The Solid Sky in Genesis: A Response to Rev. Juan Valdes

One composite reconstruction of biblical cosmology

This is the second installment in a series of responses to comments made by Rev. Juan Valdes in the debate and in his post-debate webpost responses.

In my last post, I refuted his contention that Genesis 1:1-3 does not speak of water as the primeval substance that pre-existed light, the earth, the sky, and all heavenly bodies.

In this post, I concentrate on showing that biblical authors believed that the sky was a solid structure, probably metallic, in which the stars, moon, and sun are embedded.

If so, that certainly does not accord with our observations of how the universe is structured. His relevant webpost is here.

Bill Gothard Resigns Amid Sexual Harassment Investigation

LINK. He faces allegations from over 30 women! So much for his basic biblical life principles, eh?

My Upcoming Debate With Abdu Murray: "Did Jesus Bodily Rise From the Dead?"

Abdu Murray and John W. Loftus go head to head as they debate the truth to Jesus's miraculous raising from the dead. Did it really happen? It's to take place at Alpena Community College (in the Granum Theater), Alpena, Michigan, May 12, 2014 at 6 PM. The event can be seen on Facebook right here. Abdu and I are friends. We stayed together in a hotel room when I attended the Apologetics Conference 2008, sponsored by the Evangelical Philosophical Society. Afterward I wrote a review of it which can be read here.

Quote of the Day On Liberal Christianity, by Loftus

This quote is taken from chapter one of my new anthology Christianity is Not Great, after describing the violence of Christian history:

What does this do to liberal Christianity like that represented by Kimball and Spong? If the roots of their tree of faith are evil by their own standards, as they admit, then why do they still nest in that same tree? Continuing to do so is unreasonable, just like trying to incrementally reform the Klu Klux Clan from within. No, given the history of Christianity even their own particular Christian faith should be rejected, plain and simple.

With hindsight exegesis liberal believers reinvent their theology based on the lessons of history, rather than abandoning it. They need to take seriously that theirs is an evolved faith that began with religious violence and has been sustained by violence for at least 1800 years. Christianity is red with blood in tooth and in claw. Throughout most of its history violence was its theme, its program, and its method for converting people and keeping believers in the fold. Its history is a history of violence. There is no escaping this.

There is No Such Thing as "Theism," "Christian Theism" or "Mere Christianity"

A recent book edited by evangelicals is titled, Debating Christian Theism.It looks very good if for no other reason than that the authors on the opposing side are good ones. The glaring problem however, is that the authors in this book who represent Christianity are, generally speaking, evangelicals. Evangelicals write the chapters on all the key issues defending "Christian Theism" in this book. One would expect this, since the book is edited by evangelicals. But why do they get to define "Christian Theism"? There is no such thing, as there is no such thing as "theism" or "Mere Christianity" either. These evangelicals are co-opting the term "Christian Theism" for themselves. The book title is a misnomer, even a fraud. It should be titled, "Debating Evangelicalism," or "Debating Evangelical Theism." If I were writing a chapter in this book and I had the space I would point this fraud out. There are only theisms, Christian theisms and Christianities. Below are the table of contents. See for yourself:

Forth Coming Coup de Grace Old Testament Post

One of my last post looked at the external textual evidence for a late post 200 BCE Old Testament text, especially when placed in perspective with other real ancient Near Eastern texts.  My next post will look internally at Hebrew words to prove beyond any reasonable doubt, that the text known in the Judeo-Christian-Islamic religions as the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament), is purely a late fabrication having more in common with the Book of Mormon than factual history.

Upon posting this simple internal evidence (pointed out to me by an undergraduate professor in the early 1970’s), only blind faith will prove effective in keeping the Old Testament from being a religious embarrassment (if it’s not one already)!  (I hope to have it up in several weeks.)

A Korean Language Edition of "God or Godless" is in the Works

Today I was told by Baker Books that Eunbo, Inc., an organization based in South Korea, has officially signed a contract for a Korean language edition of God or Godless?: One Atheist. One Christian. Twenty Controversial Questions.That's cool!

Is Timothy Keller Clueless, Self-Deceived, Or Another Liar For Jesus?

