Since his disappearance from DI, I have been continuing my conversation with Erik over at his blog. I was able to do this by first promising not to cuss (his requirement) but also by tacitly accepting his paradigm for the sake of the conversation (the bible is the Word of God) in order to get him to open up and learn more about him. I find his absolute certainty intriguing and I had to know more about him.

We’ve gone back and forth a bit of there usual stuff and of course he was unyielding in his opinions, as always, though polite throughout and even pleasant. There is no gray for Erik although I must admit I pushed gently. He never admitted to even a fleeting doubt. No “progress” was made as far as I was concerned.

I did find out one thing that was interesting. It turns out that Erik B is a preacher or pastor of some kind. Many of his blogs mention the sermons that he writes. So it is no surprise to me that he steadfastly refuses to accept any bit of information that cast some doubt as to the authority of his “boss”, if you will.

I hope if he reads this that he doesn’t see this post as a betrayal, as if I am coming back to DI and tattling on him! I just felt the need to mention that his BUSINESS is being an employee of God, hence there is an underlying reason for him to accept the bible as true. He’d be out of a job if he didn’t!

I think the bottom line here is that as a blog admin, you have no requirement or responsibility to provide ‘free speech’ or anything resembling a democracy to those who choose to comment here. A person’s blog simply isn’t a democracy and commenters have whatever rights the blog admin chooses to give them (see Ray Comfort’s site for a great example of actual comment censorship).

It’s clear to me that, far from being religious persecution, this new DI comment policy was instituted because of ONE particularly determined troll named Mr Brewer, who, after its inception, repeatedly & knowingly breached it in an impotent & pointless act of defiance (and who no doubt now cries persecution and claims martyrdom - however, he should realise it’s not persecution when you’re actually in the wrong. Just because everyone’s against you it doesn’t mean you’re Galileo). I’m sure if Mr Brewer continued posting on-topic comments (in his inimitably condescending fashion) but without constantly claiming to know what God thinks/wants/hates/loves et cetera ad nauseam, we all would have been fine with that. However, he made a free & conscious choice not to do so and kept the preachometer turned to 11. He experienced the consequences of his actions and seems to have flounced off to sulk, which is no great loss in my humble opinion.

I’ve had many rewarding and interesting exchanges with religious people of all shapes and colours, but the absolutists & extremists of this world, whatever their religion, simply can’t comprehend an opposing point of view (or even properly acknowledge its existence; eg the fallacies “atheism is a religion” or “you worship science”) and as such it’s pointless to engage them. Religious moderates/non-religious people/anyone who can disagree but still express themselves maturely are better off without them.

The comment policy disadvantages noone except those who refuse to participate in adult, respectful exchanges of ideas!

http://dangerousintersection.org/2008/01/19/50-atheist-aphorisms-and-bumper-sticker-slogans/

BTW, I just took a peek at EB’s blog and he has added a new post, obviously inspired by many comments here at DI. He attributes the edited comments taken from DI to “an anonymous commentor”. It is an interesting read, if you know what actually transpired, as it exposes EB egotistical view. I would post the url to his site, but that might encourage others to go feed the troll under his own bridge. He is easy enough to find if that is what you want.

When Erik Brewer first slammed into this blog with his wordy and predictable comments, the near total lack of critical thought in his comments had me believing him to be not a person but a program, a keyword driven responder such as “Eliza” or “Racter”. I was surprised to find that he was a real person.

As for a no preach policy, I think EB’s real offense is harping, not preaching. I think getting a sample of the mental processes of a real live fundie an interesting experience, but once EB had established his stance, rather than add any valuable insight to the discussions, he kept repeating the same thing over and over and over…. ad nauseum.

On the other hand, I’m not suggesting that literalist Believers are correct and I am incorrect when they say (and I doubt) that they are hearing God voice actually speaking to them when they pray or that the earth is only 6,000 years old.

However, I will agree with you that “delusional” is too judgmental . I amend my statement and say that deists are “illusional”.

Weird, this is the second time in as many days that I find myself quoting a book I read many years ago, but in Freud’s “Future of a Illusion” he describes religion as an illusion, explaining that illusions are hopes that are the “fulfillments of the oldest, strongest, and most urgent wishes of mankind”.

However, he adds, “Illusions need not necessarily be false.”

Spoken like a true agnostic!

Do you have faith that your daughters love you?

Do you have faith that your wife loves you?

Do you have faith that there is any good in a world where there is so much evil?

Delusional is as you decide. Perhaps the DSM-IV can help:

http://www.mdconsult.com/das/book/body/106586014-2/0/1243/73.html

Once you arrogate to yourself the power to declare another “delusional,” you take away something essential to their humanity and treat them as something less than yourself, and by extension, something less than human.

I am not qualified to comment upon the humanity of a person because they do not believe in God as I do believe in God.

When you comment upon deists as “delusional,” you are preaching. Rationalize it as you will as the creator but, you do deny theists part of their humanity, and as one of those which believes in God in the absence of proof, I am hurt by your actions.

You have never hurt me before in the some 38 years we have known one another. I do not see this commentary upon my actions as supporting me to be a better “Tim” as I do most of our interactions and I charitably request you to stop it.

I do want fundamentalists (and anyone else) to feel free to comment at this site, but they need to take off their God masks and tell me what they themselves think.