www.tektonics.org

GakuesiDon #fundie tektonics.org

There is a LONG list of "You Might Be A Fundy Atheist If...", I give you a meager sampling.

3. # You believe that extra drippy ice-cream is a logical proof against the existence of God, because an omniscient God would know how to stop the ice-cream from being extra drippy, an omnipotent God would have the ability to stop the ice-cream from being extra drippy, and by golly, an omnibenevolent God wouldn't want your ice-cream to be extra drippy.

10. You consistently deny the existence of God because you personally have never seen him but you reject out of hand personal testimony from theists who claim to have experienced God as a reality in their lives.

23. You blame God for the starvation, sickness, pain and suffering in the world...when, indeed, it is MAN's greed, politics, selfishness and apathy that not only causes, but also ignores the sick and the starving masses. We aren't our brothers' keepers....but we should be.

24. You believe that planes, computers, calculators, compasses, etc, were "all obviously designed," yet the human body, being intricately more complex was "obviously a product of biological evolution." It seems the more complex the apparatus, the more obvious the "fact" that it was not designed.

49. You won't bet $10 on the football game because a 50/50 chance isn't good enough, but you have no problem gambling with your life on the nearly impossible odds of a cell randomly generating from nothing.

And it just goes on and on, and much worse...

http://www.tektonics.org/parody/fundyath.html

Unnamed comic genius. #fundie tektonics.org

You may be a fundy atheist if....


25. You claim that evolution and the big bang are two entirely separate theories that explain different aspects of the universe, yet, in what school of learning can you find any real separation or distinction between the two?
31. You think that humans are products of chance but when it comes to human reason we can believe in logic! (Think about it !)
48. You are a person who absolutely believes that life came from nonlife, yet absolutely deny the possibility of anyone rising from the dead.
60. You insist that "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence", then claim that Jesus never existed.
78. You refuse to use the word "excruciating" because of its origins in describing the agonies of crucifixion. (ex crucis - "from the cross")
123. You're convinced that people only believe in God because they're afraid of going to hell...despite the fact that if there is no God, then there's probably no hell either
157. You think God was cruel for killing all of those innocent babies in the flood, and that Christians are cruel for opposing a woman's right to abort her baby
162. You spell America "AermiKKKa" and Christian "KKKristian
168. You have not seen "The Passion of the Christ," and you don’t know anyone who has seen it
180. You become upset when a Christian says that not everything in the Bible should be taken literally.
210. You insist on capitalizing "atheist"
264. You think eating bread and drinking wine is cannibalism
281. Last of all -- you write this website a letter which includes a rebuttal to the above listing!

James Patrick Holding #fundie tektonics.org

[concerning people who criticize the Bible and its texts]

Do these persons deserves our attention? Should they be recognized as authorities? No, they deserve calculated contempt for their efforts. (By this, I do not mean emotional or behavioral contempt, but a calculated disregard for their work from an academic perspective.) They have not even come close to deserving our attention, and should feed only itching ears with similar tastes. Skeptics with largo egos who complain that this site does not always link to the articles it is addressing need to be told that their efforts -- engaging what I will call from here on "trailer park scholarship" -- do not deserve links.
[...]
Who are these people trying to kid? Their scholarship, as a whole, is reckless and pitiable; what they know, they have learned from reading a few popular books with no conception of the broader issues and fields at hand.
[...]
These people deserve not links, but contempt and obscurity.