This is another post in my series, "Do You Want To Be A Christian Apologist?" This is number 16 in the series, which are tagged with the words "Christian Apologetics" below, seen in reverse chronological order. So, let's say you want to be a Christian apologist, someone who defends the Christian faith. Then what must you do? The sixteenth thing you must do is to deceive your audience, lie if necessary, in order to defend your faith. [See also the tag "Liars for Jesus" for other examples]. I have hesitated to say this before, in the cases of William Lane Craig and David Marshall, but when Randal Rauser did this my eyes were opened. Here's another clear example with Timothy Keller's book, The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism.His book is quite popular, ranking in the top ten "apologetics" category of books on Amazon for several years now. However, Bryan Frances, an Associate Professor of Philosophy at Fordham University, outs him as either clueless, self-deceived or a fraud, in the Introduction of his book, Gratuitous Suffering and the Problem of Evil: A Comprehensive Introduction.See for yourself:

Was the Cosmos Formed out of Water? Response to Rev. Juan Valdes

Rev. Juan Valdes

On February 16, 2014, I engaged in a formal debate in Indianola, Iowa with Rev. Juan Valdes, the pastor of the Iglesia Centro Evangélico Pentecostal in Miami, Florida. He is part of Reasons for Hope, an apologetics organization headquartered in Kentucky.

The topic question was: “Is Genesis 1-3 a Scientifically Reasonable Account of the Origin of our World?”
Rev. Valdes argued for the affirmative, and I argued for the negative.                                                       
You can see the debate here, and I will be referencing any precise time references (Hour:Minute:Second) in this version of the debate. Rev. Valdes has responded to some questions he did not answer at the debate here.

Attributes of the Christian God with the Trinity Made Simple

The Trinity (the illogical) Simplified 
(Or how to get away with calling polytheism monotheism.) 

The following is an alphabetical listing of all the divine attributes of God taken from an article on Wiki. This list proves that if given a Bible, for a Christian there's no limit to what theology can create from nothing. Even with all the following attributes God is endowed with, He can be compared to a toddler with a load of shit in his pants; logically God still stinks!       1. Aseity  2. Graciousness  3. Holiness 4.Immutability 5. Impassibility  6. Impeccability 7. Incorporeality  8. Incomprehensibility 9. Infinity 10. Jealousy 11. Love 12. Mission 13. Omnipotence 14. Omnipresence  15. Omniscience 16. Oneness 17. Providence 18. Righteousness 19. Simplicity 20. Sovereignty 21. Transcendence 22.Trinity 23. Veracity  24. Wrath

Quote of the Day, by Robert Bumbalough

Professor Lambert. These conversations are adversarial in nature because they are about the future of civilization. If rational people give into witch-doctors and superstition mongers, then humanity is f*cked and will quickly head towards extinction. This is rather like a cold war that could easily turn hot given the level, quantity and quality of superstition infecting Americans...It's OK for you to "believe by faith" what ever religious nonsense you like, just keep it out of the government and public schools.

Proof that the Gospels Date From 60 – 90 CE Proves to be False

When I was in seminary, one of the few arguments presented that the Gospels were written before 70 CE was that these text failed to mention the destruction of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem by the Romans. With no real dating system for the Gospels in place, scholars (who were usually linked to a religious institution) needed to keep these texts as closely connected to an early first century Jesus as they could or this divine figure would fade into legend and myth.

Dan Lambert Doesn't Think Bayesian Analysis Helps When It Comes to History

Timothy and Lydia McGrew use a Bayesian analysis (or inference) to establish the resurrection of Jesus by a percentage of over 99%. Richard Swinburne uses it to establish that if God exists then Jesus was bodily resurrected from the grave by a percentage of 97%. However, by definition, even any given mundane (or ordinary, as opposed to an extraordinary) historical event is a unique one-of-a-kind event. And the events leading up to it, and follow it, are also unique one-of-a-kind events. So when looking to see if any given event took place in the past the historian must calculate the probability of the whole series of events, the ones that came before and after the event in question, even though all of them are unique one-of-a-kind events. How does one assign probabilities to them all when they are all dependent on each other? In one sense they are all improbable for that reason. To see this from a different perspective, consider an observer before any event takes place. All events in the future have an extremely low probability to them. No one could have predicted yesterday that I would be typing these very words today, you see. In any case, here is Lambert on Facebook taking about this subject:

Why Hasn't There Been Any Sightings of Nessie In the Last Year?

