Phat's Bookshelf

So this is how you decide what books to read? Only "pro Christian worldview books" are safe to read? No wonder you're stuck on such crazy ideas.

Note that I decided to read the book regardless what it was about. I'm just admitting anxiety at being exposed to uncomfortable worldviews.Now as for you, you have the audacity to imagine that your rational view on things is always superior to religious belief. You threw out the Holy Baby with the bathwater.

If your worldview was solid, why would you be anxious about challenges to it? There is nothing audacious or imaginary about it. Rational is always superior to irrational. Period. End of story. You have a real talent for shooting yourself in the foot. It's a wonder there's still anything left of you below the waist.YOU are the one who threw the Holy Baby out. YOU are the one who denies everything He said after He grew up.

You do not get to dictate to me what the beginning and ending of the story is. You also do not get to have your own evidence, a comment that you have used on me a time or two. It may well be that Kurt Anderson is a non-believer, but he is very adept and skilled at describing trends in American culture.
As a matter of fact, Anderson describes the land of grown-up make believe in American politics starting with JFK and ending with Ronald Reagan. In this case, irrationality drove the myth of American exceptionalism and described an era (1960's, bragging rights to having the first man on the moon, a whimsical preoccupation with youth portrayed early on by an American president(JFK) who was dashingly good looking, a war hero (PT 109) and a youthful wife (31) who presided over an American Empire from a white palace known as Camelot. JFK even had as a girlfriend the idyllic sexual fantasy of Marilyn Monroe. In this early era of political theater, art imitated life and life imitated art.

Kurt Anderson:

---

As JFK was about to be elected, Norman Mailer wrote that "America's politics would now be also America's favorite movie, America's first soap opera, America's best-seller." Up until Kennedy, the wall between government and show business had been thick. His father had owned a movie studio, and not only did Jack pal around with Hollywood people, he agreed to go on stage at Madison Square Garden to receive the super salacious "Happy Birthday,Mr. President" serenade from his mistress Marilyn. (...)For a few years, Kennedy had used television and the rest of the fantasy-industrial complex(...)After JFK,president-as-performer became more explicit. In the 1980s,as America kept turning the dial up toward full Fantasyland, we were ready for Reagan as we wouldn't have been earlier. "For Ronald Reagan", said Pat Buchanan, who served as his White House communications director, "the world of legend and myth is a real world.

---

Compared to Reagan, reality TV star Trump was a piker.

Kurt Anderson:

---

His winning presidential campaign in 1980 had policy specifics that jibed with his misty vision of a simpler, happier, more patriotic old-fashioned America.(...) As a vacationing president, he wore a cowboy hat and rode a horse at his ranch in southern California. (...)Not so cute was a president of the United States expecting apocalyptic biblical prophecies to be fulfilled soon.

---

So don't tell me that rational always trumps(no pun intended ) irrational. The national soap opera awaits a new and capable actor. We the people are tired of reality. We want America to be back in the saddle again. We do not want to pay the bill nor do we want any sort of reparations. Everyone is equal and everyone is on the same page going forward. And we have no problem with Jesus being black, as long as He returns on a white horse. (thinly veiled attempt at humor)

I do not look forward to a post-Christian culture. I very much believe that Jesus is alive eternally and is(was) a real person. Life should always turn out fair in the end. Everybody gets a ribbon. We the people will be rescued (and will need rescuing, by the way) before our species becomes extinct.The anxiety stems from the idea that there is no rescuer and that the world will end up trying to fix itself. I strongly believe that humans are incapable of enough humility to get along with each other. I doubt whether *any* of you would give everything up in order to save the people on the planet. We need Jesus. Not some imitator who will propose a unified global effort at change and growth. Case closed. End of story. This is a blatant falsehood and misrepresentation of my position. Just so the peanut gallery can take notes.

I certainly DO get to tell you that rational beats irrational EVERY TIME. Period. End of story. And I have never claimed to have my own evidence, so why would you say such a silly thing? That is completely irrelevant to what we are discussing. Which makes my f**king point. If Americans were rational, they would be much better off. Why are you blathering on about it? You just finished demonstrating that it does! Which is irrational! Americans are in the fix(es) they are in largely because of their wannabe irrationality. Rationality would be better! How can you not see that?It's like you're trying to prove that the earth is flat by showing all the evidence that it is round.

