I was going to keep quiet on this one, but Stacy Harp, in the last two days, has called Joe Brummer a fool many times. It is not surprising, and I have certainly heard much worse things coming from that woman’s mouth. She also thinks that Joe is Satan’s minion:
I say humorous because Joe has no clue how deceived he is, and continues to promote the lies of Satan on his blog every time he writes.
There are so many things you could say to that. I’ll give two.
1) "No Stacy–you are promoting the lies of Satan on every blog you write." See how stupid that sounds? We could play that ‘you are satan’ game forever but it wouldn’t get us very far except to show how childish it is.
Two: "How ridiculous it is in this day and age that someone actually believes in Satan and his so-called powers."
My choice would be #2. The only evil out there is the evil that people create. There is no dark, evil force that was released on mankind just to tempt them to worship a god. At least that is my humble opinion. It is way to easy to blame your own shortcomings on an amorphous evil spirit instead of taking responsibility for your own problems.
I just left this response at Joe’s blog:
I find it very interesting that Stacy says this:
“That is so EASY – Jesus died for me and saved me by His grace. And Jesus rose from the dead and the historical evidence not only for the existence of Jesus Christ but for his resurrection is undeniable.”
Well, it is not “undeniable.” Sure, there is definite evidence that Jesus was a real person and we can find that in a couple of references outside the New Testament. However, there is no historical evidence that Jesus was resurrected from the dead. None whatsoever. Absolutely zero. To use the New Testament to prove that Jesus was resurrected is circular reasoning. If she wants to use that kind of reasoning, more power to her. But then there is no reason for me to not believe in the Hindu gods, since their religious texts state that they are real too. The founder of Mormonism supposedly talked to angels, and his text states that that is true. Does that make it historically true? No way. You can believe it, but that is very different. Sorry Stacy. Try again.
She is really talking about her beliefs. Of course her beliefs are right, at least according to her. She wouldn’t have them if she didn’t think she was absolutely right. But there is a big difference between what she believes and what other people believe. For her, the difference is that she is right and she is going to heaven because of it. And the rest of us are going to hell, and no doubt she will be extremely gleeful about it as she sits at the right hand of Jesus, making fun of people in Hell. I wonder what Christ would think seeing her sitting there making fun of all those poor people in Hell? My guess is that he will just tip her out of her throne and send her packing. 🙂
Anyway, getting back to her historical comments. She claims she has done quite a bit of studying on different religions. Maybe she can now spend some time studying on how her own religious text, that she so fervently believes in, was put together. Here are just a few facts:
Paul wrote the earliest parts of the New Testament, but not until at least 20 years after the death of Christ. Mark, the earliest Gospel, was not written until sometime in the 60s, at least thirty years after the death of Christ. Imagine what stories could be spread around and changed after thirty years. Remember that whispering game we used to play when we were little? Multiply that by a billion and you can imagine how distorted things could get in thirty years after the fact.
Here is another fact–we have no clue what these original texts said. Sure, we have a very good guess, but we do not have one single scrap of papyrus from the original texts of the New Testament. NOT a SINGLE one. Zero. Zip. Nada. Our earliest scrap dates from around 120-150. The texts we have today are the product of biblical scholars who have put it together from literally thousands of manuscripts. So how on earth someone could say that the New Testament is the actual word of God is beyond me. They can certainly believe that the text is the word of God–but it is just that–a belief. It doesn’t stand up to the real history. I just gave a talk in a myth class about this very subject.
And after these texts have been put together, anyone who bothers to spend a few minutes looking at the Greek or Hebrew texts knows that that the critical apparatus shows that there are lots and lots of variations in the manuscript tradition.
And once you can get through all of that, you then have to deal with what books of the Bible are believed to be authentic. The Greek Orthodox have different books than the Catholics, which are different from the Protestants. It is all a matter of what you believe. Plain and simple.
So the next time you hear someone like Stacy making it sound as though there is historical evidence for the resurrection, remember the history of how the text that she so fervently believes in was put together.
She writes today (or actually it is dated tomorrow for some reasons):
I think we should compare what all the Christian churches and ministries in the world have done to help this issue, compared to all the homosexual atheists like Joe. I think it would be very clear who would be shown to give more, and it wouldn’t be Joe.
In fact, I’m willing to put my checkbook on the line and share with Joe how much I’ve personally given to help those in need just this year. And in return, I’d love to see Joe’s checkbook and see exactly how much he’s given to help the poor this year.
I can say 100% confidently that Joe wouldn’t come close to what I’ve given. The question is, will Joe take me up on the challenge and prove to his readers, with checkbook proof what he’s given? Or is his mouth just running as usual, as he tries to blame religious people for not helping the poor and needy in the world?
Well Joe? What will it be? You going to share with us how you the atheist have done more to help the poor this year, than I, a Christian? Joe, it’s time to put up or shut up.
In effect she is trying to blow her own horn: "I am better than you because I have given more money than you. That makes me better and more special in the eyes of God." Blah, blah, blah.
Maybe she should take some time out to actually read her bible about what it says about pride:
Prov. 11:2 When pride comes, then comes disgrace; but wisdom is with the humble.
Prov. 16:18 Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.16:19 It is better to be of a lowly spirit among the poor than to divide the spoil with the proud.
Prov. 29:23 A person’s pride will bring humiliation, but one who is lowly in spirit will obtain honor.
Isa. 2:17 The haughtiness of people shall be humbled, and the pride of everyone shall be brought low; and the LORD alone will be exalted on that day.
1 John 2:15 Do not love the world or the things in the world. The love of the Father is not in those who love the world;2:16 for all that is in the world–the desire of the flesh, the desire of the eyes, the pride in riches–comes not from the Father but from the world.
The point is that if you are going to give money for charity, that is good. But it just looks foolish if you go around stating that you have given more than someone else. That, by the way, doesn’t make you look better. It makes you look petty and ridiculous.
That being said, I say to Stacy–go ahead and show us your checkbook. Come on. Put up or shut us, as you like to say. Why on earth would I believe that you have given a rotten penny to charity? I don’t believe anything else you say. And please, remember that pride cometh before the fall…
I suppose she is one of those people that likes to pray out loud so that everyone can know how righteous she is? I suppose she is one of those people that just has to tell everyone how much Jesus loves her because, well, he just does? And why wouldn’t he–she supposedly gives lots of her own money to charity. What’s not to love? 🙂