In the past, before there were any cameras at all, travelers through the forests and sailors on the seas would hear noises and see glimpses of animals in the moonlit night. There are some frightening noises one would hear. With the wind or a falling branch their imaginations could run wild. Wolves passing by in the forest could be thought of as scary beasts. A crashing wave could be thought of as a sea monster attacking the ship. The people back then simply didn't know otherwise. So there were believed to be a whole host of mythical beasts in the world. The Griffin is one of them. For these people the world out there contained unimaginable beasts. Good paintings and the camera eliminated them one by one. The camera never captured them on film. So there was less reason to think they existed. But not all of them were put to rest, and others surfaced.

How to Debate a Christian Apologist, by Victor Stenger

LINK.

Sean Carroll & William Lane Craig Debate Naturalism vs. Theism

FFRF Educates Bible Illiterate Tony Perkins

Dan Barker and Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-presidents of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, sent a letter yesterday to Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council responding to comments by Perkins about a press release from the Freedom From Religion Foundation that critiqued violence and sexism in the bible. Perkins accused Gaylor of not having read the bible and claimed “that’s not in the bible” during an appearance on Fox News Feb. 25 with Megyn Kelly. Barker and Gaylor’s response can be read here.

Jersey Flight: Christianity Broke My Heart

Meet the Amazing TAMers: John Loftus Part 2

"Here it Comes" I Sent The Manuscript To Prometheus Books Today

This clip from "The Wrath of Khan" expresses my thoughts as I ponder the impact of our new anthology, "Christianity is Not Great: How Faith Fails."



No violence is intended. It's purely metaphorical. We do battle against ideas though. ;-)

Prometheus Books is the premier atheist publisher of our generation and I'm happy to be a PB author/editor. Below is the official description of the book and finalized Table of Contents:

Professor Paul K. Moser Thinks Natural Theology is "In Big Trouble"

Paul Moser has a very impressive resume, and unlike some others he is a joy discussing the issues that divide us. Here is our discussion on Facebook about natural theology and what he has left, once he rejects it. Enjoy.

Meet the Amazing TAMers: John Loftus Part 1

Professor Dan Lambert Again In Discussion With Me

On Facebook Joshua Tongol quoted me, where I had written:

My goal is to force Christians to think about what they would believe if the Bible itself was undermined as a source of divine truth.” —John Loftus

Now enters Dan Lambert:

The Cannibal Dreams of the Puppet Minister

Ronald William Brown had a dream .  He wasn’t content with just doing a Christian children’s TV puppet show, and warning about the evils of porn. 

He wasn’t satisfied by working with the puppet ministry of Gulf Coast Church of Largo, Florida for 15 years.  He wanted more than just picking kids up for church in a van.  He longed for something more fulfilling than living in a trailer park, and running his Puppets Plus business.  To fulfill his dream, Ronald Brown wanted to kidnap, sexually abuse, murder, and cannibalize a child - a boy from his church!  

Founder of World's Largest Megachurch Convicted of Embezzling $12 Million

The founding pastor of the world's largest Pentecostal congregation has been sentenced to three years in prison for embezzling 13 billion won (US$12 million) in church funds. LINK. Up until David Cho's conviction Christians would have held him up as a model pastor of a model church and a good Christian. Now he'll be denounced as not a true Christian at all. "He doesn't represent true Christianity" they'll say. Then what does? No really, what does? ;-)

Quote of the Day, From Randy Pitkin on Facebook

For discussion:

Miracles don't happen today, God doesn't change, Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever. Therefore, miracles NEVER happened. Case closed, move along, nothing to see here.

A House of Cards Built on Faith: Without a Historical “Old Testament” How Can Judaism, Christianity and Islam Have Any Credibility?

People who accept religion (especially those in the Judao-Christian-Islamic belief systems) do so emotionally (as if they have found absolute truth) only to be made into doctrinal mental slaves. Without context, the Biblical Scriptures they deemed to be their foundation of authority, they tend to mentally focus all their energy on theology while their scholars continually assure them there was (at least one time) a pure uncorrupted text (or texts) generally known as the Old Testament (Hebrew Bible) as we find expressed in this typical Doctrinal Statement on The Scripture:

“We believe that the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are verbally and plenarily inspired of God, are inerrant in the original writings, and are the infallible authority in all matters of faith and conduct (II Timothy 3:16).” (Emphases mine)

Quote of the Day, by Jamie Fanol

I have written before that even among the very best Christian apologists there is a woeful, and perhaps even culpable ignorance about what atheism means. I also offered a solution to this ignorance. Perhaps Christians perfer to be ignorant because as Fanol said on Facebook:

If Christians understood atheists and how we use reason they probably would become atheists!