Funny you should say that since you're always preaching AGAINST equality.Your problem is that you're looking for some external entity to rescue you while you're heaping scorn on your fellow humans who actually CAN help you. Well, of course there is no rescuer. The world WILL have to fix itself. You don't "strongly believe" anything. You may weakly wish. What has it got to do with humility? Why do you keep harping on that? You don't seem to doubt very strongly. No. We don't.YOU claim to "have" Jesus and what good has it done you? You're wrong about almost everything. How can you be so stupid? A global effort is essential, now more than ever. You have no case to close. You have no leg to stand on. You're ignoring the story. No it is not.You HAVE thrown out what Jesus said. You don't even TRY to refute that you have. You just deny, deny, deny, like a devoted Trumpite. How can the peanut gallery take notes when you never reply to the rebuttals?

Allow me to clarify. I am against financial equality since it allows the government to tax the middle class in order to pay the bills that the poor can't pay and the rich wont pay. While I understand your basic mantra that a rising tide lifts all boats, (which in principle is superior to trickle-down economics) I lament the fact that the bills seem to be increasing (lately almost exponentially) and that inflation itself is a hidden tax. I believe that in America a small businessman should be unencumbered from earning more than his less ambitious (or financially strapped) neighbors without having his hard work taxed to lift up the masses out of poverty. They need to work too. And of course you have no evidence apart from your own conclusions...nor do any of you. In fact, I think that you all are against the belief based on the evolution and impact of right wing politics. Were Jesus to whisper to your conscience some night, perhaps not long from now, you would be a fool to dismiss your experience as madness. The world can't fix itself without draconian authoritarian meddling from what you will initially see as necessary government intervention.And I'm not being negative. I'm being realistic.
​

And YOU have no evidence that Quetzalcoaltl isn't the "real" god. The only difference between you and me is that I treat all lack of evidence equally. You call that thinking? It's more like an empty accusation. On the contrary, I would be a fool to embrace madness as a replacement for reality. Nonsense. The world has neen fixing itself forever.And learn what authoritarian means! You ARE being negative - foolishly negative, without a scrap of evidence to back up your negativity.And you wouldn't recognize reality if it sat down beside you in church.
​

At least she knows enough to go to church. She sits in the third pew right between Mother Nature and Father Time.

This book stirred up yet more questions (and concerns) regarding the future of the human race. Im listening to it on Audible. I worry about the whole universal basic income thing. It sounds biased aganst private property rights and portends a demise of the good old boys network that so many of you want to see fall. The impact of AI on the global future will increase the gap between the haves and the have nots. As usual, the victims will be the once flourishing middle class.To be continued...

No. *You* claim that I am wrong about almost everything. Wait until the jury comes back with their verdict. You and the peanut gallery may be left holding the bag.Of course I dont expect to be right about everything, but I can almost guarantee that you guys will be wrong about a few things that you are certain you will be (and currently think you are) right about. Time will tell.

Who the f**k is "she"? I was talking to YOU, you moron. Are you trying to undercut Dredge's 9 IQ?I SAID that you wouldn't recognize reality if it sat down beside you in church. You don't have to demonstrate that I'm right. You've done that often enough before.

I demonstrate what I claim. YOU don't even try to refute my claims. You just deny, deny, deny like a devoted Trumpite. The jury is in.The jury is in.The jury is in.Are you blind? How can you not see them?Are you deaf? How can you not hear the verdict? Which (AGAIN), you can not demonstrate.
​ Just try not to be so asininely wrong ALL the time. Your guarantee is as worthless as the guarantee on the Hindenberg. Thinking people are careful about certainty. YOU are not. YOU are certain of things that have been proven wrong over and over and over again. FYI, time is an ongoing thing. It has BEEN telling forever. YOU just aren't listiening.

I've had this book a while now, and listen to it over and over in the audio cassette player in the car. Theodoric, wag that he is, will likely go to internet infidels to copypaste someone else's counterclaims to the book's efficacy and apologetic value in general, though I find the book encouraging.Favorable Reviews:
GoodreadsCritical Reviews: (This is one of the best critical reviews...I respect this author.
The Case Against Faith: A Critical Look at Lee Strobel's The Case for Faith I have yet to find the critic's name, though his website is amazing! Sitemap