The “Too Stupid to Respond To” Files
It might be interesting to take a brief look at some of the more disgusting things that I’ve had the misfortune to stumble upon due to my association with apologetics ministry.
When I first started in 2006, I wanted to respond to everything. I thought that skeptics and atheists alike would be floored by my logic and rationality and could scarcely help but convert to Christianity. Obviously, I had a really steep learning curve ahead of me.
I laugh when I think back to when I first started. I probably would have attempted a serious answer to these. But now, I know better. Some stuff is just so stupid, so ridiculous, that it deserves nothing but absolute silence. So, at the risk of inflating the egos of those involved with these projects, I present a glimpse at my personal “Too Stupid to Respond To” files.
The Video Collection of NonStampCollector:
Yes, context is a very important thing. While many of the difficult verses of the Bible can be sorted out by studying the context of the passage, by that I mean both context of the surrounding passages and the cultural context in which they were written, it is also true that some cannot.
When they can’t be sorted out by understanding context, it is also helpful to know that just because something appears in the Bible, that doesn’t mean that it has a tacit stamp of approval from God. The Israelites were brutally honest in recording their history, and often included details that were outright grotesque. That often means that they recorded sins.
Either way, NonStampCollector doesn’t deserve a response because his videos are meant as humor, not as serious arguments. And if they are meant as serious arguments, he certainly isn’t presenting them in a way that many Christians would take seriously.
A couple of responses to the video have been attempted. This one is ironic because in the effort to prove that NSC has taken verses out of context, he actually takes Luke 19:27 out of context. This one offers no response whatsoever, despite calling itself a response. This one is a little better.
I’ve referenced the Mr. Deity videos before, and I have said that I won’t answer them simply because they are meant as comedy. The primary purpose of the Mr. Deity videos is to make its audience laugh. They present no arguments against Christianity.
In the above video, Mr. Deity is having an argument with Jesus over how to best proceed with the Atonement. This is, of course, crap. No such argument would have ever existed, and had the folks from Mr. Deity ever taken Christian Theology 101, they would have known that the Son offered himself willingly to the Father. The will of God, even across three beings, is united in the same purpose. The Trinity never disagrees.
Mr. Deity is a prime example of a satire that hasn’t sought to understand the point of view it is satirizing. And that makes for bad video. Why is this so popular?
God’s Wonderful World:
This is too stupid to respond to for many reasons. The inspiration behind the video (our friend John W. Loftus) left the following comment:
Nice juxtaposition. I was just watching a vid of Lee Strobel & his friends explaining how evil is the result of humanity choosing to sin. It pissed me off to no end and I thought about images just like these. It made me mad as hell that they could compare the “evil” a typical western Christian experiences to that of Rwandans or others suffering and dieing unimaginable deaths in the 3rd world. Good thing for Lee he was born in the US. God must really love him.
Yet, even ranking religous officials from third world countries find their hope in God. Archbishop Desmond Tutu wrote a book called Made for Goodness. I’ve been reading a chapter here and there. Archbishop Tutu, despite having seen things that Loftus can only allude to, still firmly trusts God to deliver humanity from our own sins.
Tutu tells us of a woman who, despite living in a one-room shack, has opened her home to any child whose parents die of AIDS. She has a virtual orphanage going on there. Despite the fact that she has nothing: no income, no food, and barely has shelter, this woman makes ends meet and no one goes hungry on her watch.
Since Loftus is so concerned about the plight of the Rwandans, perhaps he’d like to move there and help? Maybe he could follow the example of the woman Tutu tells us about. In other words, atheists like Loftus accuse Christians like Strobel of being too academic when it comes to the problem of evil, but not showing enough action. Yet these same atheists also treat the problem of evil academically. Where’s their action?