Faith Is A Slippery Pig" f/Peter Boghossian

See below:

Trying to Understand The Mind of the Christian Apologist is Like Trying to Understand the Mind of a Serial Killer!

I have spent my years online, and in my books, trying to reason with Christian apologists in front of the watching world (whoever watches anyway). It is my specialty. And yet today I feel like I am no better at understanding the mind of the apologist than when I began. Just how badly does the faith virus infect otherwise reasonable people? They cannot even understand what we're saying. They don't even try. They are in defensive mode. They only hear what they want to hear when the evidence of what we're saying should be clear enough. My goal is to break through to them, so I am forced to understand them. It's like trying to understand the mind of a serial killer. I cannot begin to understand such a person. It appears I cannot understand the mind of the apologist either, even though I was once one. How do I break through to them? I feel that if anyone can do this I can. But I admit I can't. The virus of the mind is that strong. It's very maddening. It is the most difficult challenge I have ever undertaken. [I wouldn't be surprised in the least if one of them copied this post and inserted the word atheist in it.]

Former Pastor Bruce Gerencser on "Why I Stopped Believing"

Bruce answers this question. His answer is very well-stated. I adjure you to take a look. He says:

The hardest decision I ever made in my life was the day in late November of 2008 when I finally admitted to myself, I am no longer a Christian, I no longer believe in the Christian God, I no longer believe the Bible is the Word of God. At that moment, everything I had spent my life doing was gone. In a sense I had an atheist version of a born-again experience. For the past five years, I have continued to read, study, and write. I am still very much a work in progress. My understanding of religion and its cultural and sociological context continues to grow. Now that I am free from the constraints of religion, I am free to wander the path of life wherever it may lead. LINK.

Dr. Randal Rauser is a Liar! A Liar For Jesus. There is No Escaping this.

Previously I have hesitated to say Christian apologists are liars. I have excused them because of their delusion. No More. Randal Rauser is a bald faced liar for Jesus. We have no more reason to trust anything he says, anything in defense of his ridiculous faith, none. Lest he delete his post I'll reproduce it below with a link. First the title:

Loftus admits Boghossian doesn’t care 
about truth. I call that bogusian!

 Liar! I did no such thing. Here is what Rauser said, see for yourselves:

The Next Wave of Evangelicals Will Accept Theistic Evolution

Ronald E. Olson's new book, Death Before the Fall: Biblical Literalism and the Problem of Animal Suffering, is more evidence the next wave of evangelicals will accept theistic evolution.I've written about this phenomenon before: The New Evangelical Orthodoxy, Relativism, and the Amnesia of It All.

A Forum This Weekend Featuring a Debate Between Sean Carroll vs William Lane Craig Will Be Streamed Live

The topic will be: God and Cosmology: The Existence of God in Light of Contemporary Cosmology. LINK. This should be good.

Atheism Sighting: HBO's True Detective.

Existential bleakness runs deep in HBO’s excellent new Louisiana noir crime drama, where damaged cops investigate a murder marked by cultic overtones.  I found this scene to be fascinating, between a cop who believes that religion is useful and necessary, and one who thinks that “If the common good’s gotta make up fairy tales, then it’s not good for anybody.”  (NSFW language throughout.)

Great back-and-forth verbal jousting between the two viewpoints.  You will have had these conversations many times with believers. 

“If the only thing keeping a person decent is the expectation of divine reward, then brother, that person is a piece of shit.”

“What’s it say about life… Hmm?  You gotta get together to tell yourself stories that violate every law of the universe, just to get through the goddamn day.  What’s that say about your reality, Marty?”

