviating from the truth.” All I see published on christinsane WWW sites is the result of persons possessing NO knowledge of ALL they speak/write. Thus, ALL that Religitardism publishes is LIES.

Though you may deny you have a religion, you do have a belief system. Furthermore, you are a follower of that belief system because that is how you live your life.

If you wish to call my knowledge beliefs, go ahead. Any can know I have no beliefs. I either KNOW or !KNOW. The difference is that my beliefs are backed by monumental mountains of evidence. However, with Religitards, they possess NOT any knowledge of the pathetic attempts at using science. They cannot understand nor comprehend the data within Theories. Again, all Religitards ever offer is word salad. Never any evidence.

I do not have a beLIEf system. I have logically deduced my knowledge. Searched arduously for information of that God-Thing of christinsanity. I spent 30 years traveling the Greater Levant region. Me SoulMate and I even participated on many archaeological dig sites. All the museums. The artifacts. Nothing in the christinsanity bible-thingy ever happened the way written.

My Moral Code is based upon my ability to think reasoningly, critically. I discussed these matters extensively between the Three of Me. I did not need any horror anthology to teach me it is wrong to kill another human. However, what if I MUST kill in order to not be killed? Remember subjectivity and relativism.

Therefore, you must believe that it is true. And, you are opposed to other belief systems. Whether it is "All" other belief systems, or just the ones you want to pick and choose, I don't know. So by your own statements and declarations, you are a Cult Member yourself!

I do NOT beLIEve. I KNOW, or I !KNOW. I would rather KNOW the truth than to beLIEve an unsubstantiable fantasy. I am like Carl Sagon, “I do not want to believe. I want to KNOW.” He said that half-century or more ago. I am only opposed to beliefs system that MUST use Empathic Predation. That is psychological abuse, no matter how defined.

Exactly why does it matter whether I beLIEve or not? That makes it your onus probundi. Not mine. Yet, I take offense with Religitards who prey upon people and LIE in order to rape your riches and wealth. What would be so wrong with admitting you Religitards have been wrong since time immemorial? Is it so wrong just to admit the Truth? As Steven Weinberg put, paraphrased, “With or without religion, you shall have good people doing good things and bad people doing bad things. But to get good people to do evil things, that takes religion.” Never has it been summed up any truer.

May I humbly suggest that you rework your critical thinking, logic, and theology skills so that you can put together a coherent argument that corresponds to the christinsanity worldviewPoint-of-View. Your foul language, ranting and raving, changing words around, and making claims with no bases in facts is unimpressive.

I am not the one who needs development of critical thinking, logic, and theological knowledge. It is Religitards, such as your self, that forego critical thinking, logic, and knowledge. I have been studying many various religions across this planet for over 60 years. You have how long? I was only 3y old when I figured out the christinsanity bible-thingy was the horror version of Æsop’s Fables. Æsop’s Fables, aka Æsop’s Parables, were more beLIEvable than your bible-thingy.

Hope to hear back from you, apologies for the delayed response. That will probably be more delays in the future, as I'm swamped with people asking sincere questions.

Take care,

Sincerely,

Dave

CARM Answer Team

Although listed last, this is First and FOREMOST of all, thank you for informing me that Matt Slick is doing good. I am sorry for any fright, but as said, when one studies abnormal psychology to better grasp what has occurred to me. Things came together, and I was the one whom was frightened. Thus, many thanks for that information. Please apologize to Matt if it caused any disruption. I am sorry.

With my studies, I have found that if something frightens you, it is best to do anything. Even through others.

Thanks muchly. It is a relief to me to know he is OK.

— The Unknown Atheist

Top of page

Copyright © 2024 by RMFR. Licensed under CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 International. All Other Rights Reserved