Lesson One for Randal Rauser On How to Properly Exegete the Bible or Any Other Book

The hermeneutics required to understand any book are the same. They teach hermeneutics in first year Bible College classes. Randal Rauser must have skipped out on that class or flunked it. Here is a link to several of these college level texts. Rather than rehearse this whole discipline of learning let me highlight just a few questions reasonable people must first ask in order to properly understand a text, any text. We must ask basic questions like, "Who is the intended audience?" "What is the main point of the text?" and "What does the author take for granted?" Here is a listing of others written for college students.

How to Deconvert / Deprogram a Christian with Two Simple Demands

1. Demand textual proof that any verse of the Old Testament was written before 200 BCE. (There's 23,145 verses to prove them right or wrong.)

2. Demand historical proof (apart from using the New Testament to prove the New Testament) that Jesus Christ existed. (Let's see absolute truth prove itself.)

We're Almost Finished With the Anthology, "Christianity is Not Great: How Faith Fails"

Yes, that's the subtitle Prometheus Books chose for this anthology, simple and to the point. Our book, named after Christopher Hitchens's God is Not Great, shows how faith fails to live up to it's claims. Here is a description of the book. Here is the finalized list of chapters and authors. I'm only lacking six chapters and they should come in over the weekend. The chapters I have seen are absolute killers from superior authors. It's pretty exciting as we enter the final stretch. Here is the dedication:

Dedicated to the memory of Christopher Hitchens (1949 – 2011) journalist, author, polemicist, debater, and the quintessential curmudgeon. Hitchens was a person of candor and integrity, who thought false claims of any sort were not entitled to immunity from criticism. The essays in this book reflect his commitment to unsparing examination of religious beliefs.

“My own opinion is enough for me, and I claim the right to have it defended against any consensus, any majority, anywhere, any place, any time. And anyone who disagrees with this can pick a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.”

― Christopher Hitchens

Even if the Entire Testimony of Josephus on Jesus is Authentic, It’s Apologetically Worthless

Josephus composed his four works in thirty volumes in while in Rome and in Greek. These are chronologically: the Judean War (ca. 79 CE), the Judean Antiquities (20 volumes) & his Life (93 -94 CE) and finally Against Apion (ca. 98 CE) , but in this vast amount of literary work, only a short paragraph mentioned the Jesus of Christianity; thus the theme of my post.

Snake Handling Preacher Jamie Coots Dies of Snakebite

The Ten Commandments of Rational Debate

Today at 4 PM CST Dr. Hector Avalos Will Be Debating Creationist Juan Valdes

As announced earlier Dr. Avalos (who blogs here at DC) will be debating Reverend Juan Valdes on the question: "Is Genesis 1-3 a scientifically reasonable account of the origin of our world?” You can watch it live at YouTube Countdown where the countdown has begun. Comment here as it takes place.

Bill Nye Scolds GOP Congresswoman On Global Warming

See this LINK.

Bill Nye to Debate a Climate Change Denying Congresswoman

Nye will continue his crusade against misinformation this Sunday on "Meet the Press" with a debate against proud climate change denier Marsha Blackburn, the Republican congresswoman who serves as the vice chair of the House Energy & Commerce Committee.

The host of the once popular after-school staple "Bill Nye the Science Guy" took on committed creationist Ken Ham earlier this month in a debate over the origins of humanity. LINK

Nye is my new hero! One wonders if Richard Dawkins, Jerry Coyne, or PZ Myers thinks this is a bad idea too!

Dear Christian, Would You Kill Your Kid for God?

Christian parent, I have a question for you.

Would you be willing to murder your child to prove your loyalty to your boss?

Imagine that your boss came to you and said, “Look, I know you are a good employee and all, but I really need to know for sure that you are 100% loyal to my company.  So, next Saturday, I want you to take your son on a camping trip, and while you are in the mountains I want you to cut his throat and burn his body, to honor me as your boss.“

You would look at your boss like he was insane, and refuse to do it – right?  I hope that I am right in assuming that all of you would refuse such a vile request.

Let’s up the stakes a little. What if – instead of your boss – it was your god who told you to kill and sacrifice your child - to demonstrate your faith?

Would you do it, or not?

Richard Dawkins Proposed Replacing "Evolutionary Theory" With "Evolutionary Theorum"

I have been arguing that language matters and that scientists should stop using the word "theory" when describing the evolutionary paradigm or research program. What I had forgotten was that Richard Dawkins addressed this question before me in his book, The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution.If you go to Amazon and click on the book itself you can read what he says on pp. 8-19, with the exception of one page, depending on a random calculation (if you go away and click on it a different time you might see the page missing the first time). Now will you take my proposal seriously? I'm saying the same thing as he did, only I've been suggesting different words to replace the word "theory." In any case, it's time to retire the word "theory" when describing the evolutionary paradigm or research program.

Language Matters: On Not Using the Word "Theory" When it Comes to Evolution

Previously I issued A Plea to Scientists to Stop Using the Word "Theory" When Applied to Evolution. With a dozen "Shares" on Facebook at least some people get it (quotes below).

Let me ask just one question: When do scientists stop using the word "theory" and say instead that a discovery is a fact? In my previous post I quoted Richard Dawkins who said "evolution is a fact." Jerry Coyne said the same thing:

Every day, hundreds of observations and experiments pour into the hopper of the scientific literature. Many of them don't have much to do with evolution - they're observations about the details of physiology, biochemistry, development, and so on - but many of them do. And every fact that has something to do with evolution confirms its truth. Every fossil that we find, every DNA molecule that we sequence, every organ system that we dissect, supports the idea that species evolved from common ancestors. Despite innumerable possible observations that could prove evolution untrue, we don't have a single one. We don't find mammals in Precambrian rocks, humans in the same layers as dinosaurs, or any other fossils out of evolutionary order. DNA sequencing supports the evolutionary relationships of species originally deduced from the fossil record. And, as natural selection predicts, we find no species with adaptations that only benefit a different species. We do find dead genes and vestigial organs, incomprehensible under the idea of special creation. Despite a million chances to be wrong, evolution always comes up right. That is as close as we can get to a scientific truth. [Why Evolution Is True]

A Plea to Scientists: Stop Using the Word "Theory" When Applied to Evolution

Christians habitually repeat ad nauseum that since scientists describe evolution in terms of a "theory" they will say it is not a fact. Don't you think it's time to retire that language? As Dawkins has said in his book, The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution:

Evolution is a fact. Beyond reasonable doubt, beyond serious doubt, beyond sane, informed, intelligent doubt, beyond doubt evolution is a fact...It is the plain truth that we are cousins of chimpanzees, somewhat more distant cousins of monkeys, more distant cousins still of aardvarks and manatees, yet more distant cousins of bananas and turnips...It didn't have to be true, but it is. We know this because a rising flood of evidence supports it. Evolution is a fact...No reputable scientist disputes it, and no unbiased reader will close the book doubting it. (pp. 8-9).

Can it be any more clear? Use phrases like "the fact of evolution," or just "evolution." When referring to how a particular scientific discovery supports evolution, rather than saying "this supports evolutionary theory," say instead, "this adds more weight to the fact of evolution." We don't say "the theory of the solar system," nor the theory of other well-established scientific facts. We need a change in nomenclature, now! If you agree then share this plea with others, especially scientists.

[Edit: To see this defended further here my second post on the same topic.

Does The Scale of the Universe Undercut the Belief in a Tribal Deity?

I have thought about the scale of the universe for some time and talked with other former Christians who said the scale of the universe was a factor in their deconversion. It was for me. I had bought poster photos of parts of the universe and placed them all over my office. Jeffrey Jay Lowder insists there isn't a good argument leading us to this conclusion. I have disagreed.

So let's revisit this using the title to this post. Does the scale of the universe undercut the belief in a tribal deity? Yes, most emphatically. First we have to show that a tribal deity is what we find in the Bible. After that the rest is easy. A god like that, who is only concerned with a small tribe in a very large planet, must not know about the planet. Get it? Such a tribal deity looks indistinguishable from one created by a given tribe. Tribal deities were to be found everywhere tribes could be found. Since all of the rest of these deities were created by tribal people then the odds are that the god of the Bible was created by the Israelite tribe too. What then about Anselm's omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent God? What if this is the God who exists instead of a tribal deity? Does it change anything? No, I don't think so, not much anyway, although this is the point of contention.

Quote of the Day, by Someone Named Hector

Said with a bit of sarcasm. ;-)

I am utterly baffled that atheists would expect an entity who is said to be omnipotent, omniscient and omni-benevolent to behave like an entity who is omnipotent, omniscient and omni-benevolent. What's up with that? LINK.